The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Step Back as Senior Royals: January 2020

[QueenMathilde]

I don't know what she can do going forward to improve the media coverage on her. And there is going to be lots of it - this idea that quitting the royal family means the media goes away doesn't work. Ask any celebrity who gets bashed by them.


In the end she's going to have to chose the life of a celebrity complete with media coverage or the life of a private citizen where she shuns the spotlight.


I don't see any way for there to be both no matter what she does.


As I said before they can't sue everyone. I was reading nasty, negative articles about Bill Gates and he's supposed to be the king of philanthropy.

[silverstar]

Its really so sad to think that just 18 months ago Megan and Harry s wedding was such a huge brilliant event .... the weather was perfect.... the wedding was televised all around the world .


There was such a feel good factor towards Megan and Harry ..... and then May 2019 ... the birth of Archie....
It was all set fair ... they were the new Charles and Di ready to tour the world as ambassadors.... the new glamorous Royals...


How did it all go so wrong ?
I remember that in June 2019 the weather was grim in the UK .... the wettest June on record..... Maybe Megan took a look around and thought of the warmth and blue skies of California and thought.... Im outa here....


She is obviously too independent and self willed to conform to life in the Royal Family .....
its just not her scene....

[Princess]

With that door having been left open for H&M, does anyone really think they could come back in a year or so say saying "hi we are back, sorry for all the trouble" and the world would welcome them with a Mexican wave?

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by silverstar

Its really so sad to think that just 18 months ago Megan and Harry s wedding was such a huge brilliant event .... the weather was perfect.... the wedding was televised all around the world .
There was such a feel good factor towards Megan and Harry ..... and then May 2019 ... the birth of Archie....
It was all set fair ... they were the new Charles and Di ready to tour the world as ambassadors.... the new glamorous Royals...


How did it all go so wrong ?
I do remember that June 2019 the weather was grim in the UK .... the wettest June on record..... Maybe Megan took a look around and thought of the warmth and blue skies of California and thougt.... Im outa here....
She is obviously too independent and self willed to conform to life in the Royal Family ..... its just not her scene....

Well I can see why they didn't - but from a media standpoint I think it would have been better if they'd stuck it out. The media can make more of the fact that they quit than they could of them going about their business in the UK.



Now the best I could recommend to them is decent PR people. And not Hollywood PR people - their mantra is "no publicity is bad publicity". They need to hire a PR person who has worked with royal families. I'd pick one who has worked with European royal families - maybe the royal family of Sweden. They manage to get good PR despite lots of things that would be scandals in England.


Do you think they would ever be able to return to England? Or would people hate them and hound them for quitting? I haven't seen any positive press on them there and the polls look bad.

[tausi]

I don't know what she can do going forward to improve the media coverage on her. And there is going to be lots of it - this idea that quitting the royal family means the media goes away doesn't work. Ask any celebrity who gets bashed by them.


In the end she's going to have to chose the life of a celebrity complete with media coverage or the life of a private citizen where she shuns the spotlight.


I don't see any way for there to be both no matter what she does.


As I said before they can't sue everyone. I was reading nasty, negative articles about Bill Gates and he's supposed to be the king of philanthropy.[/QUOTE]

You make great points. The key to relationship with media is diplomacy. I think Prince William has come to understand this.

H&M are trying to control the media and everyone around them. Something that is not possible.

At this point, their temperament is media's blessing. They are doing everything based on emotions, which is not very smart.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by tausi

You make great points. The key to relationship with media is diplomacy. I think Prince William has come to understand this

At this point, their temperament is a media's blessing. They are doing everything based on emotions, which is not very smart.

Diana and Fergie "quit" the royal family and the media attention got worse not better. The week before Diana died she was on the cover of six magazines when I was in the checkout lane including People and National Enquirer. All of them had negative headlines. The headlines didn't turn positive until the week after she died.


I think they should lie low for about six months. Get their bearings. She should stop with the charity visits which are being criticized anyway as competing with the royals. If she wants to do that she needs to coordinate with them.


They have until spring so it's no hurry.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by Princess

With that door having been left open for H&M, does anyone really think they could come back in a year or so say saying "hi we are back, sorry for all the trouble" and the world would welcome them with a Mexican wave?

I'm at the point where nothing would surprise me. I do think it's fairly unlikely, though, since I think this is a case where such a significant amount of public goodwill and tolerance has been lost that getting that back is likely to be an uphill slog. It might depend a lot on how the Sussexes comport themselves going forward, and where they choose to put their energies. They have a lot of charisma, so theoretically, anything is possible, but the way they handled their exit did a lot to tarnish that.

If Harry and or Meghan don't come back before the death of either Philip or the Queen I'd say the odds go way down. Either way, I am not holding my breath.

[Princess]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

Do you think they would ever be able to return to England? Or would people hate them and hound them for quitting? I haven't seen any positive press on them there and the polls look bad.

To be honest: No. At least not Meghan.

Originally Posted by Ista

I'm at the point where nothing would surprise me. I do think it's fairly unlikely, though, since I think this is a case where such a significant amount of public goodwill and tolerance has been lost that getting that back is likely to be an uphill slog. It might depend a lot on how the Sussexes comport themselves going forward, and where they choose to put their energies. They have a lot of charisma, so theoretically, anything is possible, but the way they handled their exit did a lot to tarnish that.

If Harry and or Meghan don't come back before the death of either Philip or the Queen I'd say the odds go way down. Either way, I am not holding my breath.

Yes, they broke so much china (is this also an english saying?) in such a short time.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Princess

Yes, they broke so much china (is this also an english saying?) in such a short time.

I think the Queen left the door open for Harry not Heghan. With the exception of Edward all her children got divorced. She may think Harry will do the same and want to return. If he does he can and if she's really angry with Meghan she can strip her of all her titles and sue her if she tries to profit off of them. As lawyers go the Queen's pockets are deeper than Meghan's.

[acdc1]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

Well I can see why they didn't - but from a media standpoint I think it would have been better if they'd stuck it out. The media can make more of the fact that they quit than they could of them going about their business in the UK.



Now the best I could recommend to them is decent PR people. And not Hollywood PR people - their mantra is "no publicity is bad publicity". They need to hire a PR person who has worked with royal families. I'd pick one who has worked with European royal families - maybe the royal family of Sweden. They manage to get good PR despite lots of things that would be scandals in England.


Do you think they would ever be able to return to England? Or would people hate them and hound them for quitting? I haven't seen any positive press on them there and the polls look bad.

I think they’ll be able to return to England for private functions, but certainly not for going back as working members of the royal family. Nor do I think they would want to- they would basically be running back with their tails between their legs, and neither Harry nor Meghan strike me as the type who would admit to being wrong or having made a mistake of that magnitude.

I think Meghan is done with the UK- done with living there, done with working there, and I think she’s done with the royal family, too. I think we’ll only see her in a very limited capacity at family events. I suspect she’ll only come for the big ones- Prince Philip’s and the Queen’s funerals, maybe weddings, maybe Charles’s coronation when the time comes. I think for all else- summer holidays at Balmoral, Christmas at Sandringham, etc.- she will stay back home in Canada. I think that Harry will stay away while licking his wounds, but we may see him coming back around after a year or two. I think that while Meghan never liked and never adjusted to living in the UK, Harry is a British boy at heart and it will be hard for him to stay away for too long, especially as time goes on and wounds heal.

I think the only way we will see any of them back living and working in the UK in any sort of meaningful or permanent way is if something happens in the marriage and Harry comes back alone. I think Meghan has made her decision that she wants to live and raise her child in North America. I think Archie and any future children will go to school in North America and will choose to settle there, and will probably not consider themselves British beyond heritage/place of birth. I think any future children will be born in North America, not Britain.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by acdc1

I think any future children will be born in North America, not Britain.

On a side note what would be the nationality of any baby born in Canada? British? Canadian? I was always fascinated by the conspiracy theory surrounding Obama being born in Kenya - not because I thought it was true but I thought what difference would it make if it were? He'd still be American. Wouldn't he? Isn't the baby born from a mother who is a US citizen and a father who is from another country still a US citizen no matter where he was born?


Sorry for the ramble - snowed in today and bored.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Elenath

Interpretation is what this all comes down to. I never saw a problem with how they handled Archie's birth and christening. I didn't care for the interview and thought it was a bit dramatic, but put it down to culture. Harry saying there were issues with William meant to me there were ups and downs. Like in all families. William has, I believe, said this himself at some point. This year, after the website was launched (which I thought was stupid but not awful), the first press statement by BP was equally stupid as far as I'm concerned. Months of talks is not early stages. If I were in Harry's shoes and I were trying to get things done, that statement wouldn't feel good. And it's not truthful.

And I really don't like that the entire blame for all of this is put on Meghan. Accusations here of keeping her son hostage? Of dropping him like a hat when he's no longer useful? Narcissism? Gold digger? She planned it all from the start? Dropping all of her friends, her family, etc? When I come here I expect a higher level than this!

While I agree it might have been smarter for them to come back to the UK as a family, we don't know why they didn't. There might be very good reasons for them staying there.

What I see however is people and press making a big fuss over things that aren't that important. And in let's say 10 years time, we might hear things that puts all of this in a different perspective. Like it did with Diana.

I agree with a lot of this. As said, we really have no idea what went on behind closed doors. Lots of assumptions and accusations. Will be interesting once it all settles down.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Princess

To be honest: No. At least not Meghan.

I agree. Harry, absolutely - his family is here, and I think some honesty from him would go a long way in endearing himself to the public again. People are angry with him, but they still love him. It's different with Meghan - I think at this point many just don't care for her. She doesn't like the UK, it's pretty obvious - that's already bound to annoy people - and she's tried to change a 1000 year old institution. Not just one person has noticed that Harry has changed since meeting her.

I don't care if Meghan ever returns. I care about Harry and Archie.

It should be noted that being criticized is not the same thing as being trashed/bashed, either personally or in the media.

[Princess]

Concerning Archie: I read somewhere (don't remember where) that the Queen has custody of all her grandchilden (as well as the great-grandchildren) as long as they are underaged. Some very old law. Is that true?
I heard something like that also concerning other monarchies, but I don't know if this is still valid for nowadays.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by camelot23ca

I think it’s unfortunate Meghan and Harry couldn’t have met maybe five years sooner because, to me, the stage of life Meghan was at when Harry came into her life dictated the pace of a lot of things surrounding their relationship. She was an actress in her mid 30s when she met Harry. Even very talented and well known actresses have spoken about how difficult it is for women in show business to find work after 40. Meghan’s acting wasn’t earthshaking and she didn’t have major connections in the business, so Suits was likely going to be the high point of her career. Equally as important, she was a woman in her mid 30s who, (I’m guessing based on the existence of Archie), wanted children.

So, that’s where she’s at when, out of the blue, Harry comes into her life offering solutions to her two most immediate problems - career and children. I’m not surprised she didn’t want to spend too much time digging deeper into what her life was going to look like as a royal given how appealing the superficial package must have looked. She didn’t have the luxury of time, and, as I’ve said before, Harry didn’t do the responsible thing and insist on a pre-marriage period of exposure to life in the UK and to the BRF and everything that goes with them.

So, in short order - fast marriage, baby ASAP, lots of big ideas about what kind of work she was going to do, and then a quick smash into the wall of reality in the form of the restrictions of British royal life and the ruthless British press.

I totally agree with those who think the couple could have given royal life more of a chance. I mean, two years is nothing given all the major life changes they went through. But I think for things to have really worked they would have had to agree to change their strategy to fit with the broader goals of the royal family. If they weren’t willing to do that then I think getting out fairly quickly was best for Harry and Meghan, as well as the institution itself.

This is a very well thought out post and I agree with it.

It may be that Meghan thought marrying a member of the BRF would allow her to bring attention to the causes dear to her heart (very commendable). But she miscalculated the degree of independence she would have, and - as you say - "[smashed] into the wall of reality in the form of restrictions of British royal life." She lost the freedom to exercise complete control over her life.

This might also explain her inability to ignore the intense media criticism and her desire to limit media access. Not only was her life controlled to a certain extent by others, so was her image. She'd been a popular social media influencer (a positive image) but now - thanks to the media - her public image was almost largely negative. I think Harry wants privacy from the media but I suspect Meghan wants control.

For a successful woman in her mid-30s this sudden loss of independence and control over her life and her image was probably too much, and not what she expected.

But it just boggles my mind the couple gave it less than two years.

[Hallo girl]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

The picture's all over the Mail Online. But Piers controls that media and it's always going to be negative.


I don't know what she can do going forward to improve the media coverage on her. And there is going to be lots of it - this idea that quitting the royal family means the media goes away doesn't work. Ask any celebrity who gets bashed by them.


In the end she's going to have to chose the life of a celebrity complete with media coverage or the life of a private citizen where she shuns the spotlight.


I don't see any way for there to be both no matter what she does.


As I said before they can't sue everyone. I was reading nasty, negative articles about Bill Gates and he's supposed to be the king of philanthropy.

She has already chosen a celebrity life, so nots let kid on here.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Princess

Concerning Archie: I read somewhere (don't remember where) that the Queen has custody of all her grandchilden (as well as the great-grandchildren) as long as they are underaged. Some very old law. Is that true?
I heard something like that also concerning other monarchies, but I don't know if this is still valid for nowadays.

Ooh, I asked the same question. I was told it was a rule, not a law. Whatever that means. It is three hundred years old and it affects the grandchildren only not the great grandchildren. So it wouldn't apply to her and Archie but it would apply to Charles and Archie.


And I think she was able to put her foot down and make sure Harry, William, Beatrice and Eugenie were mostly raised by their fathers with the mothers getting visitation rights.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Hallo girl

She has already chosen a celebrity life, so nots let kid on here.

IF that's the case she's failing miserably at being a celebrity.



LaRae

[Lilyflo]

I'm not uncritical of Meghan but some posts here seem unduly harsh & full of evidence-free speculation about Meghan's motives and things she has supposedly said or done so maybe it's a good time to remind ourselves of what the Queen has stated personally about Harry & Meghan's change in situation:

"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.

I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.

I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family."

The Queen didn't have to say any of the above personally. A statement from Buckingham Palace would suffice but HMQ chose to emphasise personally the love, understanding & pride in Meghan's place in the family.

In future, their situation might be a success, a failure or a bit of both but if HMQ blamed Meghan for taking Harry away from his family & duty, you can be 100% she would not have issued such a personal statement as the one above.

[Princess]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

Ooh, I asked the same question. I was told it was a rule, not a law. Whatever that means. It is three hundred years old and it affects the grandchildren only not the great grandchildren. So it wouldn't apply to her and Archie but it would apply to Charles and Archie.


And I think she was able to put her foot down and make sure Harry, William, Beatrice and Eugenie were mostly raised by their fathers with the mothers getting visitation rights.

"Perhaps one of the strangest rules in the royal rulebook has to do with the royal grandchildren. Technically, the queen has custody over Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis. Plus, when Meghan and Harry have their baby, the queen will have custody over that little one, too. According to Marie Claire, the royal rule dates all the way back to King George in the 1700s. Supposedly, King George had a bad relationship with his son, so he passed the custody law to make sure that he had control of his son’s children. The royal family never got rid of the law, which explains why the queen technically has custody today."
https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertain...children.html/

No clue if this is a reliable source