The Duke and Duchess of Sussex with Oprah I - Pre-interview, Feb-March 2021

[Kataryn]

Look up, see who's talking there and well... make up your own mind.


And here I ask: please, make up ypur own mind, watch the interview like I will and only then form your own opinion. or do you trust the media more than yourself???

 

[Queen Ester]

By simply asking to come and hoping HM or Charles want photos of a family "reunion"/make up, by threatening to have a repeat of the Remembrance Sunday Cemetery photoshoot farce every royal event, by publicly pointing out and complaining every time Bea, Eugenie, Peter, Zara etc get invited onto the Balcony and they're potentially not invited because they aren't working royals either.

I think there will be a period where they and the press try to make every event about them whether they're there or not.

You mean they will make an appearance on their own balcony)))) and wave hands to the adoring public, that's something I would watch

 

[Claire]

Yep - And if Harry's remarries it is likely to be a St. George's. And of course HRH Prince Archie and other subsequent children will be married from Windsor as well. It is what is expected and the royal family have not leg to stand on not to give it to him.

 

[duchessrachel]

By simply asking to come and hoping HM or Charles want photos of a family "reunion"/make up, by threatening to have a repeat of the Remembrance Sunday Cemetery photoshoot farce every royal event, by publicly pointing out and complaining every time Bea, Eugenie, Peter, Zara etc get invited onto the Balcony and they're potentially not invited because they aren't working royals either.

I think there will be a period where they and the press try to make every event about them whether they're there or not.

I highly doubt the Queen will give into threats, although I don't put it past Harry and Meghan to make threats. I doubt Meghan even wants to come. I don't think she will ever engage with the Royal Family again. It will only be Harry who comes to the UK.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

[...]


And here I ask: please, make up ypur own mind, watch the interview like I will and only then form your own opinion. or do you trust the media more than yourself???

I get your point. However, I am basing my opinion on the clips. In one, Meghan accuses the "Firm" of spreading falsehoods about her. In my mind, the "Firm" is the royal family, not the "men in gray" and I don't see any evidence that the "Firm" or the Palace was involved in the Times story about bullying. She also mentions "losing" things, which I assume refers to the patronages, as if the Queen was being vindictive rather than just deciding that it was inappropriate for nonworking royals to hold those positions.

Another clip shows Meghan complaining about some of the restrictions on her ability to agree to an interview with an American talk show host. Finally, we have Harry passive-aggressively criticizing his father.

Maybe the rest of the interview will put them in a better light, but I am not hopeful given that Oprah also says they revealed some "explosive" things. "Explosive" revelations are rarely positive.

 

[Durham]

What do you mean fake? They interviewed the "experts" yesterday with questions and they spoke as if they had 100% seen the full interview. It was a prank and they fell for it. The only old footage used was examples of how the media was speaking of the Sussexes daily. They were setting up prank.

And American network already went to them for comments.

https://www.insider.com/youtube-pranksters-trick-royal-experts-into-lying-about-meghan-markle-2021-3

Well that's not quite what one of them says:

Dickie added to Metro.co.uk: ‘The approach from Beneath The Fold (note correct name) alleged to be a legitimate invitation for a fast turnaround, pre-recorded interview commissioned by a UK network, to be aired on Monday 8th March 2021. ‘This was deliberately misleading and a “scam”. I commented only on clips already in global circulation, but my interview was edited so as to imply I was speculating on the full programme interview. I was not speculating. I do not speculate.’

https://metro.co.uk/2021/03/06/josh...-experts-lie-about-harry-and-meghan-14199844/

That's why it would be interesting to see the entire interview to know what these four actually did say. What the full context was. Anything can be edited to prove a particular point.

 

[Claire]

It is actually a few odd argument - but SS is actually very smart here. It is a fact that Clarence House used the press against Princess Diana (lets forget that she did the same for a minute). It is also widely accepted that he did the same against Sarah Ferguson, later Prince Andrew, Prince Edward, Sophie and Harry. So releasing negative stories against your family members is not a far fetch for Clarence House and by extension Kensington Palace.
In a rather odd way - Meghan is speaking on behalf of the last 5 people who are not able to say that they did exactly that. I was recently reminded that most of Sarah's public persona was created by the press, pretty much everything we know of the Wessex's is and well Harry and Meghan seem to have taken offensive to the narrative the press were creating.
Yes - it comes down to been in control of your image. How important is it to you that the image the public has of you is favorable. In the case of Edward - he doesn't care if the people believe he is alive or dead, or exists at all. But Harry and Meghan have chosen to make a living off their personality and image. They had to break the impression that the palace and press by extension have given them. They have to say that is a lie - I will now show you who I really am.
However the bullying allegation is different. As bullying is a rather personal crime and where one person will be offended where another will not be - it is just there to pile on the offensives of why she left. And to set herself up as a expert on the subject.

 

[tommy100]

It would be interesting to see how many interview and media offers they would get if they stopped talking about the Queen and RF - well to be fair we will get to know how that looks one day as eventually they'll only have the same old RF stories to rehash.

I would love to know what Oprah makes of it all really.

 

[tommy100]

Well that's not quite what one of them says:

Dickie added to Metro.co.uk: ‘The approach from Beneath The Fold (note correct name) alleged to be a legitimate invitation for a fast turnaround, pre-recorded interview commissioned by a UK network, to be aired on Monday 8th March 2021. ‘This was deliberately misleading and a “scam”. I commented only on clips already in global circulation, but my interview was edited so as to imply I was speculating on the full programme interview. I was not speculating. I do not speculate.’

https://metro.co.uk/2021/03/06/josh...-experts-lie-about-harry-and-meghan-14199844/

That's why it would be interesting to see the entire interview to know what these four actually did say. What the full context was. Anything can be edited to prove a particular point.

All that can be proved here is that anything can be edited to suit a purpose - as we may well see on Sunday.

 

[Durham]

The carriage at Trooping is out of the question; they turned their back no being working senior royals, so no reason at all for them to be in a carriage. That's why most people are wondering about 'the balcony'.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if this is the end of the 'entire family' being on the balcony. This year they can easily say that only the senior working royals (and the Cambridge kids) will be on the balcony because of Covid-regulations and next year continue that pattern; because 'what to do about Andrew' and 'what to do about Harry & Meghan' can most easily be solved by not putting any other family members on the balcony. I would feel sorry that everyone else would need to be sacrificed but that could very well be the reality. The alternative would be to allow all three of them in the balcony but not in the procession as they only attend in a personal capacity as family members of the monarch.

I assume the whole family will keep being invited for the Christmas luncheon; and for other personal events like weddings and funerals and most likely also for the coronation.

Well it is the monarch's "official" birthday not her real one anyway. So there's no reason why it shouldn't be just "official" representatives of the crown on the balcony.

As to coronations one king refused his own wife, the new queen, admission to the abbey so who knows. Coronations are supposed to be occasions of unity after all. The last thing any new monarch would want would be bad publicity over the attendance of divisive relatives I would have thought.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

It is actually a few odd argument - but SS is actually very smart here. It is a fact that Clarence House used the press against Princess Diana (lets forget that she did the same for a minute). It is also widely accepted that he did the same against Sarah Ferguson, later Prince Andrew, Prince Edward, Sophie and Harry. So releasing negative stories against your family members is not a far fetch for Clarence House and by extension Kensington Palace.
In a rather odd way - Meghan is speaking on behalf of the last 5 people who are not able to say that they did exactly that. I was recently reminded that most of Sarah's public persona was created by the press, pretty much everything we know of the Wessex's is and well Harry and Meghan seem to have taken offensive to the narrative the press were creating.
Yes - it comes down to been in control of your image. How important is it to you that the image the public has of you is favorable. In the case of Edward - he doesn't care if the people believe he is alive or dead, or exists at all. But Harry and Meghan have chosen to make a living off their personality and image. They had to break the impression that the palace and press by extension have given them. They have to say that is a lie - I will now show you who I really am.
However the bullying allegation is different. As bullying is a rather personal crime and where one person will be offended where another will not be - it is just there to pile on the offensives of why she left. And to set herself up as a expert on the subject.

Certainly a fair point. It's been widely reported that the royal family comms teams will feed negative stories about another family member to deflect attention from a negative story about their boss. However, Harry and Meghan did the same thing with Finding Freedom and presumably, fed Omid other stories as well.

 

[Somebody]

Well it is the monarch's "official" birthday not her real one anyway. So there's no reason why it shouldn't be just "official" representatives of the crown on the balcony.

As to coronations one king refused his own wife, the new queen, admission to the abbey so who knows. Coronations are supposed to be occasions of unity after all. The last thing any new monarch would want would be bad publicity over the attendance of divisive relatives I would have thought.

Bad publicity because of not inviting the new monarch's own son and his immediate family sounds worse to me.

 

[Durham]

Bad publicity because of not inviting the new monarch's own son and his immediate family sounds worse to me.

Yes I can see that arguement but we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I think it would be a travesty to invite those two after all the damage they've done. I see this interview as part of that damage. They don't need to do it.

 

[Claire]

Personally - if I was running their PR. I would have them say in the interview that that is it - we are drawing the line here that is all we will ever say about the matter. It makes it look like they satisfied and have said their peace and are moving on.
But that doesn't really sound like Meghan and Harry does it?

 

[ACO]

Yep - And if Harry's remarries it is likely to be a St. George's. And of course HRH Prince Archie and other subsequent children will be married from Windsor as well. It is what is expected and the royal family have not leg to stand on not to give it to him.

I must have missed when Harry and Meghan divorced.

 

[ladongas]

Surely Charles, ...

Yes I can see that arguement but we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I think it would be a travesty to invite those two after all the damage they've done.

...recalling the gracious and great forgiveness shown to him and Camilla, would be inclined to treat his son and daughter-in law with compassion for their ‘tacky’ but hardly immoral foibles? Families can have brutal and angry misunderstandings which are mainly forgotten in the grand scheme of things. HM and her family will not wish to be coldly and permanently estranged over relatively petty matters.

And they would certainly not be as gleeful over it as some observers seem to be.

 

[Claire]

I must have missed when Harry and Meghan divorced.

There is an "if" there. Just a point that they are still eligible to all the peaks of royal ceremonies if they so wish.

 

[ACO]

Well that's not quite what one of them says:

Dickie added to Metro.co.uk: ‘The approach from Beneath The Fold (note correct name) alleged to be a legitimate invitation for a fast turnaround, pre-recorded interview commissioned by a UK network, to be aired on Monday 8th March 2021. ‘This was deliberately misleading and a “scam”. I commented only on clips already in global circulation, but my interview was edited so as to imply I was speculating on the full programme interview. I was not speculating. I do not speculate.’

https://metro.co.uk/2021/03/06/josh...-experts-lie-about-harry-and-meghan-14199844/

That's why it would be interesting to see the entire interview to know what these four actually did say. What the full context was. Anything can be edited to prove a particular point.

They literally asked him about Meghan mentioning a Donkey Sanctuary and what he felt that meant --- and he responded. Maybe I missed that CBS clip though. Seems like Dickie is trying to save face because he got pranked.

At least FitzWilliams fully owned up to the fact he got punk'd.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Personally - if I was running their PR. I would have them say in the interview that that is it - we are drawing the line here that is all we will ever say about the matter. It makes it look like they satisfied and have said their peace and are moving on.
But that doesn't really sound like Meghan and Harry does it?

I agree and if I was running Charles's PR, before the interview, I would put out a statement saying that he loves and supports Harry and Meghan.

 

[Durham]

...recalling the gracious and great forgiveness shown to him and Camilla, would be inclined to treat his son and daughter-in law with compassion for their ‘tacky’ but hardly immoral foibles? Families can have brutal and angry misunderstandings which are mainly forgotten in the grand scheme of things. HM and her family will not wish to be coldly and permanently estranged over relatively petty matters.

And they would certainly not be as gleeful over it as some observers seem to be.

But it isn't about family. The coronation is a national event designed to unify a nation. It's about the relationship between the monarch & the people. The monarch's relatives are not a necessary part of the event at all. They play no role other than if they are peers. And even then their attendance is not a requirement. Or if there is a queen consort.

Although I shouldn't imagine invitations to a future coronation will be discussed as part of the interview however.

 

[Durham]

They literally asked him about Meghan mentioning a Donkey Sanctuary and what he felt that meant --- and he responded. Maybe I missed that CBS clip though. Seems like Dickie is trying to save face because he got pranked.

At least FitzWilliams fully owned up to the fact he got punk'd.

Hopefully they can put the full unedited version up on you tube & then people can make up their own minds.

 

[ACO]

...recalling the gracious and great forgiveness shown to him and Camilla, would be inclined to treat his son and daughter-in law with compassion for their ‘tacky’ but hardly immoral foibles? Families can have brutal and angry misunderstandings which are mainly forgotten in the grand scheme of things. HM and her family will not wish to be coldly and permanently estranged over relatively petty matters.

And they would certainly not be as gleeful over it as some observers seem to be.

I actually agree. I personally doubt they will be 'banned' from events as much as some hope so. That said I don't think Meghan will be in any rush to return to the UK either.

I just feel people need to prepare themselves that they will likely see Harry in the UK in 2022 at the Jubilee with the rest of the family.

My guess is once things cool down that we will start hearing how the family is trying to mend things. Heck it is already starting...

 

[Mbruno]

I actually agree. I personally doubt they will be 'banned' from events as much as some hope so. That said I don't think Meghan will be in any rush to return to the UK either.

I just feel people need to prepare themselves that they will likely see Harry in the UK in 2022 at the Jubilee with the rest of the family.

My guess is once things cool down that we will start hearing how the family is trying to mend things. Heck it is already starting...

The Jubilee, like the coronation, is not a family event either, but rather a state event, i.e. a celebration of the Sovereign's accession to the throne and the length of her reign. I don't see why Harry and Meghan should attend Jubilee events when they have no official public role in the UK or the Commonwealth.

 

[Durham]

The couple remain divisive. Doing this interview is surely an example of that.

 

[Blog Real]

I believe that Prince Harry will be in the Queen's jubilee in 2022. It is an important event for his grandmother, and I believe that he will want to be there. Maybe Meghan doesn't want to be there. But I believe that they will be invited.

 

[ACO]

The Jubilee, like the coronation, is not a family event either, but rather a state event, i.e. a celebration of the Sovereign's accession to the throne. I don't see why Harry and Meghan should attend Jubilee events if they have no official public role in the UK or the Commonwealth.

I personally don't think they will but I also won't be surprised if he was. We have seen non working royals like the Yorks sisters at State Dinners, 2012 Jubilee and even the carriage of Trooping. These are just examples that will be mentioned.

I don't even disagree with you but I am saying I don't see the them being banned. I can see them respectfully declining.

 

[Durham]

The Jubilee, like the coronation, is not a family event either, but rather a state event, i.e. a celebration of the Sovereign's accession to the throne and the length of her reign. I don't see why Harry and Meghan should attend Jubilee events when they have no official public role in the UK or the Commonwealth.

Entirely reasonable. I would not be surprised if that was the general consensus. The couple after all do seem to struggle when it comes to knowing how to publicly respond to the sovereign in the correct manner as evidenced by their response about service.

Let's hope there's no comments on "service" during the interview!

 

[Prinsara]

I agree and if I was running Charles's PR, before the interview, I would put out a statement saying that he loves and supports Harry and Meghan.

And if they run him down and kick him in the teeth? He'll look like a fool.

I would put that statement out after the interview, regardless of what they say. Nothing like taking Mummy's example.

 

[Blog Real]

As for the interview, I don't have high expectations. I think they will attack the "Firm" (the name Meghan uses to attack the monarchy) but they will not attack any member of the Royal Family (not least because it is Harry's family).
I think it is unnecessary for the Dukes of Sussex to give this interview. They will not gain anything from this and may even burn your image.
Prince Harry has always been a good representative of BRF and did not need to be involved in this type of controversy.

 

[Durham]

Despite the assertion that there are those who would gleefully like to ban the Sussexes there can only be sadness that we have reached a point where so many people in Britain can be so disillusioned with two members of the royal family.

When the couple themselves are able to recognise the damage that they have done then maybe those people in Britain can start to think differently. But to think they can just turn up, smile & wave as if nothing has happened after having chosen to do an interview with such a well known figure (when they didn't have to), well surely even they can't be that tin eared.


Mods - please remove or move if this is off thread.