The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 3: March - April 2021

[cathy50]

By "inheritance laws", do you mean the rules on the use of royal titles and styles? If so, several monarchs in Europe have been doing it for quite some time:

1. King Harald V decided that Sverre Magnus would not be an HRH (only a plain Prince) and that Princess Märtha-Louise's children would be untitled.
2. Queen Beatrix decided that Prince Constantijn's and Prince Friso's children would only be counts/countesses and not, for example, HH Prince/Princess [xxx] of Orange-Nassau (as, I believe, was still possible under the Law on Membership of the Royal Family).
3. King Juan Carlos decreed that children of Infantes/Infantas would have the consideration only of Grandees of Spain with the style of Excellency and that only the children of the Prince of Asturias would be HRH Infante/Infanta (previously, children of Infantes were Infantes too).
4. King Carl Gustaf stripped CP's and Madeleine's children of the HRH (previously all persons in the line of succession to the Swedish throne were HRHs).

So they have all "downgraded" the status of members of their families compared to previous practice. How would Charles be different if he did the same? Not all members of a monarch's family have to be royal. The cut has to be made somewhere and, nowadays, a grandson in collateral line is normally pretty far from the throne and not expected to become a state-funded working royal.

I don't know if Charles will make any changes and, as I said, I doubt he would discuss any change plans with the Family while the Queen is still alive (since royal titles still fall under her prerogative exclusively). Nevertheless, if he made any changes as King, e.g. to his grandchildren's titles, I doubt it would be seen as something scandalous or interpreted as any form of "downgrading" of the family's status.

Correct, and it is known for a while, if only rumour or a source I cannot say at the moment, that Charles plan to slim the whole thing down.
I find it hard to imagine that Harrys children and how they possibly will be brought up, outside the UK, little royal traditions, maybe not even UK citizens
can fit in. Not mentioning the question what if H&M remain antiroyal tendencies and pass them on their children. This is not at all a question of race.

In Sweden by law the children must attend a swedish school f.e. to gain royal privileges.. Madeleine decided not to do so, ok.

I don't see a problem with Charles sliming it down and combining fulltime royals or maybe those in direct line to the throne only with a title, HRH ...

[...]

 

[Denville]

Yes, only the HRH is left out.
I can't stop laughing when reading what Harry wrote. Resilience and mental power, how much he improved LOL
and of course he mentions the british military once in a while, let's see how long they will remain happy with it. there have been rumours already against him.
the media blew up the whole afghanistan thing, just like they did with Andrew and Falklands, both came in handy for the RF, but the truth behind Harry's deployment was a whole team was there to protect him- so he was able to feel important and play a little war, while others risked their lifes for him.

Curious about what Harry will write about his second job. How much he has been into disinformation LOL

The US is really good for any surprise, to ask somebody of his poor education, not even being american (will he soon be?) to work with high profiled employees on serious matters like society ? In Europe this would never work.

By the way, does nobody check his status. He must have a work permit now? Or is it done by vitamin B to Obamas?

[...]

he's just going to be a front man.. he does not need more than cursory knowledge.. and as for his work permit, really, I think that he probably has applied for a Green Card like anyone married to an American citizen and living there and he's in the process of getting one. There's no need to act like he's working illegally.
As for Andrew he DID take part in the war and did fly helicopters.. there's no need to denigrate his war service.. nor Harrys

 

[Somebody]

I don't think she attended Archie's christening, did she?

No, she didn't. The only christening that she attended and had pictures (of her great-grandchildren) released were George's and Charlotte's. She also attended Savannah's, Mia's and Lena's christening but no official picture was released.

If I am not mistaken, she missed out on the christening of Isla, Louis and Archie.

 

[duchessrachel]

Why would Harry be involved with such a commission when he is a UK citizen and member of a foreign Royal Family?

Exactly. He is not a American Citizen.

 

[Durham]

I don't know if Charles will make any changes and, as I said, I doubt he would discuss any change plans with the Family while the Queen is still alive (since royal titles still fall under her prerogative exclusively). Nevertheless, if he made any changes as King, e.g. to his grandchildren's titles, I doubt it would be seen as something scandalous or interpreted as any form of "downgrading" of the family's status.

Yes, old school textbooks, when discussing inbound immigration in the 19th and early 20th century, used to brag about how America was a land of opportunity where family name did not matter for upward social mobility (based instead on hard work and merit). That supposedly contrasted with the rigid social class in Europe with its landed aristocracy and titles.

Of course, those claims were always questionable, especially that "family name" or "family fortune" (I am not talking about "titles") didn't matter in America, but it is still part of the idea of the American dream, even for recent immigrants today.

If Archie plus sibling(s) are HRH then the BRF will have again missed an opportunity to be seen as less expansive. It should ideally have started with the daughters of the DofY. Then it'll be the children of Louis & then for fairness the children of Charlotte & then we're back to square one.

Why H&M raised this question in the way they did is beyond me. But they shouldn't be allowed to control the narrative. If the next monarch wishes to make changes then he should do so without fear of blackmail from H&M over questions of race.

Oh the irony of a republic founded in bloody rebellion against the British Crown & now feting a British prince.

 

[cathy50]

Exactly. He is not a American Citizen.

twitter is going wild about the BetterUp thing,
let's see what the community says about this one soon, though less might be interested.

 

[Kataryn]

Whether you believe he will or not does not negate the fact that it certainly is his right to do so by issuing new LPs and that was my point. Meghan stated clearly “it’s not their right to take it away” but actually, it is. Whether he does or not is an entirely different matter but it’s certainly his right to do so if he chooses.

We can differ in belief about whether or not we’ll see them with the family again, that’s fine. I simply don’t believe we will both for the comfort of the entire family and because I don’t really think they’ll set foot in the UK again other than maybe for visa related issues on Harry’s part.

You are right: he can do that. But he has aims of his own and thinks about the future, so often things that could happen don't happen. As with the quote of Meghan, it's just a different POV. Yes, the king can take away titles and styles and positions in society, but it still is a fact that the son of a king's son is a prince, no matter what! He might not have the HRH (see Denmark) but he is of Royal blood and close enough to the king to be considered as a prince. Not at the "court" of the king who took the title away but in society all over the world.For he has at his father's side a clear Royal bloodline.

 

[duchessrachel]

Actually BetterUp is a for profit business, although it seems to be working hard to disguise this fact in all the recent publicity.



Basically getting corporations to pay for an app to improve employee performance with some sort of mini CBT techniques.

I also find it interesting that Harry's titles are used A LOT on his employee page:

https://www.betterup.com/en-us/resources/blog/prince-harry-chief-impact-officer

Whereas Princess Beatrice is simply referred to as "Beatrice York" on Afiniti's website:

https://afiniti.com/team/beatrice-york

I was just about to post the same thing. Does that amount to him using his royal connections for profit? If so, is that behavior that might make Parliament revoke their duke and duchess titles?

 

[Denville]

You are right: he can do that. But he has aims of his own and thinks about the future, so often things that could happen don't happen. As with the quote of Meghan, it's just a different POV. Yes, the king can take away titles and styles and positions in society, but it still is a fact that the son of a king's son is a prince, no matter what! He might not have the HRH (see Denmark) but he is of Royal blood and close enough to the king to be considered as a prince. Not at the "court" of the king who took the title away but in society all over the world.For he has at his father's side a clear Royal bloodline.

I can't see why "being a prince" and "having royal blood" and so on, are so important, when Harry has moved to a republic, which does not recognize titles and when he made it very clear he didn't want to be a working prince...The son of a Kings son, is a prince but that rule can be changed.. just as George V changed things in 1917 when he limited HRH and Princely rank to the sons of Monarchs....

 

[AC21091968]

Actually BetterUp is a for profit business, although it seems to be working hard to disguise this fact in all the recent publicity.



Basically getting corporations to pay for an app to improve employee performance with some sort of mini CBT techniques.

I also find it interesting that Harry's titles are used A LOT on his employee page:

https://www.betterup.com/en-us/resources/blog/prince-harry-chief-impact-officer

Whereas Princess Beatrice is simply referred to as "Beatrice York" on Afiniti's website:

https://afiniti.com/team/beatrice-york

I was about to post that Patricia Treble (Royal Contributor at Macleans Magazine) tweeted out pictures of how Harry, Beatrice and Eugenie' names were shown on their companies' websites. Princess Eugenie is also referred as Eugenie York at Hauser & Wirth.

Patricia Treble @PatriciaTreble
Three of the Queen's grandchildren work in the private sector while also having Prince/Princess titles. How Beatrice and Eugenie are named on their company websites is noticeably different to how BetterUp introduces Harry
(h/t the Legal Monarchist @RoyaltyandLaw)
10:00 PM · Mar 24, 2021·Twitter for Android​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1374677423443357700

 

[Alison H]

The situation with Archie being/not being a prince has never actually happened before. The only previous monarch to have had great-grandchildren born in their lifetime was Queen Victoria. A child in an equivalent position to Archie would be the child of a younger brother of the future George V, but he didn't have any younger brothers. So it's the first time it's ever happened. And that was before the 1917 Letters Patent anyway. But that doesn't alter the fact that the rules are quite clear.

 

[Curryong]

Strictly speaking, although Beatrice and Eugenie are Princesses, they have still kept the York appellation, whereas if they really wanted to drop their links to royalty they wouldn?t be ?of York? at all, but would be Mrs Brooksbank and Mrs Mapelli Mozzi.

But any criticism will do where Harry?s concerned, won?t it? After all, Harry has gone around since boyhood insisting on his royal titles being used in all circumstances hasnt he? When he was at the Travelyst conference last year he said ?Just call me Harry? and was mocked in the media for that. So what does the media want?

The fact is that since they left GB Harry and Meghan have signed mult-million deals with Netflix and Spotify, and bought their own house in California. Harry has just got himself two good paid jobs with large multi-billion mental health operations. All in a little over a year.

And it?s still not enough for the British media and Sussex detractors who work themselves up into a lather because this couple are succeeding in the US and moving on. The attitude seems to be ?Oh No! These two can?t possibly be successes in the US. They?ve got to be crying and grovelling and begging to come back to the royal round and the UK, otherwise we are going to be proved wrong!? ‘


Well, I’m not among that number. I think that Harry and Meghan have done spectacularly well in establishing themselves in California and I wish them all the best in their endeavours in the future.

 

[Osipi]

I do think you're right on a lot of this, Curryong, but I have to admit that I do think also that doing the interview that they did and said what they've said put a lot of questions into play wondering if they've really moved on.

I really wish they'd never done that interview with Oprah and just moved forward doing their own thing without calling so much into question. That interview did not put them into a positive light at all.

One thing remains a fact and that's is that they're on their own to sink or swim from here on out. I wish them luck

 

[Nico]

And it?s still not enough for the British media and Sussex detractors who work themselves up into a lather because this couple are succeeding in the US and moving on. The attitude seems to be ?Oh No! These two can?t possibly be successes in the US. They?ve got to be crying and grovelling and begging to come back to the royal round and the UK, otherwise we are going to be proved wrong!? ‘[/FONT][/COLOR]

And at the same time Sussexes sycophants make sure that the entire World should be in awe at the holly sight of the wonders that this sterling couple is making just in front of our impish eyes.

The Yin and the Yang. Sounds balanced after all ... or is it ? In a way still searching the grey zone between "they do everything right" and "they do everything wrong" ...

 

[_Heather_]

Strictly speaking, although Beatrice and Eugenie are Princesses, they have still kept the York appellation, whereas if they really wanted to drop their links to royalty they wouldn?t be ?of York? at all, but would be Mrs Brooksbank and Mrs Mapelli Mozzi.

But any criticism will do where Harry?s concerned, won?t it? After all, Harry has gone around since boyhood insisting on his royal titles being used in all circumstances hasnt he? When he was at the Travelyst conference last year he said ?Just call me Harry? and was mocked in the media for that. So what does the media want?

The fact is that since they left GB Harry and Meghan have signed mult-million deals with Netflix and Spotify, and bought their own house in California. Harry has just got himself two good paid jobs with large multi-billion mental health operations. All in a little over a year.

And it?s still not enough for the British media and Sussex detractors who work themselves up into a lather because this couple are succeeding in the US and moving on. The attitude seems to be ?Oh No! These two can?t possibly be successes in the US. They?ve got to be crying and grovelling and begging to come back to the royal round and the UK, otherwise we are going to be proved wrong!? ‘


Well, I’m not among that number. I think that Harry and Meghan have done spectacularly well in establishing themselves in California and I wish them all the best in their endeavours in the future.

They could. Or Harry could simply choose to list himself as Harry Sussex, Harry Windsor, or Harry Mountbatten-Windsor in order to avoid any appearance of trading off his titles for profit. And as for his “jobs” well, yes, he does now have something to do but let’s be real. He didn’t exactly send out resumes and search for a job based on education and qualifications. He didn’t in any way go out and get himself a job. He’s managed to land two positions that he’s totally unqualified for based solely on his name and the customers that these companies feel his name recognition can draw in. Not exactly positions gotten by merit.

Maybe they’ll manage to do great things out there in California. But until they start to show that they’ve grown up, put their past grievances behind them, and are ready to behave like truthful, independent, forward moving adults, you’ll have to excuse us if we don’t really believe that they ever will.

 

[Mbruno]

Yes, the king can take away titles and styles and positions in society, but it still is a fact that the son of a king's son is a prince, no matter what! He might not have the HRH (see Denmark) but he is of Royal blood and close enough to the king to be considered as a prince. Not at the "court" of the king who took the title away but in society all over the world.For he has at his father's side a clear Royal bloodline.

I believe the United Kingdom is alone among the seven surviving European kingdoms in differentiating the titles of the King's grandchildren based solely on whether they descend from the King in paternal or maternal line. That actually sounds terribly old-fashioned nowadays.

Anyway, leaving gender-based criteria aside, I just gave you four examples of kingdoms (the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden) where the children of the heir are now the ony grandchildren of the King who have a title of prince or equivalent that is legally recognized. Whether people consider them "princes" or not in practice, because they are "of royal blood", doesn't change their legal status.

 

[Durham]

This couple have had plenty of opportunity to stay clear of controversy. They have chosen not to. Not all the criticism is justified by any means but a lot is. The British people have been entirely fair with these two & majority opinion on their behaviour is clear.

This interview was the final straw even for those who had previously supported them. The interview has caused real reputational damage to the BRF both in the UK & elsewhere. And not just to the BRF but by extension to the British Monarchy & the United Kingdom.

That they could do this is unconscionable. They are either malicious or lack the basic common sense that they were born with.

 

[AC21091968]

The Duke & Duchess of Sussex & Family - General News March 2021 -

Strictly speaking, although Beatrice and Eugenie are Princesses, they have still kept the York appellation, whereas if they really wanted to drop their links to royalty they wouldn?t be ?of York? at all, but would be Mrs Brooksbank and Mrs Mapelli Mozzi.

But any criticism will do where Harry?s concerned, won?t it? After all, Harry has gone around since boyhood insisting on his royal titles being used in all circumstances hasnt he? When he was at the Travelyst conference last year he said ?Just call me Harry? and was mocked in the media for that. So what does the media want?

The fact is that since they left GB Harry and Meghan have signed mult-million deals with Netflix and Spotify, and bought their own house in California. Harry has just got himself two good paid jobs with large multi-billion mental health operations. All in a little over a year.

And it?s still not enough for the British media and Sussex detractors who work themselves up into a lather because this couple are succeeding in the US and moving on. The attitude seems to be ?Oh No! These two can?t possibly be successes in the US. They?ve got to be crying and grovelling and begging to come back to the royal round and the UK, otherwise we are going to be proved wrong!? ‘


Well, I’m not among that number. I think that Harry and Meghan have done spectacularly well in establishing themselves in California and I wish them all the best in their endeavours in the future.

It's not uncommon for a woman to keep her maiden name not just for work, but also identifications, bank accounts, utility bills. One of the reason is the inconvenience and cost in changing family names and it's not just "feminism" or "women's empowerment". This could explain why Beatrice and Eugenie kept "York" as their surname for work, because they would also have to change their work contact details in both projects or employment associations. When Lady Gabriella Windsor was debuting as a singer-songwriter after she got married in 2020, she was Ella Windsor rather than Ella Kingston. She was writing songs before she got married and even get to sing her song "Out of Blue" at her London wedding reception in May 2019. It would be a hassle to changed from "Windsor" to "Kingston". The surname Windsor is not just limited to the British Royal Family. Robin Windsor, a professional Ballroom and Latin dancer, who appeared on BBC's Strictly Come Dancing at 2010-2013 was not related to the Royal Family at all.

I agree with previous posters that Harry could have been refer to as Harry Sussex, Harry Mountbatten-Windsor or Harry Windsor without using royal style (Prince) and peerage title (The Duke of Sussex).

 

[poppy7]

I believe the United Kingdom is alone among the seven surviving European kingdoms in differentiating the titles of the King's grandchildren based solely on whether they descend from the King in paternal or maternal line. That actually sounds terribly old-fashioned nowadays.

Anyway, leaving gender-based criteria aside, I just gave you four examples of kingdoms (the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden) where the children of the heir are now the ony grandchildren of the King who have a title of prince or equivalent that is legally recognized. Whether people consider them "princes" or not in practice, because they are "of royal blood", doesn't change their legal status.

This is a very good point. A very good point. Madeleine's children were treated just like her brothers. It is utterly sexist and appalling. When Louis and Charlotte's time comes I hope any family of theirs will be treated the same.

It's not uncommon for a women to keep her maiden name not just for work, but also identifications, bank accounts, utility bills. One of the reason is the inconvenience and cost in changing family names and it's not just "feminism" or "women's empowerment". This could explain why Beatrice and Eugenie kept "York" as their surname for work, because they would also have to change their work contact details in both projects or employment associations. When Lady Gabriella Windsor was debuting as a singer-songwriter after she got married in 2020, she was Ella Windsor rather than Ella Kingston. She was writing songs before she got married and even get to sing her song "Out of Blue" at her London wedding reception in May 2019. It would be a hassle to changed from "Windsor" to "Kingston". The surname Windsor is not just limited to the British Royal Family. Robin Windsor, a professional Ballroom and Latin dancer, who appeared on BBC's Strictly Come Dancing at 2010-2013 was not related to the Royal Family at all.

I agree with previous posters that Harry could have been refer to as Harry Sussex, Harry Mountbatten-Windsor or Harry Windsor without using royal style (Prince) and peerage title (The Duke of Sussex).

It's not uncommon for women just to keep their own name.

 

[Moran]

I agree with previous posters that Harry could have been refer to as Harry Sussex, Harry Mountbatten-Windsor or Harry Windsor without using royal style (Prince) and peerage title (The Duke of Sussex).

I very much doubted it. If he was just Harry Sussex, Harry Mountbatten-Windsor or whatever - anything without his title or style - he likely wouldn't have gotten the place. Who in America would know who this guy is?
It's the glamour that makes publicity and it was the glamour the company was after, not Harry's one and only incomparable (and non-existing) qualifications for the job.
So Beatrice and Eugenie didn't go out of their way to remove a last name that exists with and without a connection to the RF and it's totally the same as BetterUp going out of their way to use whatever royalty Harry could claim. Riiiiiight.

 

[QueenMathilde]

Oh come, I think that's a bit silly. And God knows I don't like her. But I think that the atmosphere was so frosty back then that Im sure all shed pick up would have been talk about trivialities since it was clear that she and Harry were at odds with Will and Kate, and W and K were politely ignoring htem...
I'd say that Will has been wary of them for some time and probably keeps up a very distant polite contact, and now I think that all the RF will be wary and feel afraid that something they say will be twisted and show up on Oprah or some other TV program.

I think it's silly too - but didn't they both imply they had "proof" about their racism claims? So if they do they were certainly gathering items they could use against the royal family early on. Harry said it was said before he even got married.

 

[Curryong]

They could. Or Harry could simply choose to list himself as Harry Sussex, Harry Windsor, or Harry Mountbatten-Windsor in order to avoid any appearance of trading off his titles for profit. And as for his “jobs” well, yes, he does now have something to do but let’s be real. He didn’t exactly send out resumes and search for a job based on education and qualifications. He didn’t in any way go out and get himself a job. He’s managed to land two positions that he’s totally unqualified for based solely on his name and the customers that these companies feel his name recognition can draw in. Not exactly positions gotten by merit.

Maybe they’ll manage to do great things out there in California. But until they start to show that they’ve grown up, put their past grievances behind them, and are ready to behave like truthful, independent, forward moving adults, you’ll have to excuse us if we don’t really believe that they ever will.

Harry’s new boss has already stated to the media that Harry prefers to be called Harry at work, and that is what everyone calls him. And going forward I believe that is what both colleagues and clients call him.


As for being completely unqualified for any role in the mental health area, Harry was co founder of Heads Together, met many professionals in the field, and for years has advocated for mental health initiatives especially within the armed forces. His podcast during the Heads Together years caused a bump in people in Britain calling mental health services over their own issues. He was praised by health professionals at the time. No-one can say that mental health hasn’t been at the top of Harry’s endeavours for many years.


And Harry has also interested himself in the field of online misinformation. He’s spoken out about it and made speeches on the subject many times.


Of course companies go for recognised figures. That’s why so many royals are patrons of organisations they often know nothing about. It brings publicity and there’s nothing wrong with that. Nevertheless, the CEO of BetterUp seems to regard Harry as a knowledgeable and enthusiastic new member of his team.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I think what people took issue with was the idea that Charles (or whoever) would want to change the LP for the grandchild(ren) of mixed racial background. They have every right to do whatever they want but you have to admit if that had occurred many would have questioned why...

You sure? I think many would question why it would start with Archie. There is a reason why many reacted the way they did. Right or wrong, it is a valid question.

Strictly speaking, although Beatrice and Eugenie are Princesses, they have still kept the York appellation, whereas if they really wanted to drop their links to royalty they wouldn?t be ?of York? at all, but would be Mrs Brooksbank and Mrs Mapelli Mozzi.

But any criticism will do where Harry?s concerned, won?t it? After all, Harry has gone around since boyhood insisting on his royal titles being used in all circumstances hasnt he? When he was at the Travelyst conference last year he said ?Just call me Harry? and was mocked in the media for that. So what does the media want?

See here for my replies.

Questions about British Styles and Titles

 

[poppy7]

I very much doubted it. If he was just Harry Sussex, Harry Mountbatten-Windsor or whatever - anything without his title or style - he likely wouldn't have gotten the place. Who in America would know who this guy is?
It's the glamour that makes publicity and it was the glamour the company was after, not Harry's one and only incomparable (and non-existing) qualifications for the job.
So Beatrice and Eugenie didn't go out of their way to remove a last name that exists with and without a connection to the RF and it's totally the same as BetterUp going out of their way to use whatever royalty Harry could claim. Riiiiiight.

Therefore really jobs like the girls have. They are qualified...But you know their connections didn't hurt.

Harry has no qualifications. The job is name recognition but why not. It isn't an embarrassing role or job.

 

[Moran]

Therefore really jobs like the girls have. They are qualified...But you know their connections didn't hurt.

Harry has no qualifications. The job is name recognition but why not. It isn't an embarrassing role or job.

Definitely. I just disagree the two situations are the same.

 

[poppy7]

Definitely. I just disagree the two situations are the same.

It was a typo. I meant to say the girls have real jobs. And I agree it isn't the same.

 

[Heavs]

The phrase "Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex" was used six times in a brief introduction to him and his new role and "Prince Harry" a further time. Just like "DDoS" was all over their Spotify and Netflix announcements. It's noticeable, not just because it's there but because it seems to be used as much as humanly possible.

"Beatrice York" is used just once - as her full name at the top. Her bio doesn't mention her family or title at all. Nor does her Linked In profile.

Do her family connections open doors? Yes. But the York name isn't exactly covered in glory these days so using it doesn't give her much in the way of a specific boost. She would be better off using "Mountbatten-Windsor" for that, so it seems its more about personal choice and because she's built up a professional profile.

If Harry wanted to use Sussex or M-W that's fine, or even Duke of Sussex just once and then "Harry". But what really makes me laugh is that it's clearly his main selling point despite his "Why I'm here" section.

 

[QueenMathilde]

The website uses their titles for Harry's new job? But I thought he wasn't going to sell his royal titles.

 

[_Heather_]

Harry’s new boss has already stated to the media that Harry prefers to be called Harry at work, and that is what everyone calls him. And going forward I believe that is what both colleagues and clients call him.


As for being completely unqualified for any role in the mental health area, Harry was co founder of Heads Together, met many professionals in the field, and for years has advocated for mental health initiatives especially within the armed forces. His podcast during the Heads Together years caused a bump in people in Britain calling mental health services over their own issues. He was praised by health professionals at the time. No-one can say that mental health hasn’t been at the top of Harry’s endeavours for many years.


And Harry has also interested himself in the field of online misinformation. He’s spoken out about it and made speeches on the subject many times.


Of course companies go for recognised figures. That’s why so many royals are patrons of organisations they often know nothing about. It brings publicity and there’s nothing wrong with that. Nevertheless, the CEO of BetterUp seems to regard Harry as a knowledgeable and enthusiastic new member of his team.

And maybe in the course of conversation he will be called Harry. But if he truly were just going for the “I’m Harry” but he wouldn’t have used his title and style six or seven times on the company website or allowed them to do so.

And interested or involved in mental health as he may be, he proved to the entire world just how vastly unqualified he is to speak about or influence others in their mental health decisions. We’ve rehashed it time and again here. You know perfectly well why we believe he’s so unqualified. And the exact same thing could be said for this “online misinformation” word salad that’s come out today. Since he and his wife are certainly dealing in spreading misinformation I’d think that might actually disqualify him rather than be an argument in his favor.

As for the name recognition, well, sure. Lots of companies go for name recognition. But call a spade a spade. In one reply you argue that he’s gone and gotten himself these important position with multi billion dollar companies as if he’s earned them. In another you’re agreeing that he didn’t earn them and he’s trading on his name. So which is it? I think most people here can pretty clearly agree that definitely didn’t earn those spots and he’s 100% trading on his titles.

 

[Denville]

well he has earned them in the sense that they want a name which has just been on TV.. and he needs to be seen working....