The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -

[Queen Claude]

Is William or a specific friend quoted on this or is it supposition on the part of the writer.

Here is the passage:

In the aftermath of the King’s coronation last year, William let it be known that he wanted his own crowning to “look and feel different”. One difference could be the absence of Harry. Friends of William say that as things stand he would not want his brother at his coronation, whenever that time comes.​

So the sources are "friends" of William, but it looks like the writer may have posed a leading question to these sources. It seems like they are stating is that William wants nothing to do with Harry currently. and if their relationship is in the same state at the time of William's coronation, then Harry will not be wanted.

 

[tommy100]

If they are charging the media for pictures and footage then these tours won't last much longer IMO.

The reality is there isn't that much interest in them for news organisations to shell out tens of thousands of pounds on pictures and footage that the RF and other celebrities provide for free.

I'd say the coverage in the UK has certainly been less than that for Nigeria and that I suspect is because the media just don't want to pay for it. Interesting that the BBC and others are using the pictures from the VP meeting (which were less exclusive) and then a write up. The Sussex's fame had peaked and without more talk of the RF the interest just don't justify the cost.

 

[Hallo girl]

Here is the passage:

In the aftermath of the King’s coronation last year, William let it be known that he wanted his own crowning to “look and feel different”. One difference could be the absence of Harry. Friends of William say that as things stand he would not want his brother at his coronation, whenever that time comes.​

So the sources are "friends" of William, but it looks like the writer may have posed a leading question to these sources. It seems like they are stating is that William wants nothing to do with Harry currently. and if their relationship is in the same state at the time of William's coronation, then Harry will not be wanted.

That seems like pot stirring to me.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

Are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex responsible for the problems in Colombia? Should they have turned down the Vice President’s invitation for the sake of the Colombian people?

Also, is the relative low coverage due to a lack of interest or a lack of access by the Sussexes? If it’s a lack of interest, then why does it matter how little access the Sussexes are given on this trip?

Will tabloids buy pictures of this visit? Well, since they love showing pictures of Meghan walking around her house and going to lunch, I’m pretty sure many of them will.

 

[Queen Claude]

Are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex responsible for the problems in Colombia? Should they have turned down the Vice President’s invitation for the sake of the Colombian people?

Also, is the relative low coverage due to a lack of interest or a lack of access by the Sussexes? If it’s a lack of interest, then why does it matter how little access the Sussexes are given on this trip?

Will tabloids buy pictures of this visit? Well, since they love showing pictures of Meghan walking around her house and going to lunch, I’m pretty sure many of them will.

Yeah, the Sussexes have taken a significant hit when it comes to favorability in he past few years, but there is significant interest in them, particularly by the British media. They will grouse about all manner of things, some valid, but then will cover them extensively.

 

[TLLK]

Thank you to all who have shared the photos and stories about the trip to Colombia.

 

[TLLK]

T

Thanks for posting the archived version @shady lady, much appreciated!

Thank you for finding and sharing the archived version.

 

[HRHHermione]

The moderation team has removed several posts that were speculative, stated opinions as facts, and rehashed old information, as well as replies to these posts. As always, please ensure you are following the rules for this thread so that we do not need to close it.

 

[tommy100]

The Telegraph has a good summary of the trip

More questions than answers over Harry and Meghan's Colombia visit

archived 18 Aug 2024 20:13:09 UTC

archive.ph

Interesting fact - only one reporter (apparently from Harpers Bazaar) has been allowed to travel with them writing reports for other newspapers and media outlets to use for their own reporting. That IMO explains some of the reporting or lack of it we have seen.

 

[Marengo]

That is highly irregular. Why was the rest of the press not allowed to be there? Is that on request of the couple/Archwell or on request of the Vice-president? Isn't the whole point of the visit to gather attention for these causes?

It is a tad ironic that the press was restricted, as one of the key topics was false news. A free press with access is a vital element against that!

Not that they will be alone in restricting press access. It is something that has been going on for a decade or more. And the result is docile interviews everywhere as journalists are afraid to lose access to whatever celebrity or politician they are writing about - filming.

 

[shady lady]

The Telegraph has a good summary of the trip

More questions than answers over Harry and Meghan's Colombia visit

archived 18 Aug 2024 20:13:09 UTC

archive.ph

Interesting fact - only one reporter (apparently from Harpers Bazaar) has been allowed to travel with them writing reports for other newspapers and media outlets to use for their own reporting. That IMO explains some of the reporting or lack of it we have seen.

Thank you for posting this @tommy100 !

I thought it was a really good article, and one line stood out to me: With no access, there is no independent scrutiny. Spot on.

IMO the main aim of the visit was a content for profit exercise with the intent of using it in a future documentary.

 

[Asteria12]

Thank you for sharing the article @tommy100, much appreciated!

 

[Then]

Interesting fact about the Colombia visit - few media have been allowed and most reporting on it have had to use pictures licensed by Archewell.

So?

That is highly irregular. Why was the rest of the press not allowed to be there? Is that on request of the couple/Archwell or on request of the Vice-president? Isn't the whole point of the visit to gather attention for these causes?

It is a tad ironic that the press was restricted, as one of the key topics was false news. A free press with access is a vital element against that!

Not that they will be alone in restricting press access. It is something that has been going on for a decade or more. And the result is docile interviews everywhere as journalists are afraid to lose access to whatever celebrity or politician they are writing about.

The BRF often limits the number of newspapers/journalists present as its events or tours. For one because it become too busy, but also because that is entire idea of the royal rota. A limited number of agencies present and the ones that aren't there have to buy their info/photos from the ones that were there. And that was one of H&M objections. If other papers have to buy their info from papers (like the DM) who couldn't report anything positive or truthful if someone held a gun to their collective heads, reporting is distorted.
Now I don't know if agencies have to pay the Sussexes for the photos, but I don't care if they want some control over the narrative. It's essentially what the BRF has been doing for years.

 

[tommy100]

So...Archewell is making money from the pictures of Harry and Meghan on a trip likely paid for by the Colombian taxpayers.

The difference with the BRF's rota system is that it uses journalists from a range of main stream UK media, not just one reported handpicked Harpers Bazaar. Likewise, they are expected to share pictures and reports with other rota members for free and immediately. It is like the White House Correspondents Association. Imagine if instead of using the White House pool Trump or Biden started using only one favourable media outlet to feed news to all the others, and started charging for the pictures they took. That is what Harry and Meghan are doing.

Its fine if that is what they want to do, but it is worthy of note and shows that all the reporting is likely to be skewered towards a more positive slant.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Links about the trip so far from Sussex.com

Welcome to Colombia | The Office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex

Prince Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex have commenced their visit to Colombia with a memorable and heartfelt welcome from Vice President Francia Márquez and her partner, Rafael Yerney Pinillo. Known for her fierce advocacy for environmental justice and human rights, Vice President...

sussex.com

[...]

As Sussex.com is the Duke and Duchess's official website, the very flattering introductory description of Vice President Márquez seems like an endorsement of the (partisan, divisive) government of Colombia. I had thought that was something the generally nonpartisan British royal family usually avoided doing, even with the governments of the UK.

 

[Mirabel]

I bet this thread is closed more than all the rest put together!
Maybe we should have a betting pool on how long it will take? LOL.

As for press access, Harry and Meghan have always attempted to control press coverage, and in situations like this trip, it is made possible. No surprises there.

 

[llj]

As Sussex.com is the Duke and Duchess's official website, the very flattering introductory description of Vice President Márquez seems like an endorsement of the (partisan, divisive) government of Colombia. I had thought that was something the generally nonpartisan British royal family usually avoided doing, even with the governments of the UK.

I think it's more important than ever that a clear line be made between Meghan and Harry's activities and the British Royal Family. Attempts have been made with the working royals/member of the family distinction, but it needs to be crystal clear that they don't speak for His Majesty or His Majesty's Government.

 

[FigTree]

Isn't Victoria Ward a 'friend' of Harry's? I know there is one at the Telegraph he gives interviews too. Interesting and not wrong.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I think it's more important than ever that a clear line be made between Meghan and Harry's activities and the British Royal Family. Attempts have been made with the working royals/member of the family distinction, but it needs to be crystal clear that they don't speak for His Majesty or His Majesty's Government.

I think one genuine silver lining of the couple's attacks on the British public, journalists, government officials, courtiers and senior royals is that they have made crystal clear to the majority of people that the couple speak and act independently and not as representatives of the British monarchy, government, or state. (This was not so clear when they were working royals who were outwardly on good terms with the monarchy and government and more popular with the public than they are now. Other people, including senior royals and courtiers, were thought at the time to be responsible for some decisions which, in hindsight, may actually have been driven by the couple.)

 

[Then]

So...Archewell is making money from the pictures of Harry and Meghan on a trip likely paid for by the Colombian taxpayers.

Any evidence of this? I did find out licensed photos of this tour are available to buy on Getty images and made by Eric Charbonneau. He has a contract with Getty Images. Was he asked by H&M to make photos? Maybe, but that doesn't mean H&M make a lot money this way. And even if they did, if that money goes to their foundation I have no problems with that.
And, there was also at least photographer from the office of the Vice President. Those photos and videos would be available for free, so it would make no sense if H&M would sell theirs. Both photographers would be at the same events, I think.

​

 

[Queen Claude]

I admit that I have eye-rolled and laughed at Meghan's word salad tendencies but Meghan can only dream of pulling off the gymnastics that Victoria Ward, Deputy Royal Editor for The Telegraph wrote in her article. She lays out how the Sussexes hand-picked an online reporter to feed information to the other media. I look at this from both sides, one it is not unprecedented, hellooo royal rota! The other side, is that if The Telegraph feels that scrutiny is warranted but access is being denied, surely there are resources that know how to deal with getting information. Has The Telegraph never reported on totalitarian states like North Korea or the USSR? Have they not broken stories of political or financial corruption in the UK? If so, were they only successful because the target granted them access?

So Victoria Ward writes:

With no access, there is no independent scrutiny.​

Immediately followed by:

The couple, now operating as private individuals no longer reliant on public funds, can do as they please.​

But the last section of the article with the subheader, "Call for slave trade apology" really had me scratching my head. So The Telegraph, a publication that carries the nickname "The Tory-graph," is asserting that Prince Harry and ADOS* Meghan were remiss because they did not address slavery, colonialism and reparations, rather they stated that they were there to “listen and learn”.

The Duke, too, was considered “uniquely positioned” to speak about reparations, with some even calling for him to apologise for his family’s role in the slave trade.​

​

I may be wrong but the only BRF person that was referenced on this trip was Diana, Princess of Wales. I don't think HLM was mentioned which is a good thing because IMO she has been Harry's go-to for clout.

So it seems to me that according to Ms. Ward, it would have been A-OK for Harry to re-activate his royal card and speak out on this very sensitive topic.

* American Descendants of Slavery.

 

[Then]

But the last section of the article with the subheader, "Call for slave trade apology" really had me scratching my head. So The Telegraph, a publication that carries the nickname "The Tory-graph," is asserting that Prince Harry and ADOS* Meghan were remiss because they did not address slavery, colonialism and reparations, rather they stated that they were there to “listen and learn”.

The Duke, too, was considered “uniquely positioned” to speak about reparations, with some even calling for him to apologise for his family’s role in the slave trade.​

​

Funny thing is if he had talked about the slave trade people would have accused him of being political, of not knowing what he is talking about, etc (2nd amendment anyone), and now that he doesn't talk about it they say it's a missed chance.
And that's the problem I have with this, there's no pleasing people.

 

[Alison H]

Known for her fierce advocacy for environmental justice and human rights, Vice President Márquez is a champion for marginalized communities and a defender of Colombia’s natural heritage. Her work has garnered international acclaim, including the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize, a testament to her dedication and impact.

(From the Sussexes' website.)

I certainly don't think that we would see working royals, or Beatrice, Eugenie etc making such a strong statement in favour of a politician. Harry and Meghan have distanced themselves from the Royal Family, but it's quite a delicate area.

 

[HRHHermione]

Funny thing is if he had talked about the slave trade people would have accused him of being political, of not knowing what he is talking about, etc (2nd amendment anyone), and now that he doesn't talk about it they say it's a missed chance.
And that's the problem I have with this, there's no pleasing people.

I think this is a misunderstanding of the point of Ms. Ward’s article. She wasn’t suggesting they SHOULD have spoken out, just that in choosing to visit this town with its history, many expected them to, including locals who were making calls on Harry to apologize. I think it was meant to highlight that the purpose of the trip was very unclear and open to interpretation.

 

[kalnel]

Funny thing is if he had talked about the slave trade people would have accused him of being political, of not knowing what he is talking about, etc (2nd amendment anyone), and now that he doesn't talk about it they say it's a missed chance.
And that's the problem I have with this, there's no pleasing people.

2nd amendment?

 

[Kaye1850]

2nd amendment?

You know he meant the first amendment:

Prince Harry criticised after calling First Amendment in USA ‘bonkers’

Duke of Sussex says anyone ‘can capitalise or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said,’ in podcast interview

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Kenya]

2nd amendment?

It was the First Amendment, which is fitting, since Harry has repeatedly made it clear (and this trip has reinforced) that he does not believe in and does not support the idea of a free press.

From the article:

No such references were made. Instead, the couple were there to “listen and learn”, it was said, and to experience the culture and community.

That's all well and good, but why should taxpayers pay for these two private citizens, who represent nothing and no one, to "listen and learn"? If the Sussexes believe these "listening and learning" trips are so vital for their work, then Archewell should be the ones funding them. It's fortunate for them that there are opportunistic politicians willing to pay their way and roll out the red carpet in exchange for photo ops, but I'd be outraged if my

It would be one thing if Harry and Meghan had the ability to drive investment, if they were looking to relocate a company, or if they were making huge Gates or McKenzie Scott-like charitable donations in the countries they're visiting. But they are offering literally nothing, other than some moderate press attention for a few days.

 

[Then]

You know he meant the first amendment:

Prince Harry criticised after calling First Amendment in USA ‘bonkers’

Duke of Sussex says anyone ‘can capitalise or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said,’ in podcast interview

www.independent.co.uk

Yes I did and thank you. The 2nd one is the militia thing.

 

[carlota]

It was the First Amendment, which is fitting, since Harry has repeatedly made it clear (and this trip has reinforced) that he does not believe in and does not support the idea of a free press.

what a strange comment to make. if he doesn't agree with a free press, does he suggest we go to dictatorship style media?

The Colombian tour is receiving international coverage. This tells me all I need to know about the relevance and reach of H and M.

reach and relevance, maybe. impact? it is arguable. aside from boosting the popularity of the vicepresident, and improving the image of H&M one would argue what this 'tour' has achieved for colombia.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

So Harry and Meghan are criticized for expecting to be treated as royals when they're private citizens, but when they do things that many wealthy private citizens do (hiring handpicked reporters to follow them, possibly lining up a sale of the pictures for profit, alluding to private political beliefs), all of a sudden they should be acting more royal (opening it up to all press in spite being a private visit, not selling pictures because royals grant most of them for free, staying politically neutral in spite not representing anyone but themselves)?

Of course, the Colombian people have a right to denounce their taxes being used to host the Sussexes, but the fault for that lies with the Colombian government, the Vice President specifically. If she offered to pay all of their expenses, why would the Sussexes turn that down? Why should they?