The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 4: April-June 2021

[Sunnystar]

Good points.

I will add this though: Harry MIGHT have employer based health insurance via his job as Chief impact officer. I have some level of doubt that he truly puts in the time that other people would have to in order to do that particular job. But he may well have the perk of insurance out of it. And it may have been a reason to take the job. Insurance is expensive.

Oh, very good point! Yes, let's assume that the CIO position gives him employer-based healthcare by probably 90%. Even the most expensive of employer health plans for the employee, spouse and dependents isn't going to cost more than $500/month out of the employee's salary, though they're still going to have co-pays, prescriptions and an annual deductible - so, figure $1000/month. Plus, Meghan might still qualify for SAG-AFTRA health insurance since she did that Disney narration.

But, still, shaving off $100k in health insurance costs still leaves them in the hole with regard to the idea of living off the interest of Harry's fortune alone.

We can't forget, too, that they have to pay for Sunshine-Sachs, their PR people. From what I've read on here, Sunshine-Sachs is a PR firm with a reputation of representing a lot of celebrities and they are known for their scorched earth, win-at-all-cost attitude and tactics. I don't think they would come cheap.

They also most likely have a team of lawyers on retainer. As we know, they've needed them.

Yes, I forgot about Sunshine-Sachs. Best guess is that Sunshine-Sachs as well as their attorneys are falling under the mantle of Archewell, similar to, in all likelihood, their PAs. In that case, they probably aren't paying for them out of Harry's personal fortune.

 

[Osipi]

Back to Harry and Meghan, I fully supported them leaving royal life and wanting to be their own persons and making their own income and being philanthropists the way they wanted to do it. Every person has the inherent right to live their lives the way that makes them happy.

The way Harry and Meghan went about doing it by releasing their "manifesto" as if it was a done deal really soured me on the couple. My opinion has constantly gone downhill since then.

Perhaps now that the interview has passed and the Oprah documentary and it's follow up have been aired, they'll move onto actually doing something that is beneficial to their world around them. At least I hope so. This couple could use their name and public personas to do so much good rather than seem to be in it solely for greed and notoriety for themselves. Hope all we hear about next is the birth of their daughter which really shouldn't be too far off now.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, hoping to hear soon, in maybe the next fortnight that a little girl is born.

We don’t know what money Harry and Meghan have already invested in the US. And if they ever sold their home it will probably have doubled in value already simply because of who they are.

[...]

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

I totally agree with you, we have less dramatic but somehow similar stuff with Prince Joachim who should be more grateful IMO.

I wonder who this therapist is, he mentions now, if he stills sees her what must she think, no professional would advise him to act like this.
Though it seems to free him to certain scale which is probably all important at the moment.
And of course making money. And him Oprah working on this since 2018 and now broadcasting seems to have opened a valve in him.
So much anger, he repeatedly speaks of his anger, wow, let's hope he finds a balance soon, if not this will most likely cause physical problems, too.

And how shocked Meghan was to look behind the curtain of his families life. Gosh, he says so many bad things, he just can't stop.

I like the idea of speaking out, but Harry seems to be riding the wave, feeling like King of the world, but once the sea calms he'll fall deep down the ocean.
I wonder with what Harry wants to go on in the future. New stories might be rare, because the RF is wary about him and must be! He will drag them all into his dirt if they give him the chance! he proofed now.
But he has many many memories of some 36 years to tell, childhood stories, if the US audience love Diana, why not let them know more of it?

Or will H&M simply stop once they fullfilled their contract with Netflix?
Made enough money?
Live the quiet life to protect their children?
Lead a z-celebrity life with elderly Meghan trying to hide her true age (like so many others at Hollywood), appearing to a few red carpet events?

I know too little about the states, but there are so many celebs I think H&M will soon be boring for the media?

Well, another thing confuses me. It took me some time to realize who this Zac is. The concept of the show and focus is really for the US audience.
I bought me a new ipad a therefore have one year appleTC+ for free,
but certainly had not bought it only to watch this, I can't believe there are millions who will pay because of these two.
Netflix is another thing, people buy it for a month to watch a special film, it's cheaper than going to the cinema.

Yes, I agree. The big streaming services and those who are developing tv and movies are HBO, Netflix and Amazon in the US. I found this and it looks pretty accurate to me. While iPhones, iPads, and other Apple products are everywhere, Apple TV isn’t even in the top 8.

1. HBO Max ($14.99 per month)
2. Netflix ($8.99 per month)
3. Disney Plus ($6.99 per month)
4. Hulu ($5.99 per month)
5. Sling TV ($35 per month)
6. Amazon Prime Video ($119 per year)
7. Fubo TV ($64.99 per month)
8. Crackle (free)

https://www.tomsguide.com/us/best-streaming-video-services,review-2625.html

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

It is not uncommon for newspapers who cover areas with high-profile people to routinely check police reports to see if anything comes up involving a name/ address of one of those individuals. I have no idea how the information available to the public works in the area involved here, but it may be that no one leaked this story. TMZ may have been doing a routine check for information (police called to the home of a well-known individual), saw this information, and worked backward to get the details for the story.

And while I agree that it doesn't make Harry look great, it has taken focus away from some of the most incomprehensible and misguided things he has ever uttered on the public stage, to wit, implying that someone in the throes of a suicidal crisis can change their mind simply by the thoughts of the pain it would cause surviving loved ones. (Seriously, if this were the case, no one with loved ones would commit suicide, and what his comments imply for those of us who are survivors of suicide loss is appalling, as if our loved ones weren't able to just take a step back and consider what their loss would mean to us, or perhaps we should have just given them 'a cuddle' to get them past the moment.) This story taking the focus off those comments is a godsend for Harry.

Harry’s comments about suicidal ideation and “getting over it” with a cuddle are outrageous. And he can’t even get that story straight. Meg wakes him up crying, tells him she wants to kill herself and has a plan, they have a quick cuddle which is all they have time for because they have to get up RIGHT THEN (is it the middle of the night? Is it morning?) and get dressed ( either in the middle of the night or in the morning - you pick) to go out to an EVENING event. This makes zero sense.

Bashing your own family is horrible, but setting yourself up as a mental health guru when you don’t have a clue about what you are talking about is despicable and dangerous.

I really want to know when he had that EMDR session with the UK therapist and what bill of goods she was sold to allow that session to be on TV. It was remote so I’m assuming it was after they left the UK. I have checked out her credentials and she is not only licensed but someone who teaches and supervises others who are working on becoming licensed. So her credentials in EMDR at least look very, very good to me. I cannot believe she would have agreed to be a part of this had she known what he planned to say.

I am so angry about this callow, kitchen table approach to mental health.?

 

[Queen Claude]

Yeah Edward VIII lied about having money put aside, but he owned Balmoral and Sandringham and IMO should not have felt obligated to sign the properties over to his brother without being compensated.

My understanding is that the original scheme was to have Edward VIII / The Duke of Windsor be compensated for Balmoral and Sandringham by getting an income from the Civil List - I don't see that as honorable either. The government / Parliament ended up vetoing that arrangement.

I am an admirer of George VI, Edward VIII not so much, however I don't have a problem that George VI had to endure a few lean years due to him having to purchase the estates from his brother. When he ascended he got income from both the duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, and during his brief reign he accumulated a decent amount of wealth.

Furthermore, both of those properties were acquisitions during Queen Victoria's reign, so fairly recent acquisitions and no long-standing tradition of monarch to monarch transfer. Osborne House was also acquired during Victoria's reign, and has the distinction of being where she died, and yet her successor had no problem divesting of the property.

 

[camelot23ca]

Harry’s comments about suicidal ideation and “getting over it” with a cuddle are outrageous. And he can’t even get that story straight. Meg wakes him up crying, tells him she wants to kill herself and has a plan, they have a quick cuddle which is all they have time for because they have to get up RIGHT THEN (is it the middle of the night? Is it morning?) and get dressed ( either in the middle of the night or in the morning - you pick) to go out to an EVENING event. This makes zero sense.

Bashing your own family is horrible, but setting yourself up as a mental health guru when you don’t have a clue about what you are talking about is despicable and dangerous.

I really want to know when he had that EMDR session with the UK therapist and what bill of goods she was sold to allow that session to be on TV. It was remote so I’m assuming it was after they left the UK. I have checked out her credentials and she is not only licensed but someone who teaches and supervises others who are working on becoming licensed. So her credentials in EMDR at least look very, very good to me. I cannot believe she would have agreed to be a part of this had she known what he planned to say.

I am so angry about this callow, kitchen table approach to mental health.?

Yeah, I have to wonder who is really helped by this sort of programming. Watching celebrities get some sort of fix by sharing their alleged traumas with the world - this is entertainment for profit, nothing more. Who is being helped in any tangible way by watching Harry, or lady gaga, or whoever put their issues out there for public examination? I know the answer is supposed to be that there are people out there in real trouble who will watch and.. what? Feel supported and heard by famous people who have more money than they know what to do with, and who, by participating in this show get both the ego trip of their fans telling them how brave they are and a boost to their careers?

So, the show benefits Apple and Oprah and Harry and lady gaga in obvious ways. But I don’t understand how a person with mental health issues is supposed to be helped by watching it. So again, it’s just entertainment. It’s Keeping Up With the Kardashians with delusions of grandeur.

Harry and Meghan could have decided to focus full time on working towards ways to expand access to the therapies they found helpful. Get well trained therapists into communities that don’t have them now. Partner with companies, churches, schools, community centres. It’s not especially glamorous and it would take a long time to see major changes, but if this is an area they’re truly passionate about then there are worse ways to spend the next ten or twenty years. Right now they’re just flitting from one hot button issue to the next. They should focus their energies on one or two issues and use their names and influence to gradually and responsibly make a difference.

 

[Denville]

Yeah, I have to wonder who is really helped by this sort of programming. Watching celebrities get some sort of fix by sharing their alleged traumas with the world - this is entertainment for profit, nothing more. Who is being helped in any tangible way by watching Harry, or lady gaga, or whoever put their issues out there for public examination? I know the answer is supposed to be that there are people out there in real trouble who will watch and.. what? Feel supported and heard by famous people who have more money than they know what to do with, and who, by participating in this show get both the ego trip of their fans telling them how brave they are and a boost to their careers?

So, the show benefits Apple and Oprah and Harry and lady gaga in obvious ways. But I don’t understand how a person with mental health issues is supposed to be helped by watching it. So again, it’s just entertainment. It’s Keeping Up With the Kardashians with delusions of grandeur.

Harry and Meghan could have decided to focus full time on working towards ways to expand access to the therapies they found helpful. Get well trained therapists into communities that don’t have them now. Partner with companies, churches, schools, community centres. It’s not especially glamorous and it would take a long time to see major changes, but if this is an area they’re truly passionate about then there are worse ways to spend the next ten or twenty years. Right now they’re just flitting from one hot button issue to the next. They should focus their energies on one or two issues and use their names and influence to gradually and responsibly make a difference.

But that's not what they want to do. They may say different but their actions show the truth of their words a year ago that they wanted to leave royal life to "Make an income". And they are presumably doing that, by these programmes and also getting their revenge on the RF that "ill treated them." But IMO what they really want is to be seen on TV, to get noticed, and to make money. If they wanted to help people they would join an existing worthwhile organisation and use their free time to work for it.

 

[Alison H]

I think there've been some excellent TV programmes about trauma and mental health issues. Rio Ferdinand, a former England footballer whose first wife tragically died of cancer in her 30s, presented a programme about coping with being a young widower and single father of three motherless children. Jesy Nelson from Little Mix presented a programme about eating disorders and related issues.Roman Kemp, radio DJ and son of Martin Kemp from Spandau Ballet, presented a programme about suicide amongst young men, after a close friend of his took his own life. They were all widely praised, and saw an upsurge in people asking for help.
Even soap opera storylines have seen a big increase in people contacting support services, and the programmes work closely with charities to make sure that they approach things in the most helpful way.
So I do think that these programmes can be helpful -but it's where there's a focus on helping others who may be in a similar situation and showing them that help's out there, not in using TV time to slag off your family and complain about how hard done by you are.

 

[Denville]

I think there've been some excellent TV programmes about trauma and mental health issues. Rio Ferdinand, a former England footballer whose first wife tragically died of cancer in her 30s, presented a programme about coping with being a young widower and single father of three motherless children. Jesy Nelson from Little Mix presented a programme about eating disorders and related issues. Roman Kemp, radio DJ and son of Martin Kemp from Spandau Ballet, presented a programme about suicide amongst young men, after a close friend of his took his own life. They were all widely praised, and saw an upsurge in people asking for help.
Even soap opera storylines have seen a big increase in people contacting support services, and the programmes work closely with charities to make sure that they approach things in the most helpful way.
So I do think that these programmes can be helpful - but it's where there's a focus on helping others who may be in a similar situation and showing them that help's out there, not in using TV time to slag off your family and complain about how hard done by you are.

Well. Im dubious. I think that years ago, when people were more reticent a programme by someone well known, about some issue of mental or physical health could be helfpul in showing people they were not alone and how to get help.
But it seems to me that too much is shared on TV now, and its more about gaining sympathy for the "hard done by one" than helping others. And Harry's programme seems to be pretty much "Poor poor us, we were so cruelly treated we should have been treated better." and has little to offer to someone who is alone with a problem and seeking help....

 

[Royalist.in.NC]

I think there've been some excellent TV programmes about trauma and mental health issues. Rio Ferdinand, a former England footballer whose first wife tragically died of cancer in her 30s, presented a programme about coping with being a young widower and single father of three motherless children. Jesy Nelson from Little Mix presented a programme about eating disorders and related issues. Roman Kemp, radio DJ and son of Martin Kemp from Spandau Ballet, presented a programme about suicide amongst young men, after a close friend of his took his own life. They were all widely praised, and saw an upsurge in people asking for help.
Even soap opera storylines have seen a big increase in people contacting support services, and the programmes work closely with charities to make sure that they approach things in the most helpful way.
So I do think that these programmes can be helpful - but it's where there's a focus on helping others who may be in a similar situation and showing them that help's out there, not in using TV time to slag off your family and complain about how hard done by you are.

Alison, this is good to know that there have been some programs in the UK that have been viewed as helpful to others.

 

[camelot23ca]

I think there've been some excellent TV programmes about trauma and mental health issues. Rio Ferdinand, a former England footballer whose first wife tragically died of cancer in her 30s, presented a programme about coping with being a young widower and single father of three motherless children. Jesy Nelson from Little Mix presented a programme about eating disorders and related issues.Roman Kemp, radio DJ and son of Martin Kemp from Spandau Ballet, presented a programme about suicide amongst young men, after a close friend of his took his own life. They were all widely praised, and saw an upsurge in people asking for help.
Even soap opera storylines have seen a big increase in people contacting support services, and the programmes work closely with charities to make sure that they approach things in the most helpful way.
So I do think that these programmes can be helpful -but it's where there's a focus on helping others who may be in a similar situation and showing them that help's out there, not in using TV time to slag off your family and complain about how hard done by you are.

Fair enough; these sorts of shows aren’t really my taste, so I really only wind up hearing about the ones that get a lot of publicity like the Oprah/Harry fiasco. The ones I’ve watched have been very self indulgent and more like vanity projects or thinly disguised attempts to boost the careers of the participants, but I’m likely not getting a representative sample! I’ve certainly listened to a few thoughtful and well done podcasts about various mental health issues over the last few years, but what I’ve appreciated about those is that they always provide some sort of clear advice or information for people listening who may also be struggling. They’re interesting stories but, as you say, the focus is on helping others.

Anyway, I hope that as time goes on Harry and Meghan may change their strategy and look at how they can maximize their impact in ways that will really make a difference for people who don’t have their resources.

 

[vulture]

The ones I’ve watched have been very self indulgent and more like vanity projects or thinly disguised attempts to boost the careers of the participants, but I’m likely not getting a representative ...

I took a media law class last fall - I’m not a law student, I’m working on a communications master’s degree. In the US, broadcast stations have been free from the obligation to dedicate some of their air time to public service programming since the early 1970s. Unless the content is being produced by a non-profit, it’s safe to assume at least in the US that the purpose of the content is profit. Some of the content and stations they are shown on have branding designed to give them gravitas, but branding is all they have going for them, as far as actual public service goes. It seems that for most people the appearance of doing good is sufficient. That’s what the branding does. Different branding for different audiences. That is the only difference between tabloid type programming and “serious” programming - the branding.

In my opinion that is what the people purchasing Harry and Megan’s services are getting - branding to make their products look legit. Ideas are products, as are media products and physical products. I hope that helps explain things that are difficult to make sense out of!

 

[Osipi]

One of my favorite shows to watch here is called "A Million Little Things". Its been a success story for ABC. The show started its first episode with the suicide of a business man. The show then revolves around the family and the close knit set of friends that he had and the impact his suicide left on them.

Just last week, the episode was about the young woman who was the businessman's daughter. She had suffered from sort of a sexual assault from her music mentor. They've tackled many different issues in the 3 years this show has been on the air.

Why is it more impactful for me? They show what could be you or me or your neighbor experiencing something (never, ever graphic though) then the cast takes a few minutes at the end of the show to talk to their audience and say things like "if you have had thoughts like this or have experienced something like this call (appropriate hot line phone number here). To me, this is using an entertaining show to bring awareness to an issue and if someone is watching the show that it impacts because it's their issue too, the information is there to get the help that they'd need.

Harry's life and woes are not identifiable to 99.9% of Americans as they've never walked the road Harry's walked. Harry no more could resonate with the steel mill worker that lost his job, is about to lose his home and is thinking of ending it for insurance cash out for his family than I can identify with getting my hair done just right to hold a tiara.

Harry's problems are valid and I'm sure affecting him deeply but in that case, he should be seeking professional therapy for himself and concentrate solely on his own mental health. Going public with what "bugs" Harry helps no one at all. He most certainly isn't a success story of overcoming mental illness or stress but rather a prime example of someone still deep in a dark place no one else has been.

 

[vulture]

Osipi what you just wrote about is something I was considering doing my thesis on - how do individuals use media to create value for themselves? Sometimes it’s intended by the content producers, sometimes it isn’t.

Corporate social responsibilityis a fascinating topic I learned about in Marketing, and I just had Social Engineering. What I see happening a lot is CSR used as a way to social engineer people to buy their products while appearing to serve a higher cause. I think some of the people doing this believe they are doing the right thing. Unless they are at a level of management high enough up to know the full agenda, they may never realize how they are being used.

 

[vulture]

Osipi one of the TV shows I wrote about in one of my papers for Media And Culture class was Law and Order SVU. With this show, some viewers can indulge in voyeurism while others can get their awareness raised of certain things. The purpose of my paper was not to judge whether the show was good or bad, but how it can be argued that there are both harmful and beneficial effects from the same show, because members of the audience get their own meaning from it. Since some of the effects are conscious and some subconscious, i advocate caution and mindful use of media to minimize harmful effects. In other words, i promote media literacy skills for everyone.

 

[Osipi]

Osipi what you just wrote about is something I was considering doing my thesis on - how do individuals use media to create value for themselves? Sometimes it’s intended by the content producers, sometimes it isn’t.

Corporate social responsibilityis a fascinating topic I learned about in Marketing, and I just had Social Engineering. What I see happening a lot is CSR used as a way to social engineer people to buy their products while appearing to serve a higher cause. I think some of the people doing this believe they are doing the right thing. Unless they are at a level of management high enough up to know the full agenda, they may never realize how they are being used.

When I was younger many, many moons ago, there was a book released that was quite popular and even parents were buying it to have their kids read it and teachers would tell their students about it. The book is "Go Ask Alice" by Beatrice Sparks. It was released in 1971. Curious, I used my search engine to see if I could find out what the impact of it was and these are a few things. First up, the positive.

"This story scares the hell out of you through a teenage girl. This book consists of drugs, sex, and violence. Definitely recommend, at a decent age of course. This story shows the struggles of being addicted to drugs, and wanting so bad to go back and erase it all."

Later on, the reviews get more negative. This is from 2018.

https://www.theparisreview.org/blog...the adult reader,Happened to Nancy (the “real

What is the difference between "A Million Little Things" and "Go Ask Alice" and Harry baring his soul with Oprah on Apple TV? The difference to me is that the show and the book present the issues (even fictionally) through experiences that happen to someone suffering in the third person. They're relating about the issue itself that could affect any one of us. Harry is focused solely on the "me" and, as you have said, it becomes his "brand".

I believe the show and the book's purpose was to present the issues and to guide a person identifying with the "character" that they're not alone and tell how to find the help they need. Harry doesn't do this. He's baring his soul while obviously finger pointing to "sources" such as his family to elicit sympathy and call attention to himself (his brand). Big difference.

 

[Denville]

Go Ask Alice was a fake book. It was sold as a genuine diary from a teenage addict and it quite simply was not. It was written as I recall by an adult who had no experience of taking drugs. Not really something that was a good idea.

As for Harry, I dont know if he has genuinely convicned himself that he's "doing good" with his programmes but I think its pretty obvious to everyone else that he is not doing any good.. and that its just something he is doing to make money....

 

[vulture]

I think the CSR portion of some content can create value for some viewers even if the content is produced for profit as Osipi explained, in other words. Each organization’s members have an obligation to perpetuate and benefit their own organization, unless they go rogue, which does happen! Sometimes it’s good for the brand to spread some benefit around. That doesn’t necessarily mean that benefit has no value. But people have different standards for what is acceptable. If people don’t understand the values of their audience well enough they can go too far. Sometimes they have made a conscious choice to write off one audience while courting another. I think there is a lot of that going on, what do you think?

 

[Osipi]

Osipi one of the TV shows I wrote about in one of my papers for Media And Culture class was Law and Order SVU. With this show, some viewers can indulge in voyeurism while others can get their awareness raised of certain things. The purpose of my paper was not to judge whether the show was good or bad, but how it can be argued that there are both harmful and beneficial effects from the same show, because members of the audience get their own meaning from it. Since some of the effects are conscious and some subconscious, i advocate caution and mindful use of media to minimize harmful effects. In other words, i promote media literacy skills for everyone.

Very wise words. Information is like food. We're affected by not only what we eat but what we feed our minds with. Just mentioning L&O: SVU brings to mind an episode about a young boy (think 13 or 14) that abused fellow classmates because he learned by watching porn that "no means yes".

This is good definition of the impact of Harry and Meghan using their public persona to try and tarnish not only his family, but the institution of the monarchy itself. They're actively saying its OK to trash your family, your friends, your neighbor down the street and even your God for your woes and mental stresses. It's someone else's fault and never your own. This is sending a totally *wrong* message.

 

[Osipi]

Go Ask Alice was a fake book. It was sold as a genuine diary from a teenage addict and it quite simply was not. It was written as I recall by an adult who had no experience of taking drugs. Not really something that was a good idea.

As for Harry, I dont know if he has genuinely convicned himself that he's "doing good" with his programmes but I think its pretty obvious to everyone else that he is not doing any good.. and that its just something he is doing to make money....

To me, it doesn't matter if it was a real diary or a fake diary. I'm talking about the *impact* of the book. "A Million Little Things" is fictional with characters played by actors. It's impact and how they use it to highlight issues and then the actors (portraying themselves) at the end advise the audience how to get help if needed.

 

[vulture]

I think much entertainment we are exposed to has a social engineering aspect to it. I can’t say what percentage - but I assume there is an agenda and analyze everything just in case. Does it completely protect me? No I don’t think so. Does it make me more resilient? I think it probably does. But I limit my intake severely compared to most people as a precaution. I like discussion boards a lot because you can get more than one point of view to think about.

 

[Denville]

To me, it doesn't matter if it was a real diary or a fake diary. I'm talking about the *impact* of the book. "A Million Little Things" is fictional with characters played by actors. It's impact and how they use it to highlight issues and then the actors (portraying themselves) at the end advise the audience how to get help if needed.

But it does matter. It was sold as a real book by a real teenage addict.. and it wasn't. Its faded into justifiable obscurity and seems to have been pretty homophobic. It was written by someone who knew nothing of drugs and probably not much about teenagers or gay teenagers either.

 

[Denville]

I think much entertainment we are exposed to has a social engineering aspect to it. I can’t say what percentage - but I assume there is an agenda and analyze everything just in case. Does it completely protect me? No I don’t think so. Does it make me more resilient? I think it probably does. But I limit my intake severely compared to most people as a precaution. I like discussion boards a lot because you can get more than one point of view to think about.

I'm not sure what this has to do with Harry. HE is using his fame as a royal to get on TV/internet and do these broadcasts, and his motives are pretty much to make money and to hit out at his family for what he perceives as wrongs against him and Meghan. I dont know what social engineering is involved.

 

[vulture]

This is good definition of the impact of Harry and Meghan using their public persona to try and tarnish not only his family, but the institution of the monarchy itself. They're actively saying its OK to trash your family, your friends, your neighbor down the street and even your God for your woes and mental stresses. It's someone else's fault and never your own. This is sending a totally *wrong* message.

I think the institution of the monarchy being “cancelled” is something that one audience sees as a good thing, another as a bad thing, and still others have not thought it over. I’m pretty sure I know what M&H handlers think. What I don’t know is what M&H think they are doing. I don’t know if they are in the same side. But I’m watching and reading for clues in order to form theories!

 

[Denville]

I think the institution of the monarchy being “cencelled” is something that one audience sees as a good thing, another as a bad thing, and still others have not thought it over. I’m pretty sure I know what M&H handlers think. What I don’t know is what M&H think they are doing. I don’t know if they are in the same side. But I’m watching and reading for clues in order to form theories!

Who really thinks that the monarchy is going ot be "cancelled"?

 

[Osipi]

But it does matter. It was sold as a real book by a real teenage addict.. and it wasn't. Its faded into justifiable obscurity and seems to have been pretty homophobic. It was written by someone who knew nothing of drugs and probably not much about teenagers or gay teenagers either.

If the book scared just one teen from starting to use drugs and go down the road to addiction, I would say that the book served a purpose. Dan Brown's "The DaVinci Code" was totally a work of fiction based on some possible historic fact and even though it was billed as fiction, the Catholic Church was really up in arms about it and reacted to the book as if it was factual. Same with an old show "Married with Children". Yeps. The show Meghan's dad worked on. It was billed as entertainment.

"Controversy. In 1989, Terry Rakolta, from Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, led a boycott of the show after viewing the episode "Her Cups Runneth Over". ... Amanda Bearse told News Corp Australia in 2018 that she did not believe the show would work in the present day given its content amid a more politically correct climate."

What did all the outrage of the show do? It actually *increased" it's popularity and the show ran for years. Is this perhaps what Harry is trying to accomplish? Plant his feet and his face and his name into the public conscious by spewing whatever "truths" come out of his mouth as outrageous?

As for the monarchy. As these documentaries are aimed specifically at an American audience, I seriously doubt 95% of Americans actually know or care how the British monarchy works. They know of the British royal family but most do not know how they relate to the "Firm", the family business that supports the monarchy or even the relationship between the monarchy and it's Parliamentary form of government. It's all Greek to most Americans, I'd think.

 

[vulture]

I'm not sure what this has to do with Harry. HE is using his fame as a royal to get on TV/internet and do these broadcasts, and his motives are pretty much to make money and to hit out at his family for what he perceives as wrongs against him and Meghan. I dont know what social engineering is involved.

I don’t know either! I’m not assuming that H&M’s “handlers” and their motives are the same, or that they are not. I’m just using what I’ve learned to theorize and analyze. Only H&M know what they think they are trying to do. There is no way for anyone else to know that. We can only observe and interpret according to what our prior experience and life situation indicates to us.

 

[Denville]

If the book scared just one teen from starting to use drugs and go down the road to addiction, I would say that the book served a purpose. Dan Brown's "The DaVinci Code" was totally a work of fiction based on some possible historic fact and even though it was billed as fiction, the Catholic Church was really up in arms about it and reacted to the book as if it was factual. Same with an old show "Married with Children". Yeps. The show Meghan's dad worked on. It was billed as entertainment.

"Controversy. In 1989, Terry Rakolta, from Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, led a boycott of the show after viewing the episode "Her Cups Runneth Over". ... Amanda Bearse told News Corp Australia in 2018 that she did not believe the show would work in the present day given its content amid a more politically correct climate."

What did all the outrage of the show do? It actually *increased" it's popularity and the show ran for years. Is this perhaps what Harry is trying to accomplish? Plant his feet and his face and his name into the public conscious by spewing whatever "truths" come out of his mouth as outrageous?

I really dont know what the heck Married with Children has to do with - well anything except having a good laugh.
And I doubt if GO ASK Alice did much good because it was a badly written book which probably influenced teens to be homophobic more than it scared them off drugs. Plus IMO it matters, if you write a book and market it falsely.

 

[Denville]

I don’t know either! I’m not assuming that H&M’s “handlers” and their motives are the same, or that they are not. I’m just using what I’ve learned to theorize and analyze. Only H&M know what they think they are trying to do. There is no way for anyone else to know that. We can only observe and interpret according to what our prior experience and life situation indicates to us.

I think its pretty clear what they are trying to do. Theyve made numerous false statements, and their avowed intent on leaving the RF and the UK was to make a "professional income" and achieve financial independence. I dont know who their "handlers" are as I think that they have never been willing to take advice....