Alisa
Heir Apparent
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2003
- Messages
- 4,021
- Country
- United States
It has nothing to do with the number of photos. When the news of BP refusing to lay a wreath in Harry's behalf broke. The critics said he should go lay one on his own. When he did- they found something else to criticize -the photos. Even in this thread alone the critics are divided on the number of photos or whether he should even released photos at all.It's simply not damned if they do and damned if they don't. Most posters on the forum do not object Harry and Meghan paying tribute to ex-serviceman on Remembrance Sunday. What they do object is the sheer number of photographs (7 in total) of Harry and Meghan in the Los Angeles National Cemetery. Had the photos been in similar format as these politicians, the response would have been different. Apologies for quoting myself on post #1040 with some edits.
Some of these photographs were probably not taken by photographers. George Spencer-Churchill, Marquess of Blandford (heir to the Duke of Marlborough) did not post photos of himself at all, but silhouettes of fallen soldiers and wreaths on the gardens of Blenheim Palace.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CHTM43YgFN3/
Some of the social media comments (that I have read) towards Arthur Edwards from the "Sussex Squads" have been ludicrous. Dare I say these comments were much worse than most posts in this forum. They actually compared Harry's plea in laying a wreath on personal behalf during the Remembrance service to Arthur Edwards laying a wreath behalf of The Sun readers at the end of the service (where members of the public were free to do so).
Whatever they had done the critics would've criticized. Same story different day.