Christening of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor: July 6th, 2019

[Mbruno]

A better question is do the media hear Harry (and Meghan)? They aren't going to let the media treat their child as a zoo exhibit. It has been made very clear that the Sussexes are putting the best interest of their child first, and as a private citizen there will be limited access to him and their private lives and they aren't going to waiver from that. Once the media understands that and stops trying to 'other' Meghan things will cool down.

I don't get the media is whining, we all got wonderful pictures and some of the papers still managed 4-page spreads of the event. I wish someone could give me a sufficient reason why the media and the public need to know who Archie's godparents are...because right now, where I'm sitting there isn't one.

The answer is very simple. First, it is a matter of historic record for a grandchild of a sovereign as Archie will probably be in the future. Second, under British law, the identity of the godparents of any child baptized in the CoE is public information. The Royal Family chooses to ignore the law as Richard Palmer tweeted, but, even so, Dickie Arbiter admitted that Archie's sealed baptism records at Windsor will be eventually made available to historians in a distant future.

 

[Marlo]

Looking at the Duchess of Cambridge's pose on that chair in the photograph, she looks to me as though she cannot wait to leave...

Yeah, William and Kate were very childish in their behaviors imo.

According to Lainey Gossip, "William and Kate arrived just before noon on Saturday and left just before 1pm, staying exactly an hour. Most people were there longer. Not that it means anything but since the gossip for the better part of a year has been about Will and Harry’s relationship and whether or not it’s been strained, that doesn’t seem like an indication that the situation has thawed. And if we’re playing Photo Assumption, our favourite game of baseless conclusions, on this portrait… what’s Will’s face saying to you?"

https://www.laineygossip.com/archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor-christened-at-windsor-castle/56035

 

[wartenberg7]

But they are not private citizens!
They are funded by taxpayer money (even if indirectly, though the Duchy of Cornwall), and to carry on this way causes needless resentment.

There is increasing hostility in the press, and that is the thing the RF always tries to avoid.

That does not justify that the public, the media has a right upon everything they do in private! The RF is not there by the mercy of anybody, they are there because they are linked to the long and often turbulant history of Britain and its embodiment. Besides that they do a very hard job! They are not sitting on a sofa, being served tea and reading novellas...!

 

[BaiSoSo]

The answer is very simple. First, it is a matter of historic record for a grandchild of a sovereign as Archie will probably be in the future. Second, under British law, the identity of the godparents of any child baptized in the CoE is public information. The Royal Family chooses to ignore the law as Richard Palmer tweeted, but, even so, Dickie Arbiter admitted that Archie's sealed baptism records at Windsor will be eventually made available to historians in a distant future.

That doesn't tell me why people need to know, what are the media/fans going to do with the information? Archie isn't the grandchild of a sovereign yet so that argument doesn't work right now. It sounds like the information will be released (so the RF isn't ignoring laws) just doing it in the distant future.

In a time when the media has blatantly invaded Harry and Meghan's privacy by hiring helicopters to take pictures inside their home, the media trying to tie Meghan to terrorism, murder and some in the public calling for Harry's death because he married Meghan. I can understand why they have taken extra precautions for their child and family/friends.

 

[wartenberg7]

Yeah, William and Kate were very childish in their behaviors imo.

According to Lainey Gossip, "William and Kate arrived just before noon on Saturday and left just before 1pm, staying exactly an hour. Most people were there longer. Not that it means anything but since the gossip for the better part of a year has been about Will and Harry’s relationship and whether or not it’s been strained, that doesn’t seem like an indication that the situation has thawed. And if we’re playing Photo Assumption, our favourite game of baseless conclusions, on this portrait… what’s Will’s face saying to you?"

https://www.laineygossip.com/archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor-christened-at-windsor-castle/56035

Wow, the name "Lainey Gossip" says it all...!
Seems to be a very discreet and trustworthy source.... I´m convinced! It must be true!


Question: Who is "childish"? Two people who attended a christening and are pictured on a photograph later, or adult people gossipping and speculating about things they cannot know about because they were not there and which are technically none of their business at all...?!
If I were Harry or Meghan, the next time, after reading all this junk and crap, I´d go further and release nothing, nada, zero at all - maybe release a christ. photo a couple of years later, to mark the occasion, when the child becomes 5 or 10!

 

[Ista]

Yeah, William and Kate were very childish in their behaviors imo.

According to Lainey Gossip, "William and Kate arrived just before noon on Saturday and left just before 1pm, staying exactly an hour. Most people were there longer. Not that it means anything but since the gossip for the better part of a year has been about Will and Harry’s relationship and whether or not it’s been strained, that doesn’t seem like an indication that the situation has thawed. And if we’re playing Photo Assumption, our favourite game of baseless conclusions, on this portrait… what’s Will’s face saying to you?"

https://www.laineygossip.com/archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor-christened-at-windsor-castle/56035

Could you explain how the Cambridges attending their nephew's christening is childish? And what the correct amount of time for them to be there would have been?

And I'm not willing to take any speculation offered by someone who calls themselves Lainey Gossip as anything other than exactly that, gossip.

 

[muriel]

Yeah, William and Kate were very childish in their behaviors imo.

https://www.laineygossip.com/archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor-christened-at-windsor-castle/56035

Pray how might that be the case?

According to Lainey Gossip, "William and Kate arrived just before noon on Saturday and left just before 1pm, staying exactly an hour. Most people were there longer.

For a comparative statement like that to have relevance, do we know how long others were there for?

I believe the christening was around half eleven

 

[JR76]

Christening receptions in general are in my own experience often quite short and this is very busy people we're talking about here so why the outrage.
That aside I'm a bit puzzled by how posters who have no problem calling out any criticism against their favourite as fake news while believing anything positive written about them to be the absolute truth.
I'm not saying that is the case here, but layineygossip is a blog. There are of course exceptions, but blogs are rarely reliable sources.

 

[jacqui24]

So Harry and Meghan should just give the press and others whatever they want?? There is a fuss because people feel entitled, not because Harry and Meghan are doing things wrong. These are private lives, people are not entitled to anything.

I completely agree with this.

But they are not private citizens!
They are funded by taxpayer money (even if indirectly, though the Duchy of Cornwall), and to carry on this way causes needless resentment.

There is increasing hostility in the press, and that is the thing the RF always tries to avoid.

They are funded because they carry out engagements in support of the monarch and gave up the right to make a profit privately. Not because they are selling their private life or their son.

 

[Skippy]

Harry and Meghan want things too private. How realistic is that for the son and brother of a future king? Especially Harry should know that media is a part of the package.

As I have said before, TRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Master Archie? Royal, titled parents and plain private offspring?
It seems they want to control it all and the press have to be willing to follow their rules. That's not the way it works, it works both ways.

When you are royal and titled, you cannot expect to keep your child completely in the background as a private citizen. It comes with the territory of who you are. They have made this unnecesarily difficult.
Had they just made him Viscount XXXX, I don't think there would have been a problem.

They would truly have lived up to their word of "Private Christening" had they only announced it afterwards. If you announce it prior, it is not "private".

I practically agree with what Somebody here said earlier, they seem to be using him as a teaser.

And now I am going to try to bow out of here, somewhere in the future there will be a crash landing...

 

[ashelen]

Yeah, William and Kate were very childish in their behaviors imo.

According to Lainey Gossip, "William and Kate arrived just before noon on Saturday and left just before 1pm, staying exactly an hour. Most people were there longer. Not that it means anything but since the gossip for the better part of a year has been about Will and Harry’s relationship and whether or not it’s been strained, that doesn’t seem like an indication that the situation has thawed. And if we’re playing Photo Assumption, our favourite game of baseless conclusions, on this portrait… what’s Will’s face saying to you?"

https://www.laineygossip.com/archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor-christened-at-windsor-castle/56035

So if they stayed only an hour more or less, wasn't there a lunch , cake ad a drink? so short was the event ?
The article make a comment about Doria hat, and that is so right on point!

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I wish someone could give me a sufficient reason why the media and the public need to know who Archie's godparents are...

Because Archie is currently 7th in line to the British throne, no matter what his parents are saying about his title or lack thereof.

 

[jacqui24]

Because Archie is currently 7th in line to the British throne, no matter what his parents are saying about his title or lack thereof.

And it has often been said he's ONLY 7th in line. Is there a specific place in line where they are allowed to be private citizens? Unless the monarch plans to fund them for life, they all have the right to being a private citizen.

 

[Skippy]

And it has often been said he's ONLY 7th in line. Is there a specific place in line where they are allowed to be private citizens? Unless the monarch plans to fund them for life, they all have the right to being a private citizen.

Consistency, jacqui24, consistency. Parents untitled, offspring untitled. That is when being a private citizen makes sense.
In this case it's both, titled parents and untitled offspring. That is unprecedented, nobody in the BRF has it like this, and makes for a weird construction.

What are they going to do in the future when there is interest for Archie? Complain that he is a private citizen? If so, they should have thought about that beforehand. Harry knows, or should know, how it works. And Meghan has a lot to learn.

This whole thing is stupid and thoughtless. And now I'm truly gone.

 

[Zaira]

What stunning, stunning pics! The BW white is especially emotional for me. Archie is a truly beautiful baby. Meghan and Harry both look so thrilled and in love with their son. Meghan is just glowing these days, isn't she?

The stand out for me in the family pic, though, is Doria. What an absolutely regal woman. I think she honestly outshines every royal in whatever pic she is in. She has such a serenity and quiet power to her. Love what we can see of her outfit and that she wore hoop earrings too!

 

[jacqui24]

Consistency, jacqui24, consistency. Parents untitled, offspring untitled. That is when being a private citizen makes sense.
In this case it's both, titled parents and untitled offspring. That is unprecedented, nobody in the BRF has it like this, and makes for a weird construction.

What are they going to do in the future when there is interest for Archie? Complain that he is a private citizen? If so, they should have thought about that beforehand. Harry knows, or should know, how it works. And Meghan has a lot to learn.

This whole thing is stupid and thoughtless. And now I'm truly gone.

The issue of consistency has been muddied over the years with member of BRF. And Harry an Meghan are certainly not the first to do it. If we want to get technical, Archie is a step below what title he could use as are the Wessex children.

On the issue of titled parents with untitled children. Anne's children are not titled while she is HRH.

No one has to comply with the media just because they have interest. And when Archie's old enough, it's his own choice, not the media's.

Harry and Meghan both are aware of the interest in their son, and they have allowed some access to say thank you for the support. But that does not mean he's public property or that people would get as much access to him as they want. And that's been a clear message. They have obviously decided to address each situation as it comes. Good on them for putting their child first even if they know they'll be faced with unfair criticism.

 

[Zaira]

Consistency, jacqui24, consistency. Parents untitled, offspring untitled. That is when being a private citizen makes sense.
In this case it's both, titled parents and untitled offspring. That is unprecedented, nobody in the BRF has it like this, and makes for a weird construction.

What are they going to do in the future when there is interest for Archie? Complain that he is a private citizen? If so, they should have thought about that beforehand. Harry knows, or should know, how it works. And Meghan has a lot to learn.

This whole thing is stupid and thoughtless. And now I'm truly gone.

This isn't true. The Princess Royal's children ARE private citizens despite having a mother who is a working royal and titled. And for all intents and purposes, the Wessex children are also private. We went YEARS without seeing either of them much. Its only been in recent years that Sophie and Edward have had them out in public.

Honestly, Harry and Meghan are not doing that much out of the norm for children not in the direct line. I think people are thrown off by Harry's much bigger profile and prominence than your average 7th in line, I get that. But people are honestly acting like Archie is the DIRECT heir. Technically, not even George is yet. And that excuse was used for why we didnt get as much access to him and his siblings for years. Archie is a historic and important "royal" baby born to a historic royal couple who happen to be very very popular/beloved (his dad especially), and Harry and Meghan have recognized that by giving us a lovely birth presentation and now lovely christening pics, following the traditional aspects of a BRF christening in terms of the font, dress, etc. I mean its a balance for them and they are still figuring it out, but no matter what they will never be able to please everyone and certainly not the media.

Do I think the christening could have been better messaged? Yes, I think the younger royals have long been hobbled by bad PR management (not just the Sussexes), but my goodness people here really want to have their cake and eat it too. So many competing demands from folks over a 2 month old baby.

 

[muriel]

Harry and Meghan both are aware of the interest in their son, and they have allowed some access to say thank you for the support. But that does not mean he's public property or that people would get as much access to him as they want. And that's been a clear message. They have obviously decided to address each situation as it comes. Good on them for putting their child first even if they know they'll be faced with unfair criticism.

I don't believe that anybody is suggesting that Archie is public property. All that has been consistently said by a fair few posters on TRF as well as quite a lot of the more "mainstream" and broadsheet Press as opposed to the tabloids, are two points:

a) H&M appear to have made the wrong decision with regards to refusing to announce the names of the Godparents to Archie; and

b) H&M appear to have alienated themselves from the Press and the relationship has completely broken down.

Wrt to B), this cannot be a healthy situation, longer term. It is incumbent on H&M to try and resolve this, before it becomes a larger issue for the Firm, and Charles has to step in and fix it.

 

[jacqui24]

I don't believe that anybody is suggesting that Archie is public property. All that has been consistently said by a fair few posters on TRF as well as quite a lot of the more "mainstream" and broadsheet Press as opposed to the tabloids, are two points:

a) H&M appear to have made the wrong decision with regards to refusing to announce the names of the Godparents to Archie; and

b) H&M appear to have alienated themselves from the Press and the relationship has completely broken down.

Wrt to B), this cannot be a healthy situation, longer term. It is incumbent on H&M to try and resolve this, before it becomes a larger issue for the Firm, and Charles has to step in and fix it.

No one has to flat out say he is public property. They certainly act it with the way they feel entitled to him. I keep hearing they should give us access because paid $3 million for their home. You didn't buy their son. They were given a home because the parents have given up the right to make a profit privately to support the monarch. They didn't sell their first born.

The relationship with press have broken down because they won't satisfy their insatiable appetite for their private lives. Last I checked, they are welcome to cover the public events. And I don't think that's something they should compromise on.

As someone said above, it's a case of appeal not matching the rank. If the Sussexes had less appeal, this wouldn't be an issue. But then, I thought royalty isn't about celebrity, and not be about feeding the media because there is appeal.

And seriously, after everything the monarchy has been through, the Sussexes' expecting to have certain control of their private life is what's going to do damage? Please. And let's not forget this issue regarding godparents has the approval of the monarch. She has the baptismal records, she could simply release it. Or you know, have the original announcements include godparents as the Sussexes' communications team reports to her Press Secretary.

 

[Chloep]

Yes, retrospectively we could argue that if Meghan and Harry just played along with all the whims of the British press it would have been much better and easier for them too. Alas, the British press' past behaviour towards Meghan tells a very different story.

There is some definite revision of history that is taking place in here, imo. 'The poor British tabloid press'. The poor, professional, respectful, reliable British tabloid press.
I wonder where this sheer entitlement is coming from and why we never experienced it to this degree. (Even in recent memory with the Cambridge's press troubles for their kids' privacy.)
Is it truly a mystery why Harry and Meghan feel protective of their lives considering all the baseless vitriol aimed at Meghan? They can dress it up however they'd like, but all the moaning in the tabloid press is solely money. Meghan sells like NOTHING else, we know this for a fact. The British tabloid press was warned by Harry all the way back in 2016. It was never in doubt how aware and protective he was going to be when it comes to his family.

I wonder when one should just take it all and smile about it and when one has the right to bemoan their 'Civil Rights' and enact a complete nationwide media taboo. Quite hypocritical, isn't?

There were seemingly ZERO boundaries on Meghan before the split from Kensington Palace. Zero. Not before the wedding. Not after. Not when she was heavy with their first child and the British press completely snapped. That's why media relations reached these levels to begin with. The sheer entitlement and rabidity that some extremely unprofessional individuals now operate with needs to be reigned in. Point blank.
It would have been much easier to control the situation as it was unfolding and not retrospectively, but alas the continued incompetence of some in assessing the situation over the course of *1 full year* cannot be ignored. There will be an adjustment period for all.

The professional press people will adjust(mainstream and big firm) - most are already. The bloggers and Palmers of the world likely won't. C'est le vie. Alas, the Sussexes will survive the antagonistic nature of those 'publications' just fine. They were never going to be winning them anyway. And as time goes by & interest instead shifts to the next generation, the Sussexes will hopefully get to follow in the footsteps of the Wessexes. Doing good, doing a lot and being left in peace to live their lives with their children.

 

[muriel]

No one has to flat out say he is public property. They certainly act it with the way they feel entitled to him. I keep hearing they should give us access because paid $3 million for their home. You didn't buy their son. They were given a home because the parents have given up the right to make a profit privately to support the monarch. They didn't sell their first born.

The relationship with press have broken down because they won't satisfy their insatiable appetite for their private lives. Last I checked, they are welcome to cover the public events. And I don't think that's something they should compromise on.

As someone said above, it's a case of appeal not matching the rank. If the Sussexes had less appeal, this wouldn't be an issue. But then, I thought royalty isn't about celebrity, and not be about feeding the media because there is appeal.

> I think the cost of home repair is a red herring. However, given the state of the relationship between the Press and H&M, costs of the home are a good one to beat them with, but we know, that argument only runs so far.

> The relationship has also (and not solely so!) broken down because H&M have made a series of own goals, including for example arrangements around the birth of Harry (clearly misleading), the christening and so on. The point is not to argue about the specifics of these points (we have all done that previously), but to realise that there were multiple factors at play there.

> As a result of this situation, the ones suffering he most are not the Press, but H&M and ultimately, The Firm. It is incumbent on them to resolve this and turn the narrative around. Several members of Harry's family have done this well, and he will do well to seek advice from them.

 

[jacqui24]

> The relationship has also (and not solely so!) broken down because H&M have made a series of own goals, including for example arrangements around the birth of Harry (clearly misleading), the christening and so on. The point is not to argue about the specifics of these points (we have all done that previously), but to realise that there were multiple factors at play there.

What goals? Secondly, the nastiness has been around way before any of the things you described. In fact, it was around before they even married. So I fail to see how it's their arrangement that's the issue.

In terms of fixing the relationship, what the press want is more access, not to their public life, but their private. And I just don't see how they can come to an agreement with that.

Like I've said before, being that Archie is 7th in line, they have a lot more flexibility to determine what to release and when as they don't have the same obligation. That is the perk of not having rank.

 

[bertie5252003]

I think it is unfortunate that they have made themselves a topic in the way they have.Is it poor advise or just stupidity on their part?? Who knows .. I believe that that should have releases the name of the godparents and allow the child privacy in the same way the Wessexes did without their making such a big deal about it ! They appear to be their own worse enemy IMO

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I have to agree that the decision not to release the names of the baby's godparents seems minor on the surface but it's a self inflicted injury(to use sports jargon) that the Sussexes could easily have avoided.

It won't shake the Monarchy to it's timbers of course, but it creates needless bad will and at best comes off as petty and peevish.

Unless they have appointed some seedy, controversial characters as godparents what exactly is the point?

 

[jacqui24]

Unless they have appointed some seedy, controversial characters as godparents what exactly is the point?

The point is, if a private citizen want their right to privacy, they should have it. Let's not pretend there wouldn't be snide remarks and insults just because they aren't seedy or controversial characters. I still remember what happened when the page boys and bridesmaids were announced. If they will insult children like that, imagine what snobbery at its finest will do to godparents. There are enough unfounded stories about Meghan's friends out there even though none of them are seedy and controversial.

 

[Hallo girl]

Christening receptions in general are in my own experience often quite short and this is very busy people we're talking about here so why the outrage.
That aside I'm a bit puzzled by how posters who have no problem calling out any criticism against their favourite as fake news while believing anything positive written about them to be the absolute truth.
I'm not saying that is the case here, but layineygossip is a blog. There are of course exceptions, but blogs are rarely reliable sources.

I have said that before, people on this forum are selective on what stories they chose to believe.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

The point is, if a private citizen want their right to privacy, they should have it. Let's not pretend there wouldn't be snide remarks and insults just because they aren't seedy or controversial characters. I still remember what happened when the page boys and bridesmaids were announced. If they will insult children like that, imagine what snobbery at its finest will do to godparents. There are enough unfounded stories about Meghan's friends out there even though none of them are seedy and controversial.

Regardless of how they have chosen to view themselves, the Sussexes are not private citizens. No one who lives in an historic palace/castle partially subsided by the British taxpayers can claim to be private citizens.


(*I can't address the issue of harrassment of the bridesmaids and pageboys, I don't remember it**)

 

[Hallo girl]

This isn't true. The Princess Royal's children ARE private citizens despite having a mother who is a working royal and titled. And for all intents and purposes, the Wessex children are also private. We went YEARS without seeing either of them much. Its only been in recent years that Sophie and Edward have had them out in public.

Honestly, Harry and Meghan are not doing that much out of the norm for children not in the direct line. I think people are thrown off by Harry's much bigger profile and prominence than your average 7th in line, I get that. But people are honestly acting like Archie is the DIRECT heir. Technically, not even George is yet. And that excuse was used for why we didnt get as much access to him and his siblings for years. Archie is a historic and important "royal" baby born to a historic royal couple who happen to be very very popular/beloved (his dad especially), and Harry and Meghan have recognized that by giving us a lovely birth presentation and now lovely christening pics, following the traditional aspects of a BRF christening in terms of the font, dress, etc. I mean its a balance for them and they are still figuring it out, but no matter what they will never be able to please everyone and certainly not the media.

Do I think the christening could have been better messaged? Yes, I think the younger royals have long been hobbled by bad PR management (not just the Sussexes), but my goodness people here really want to have their cake and eat it too. So many competing demands from folks over a 2 month old baby.

To be pedantic on this ,Mark Phillips did not have a title, children take the title from the father.

 

[tommy100]

I honestly think, and I feel like I've said it lodes, they should have kept the Christening private, announcing on the morning or after it happened. Part of the problem seems to be, IMO, that they announced it in the same way as W&K did but then said there would be no cameras and no list of godparents. I honestly think, if Archie is a private citizen like say, Princess Anne's grandchildren or similar to the way the Wessex kids are then they need to treat announcement around him as such.
The media need to recognise they want privacy for him and accept that and likewise M&H maybe need to dial down using pics of him on insta etc. The problem now IMO is that they are trying to occupy a new middle ground - he is a private citizen but they happily post pics and make public announcements about him.

I get the media would probably loose their heads if they stop making public pics etc but after a while the fuss may die down.

 

[Skippy]

I honestly think, and I feel like I've said it lodes, they should have kept the Christening private, announcing on the morning or after it happened. Part of the problem seems to be, IMO, that they announced it in the same way as W&K did but then said there would be no cameras and no list of godparents.

That sounds contradicting - either do it in the same way or keep quiet and release afterwards that the event has taken place. You can't have both.

I honestly think, if Archie is a private citizen like say, Princess Anne's grandchildren or similar to the way the Wessex kids are then they need to treat announcement around him as such.

Only the basics then.

The media need to recognise they want privacy for him and accept that and likewise M&H maybe need to dial down using pics of him on insta etc. The problem now IMO is that they are trying to occupy a new middle ground - he is a private citizen but they happily post pics and make public announcements about him.

That is IMO indeed what causes the friction. It sends conflicted messages and gives an overall What Do You Want? feeling.

I get the media would probably loose their heads if they stop making public pics etc but after a while the fuss may die down.

Then they would at least live up to that private thing that they created themselves. Walk the walk, talk the talk.


Sorry, this was the last thing I had to get out. *Skippy jumps off to other pastures*