The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 1: September-December 2020


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't have an opinion on what the Sussexes do or don't have in the works, but there is an important distinction to be made here.

What they apparently denied having plans to take part in is a "reality show." Reality TV is just what the name implies- just a show of someone else's (not really but supposed) reality. The whole concept is that there is no plot or greater point. You're just peeking into someone else's life.

What the Sussexes were rumored to be taking part in was labeled as reality TV in a derisive way, but what was actually being described was a kind of documentary or show about their lives or some aspect of their lives. The difference is that a documentary has some point or message, you are not just following someone's life aimlessly.

So this denial does not mean that the rumored piece is not in the works. I would not consider their denial inconsistent with the kind of work that was supposedly being produced.
 
The entire focus of the current conference seems to be on 'covid and working from home' and the different issues that has presented. The different talks are about managing working from home, and continuing to create a team environment digitally, and so on. Having that human connection not only with your employees but with your customers as well all while doing it digitally. But also about the need to adapt to the demands of inclusion and diversity, and how to do so in this new world.

Meghan seems to be speaking about how they continue charity work and speaking out, on line. And how one can still try and shape change, when doing it behind a computer.
 
I don't have an opinion on what the Sussexes do or don't have in the works, but there is an important distinction to be made here.

What they apparently denied having plans to take part in is a "reality show." Reality TV is just what the name implies- just a show of someone else's (not really but supposed) reality. The whole concept is that there is no plot or greater point. You're just peeking into someone else's life.

What the Sussexes were rumored to be taking part in was labeled as reality TV in a derisive way, but what was actually being described was a kind of documentary or show about their lives or some aspect of their lives. The difference is that a documentary has some point or message, you are not just following someone's life aimlessly.

So this denial does not mean that the rumored piece is not in the works. I would not consider their denial inconsistent with the kind of work that was supposedly being produced.


I am in the same camp HighGoalHighDreams.

A lot of articles are reporting it as a docuseries ... which fits with the description of the Duke and Duchess being followed and filmed for three months as they go about their charity work.

They took their own photographer/videographer with them to the school garden and the school hand things out visits - so they may have quite a bit already filmed and now the leaks and denials are coming out to build an audience.
 
Last edited:
Rebecca English - while acknowledging the reality series denial given to "Hello" magazine - is reporting that the Duke and Duchess have "sensational home footage recorded during their departure from the Royal Family".

And that part of their pitch for a deal was this trove of personal videos.

Details below -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ed-scenes-footage-decision-leave-Britain.html

If they want to use home footage of themselves, that’s their business, though that is still hypocritical to me as it flies in he face of their insistence on privacy. If that footage includes Royals, that’s a huge NO NO for me.
 
If they want to use home footage of themselves, that’s their business, though that is still hypocritical to me as it flies in he face of their insistence on privacy. If that footage includes Royals, that’s a huge NO NO for me.

I think Russell Myers's tweet share the same concern or scepticism with you in regards to "personal life" and "privacy". From reading at his tweet (as I have posted earlier), he seems to think that there is little difference between reality TV and fly-on-wall documentary series, given that both "presentation styles" will provide a lot of details on their personal life. If however, Harry and Meghan are not going to be on the screen (but rather as director) and the documentary focuses on the charities or causes, I would have little or no problem with it.


I agree with you that if the footage includes the Royal Family, it would not go down well.
 
It depends what it is. You could call the recent documentary made for Princess Anne's 70th birthday "reality TV", because it showed her visiting her charities, doing some work at Gatcombe Park, and speaking about how she'd tried to help with home-schooling her grandchildren once the restrictions on visiting were lifted. Cameras followed her for a year. There was nothing "sensational" about it. There've been similar documentaries about Prince Charles and his work. Obviously no payment was involved with any of those, though.
 
I am looking forward to seeing what they come up with. If it is a series that highlights various charities, it might be interesting. If it profiles Harry and/or Meghan as they go around engaging with worthy causes, then it runs the risk of being too self-aggrandizing. Unlike the situations of Princess Anne and Prince Charles, it is a little early in Harry and Meghan’s charity work career to celebrate their contributions and good works.
 
It depends what it is. You could call the recent documentary made for Princess Anne's 70th birthday "reality TV", because it showed her visiting her charities, doing some work at Gatcombe Park, and speaking about how she'd tried to help with home-schooling her grandchildren once the restrictions on visiting were lifted. Cameras followed her for a year. There was nothing "sensational" about it. There've been similar documentaries about Prince Charles and his work. Obviously no payment was involved with any of those, though.

Cameras literally followed William for 2 years for his documentary airing this weekend. A reality show? I guess so by this current definition. Anyways I think most would agree they just using that to talk down the alleged documentary though it sounds exactly like what the rest does.

But we shall see.
 
Yes some members of the RF have done these docus before but did they profit from it? And if the Sussexes do it, will they personally profit from it for their personal gains or donate proceeds to charity?:flowers:
 
I think Russell Myers's tweet share the same concern or scepticism with you in regards to "personal life" and "privacy". From reading at his tweet (as I have posted earlier), he seems to think that there is little difference between reality TV and fly-on-wall documentary series, given that both "presentation styles" will provide a lot of details on their personal life. If however, Harry and Meghan are not going to be on the screen (but rather as director) and the documentary focuses on the charities or causes, I would have little or no problem with it.


I agree with you that if the footage includes the Royal Family, it would not go down well.

I share RM’s skepticism - while there might be some differences between a reality show and a docu-series, ultimately those are overshadowed by the one huge similarity: that there is an enormous lack of privacy in each. I agree that the bolded part would be another story altogether.
 
Several posts had been deleted as they are overly speculative and insulting. Responses to those posts have also been removed. Further posts along those lines will be deleted without notice.
 
Anyone that has transplanted home and family across the miles away from everything they've known, knows that there are many, many adjustments to be made. Nothing is familiar. Nothing feels like "home" yet and there's a period of homesickness that makes you wonder if you've made the right move.

Harry and Meghan and Archie have been in California what? Six months? Seven tops? From where I sit, they've done good for themselves so far. They've bought a home. They've paid off Frogmore Cottage and are living financially independent. They've signed with Netfix with a deal. This is amid a pandemic too and in a time of isolating and social distancing. That, to me, is adjusting pretty well so far. They may have made a few mistakes in our eyes here and there but they're in the position to make their own decisions on things now.

I really don't see any move coming in the future of any of the Sussexes returning to the UK except for what they said they were going to do. Spend part of the year in the UK at Frogmore Cottage. They have left working as royals for the "Firm" and I think that is permanent and there's no going back.

As someone who has lived abroad before I will say that there is a cycle, which tends to happen to most people who move to a foreign country:
First year- you are on a high, getting used to the new country, most everything is exciting and new and you can not wait to explore, you also tend to either miss or not realize any cultural subtext you are not following. if you are with a local partner you tend to rely on them to help you and guide you.
second/third year- this is when the high starts to come down a bit, you start to feel homesick here, you have likely not yet made any friends whose bond with is as strong as the ones you had back home, the holidays and other family events tend to be the times you start to feel the homesickness.

After that things either get better for you, or not.

That being said, Covid and lockdown has created major shakedown for many people, and may quicken the homesickness, especially if (like with Harry) a loved one became ill, a financial issue has arisen, or being stuck in the same home with your partner and suddenly realizing you don't know them as well as you thought you do.. i'm sure we all know of at least one couple who called it quits due to lockdown.
 
As someone who has lived abroad before I will say that there is a cycle, which tends to happen to most people who move to a foreign country:
First year- you are on a high, getting used to the new country, most everything is exciting and new and you can not wait to explore, you also tend to either miss or not realize any cultural subtext you are not following. if you are with a local partner you tend to rely on them to help you and guide you.
second/third year- this is when the high starts to come down a bit, you start to feel homesick here, you have likely not yet made any friends whose bond with is as strong as the ones you had back home, the holidays and other family events tend to be the times you start to feel the homesickness.

After that things either get better for you, or not.

Meghan didn't seem to make it through the second transplant year (and is, in fact, now comfortably re-ensconced in familiar surroundings). Should we assume Harry will be different?
 
Meghan will be part of another online women’s conference tomorrow.

https://fortuneconferences.com/conferences/most-powerful-women-summit-2020/?linkId=100659187

Her interview is at 1:15pm EST / 6:15pm GMT.

This conversation is about creating "humane tech" sorry I must have missed it when got a degree in sociology and/or psychology or tech to have the qualification to talk about this topic.

This is truly outrages. I can literally think of two highly qualified women to do this talk instead of Meghan, both have researched and dedicated their careers to this exact same topic!

She sure is doing alot of those paid (and they are paid make no mistake) companies/organizations public speaking stuff speaking of stuff she is not qualified to talk. we all know she only gets these talks because of who she married, which for me as a woman is annoying to see an unqualified woman gets a stage because of the man she married, when she has no qualification or real achievements on the topic.


meanwhile, I have not seen Harry do any except those related to his charities.
I find that interesting, but that may change.
 
Meghan's interviewed has been covered.

https://fortune.com/2020/09/29/meghan-duchess-of-sussex-fortune-mpw/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-misinformation_n_5f73262cc5b6117cd1048a23

“If you look back at anything I’ve said, what ends up being inflammatory is people’s interpretation of it,” “But if you listen to what I actually say”—like encouraging Americans to vote—”it’s not
controversial.” ~ Meghan

I have to agree with her.


Video clip.
 
Last edited:
Meghan didn't seem to make it through the second transplant year (and is, in fact, now comfortably re-ensconced in familiar surroundings). Should we assume Harry will be different?

Meghan situation has been discussed, so I won't go into it.
As for Harry.. I can not say for sure. I have known couples who relocated together (or one was a local the other a foreigner), had kids, things were okay.. until they weren't and they ended up divorced.
Things get tricky if one parent wants to go back to their home country, they may not be able to do that because, to my knowledge, in most custody situations you need the other parent permission to take the child out of the country (sometimes out the state!), if you can not get that you are affectively stuck, and if the other parent is abusive or a narcissist you may have no choice but to stay put until the youngest kid reaches 18.


I don't rule the possibility that if/by the time the couple divorces in a few years that Harry may end up building a strong local support system and he'll decide to stay - especially if he won't get full custody (or as google tells me: primary residential parent).


Time will tell.

Meghan's interviewed has been covered.

https://fortune.com/2020/09/29/meghan-duchess-of-sussex-fortune-mpw/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-misinformation_n_5f73262cc5b6117cd1048a23

“If you look back at anything I’ve said, what ends up being inflammatory is people’s interpretation of it,” “But if you listen to what I actually say”—like encouraging Americans to vote—”it’s not
controversial.” ~ Meghan

I have to agree with her.


Video clip.


She's being obtuse and trying to gaslight people who are reading the situation for what it is. I truly think she thinks she's the smartest ever and we're all dumb sheep.


Her words at the Time video were very specific! and yes, they caused a controversy because it was obvious what was being said between the lines.
You don't have to be blunt and specific if you are using the right code words.
(and I say this as a life long left side voter- I knew exactly what "change" she was talking about, and who she was telling people to go and vote for)
She was not talking in a general manner, she used specific words to create a specific message and now she is crying about people understanding and responding to it?
The controversy exists because she created it.


People who do not like controversy and drama do not seek to create it.
 
Last edited:
It is a conservative publication aligned with the Republican Party.

So....only Democratic/Liberal aligned publications are reliable? :lol: Don’t be absurd. All of them play the spin game to suit their political audiences.
 
Meghan situation has been discussed, so I won't go into it.
As for Harry.. I can not say for sure. I have known couples who relocated together (or one was a local the other a foreigner), had kids, things were okay.. until they weren't and they ended up divorced.
Things get tricky if one parent wants to go back to their home country, they may not be able to do that because, to my knowledge, in most custody situations you need the other parent permission to take the child out of the country (sometimes out the state!), if you can not get that you are affectively stuck, and if the other parent is abusive or a narcissist you may have no choice but to stay put until the youngest kid reaches 18.


I don't rule the possibility that if/by the time the couple divorces in a few years that Harry may end up building a strong local support system and he'll decide to stay - especially if he won't get full custody (or as google tells me: primary residential parent).


Time will tell.




She's being obtuse and trying to gaslight people who are reading the situation for what it is. I truly think she thinks she's the smartest ever and we're all dumb sheep.


Her words at the Time video were very specific! and yes, they caused a controversy because it was obvious what was being said between the lines.
You don't have to be blunt and specific if you are using the right code words.
(and I say this as a life long left side voter- I knew exactly what "change" she was talking about, and who she was telling people to go and vote for)
She was not talking in a general manner, she used specific words to create a specific message and now she is crying about people understanding and responding to it?
The controversy exists because she created it.


People who do not like controversy and drama do not seek to create it.

Well said. If she had t been so verbal about her dislike of Trump then she could claim it was taken out of context or misinterpreted. Not the case and everyone knows it.
 
Meghan situation has been discussed, so I won't go into it.
As for Harry.. I can not say for sure. I have known couples who relocated together (or one was a local the other a foreigner), had kids, things were okay.. until they weren't and they ended up divorced.
Things get tricky if one parent wants to go back to their home country, they may not be able to do that because, to my knowledge, in most custody situations you need the other parent permission to take the child out of the country (sometimes out the state!), if you can not get that you are affectively stuck, and if the other parent is abusive or a narcissist you may have no choice but to stay put until the youngest kid reaches 18.


I don't rule the possibility that if/by the time the couple divorces in a few years that Harry may end up building a strong local support system and he'll decide to stay - especially if he won't get full custody (or as google tells me: primary residential parent).


Time will tell.

"Where's your mom, kids?"

Divorce has nothing to do with it. At least with the US-Canada border, it's helpful to have spousal consent to take your children across, because the first thing the border guards will look for and assume is heading off potential kidnapping/custody battle scenarios.

Although the only time this ever became an issue, I was traveling with my father. My reply: "She's at a meeting!" :lol:

I can only imagine they've gotten tougher since then, and I don't envy Archie in the future if his parents decide to travel with him individually.

She's being obtuse and trying to gaslight people who are reading the situation for what it is. I truly think she thinks she's the smartest ever and we're all dumb sheep.


Her words at the Time video were very specific! and yes, they caused a controversy because it was obvious what was being said between the lines.
You don't have to be blunt and specific if you are using the right code words.
(and I say this as a life long left side voter- I knew exactly what "change" she was talking about, and who she was telling people to go and vote for)
She was not talking in a general manner, she used specific words to create a specific message and now she is crying about people understanding and responding to it?
The controversy exists because she created it.


People who do not like controversy and drama do not seek to create it.

To me, it honestly doesn't matter what she said. It's the timing and the situation, the fact that she knew this could not go unremarked on and Harry not having the sense or restraint to stay out of this minefield.

It would almost have been better to be hung for a sheep and not a lamb, be openly partisan rather than push this boundary and make trouble mouthing nothing but mealy air. If this really meant so much to her and she'd spared a thought, she could have at least done it as Meghan [Whatever], not as the Duchess.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Every interview every article written it always states Meghan the Dss of Sussex. She left the Family behind,so why use the TITLE. Won't Meghan Markle be enough,or Windsor. The TITLE seems to be most important thing to her. Really it is not to be nasty,but it comes across to me,as it is.
 
"Where's your mom, kids?"

Divorce has nothing to do with it. At least with the US-Canada border, it's helpful to have spousal consent to take your children across, because the first thing the border guards will look for and assume is heading off potential kidnapping/custody battle scenarios.

Although the only time this ever became an issue, I was traveling with my father. My reply: "She's at a meeting!" :lol:

I can only imagine they've gotten tougher since then, and I don't envy Archie in the future if his parents decide to travel with him individually.

It applies to divorced couples too!
I asked a divorced friend who lives in the US, she and her US ex both needs each other written permission every time one of them wants to take the kids outside the US.

I don't know when your thing happened, but yes, immigration officers are more stricter now because of not only custody battles but child trafficking.
 
I know that this post might get removed, as it is about the Harry and Meghan's royal title.

An YouGov poll has conducted with the question "Do you think that Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan should or should not be stripped of their royal titles?", conducted on 30th September with a sample size of 3250 British adults.

Should be: 48%
Should not be: 27%
Don't know: 25%​

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...edium=daily_questions&utm_campaign=question_3

Unlike the previous polls, there is the option of "Don't know", which accounted for 25%. The categories that shows the variation are region, politics and age.

YouGov's has also tweeted this out
YouGov @YouGov
Brits on whether Harry and Meghan should be stripped of their royal titles:
Should be: 48%
Should not be: 27%
12:30 AM · Sep 30, 2020·Twitter Web App​

Edited: Inclusion of "British adults"
 
Last edited:
I know that this post might get removed, as it is about the Harry and Meghan's royal title.

An YouGov poll has conducted with the question "Do you think that Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan should or should not be stripped of their royal titles?", conducted on 30th September with a sample size of 3250.
Should be: 48%
Should not be: 27%
Don't know: 25%​
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...edium=daily_questions&utm_campaign=question_3

Unlike the previous polls, there is the option of "Don't know", which accounted for 25%. The categories that shows the variation are region, politics and age.

YouGov's has also tweeted this out
YouGov @YouGov
Brits on whether Harry and Meghan should be stripped of their royal titles:
Should be: 48%
Should not be: 27%
12:30 AM · Sep 30, 2020·Twitter Web App​




This was a survey of Brits, right? Because YouGov also does American polls.
 
This was a survey of Brits, right? Because YouGov also does American polls.

Correct, the survey is conducted on British adults. I have edited my previous post.

The group that has high percentage of "They should be" stripped of their royal titles are
Rest of South, which includes the ceremonial counties of East Sussex and West Sussex [in Region category]: 54%
Conservative [in Politics category]: 70%
Leave [in Politics category]: 66%
50-65 [in Age category]: 58%
65+ [in Age category]: 65%
 
Last edited:
Meghan didn't seem to make it through the second transplant year (and is, in fact, now comfortably re-ensconced in familiar surroundings). Should we assume Harry will be different?

Not everyone reacts in the same way. I emigrated halfway across the world to Australia from Britain, loved it, and met my husband in the first year here. The only time I felt a bit homesick was when my first baby was born because my birth family was so far away.

Harry may well absolutely love California and although miss certain aspects of his old life, others may be looked back on with no regret. As for splitting up, there has been no signs of them even thinking of such a thing. This couple have been tight emotionally since they met.

Harry and Meghan have gone through a huge amount of change since their wedding and nothing, not stuck in the same house through Covid or any of the other major or minor things has broken their bond.
 
If they want to use home footage of themselves, that’s their business, though that is still hypocritical to me as it flies in he face of their insistence on privacy. If that footage includes Royals, that’s a huge NO NO for me.

I can’t see how it could legally include anyone who has not agreed to participate in it. Unless, they include royal engagements that H or M undertook with other members of the family- and use pictures/video already publicly available.
 
I can’t see how it could legally include anyone who has not agreed to participate in it. Unless, they include royal engagements that H or M undertook with other members of the family- and use pictures/video already publicly available.

It couldn’t, assuming things work in the UK as they do in the States. Of course, the real issue for me would be less about legalities and more about morality... That said, I honestly don’t think H and M would do that...
 
I really don't think we can complain to Fortune about that . Meghan called them and asked to be included. And this really seems to be her manner of doing things. Her team are finding events and then are cold calling to find out if the producers are interested in working with her. Some people are - but many are not. (ie. Lady Gaga's Covid Concert - We all in this together)

Personally I think this shows more then a bit of desperation and lack of direction in regard to a Charity and Patronage portfolio. But whatever floats your boat.
 
“If you look back at anything I’ve said, what ends up being inflammatory is people’s interpretation of it,” “But if you listen to what I actually say”—like encouraging Americans to vote—”it’s not
controversial.” ~ Meghan

I have to agree with her.

I agree with the content of the speech as well - but now lets look at the context.

If this was done by someone who hasn't spoken out to their own fan base about the hate speech they are sprouting online, they are then indirectly supporting and encouraging it. Meghan has in the past and currently through her PR specialized using social media to get views - I will go as far as saying she used click bait herself in her suggestive photos and dropping private comments to the press to pick up.

Also and the most important - Meghan has in the passed (some before her marriage) spoken out about Trump and his negativity and hate speech. It does not take a hop skip and jump here to put two and two together here.
 
I really don't think we can complain to Fortune about that . Meghan called them and asked to be included. And this really seems to be her manner of doing things. Her team are finding events and then are cold calling to find out if the producers are interested in working with her. Some people are - but many are not. (ie. Lady Gaga's Covid Concert - We all in this together)

Personally I think this shows more then a bit of desperation and lack of direction in regard to a Charity and Patronage portfolio. But whatever floats your boat.

Wait she called them? IF that is true it would explain why she seems so out of place with the rest of the line up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom