The Duke & Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 2: December 2020-March 2021

[AC21091968]

but it doesnt matter if they are perceived as politically involved on one side, surely? They are private individuals, they dont have to stick with the convention that as royals they can't be political.

On the Sussex Royal website, at one point (particularly after the announcement), it mentioned along the lines of Harry & Meghan would continue to upheld the values of Her Majesty The Queen or represent The Queen. By being politically, that is breaking the “promise” and royal convention. Of course, things could have changed since then with the Archewell foundation.

Even non-working royals or those in the lower line of succession have avoided expressing or hinted political views. I don’t even know how the Gloucesters, Kents or Harewood voted in elections or do they even not vote at all. I imagined there would be backlash if Autumn Phillips & Peter Phillips decided to get involved in Canadian politics or Gary Lewis & Lady Davina Windsor in New Zealand’s or The Duke & Duchess of Gloucester in Denmark’s.

I’m sure there would also be backlash if other junior members of the Royal family got involved in UK politics.

The only exception is probably Lord Nicholas Windsor who wrote an opinion column on The Telegraph against abortion.

 

[Denville]

I dont think they are worrying too much about that.. They've made it clear for months now what side they're on and they must be aware that it is giving conservatives in the UK more ammo against them.. but it doesn't bother them. They are never coming back..so they aren't worried what the Britsih population or the RF think. They'll probably make an OK living in the US even if not perhaps become millionaires on the back of what they are doing...

 

[acdc1]

On the Sussex Royal website, at one point (particularly after the announcement), it mentioned along the lines of Harry & Meghan would continue to upheld the values of Her Majesty The Queen or represent The Queen. By being politically, that is breaking the “promise” and royal convention. Of course, things could have changed since then with the Archewell foundation.

Even non-working royals or those in the lower line of succession have avoided expressing or hinted political views. I don’t even know how the Gloucesters, Kents or Harewood voted in elections or do they even not vote at all. I imagined there would be backlash if Autumn Phillips & Peter Phillips decided to get involved in Canadian politics or Gary Lewis & Lady Davina Windsor in New Zealand’s or The Duke & Duchess of Gloucester in Denmark’s.

I’m sure there would also be backlash if other junior members of the Royal family got involved in UK politics.

The only exception is probably Lord Nicholas Windsor who wrote an opinion column on The Telegraph against abortion.

When they issued their statement on the Sussex Royal website, they were still hoping for their original “half-in/half-out” plan. Since they weren’t able to get that and are now firmly “all out,” I don’t think they’re too concerned about upholding the values of the Queen, in the sense of toeing all the lines that they would have had to as working royals. They’re going to speak out about things that they’re passionate about (one of the reasons I think Meghan was unhappy being a working royal was that she couldn’t do this anymore). They aren’t going to have anyone who is super controversial (like someone advocating for the total overthrow of the monarchy for example) or harmful, and in the grand scheme of things Stacey Abrams isn’t all that radical or controversial. She’s done a lot of good things to get people registered to vote and she’s pretty highly thought of.

The Sussexes have made very clear that they won’t be returning as working royals or living in the UK. They’ve moved on, and frankly I think we’re going to have to accept that whether we like it or not.

 

[Denville]

When they issued their statement on the Sussex Royal website, they were still hoping for their original “half-in/half-out” plan. Since they weren’t able to get that and are now firmly “all out,” I don’t think they’re too concerned about upholding the values of the Queen, in the sense of toeing all the lines that they would have had to as working royals. They’re going to speak out about things that they’re passionate about (one of the reasons I think Meghan was unhappy being a working royal was that she couldn’t do this anymore). They aren’t going to have anyone who is super controversial (like someone advocating for the total overthrow of the monarchy for example) or harmful, and in the grand scheme of things Stacey Abrams isn’t all that radical or controversial. She’s done a lot of good things to get people registered to vote and she’s pretty highly thought of.

The Sussexes have made very clear that they won’t be returning as working royals or living in the UK. They’ve moved on, and frankly I think we’re going to have to accept that whether we like it or not.

No I dont think they'll come back unless they fail.. or perhaps in a few years when they have made a bit of money but aren't a hot topic anymore.. and while they are not broke they're not super rich. I think its possible that they might come back then.. but even if they do, are they likely to become working royals again? I think not. They've shown they have no real respect for the monarchy and don't care much about what people in the UK think of them anyway....

 

[ACO]

https://archewell.com

They have officially launched their website.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Well, Charles just received the world's largest slap in the face.

 

[Lee-Z]

https://archewell.com

They have officially launched their website.

why oh why the explicit focus on mothers and strangers?
This is just baiting responses in defense of fathers, brothers and sisters, grandparents, cousins, friends etc etc

 

[Denville]

why oh why the explicit focus on mothers and strangers?
This is just baiting responses in defense of fathers, brothers and sisters, grandparents, cousins, friends etc etc

What does it all mean....

 

[Pranter]

https://archewell.com

They have officially launched their website.

I kinda like it...not fussy and it seems user friendly.


LaRae

 

[RandyDrx]

Well, Charles just received the world's largest slap in the face.

I'm not surprised, Diana was more popular than Charles, so obviously they are going to post a picture of her rather than him, especially in the US which is their main target audience. Ironically, their podcast was ranked higher in the UK compared to the US.

 

[Claire]

why oh why the explicit focus on mothers and strangers?
This is just baiting responses in defense of fathers, brothers and sisters, grandparents, cousins, friends etc etc

I really think it is just Meghan’s attempt to be Ernest Hemingway. Harry needs a good smack in the head to be reminded that this attempt to constantly throw Diana dust over himself and what his does _ is rather ridiculous for a man of his age. Other well known men with famous mothers don’t do this, or didn’t do this. Can you imagine if John F Kennedy Jr did this, or the sons of Este Lauder. When the only thing going for you is to invoke that you have a dead famous mother , good luck to you. I just want to cry if I think at how much he hates people using her and her memory, but now can really count himself among them.
Can’t the rest of the Diana Foundation, William, or Diana’s sister and gasp, brother put an end to this.
Considering Meghan throws her family and friends away ever five years _ I can understand her comments about just been Archie’s mom.

They have essentially used the two most approved parts of their PR. Harry is Diana son, and therefore half saintly. And the only part of Meghan where even her critics protect her, Archie.

 

[bertie5252003]

It is very sad for Harry I am sad for the PoW that once again she is being used vey someone I just feel sad about Harrys decision making processes if they are intact his , mind you, so much for all that privacy

 

[evolvingdoors]

it's petty but: Why is the entire website in sepia and brown? what do they against color?!

I saw the bit about mothers on twitter and rolled my eyes. I see they continue to exploit Diana's memory - I can not imagine she would ever approve of any of this.
I imagine they couldn't use Charles image seeing as he is the heir- I can't imagine the crown would have approved. but it is still literally erasing their fathers from the core of who they are. What a disgusting way to thank two men who did everything for them, two men who they would not be where they are without their love and support, and money!.
The pictures and message are irrelevant to their work. why not post a picture of them from one of their PR charity stunts?


I don't know who wrote that letter, but lord they need a writer class.
They talk compassion but I don't think they truly understand the meaning.

Everything they have done so far this year give me The Tig feeling, and that was awful from the little I saw.

Also, someone online pointed out there was no info about Harry's military work - shouldn't IG be featured- only WCK, a charity that supports black women, and a bunch of charities that promote social media censorship (like that org they talked about a few months ago).. all of those seem to be Meghan interests, and less so Harry.

And lastly using the same name for their Foundation and their For- Profit: that's gonna create problems imo, especially with people who may end up confusing the three of them.
Even the Obama's are keeping their profit venture under a different name than their foundation.

Also, didn't they say they were not going the foundation route? BTW foundation only have to donate 5% of their net assets for charitable purposes.

 

[TLLK]

https://archewell.com

They have officially launched their website.

Adorable photos of Harry, Meghan and their mothers from their childhood. I especially enjoyed seeing the one of Meghan and Doria as we are more familiar with the ones of Diana and Harry. However I truly wish that there had been a mention regarding their fathers or that they'd simply acknowledged "our parents." Yes Sussexes' adult child and parent relationships have been and are tricky now but Diana/Charles and Doria/Thomas all played a part that created both the son and the daughter to be compassionate and caring adults. It would be an example of "One act of compassion at a time."

 

[Hallo girl]

I really do hope that they put in to practice the acts of healing and compassion they talk about. We should all practice what we preach,

 

[Betsypaige]

Well, Charles just received the world's largest slap in the face.

I just saw that...holy bleep, that goes beyond disrespectful. My god, what was Harry thinking ? I can’t imagine how hurt Charles will be... wow. I’m just so angry right now. He’s Diana’s son ? Really? Playing off of his mother’s memory again and erasing his father?

 

[Nico]

https://archewell.com

They have officially launched their website.

Looks like the website for some kind of Born Again cult or a TV product sold on QVC.
Cheesy as hell.

 

[AC21091968]

https://archewell.com

They have officially launched their website.

I really don't know what and how to make of it to be honest.

I dont think they are worrying too much about that.. They've made it clear for months now what side they're on and they must be aware that it is giving conservatives in the UK more ammo against them.. but it doesn't bother them. They are never coming back..so they aren't worried what the Britsih population or the RF think. They'll probably make an OK living in the US even if not perhaps become millionaires on the back of what they are doing...

I agree, I don't think conservatives politicians or even party members like Harry & Meghan and probably won't defended the Sussexes like the rest of the members of the Royal Family (The Crown, Duke & Duchess of Cambridge train tour), despite being monarchists themselves. But then again, as you mentioned, the Sussexes probably don't care what the UK population think about them and most likely to stay in America for a while.

Problems will arise if they want to rejoin the Fold/Firm as senior working members of the Royal Family.

 

[UglyAmerican]

Poor Charles. He may not have been a very good husband to Diana, but he's been a good father to Harry. He doesn't deserve this. The only explanation I can think of for the obsession with mothers and motherhood is that Meghan is a mother now, and praising the importance of motherhood is a (not very) backhanded way of praising herself. There was no need to talk about their parents or their son at all - they're just trying to capitalize on their royal connections, as usual. That wouldn't be so bad if they were doing it entirely for charity, but their for-profit endeavors seem to be mixed in, and a casual viewer wouldn't be able to tell which was which.

 

[Curryong]

I don't think that Harry would have any trouble acknowledging the role his father has played in his life. The two of them are on good terms apparently. However it would stick out like a sore thumb if he praised both his parents while Meghan only felt able to show closeness to her mother on the same theme.

I think it's being forgotten here that Meghan has a lawsuit ongoing with a giant newspaper group, a lawsuit that began when her father allowed the Sunday Fail access to his daughter's letter to him. He has also pronounced that he is willing to appear as a witness for the newspaper group when the suit comes to court.

If Meghan had publicly praised Thomas, a man she feels betrayed her, on the Archewell site, the outrage from the Press, SM, Twitter etc would have been overwhelming and would have gone on for days, weeks probably. The Fail would be leading the charge accusing hypocrisy, a major blunder in the case against them, and all sorts of things. They would be ecstatic.

I am sure that Harry and Charles are in regular communication and that Charles is very much aware of the circumstances in which Harry is keeping things to mothers only and supporting his wife.

 

[acdc1]

I was wondering if maybe the Queen made it clear to them that they couldn’t have any references to the royal family in their private enterprises.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

A good point, Curryong, that I had not considered.

 

[Curryong]

I was wondering if maybe the Queen made it clear to them that they couldn’t have any references to the royal family in their private enterprises.

Harry is a member of the royal family himself, and I hardly think the Queen, his grandmother, would have said to him that under no circumstances was he allowed to mention family like his father, brother, sister in law or herself in any statements.

 

[Denville]

Harry is a member of the royal family himself, and I hardly think the Queen, his grandmother, would have said to him that under no circumstances was he allowed to mention family like his father, brother, sister in law or herself in any statements.

I'd say it is more than likely that he's been forbidden from talkng about the RF in his working life..

 

[Betsypaige]

Curry, that is a good point about it being potentially awkward with Meghan not mentioning her own father. I was upset earlier, but I never thought it was about Harry not loving his father or not being on good terms with him.

 

[Curryong]

The thing about not involving the Crown in any commercial activities was worked out months ago at the time of the negotiations. Since then Harry and Meghan have mentioned the Queen in reference to the Commonwealth Trust and there have been exchanges via IG/Twitter on various Royal birthdays etc, including Harry's. I hardly think mentioning his father or grandmother or indeed any relatives on Archewell (unless he insults them of course, which won't happen) is going to constitute a breach of some code or agreement which we don't know the details of anyway.

 

[RoyalNight]

I was wondering if maybe the Queen made it clear to them that they couldn’t have any references to the royal family in their private enterprises.

That might be. If so they could form the intro differently.

 

[TLLK]

I was wondering if maybe the Queen made it clear to them that they couldn’t have any references to the royal family in their private enterprises.

That's a good point and one item that I believe would have been part of the January 2020 meeting at Sandringham.

 

[RJC]

Their PR companies don't seem to have any idea. They could have made it more about -- this is Archie whom we love and would like to do this in his honour -- rather than the whole mothers thing.

 

[Madame Verseau]

@Curryong - sorry not sorry for Charles and Thomas being left out of Archwell opening of the website. Both fathers have hurt their children by different means but still publicly so why should Harry and Meghan owe filial loyalty to them? The Dads can stay mad. Besides in certain courts of public opinion Charles and Thomas are not getting Father of the Year awards. Both men have negative opinions placed on them and that's due to their voluntary actions.