General News about the Sussex Family, Part Two: April-August 2020

[Betsypaige]

Well, to be clear, when I say good PR strategy, I mean a good ongoing strategy for Harry and Meghan to keep themselves in the public eye. Right now they don’t seem to be too choosy about the sort of attention they get, and they’ve never seemed to care too much about whether what they’re doing is good for the BRF.

I think the way they made the public announcement that they would be leaving the RF and everything surrounding that was a mess, especially since it wound up with them having to walk back many of their original statements. That part, to me, seems like Harry and Meghan were holed up in Canada and either making and announcing these decisions totally on their own, or not listening to their PR person/team.

But I think things like the interview they did while they were on tour, the lawsuits, the multiple statements and explanations about the lawsuits and about their dealings with the press, etc, have all been calculated and timed with the advice of a PR team with the goal of keeping the couple in the public eye.

To take the latest example - they could have decided they were going to privately inform various media outlets about their decision to cut them off. No preemptive statement needed. There would have been an uproar and at that point Harry and Meghan could have decided to take the high road and say publicly their decision was made, the reasons for it had been communicated to the media outlets involved and they would not be commenting further. Or they could have issued a very short statement summarizing their issue, without going into the part about the free press and all the other extras.

This I agree with, although I believe that their PR team is incompetent because I don't believe in the idea that there is no such thing as bad publicity. All these things we've referenced have made H and M look bad, IMO - and if the idea was to gain support by keeping themselves in the public eye, I think they've failed (except in the eyes of their most ardent supporters). Most people of the world have far more important things to concern themselves with than anything Harry and Meghan are saying, which for the most part seems to be about self-promotion. Maybe that's not their intent, but that's what they are communicating. Their statements have been poorly written and, IMO, have not been effective at all in communicating the points they've been trying to make.

 

[Somebody]

Meghan didn't go on GMA. The network (owned by Disney) aired a Disney+ feature they released today promoting their documentary. It was filmed last year when she was still a working royal.

This is a great example of exactly what Harry and Meghan are talking about.

Thanks for clearing that up. Although Meghan promoting herself to do the narration wasn't very royal in my book at that time either but that's a different discussion that we probably shouldn't repeat.

Nonetheless, I stand by my main point of them continuing to seek the lime light: not day-to-day but often enough to keep their profile that they depend on for their new way of life.

 

[evolvingdoors]

I would have assumed that if it was a charity, and it wa to help vulnerable people, they would be able to use volunteers provided they were obeying the normal precautions and possibly had been tested for the virus. Did they get rid of their volunteers? Are Meg and Harry the only ones who have been doing deliveries?

Go to the website link. They explain everything.
On regular times they use volunteers. They also have 2 (may be more I saw two mentioned) professional drivers who deliver the food.
But due to the corona virus they had to ask their volunteers to not come.

For the food prep work they have hired professional chefs for the pandemic. They added five more!
And they have added more paid workers to deliver the food.

Essentially H&M doing deliveries means someone who is out of a job could have done it and get paid and you know, survive.

I mentioned the Soho House guy not only for the likely Marcus Anderson connectionton, but to showcase the very rich and powerful benefactors they have- check their IG page.
This is a charity that has been around for 30 years now!

(Someone told me the director said it was her mother who recommended working with them- not sure if this is true i’ll Need to watch an interview he did the other day, but a charity this big and this financially strong.. Megahn had to have at least already heard about them?
Also just a look in their IG looks like they have been in the local news quite a bit. This ost month.

 

[lirienn]

The interview is old but the thing that them voluntiring with bodyguards probably costed more than it was worth and was such a pr move and than attacking daily mail again right before the queen's birthday and during the pandemia.. Even if they do make a point they're so hot-headed, don't read the public mood right and are really proving the point their critics make.

 

[Denville]

The interview is old but the thing that them voluntiring with bodyguards probably costed more than it was worth and was such a pr move and than attacking daily mail again right before the queen's birthday and during the pandemia.. Even if they do make a point they're so hot-headed, don't read the public mood right and are really proving the point their critics make.

Perhaps they menat well with the volunteering but it does seem confusing and messy and one can't help feeling that either the charity was using them for promoting itself or they were hapy to do it, because they knew it would get out that they were volunteering. But if the charity had taken to using paid staff, it doesn't seem very sensible to take on Meg and Harry and tell its usual volunteers they were not required. Im sure there were other things the 2 of them coudl have done, such as volunteering behind the scenes, or if they do want to go on TV, to go and urge people to help out....in charities that were using volunteers.

 

[Dalriada]

Go to the website link. They explain everything.

On regular times they use volunteers. They also have 2 (may be more I saw two mentioned) professional drivers who deliver the food.

But due to the corona virus they had to ask their volunteers to not come.



For the food prep work they have hired professional chefs for the pandemic. They added five more!

And they have added more paid workers to deliver the food.



Essentially H&M doing deliveries means someone who is out of a job could have done it and get paid and you know, survive.



I mentioned the Soho House guy not only for the likely Marcus Anderson connectionton, but to showcase the very rich and powerful benefactors they have- check their IG page.

This is a charity that has been around for 30 years now!



(Someone told me the director said it was her mother who recommended working with them- not sure if this is true i’ll Need to watch an interview he did the other day, but a charity this big and this financially strong.. Megahn had to have at least already heard about them?

Also just a look in their IG looks like they have been in the local news quite a bit. This ost month.

The Soho House connection to this charity rings a bell or two with so much about the past of these two self-absorbed deplorables. It’s almost a recurring theme in an undercurrent of stories concerning them.

 

[lirienn]

Perhaps they menat well with the volunteering but it does seem confusing and messy and one can't help feeling that either the charity was using them for promoting itself or they were hapy to do it, because they knew it would get out that they were volunteering. But if the charity had taken to using paid staff, it doesn't seem very sensible to take on Meg and Harry and tell its usual volunteers they were not required. Im sure there were other things the 2 of them coudl have done, such as volunteering behind the scenes, or if they do want to go on TV, to go and urge people to help out....in charities that were using volunteers.

Agreed. They knew it'd get out, they walked hand in hand, were touchy-feely. They want to be "people prince/princess" but they could have go on tv not deliver like a few packages from their porsche and in two days get into a fight mode with some journalists.

 

[Osipi]

How is going on Good Morning America NOT seeking the limelight?

They continue to seek the limelight; and they'll have to for the type of life they want to live - as they want to have impact/influence and they need the limelight and their former status as royals for that.

Let's look at this. The GMA segment in question is a prerecorded one from a ways back. Its regarding the Disneynature "Elephant"documentary. Most likely, the content of the the documentary and any "interviews" or such regarding this documentary are the property of Disneynature, most likely all that happened is that Meghan gave her permission to use her videotaped comments on GMA;. This was not done at all to "promote" Meghan whatsoever. Its to promote the "Elephant" documentary. Simple.

 

[Somebody]

Let's look at this. The GMA segment in question is a prerecorded one from a ways back. Its regarding the Disneynature "Elephant"documentary. Most likely, the content of the the documentary and any "interviews" or such regarding this documentary are the property of Disneynature, most likely all that happened is that Meghan gave her permission to use her videotaped comments on GMA;. This was not done at all to "promote" Meghan whatsoever. Its to promote the "Elephant" documentary. Simple.

Don't rule out that it's doing both. Meghan herself offered to narrate this documentary knowing that it would benefit the cause and bring publicity. Had it not also been about 'Meghan', there would not have been a need to do it in the first place; they could have picked anyone random and not use 'star power' to do this.

Harry and Meghan were already thinking about doing things their own (and not the BRF) way and this fitted with their view of the 'modern' royal (or after-royal) approach. If they had not wanted the limelight (the claim I responded to was that they didn't seek it), she would not have proposed to do it. Many of their actions show that they do seek the limelight (see also my previous post - won't continue this discussion any further not because I don't want to engage but to avoid it derailing this thread).

 

[Zaira]

Thanks for clearing that up. Although Meghan promoting herself to do the narration wasn't very royal in my book at that time either but that's a different discussion that we probably shouldn't repeat.

Nonetheless, I stand by my main point of them continuing to seek the lime light: not day-to-day but often enough to keep their profile that they depend on for their new way of life.

Well, when she started working with the director on the project she wasn't a royal. They began talks about this project in 2017--before she was married.

And not sure I understand how narrating a nature documentary isn't royal...Charles has also narrated projects before too.

I actually listened to this podcast and nowhere did Harry state that. I listened to it many times. I heard him say the media can downplay the human aspect of things and make people believe good isn't happening too. And the creators of the podcast pushing back on the media twisting his words out of context for clickbait.

Harry was clumsy in his wording (something he needs to work on) but it is clear to anyone who listened to the actual podcast that he is talking about people doing good or amazing things and not that COVID is horrific or that bad.

The comment pulled out by the media is between two examples of him talking about everyday works stepping up and doing good.

“I'm honored to be a veteran, and honored to be part of this community. I’m just so incredibly proud to see what these individuals up and down the country and across the world are doing on a day-to-day basis. What has happened, especially in the U.K., shows the very best of human spirit.”

It's also proving that I think things are better than we're led to believe through certain corners of the media. It can be very worrying when you're sitting there and the only information you are getting is from certain news channels, but then if you are on the right platforms, you can really sense this human spirit coming to the forefront.”

Again, I really wish people would read or listen to full things before forming and defending opinions.

 

[Denville]

Why did he refer to "certain news channels"? THat seems to be a dig at parts of the meida. If he was just saying "People still do good things, in spite of all the bad news there Is in the world, there are still people doing good".. he didn't need to particularise the media or even more oddly "certain parts of it!". That seems to be an implcatin that he is having a go at some news networks and saying that their information isn't accurate.

 

[Claire]

The Soho House connection to this charity rings a bell or two with so much about the past of these two self-absorbed deplorables. It’s almost a recurring theme in an undercurrent of stories concerning them.

I am afraid the optics on this is terrible. This can only get worst. How were they allowed to volunteer ? It brings up horrible questions - was it all done for the photos. Are they using a pandemic to get good photo opportunities?

 

[Kataryn]

Indeed...It’s all about being in the limelight all the while humanity weeps in unison....

Maybe you all who think that should read this article. It's decent in its approach and writing but brings on the important points.


https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/0...on-tabloid-tone-deaf-long-overdue-coronavirus


Not sure where to put the New Statesman but it's surely a better media outlet than the Express (50! articles on Meghan and Harry!) or the Daily Mail...

No the issue is that they said they wanted to step back from Royal life to make money. They were told that they could not do that, so they gave up royal life. But being independent means living off your OWN money or earning it. If they go on taking anyone's money, whether it is the RF's private funds, or the Duchy of Cornwall money or the tax payers.. they are not being independent.

No, they said they stepped back to protect their family. It's the Daily Mail and those other tabloids who wrote that that was the reason! Or show me the interview where they said that.

 

[Zaira]

Why did he refer to "certain news channels"? THat seems to be a dig at parts of the meida. If he was just saying "People still do good things, in spite of all the bad news there Is in the world, there are still people doing good".. he didn't need to particularise the media or even more oddly "certain parts of it!". That seems to be an implcatin that he is having a go at some news networks and saying that their information isn't accurate.

I mean, but there has been inaccurate or inflammatory reporting though. I don't think its wrong to call out the press when their actions are troubling. And the tabloids coverage of the virus has at times veered that way. People have criticized Harry before for seemingly generalizing the media too much so saying "certain parts" is a way around that.

With that said, I do agree that is wording of this was clumsy. I think he was touching on an earlier point in the interview about people being in isolation and only hearing certain things from the media and thus not seeing the good going on and how that can impact mental health. But again, he brought the points together in a disjointed way. It happens when you are speaking in a forum like a podcast though. As the folks say, he was doing too much in that bit trying to connect different strands of the conversation.

Overall though, it was a good podcast. I have enjoyed the two podcasts he has done in recent years. In general I think its a good forum for royals and hope we see more of it from the BRF/Sussexes

 

[Durham]

Maybe you all who think that should read this article. It's decent in its approach and writing but brings on the important points.


https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/0...on-tabloid-tone-deaf-long-overdue-coronavirus


Not sure where to put the New Statesman but it's surely a better media outlet than the Express (50! articles on Meghan and Harry!) or the Daily Mail...

Thanks for the link. I will read this but for anyone who is unaware the New Statesman is a well known left wing periodical in the UK with its own biases, slants & axes to grind. After all, nothing ever happens in a vacuum.

It's great rival is The Spectator btw.

Both excellent reads but very different in their politics, stances in the culture wars & attitudes to the monarchy.

I don't believe for one moment that the writers or readership of The New Statesman see anything about the Sussexes that is even remotely important or relevant. The would see it as non serious title tattle that belongs in the celebrity column of a waiting room magazine. The whole affair is however a great opportunity to have a go at their media rivals & political opponents. In other words it is a proxy for furthering their own ideological agenda. Caveat emptor.

 

[Hallo girl]

No, they said they stepped back to protect their family. It's the Daily Mail and those other tabloids who wrote that that was the reason! Or show me the interview where they said that.

I do believe they also said that they wanted to be financially independent, I am paraphrasing here but did they not also speak about a new role/ way of working, that would include part time royal duties.

 

[Kataryn]

I don't believe for one moment that the writers or readership of The New Statesman see anything about the Sussexes that is even remotely important or relevant. The would see it as non serious title tattle that belongs in the celebrity column of a waiting room magazine. The whole affair is however a great opportunity to have a go at their media rivals & political opponents. In other words it is a proxy for furthering their own ideological agenda. Caveat emptor.

But you see that they are using Maghan and Harry to further their agenda. Whatever that is. The other media outlets do that as well. That's what I wanted to point out. These two should not count as "persons" but with what they do. The media should simply report on that and on the impact they have, not on who they are, who they were and how they live. You don't need to be starving to really feel you should help starving people. You just need to do something. There is so much to "report" today. Why do media outlet feel the need to comment on things noone is really touched by (before they made it a BIG THING)?

 

[Durham]

But you see that they are using Maghan and Harry to further their agenda. Whatever that is. The other media outlets do that as well. That's what I wanted to point out. These two should not count as "persons" but with what they do. The media should simply report on that and on the impact they have, not on who they are, who they were and how they live. You don't need to be starving to really feel you should help starving people. You just need to do something. There is so much to "report" today. Why do media outlet feel the need to comment on things noone is really touched by (before they made it a BIG THING)?

Fair enough. I understand your point.

The agenda of The New Statesman would be that of self described "liberal progressives". So, social & political issues, inequality etc. It's a serious heavyweight publication that doesn't normally go any where near stories about individual members of the royal family. It would see such stories as non serious, trivial really. It's also written by & for people who would probably be largely or even predominantly republican by instinct. I think it's a good read a lot of the time but I am aware of its biases.

You might be interested to know that there is an article in The Daily Telegraph that has the opposite viewpoint to the one in The New Statesman. Again, the Telegraph also has its own agenda & biases. This time on the right of the political/social spectrum.

In the end it's all just opinion.

 

[Denville]

No, they said they stepped back to protect their family. It's the Daily Mail and those other tabloids who wrote that that was the reason! Or show me the interview where they said that.

Iif all they wanted to do was to "protect their family", then all they had to do was to give up working as royals and retire into private life. They didn't need to have this business of selling their brand. They ddn't have to negotiate with the RF about whether they could use the HRH or what they could and could not do.

I do believe they also said that they wanted to be financially independent, I am paraphrasing here but did they not also speak about a new role/ way of working, that would include part time royal duties.

yes, they did. They wanted to have a "professional income" and to be financially independent..and they wanted to work part time as royals. They were told that they could not do that, they could give up royal working life and concentrate on their new career or they could stay as working royals. THey chose to leave.

 

[Eskimo]

Iif all they wanted to do was to "protect their family", then all they had to do was to give up working as royals and retire into private life. They didn't need to have this business of selling their brand. They ddn't have to negotiate with the RF about whether they could use the HRH or what they could and could not do.

Heck they didn’t even have to retire behind closed doors. Meghan was on a cable TV show and could have stayed in Vancouver and gone back to working for a smaller, more obscure show. But they don’t want to do that. They want to protect their privacy by controlling the press, but live in Hollywood and be part of the everyday public conscience.

IMO, that is their hubris. They want to have the Oprah and Clooney “celebrity” lifestyle but do not want any negative coverage. Heck, even Oprah has been recently pillared by the black community and most tabloid magazines view Amal as an emaciated gold digger. They want to the the only ones who benefit financially from their public image and that is not something anyone has been successfully able to do-ever.

 

[phss]

Iif all they wanted to do was to "protect their family", then all they had to do was to give up working as royals and retire into private life. They didn't need to have this business of selling their brand. They ddn't have to negotiate with the RF about whether they could use the HRH or what they could and could not do.

This is what sits so uneasy about the whole situation.

I don't post here very often as I don't seem to know as much about the royals as many of the posters here, so I tend to just read what everyone else has to say but I wanted to say/ask a couple of things...

I really don't understand the logic behind their decision to leave the BRF. IF it's as Harry says and is purely to protect his family (from the media) then surely staying inside the BRF is much safer than striking out on his own? Also, if he truly wanted a more 'peaceful' and 'private' life, why is he attempting to set up basically a rival institution (can't think of a better term, apologies!) to his family's 'business'? Living in LA, choosing to live life in the public arena still (they will need publicity to be successful in their charitable causes), most likely setting up new social media accounts (Instagram etc) all contradict that...

If he/they wanted a private life why couldn't they just get 'normal' jobs and then quietly volunteer on their days off like most of us do? Why try to do it in such a public way?

Harry was my gateway royal into the BRF, he's always been my favorite because his personality always came across as 'warm' as opposed to his slightly more rigid older brother, and so I hope I don't come across as a 'hater' but his behavior the last couple of years has been so... aggressive? I don't disagree with him for being angry at some of the horrific media coverage, but allowing his anger to fester and turn into a hatred that appears to dominate everything he does nowadays (it feels to me like every time I 'hear' from him he's getting a dig in at the media, even if they weren't the original topic of conversation) is really sad.

I really hope he's still getting counseling in America because I think he still needs it to help come to terms with his mother's death etc. I also hope he stops using her name (giving speeches and referencing her as he did in his first speech after their bombshell announcement back at the, I think, ivy gardens? Chelsea gardens? and then again at that paid for speech for the bank) to evoke sympathy as I think it's really unhealthy for him to stay so stuck in that mindset and will do more harm than good to his mental wellbeing...

Lastly, (i know this has been a ridiculously long post!!) a quick question for all of the better-informed posters here! Who would you say are decent(ish)/fair(ish) Royal Reporters?

I've been reading a lot of articles/ reading twitter feeds of certain RR's and just wondered where they 'sit' in terms of respect from the opinion of those of you who have followed Harry etc for longer than me...

I've read a fair amount from: Richard Palmer - Daily Express
Emily Nash - Hello
Rebecca English - Daily Mail
Victoria Murphy - GMA
Omid Scobie - VF (although he seems to be more of a spokesperson for M and H than anything!)


Congrats to anyone who made it through all of that!?

 

[Denville]

This is what sits so uneasy about the whole situation.
e attempting to set up basically a rival institution (can't think of a better term, apologies!) to his family's 'business'? Living in LA, choosing to live life in the public arena still (they will need publicity to be successful in their charitable causes), most likely setting up new social media accounts (Instagram etc) all contradict that...

If he/they wanted a private life why couldn't they just get 'normal' jobs and then quietly volunteer on their days off like most of us do? Why try to do it in such a public way?

Ha

Congrats to anyone who made it through all of that!?

Normal jobs? You don't really think they are going to do that? I can't see what normal job Harry could get anyway, He has no training except in the army and he's a bit old for that now. Meghan was a working actress, but I hardly think she's going to tgo back to that.. although she might take up voice work. but yes its been said, lots of times.. they claim to want privacy and to protect their family but they are embarking on a public career that is going to attract media attention.

 

[Betsypaige]

This is what sits so uneasy about the whole situation.

I don't post here very often as I don't seem to know as much about the royals as many of the posters here, so I tend to just read what everyone else has to say but I wanted to say/ask a couple of things...

I really don't understand the logic behind their decision to leave the BRF. IF it's as Harry says and is purely to protect his family (from the media) then surely staying inside the BRF is much safer than striking out on his own? Also, if he truly wanted a more 'peaceful' and 'private' life, why is he attempting to set up basically a rival institution (can't think of a better term, apologies!) to his family's 'business'? Living in LA, choosing to live life in the public arena still (they will need publicity to be successful in their charitable causes), most likely setting up new social media accounts (Instagram etc) all contradict that...

If he/they wanted a private life why couldn't they just get 'normal' jobs and then quietly volunteer on their days off like most of us do? Why try to do it in such a public way?

Harry was my gateway royal into the BRF, he's always been my favorite because his personality always came across as 'warm' as opposed to his slightly more rigid older brother, and so I hope I don't come across as a 'hater' but his behavior the last couple of years has been so... aggressive? I don't disagree with him for being angry at some of the horrific media coverage, but allowing his anger to fester and turn into a hatred that appears to dominate everything he does nowadays (it feels to me like every time I 'hear' from him he's getting a dig in at the media, even if they weren't the original topic of conversation) is really sad.

I really hope he's still getting counseling in America because I think he still needs it to help come to terms with his mother's death etc. I also hope he stops using her name (giving speeches and referencing her as he did in his first speech after their bombshell announcement back at the, I think, ivy gardens? Chelsea gardens? and then again at that paid for speech for the bank) to evoke sympathy as I think it's really unhealthy for him to stay so stuck in that mindset and will do more harm than good to his mental wellbeing...

Lastly, (i know this has been a ridiculously long post!!) a quick question for all of the better-informed posters here! Who would you say are decent(ish)/fair(ish) Royal Reporters?

I've been reading a lot of articles/ reading twitter feeds of certain RR's and just wondered where they 'sit' in terms of respect from the opinion of those of you who have followed Harry etc for longer than me...

I've read a fair amount from: Richard Palmer - Daily Express
Emily Nash - Hello
Rebecca English - Daily Mail
Victoria Murphy - GMA
Omid Scobie - VF (although he seems to be more of a spokesperson for M and H than anything!)


Congrats to anyone who made it through all of that!?

Excellent post, and I agree with everything you said! I also wondered why H and M just didn’t ask to step away for a period of time instead of making such a huge move. Personally I think they are two drama queens who enjoy making a splash; they’re also impatient and demanding. HM and Charles knew Harry was unhappy, and they wanted to help him, but instead of patiently trying to work this out quietly, H and M didn’t want to wait and, therefore, they dropped their bomb.

Harry is obsessed with the media. Of course I understand where his issues with them come from, but this mania/hatred has become paranoia, and is really unhealthy. I also agree that he uses his mother’s name too often; in trying to engender sympathy, he comes across as manipulative.

I think Harry has a good heart, truly, but he’s acting foolishly and rashly.

I read everyone you listed, except Scobie (periodically, but no way regularly as he is friends with H and M). I also love:

Victoria Arbiter
Dickie Arbiter
Robert Jobson
Robert Hardman

and two Royal historians: Robert Lacey and Hugo Vickers.

 

[QueenMathilde]

That's a fair question. On the other hand aren't they already enormously wealthy individuals? How much money does anyone need in life?

Compared to the way you or I live they are enormously wealthy. But they live on a lavish style and have nowhere near the money they need to do that. One house would cost all of Harry's 30 million.

 

[rominet09]

This is what sits so uneasy about the whole situation.

I don't post here very often as I don't seem to know as much about the royals as many of the posters here, so I tend to just read what everyone else has to say but I wanted to say/ask a couple of things...

I really don't understand the logic behind their decision to leave the BRF. IF it's as Harry says and is purely to protect his family (from the media) then surely staying inside the BRF is much safer than striking out on his own? Also, if he truly wanted a more 'peaceful' and 'private' life, why is he attempting to set up basically a rival institution (can't think of a better term, apologies!) to his family's 'business'? Living in LA, choosing to live life in the public arena still (they will need publicity to be successful in their charitable causes), most likely setting up new social media accounts (Instagram etc) all contradict that...

If he/they wanted a private life why couldn't they just get 'normal' jobs and then quietly volunteer on their days off like most of us do? Why try to do it in such a public way?

Harry was my gateway royal into the BRF, he's always been my favorite because his personality always came across as 'warm' as opposed to his slightly more rigid older brother, and so I hope I don't come across as a 'hater' but his behavior the last couple of years has been so... aggressive? I don't disagree with him for being angry at some of the horrific media coverage, but allowing his anger to fester and turn into a hatred that appears to dominate everything he does nowadays (it feels to me like every time I 'hear' from him he's getting a dig in at the media, even if they weren't the original topic of conversation) is really sad.

I really hope he's still getting counseling in America because I think he still needs it to help come to terms with his mother's death etc. I also hope he stops using her name (giving speeches and referencing her as he did in his first speech after their bombshell announcement back at the, I think, ivy gardens? Chelsea gardens? and then again at that paid for speech for the bank) to evoke sympathy as I think it's really unhealthy for him to stay so stuck in that mindset and will do more harm than good to his mental wellbeing...

Lastly, (i know this has been a ridiculously long post!!) a quick question for all of the better-informed posters here! Who would you say are decent(ish)/fair(ish) Royal Reporters?

I've been reading a lot of articles/ reading twitter feeds of certain RR's and just wondered where they 'sit' in terms of respect from the opinion of those of you who have followed Harry etc for longer than me...

I've read a fair amount from: Richard Palmer - Daily Express
Emily Nash - Hello
Rebecca English - Daily Mail
Victoria Murphy - GMA
Omid Scobie - VF (although he seems to be more of a spokesperson for M and H than anything!)


Congrats to anyone who made it through all of that!?

I did and it was very interesting. I have Always been a big fan of them but I ask myself the same questions than you. The way they behave looks very erratic.
I will say that they time their moves very badly considering the situation (dramatic money and job Wise) of most of the people in the world today.
I am still very much fond of them but their actions and especially their timing puzzle me;

 

[Osipi]

The more I think about it, with Harry at least, going from an entire life lived with having "people" that structure things for you and do the grunt work about where you're going and who you're going to be meeting with and prepare a synopsis to "inform" you in a nutshell what you need to know and also, at times, prepare statements for you then *boom* you're on your own without those "people", it can be a rude awakening.

Meghan, for as little that she was actively part of the BRF machine, may never have realized how dependent her husband had been on his "people" as he's never really had to worry about being without them before and they remained mostly in the background of the Sussexes life more or less as part of the woodwork.

We have to remember that from the get go, H&M had staff. First at Kensington Palace and then at Buckingham Palace. That staff is now gone. Anyone that they would think to hire now to fill those roles most likely are not schooled in the ways and means of what Harry's status really is and what is expected of a person with his status and see Harry, Duke of Sussex, private individual. There's a difference between being PR savvy when it comes to a Prince of the United Kingdom (which he still is) and PR savvy for a private individual that isn't savvy enough to know himself what is needed and what isn't acceptable.

I think Harry is striking out on his own, finding his own way and its showing. Baby steps and hopefully with experience, he'll find what works for him and what doesn't. We all have to start somewhere when taking on something totally new and foreign and Harry is no exception. ?

 

[Kataryn]

Iif all they wanted to do was to "protect their family", then all they had to do was to give up working as royals and retire into private life. They didn't need to have this business of selling their brand. They ddn't have to negotiate with the RF about whether they could use the HRH or what they could and could not do.

They wanted to continue their charitable work. Call that "using their brand" or figure out their position with it, but to continue doing things they considered helpful to others, they had to find common ground with the Royal family and the government.

When they didn't reach an agreement, they published their website and proclaimed their leaving the job as working Royals, because this information was being leaked to the tabloids and they wanted to be first in announcing it. That, IMHO, was a big fault. But understandible in their situation. But from then on they never had a chance because the tabloids started a full on war on them.

You can believe the media, but for me what they claimed and wrote was without proof or misinterpretation.

I personally believe they only wanted to get away from the constant bash of what they did with the taxpayer's money when they claimed they wanted to be financially independent. But since the media and their believers even socialised Charles' money as part of the public purse, there was nothing they could do but weather the storm. And then corona came...

The more I think about it, with Harry at least, going from an entire life lived with having "people" that structure things for you and do the grunt work about where you're going and who you're going to be meeting with and prepare a synopsis to "inform" you in a nutshell what you need to know and also, at times, prepare statements for you then *boom* you're on your own without those "people", it can be a rude awakening.

Meghan, for as little that she was actively part of the BRF machine, may never have realized how dependent her husband had been on his "people" as he's never really had to worry about being without them before and they remained mostly in the background of the Sussexes life more or less as part of the woodwork.

We have to remember that from the get go, H&M had staff. First at Kensington Palace and then at Buckingham Palace. That staff is now gone. Anyone that they would think to hire now to fill those roles most likely are not schooled in the ways and means of what Harry's status really is and what is expected of a person with his status and see Harry, Duke of Sussex, private individual. There's a difference between being PR savvy when it comes to a Prince of the United Kingdom (which he still is) and PR savvy for a private individual that isn't savvy enough to know himself what is needed and what isn't acceptable.

I think Harry is striking out on his own, finding his own way and its showing. Baby steps and hopefully with experience, he'll find what works for him and what doesn't. We all have to start somewhere when taking on something totally new and foreign and Harry is no exception. ?

It was claimed Harry didn't feel the staff of the Royal family (not the family themselves) did enough to protect Meghan, but that part of the established staff didn't agree with that marriage and sold them out. From the fights Sarah and Diana had with the "grey men" which have been very well protocolled (and I was interested in Diana from the moment she appeared on the scene, being only 2 years younger, so read a lot about that) I know that there is not only the actual "Royal family" to cope with but their advisors and staff as well up to the government. People interlinbked with the media, especially the tabloids (as these pay the best, I think!) and with their short courtship, it was a very difficult situation, far worse than that of William and Catherine.

Harry was raised a soldier, not a courtier, and I believe you can see this in the way their situation changed and all played out. While Meghan just followed Harry, IMHO, as she had no experience of the life at court. The way the family reacted was not how Harrywanted them to: instead of "protect Meghan and Archie now!" they tried to even things out, win time, probably hoping to find a solution in peace with a slow transformation. Then that leak and Harry and Meghan going public...
The situation is bad, with them in LA and corona all over the planet. We'll see how that turns out.

 

[carlota]

It was claimed Harry didn't feel the staff of the Royal family (not the family themselves) did enough to protect Meghan, but that part of the established staff didn't agree with that marriage and sold them out. From the fights Sarah and Diana had with the "grey men" which have been very well protocolled (and I was interested in Diana from the moment she appeared on the scene, being only 2 years younger, so read a lot about that) I know that there is not only the actual "Royal family" to cope with but their advisors and staff as well up to the government. People interlinbked with the media, especially the tabloids (as these pay the best, I think!) and with their short courtship, it was a very difficult situation, far worse than that of William and Catherine.

Harry was raised a soldier, not a courtier, and I believe you can see this in the way their situation changed and all played out. While Meghan just followed Harry, IMHO, as she had no experience of the life at court. The way the family reacted was not how Harrywanted them to: instead of "protect Meghan and Archie now!" they tried to even things out, win time, probably hoping to find a solution in peace with a slow transformation. Then that leak and Harry and Meghan going public...
The situation is bad, with them in LA and corona all over the planet. We'll see how that turns out.

You make it sound like they are complete victims, that they did no wrong, that Harry is just an honest, betrayed army man and Meghan is a meek wife just following her husband.

IMO this is far from the truth.

 

[Alison H]

We're living in the reign of Elizabeth II, not Elizabeth I! We don't have everyone living at court, plotting against each other.

 

[Kataryn]

You make it sound like they are complete victims, that they did no wrong, that Harry is just an honest, betrayed army man and Meghan is a meek wife just following her husband.

IMO this is far from the truth.

On what data do you base your opinion of?



Mine is made of the books about Charles & Diana and the court surrounding them, about what Harry said in public, from the website they presented and from the way Charles and the queen support them.



Harry never had been able to really conform to the life at court, he did his own things as soon as he stopped being a professional soldier.



I am not saying he is a complete victim, but I feel that Meghan was and that they both tried to free themselves from the toxic atmosphere they found themselves surrounded by. It backfired spectacularily and we'll have to see how the story ends but yes, I am convinced if the tabloids had treated Meghan and poor little Archie better, than the Sussexes would have stayed on and tried to solve the internal problems at court with Charles' help.



But hey, I am convinced as well that papers should treat Royals and other people with respect, refrain from lying and only write about things that people do (including all their misdeeds! Nothing against investigative journalism! But only real info, not "a source claimed what I wanted to hear and now print...).



For these tabloids Harry and Meghan are just characters that are colourful enough to create clicks if the people are roused enough against them. They don't see them as "real people" - what with offering enormous amounts of money to actpors who played with Meghan, so that they lie about having an affair with her? What with using Meghan's internal family conflicts on buying her opposition from father and sister - does one do that to "real people"? Calling the little boy a monkey because his mother is biracial? And those aggressive reports about things Meghan allegedly did to her staff which is nothing uncommon in today's journalism? Oh, come on!

We're living in the reign of Elizabeth II, not Elizabeth I! We don't have everyone living at court, plotting against each other.

Sorry if I used the word "court" to include all people who keep the monarchy working in the several palaces. But there are so many reports about warring staff (War of the Waleses??) and believe me, such things don't simply end. Plus people whose ancestors already worked for the Royals have their own opinions about how the Royals should be or not be and that leads to acting. It's human behaviour and I don't think you can just say it doesn't exist anymore.