The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 8: April - August 2023

[Maryrose]

I don't think Dior was ever looking to sign the Sussexes as brand ambassadors. Yes they dress them and post their pictures on their instagram pages wearing Dior clothes. I think all this speculation came about after the Spotify news and this was just thrown out there by the press.

 

[yukari]

Thank you for clarifying. In reading your original comment, it seemed as if you were stating you had read press reports saying (paraphrased) "Meghan is about to sign a sponsorship deal with Dior", and that "maybe that's the direction" was your commentary. But, if I understand your clarification correctly, what your comment meant was that you had read press articles saying (paraphrased) "Meghan being about to sign a sponsorship deal with Dior is maybe the direction Meghan is heading in" (my emphasis), and no article actually reported a deal.

From what I saw on social media, story came from the Daily Mail that "source close to the Sussex" (or was it WME) said that Meghan sort of potentially would/might land a deal with Dior (with headline "Is Meghan about to become the mega-buck Duchess of Dior" and you can Google the article using that headline). The New York Post also picked it up. Admittedly I haven't (and will not) give click to both articles, but I've just seen the links and snapshots of said articles shared in both Sussexes fan accounts and anti-Sussexes accounts (which I find funny to see those Sussexes fan accounts raving the article as a fact despite often calling it "Daily Fail" and the article is rather scathing towards Harry -- and I'm paraphrasing -- something about he is too toxic with his crusade and negativity against the press and BRF and how wise of Meghan to put distance with him because she has so much potential to aim higher).

I guess the Telegraph saw that and didn't want to miss the story, but unlike DM, their journalist contacted Dior first for confirmation before printing the story.

 

[Maryrose]

I think the Sussexes make announcements through their spokesperson that’s why I always take these sources close to the Sussexes info with a grain of salt.

 

[Heavs]

I think the Sussexes make announcements through their spokesperson that’s why I always take these sources close to the Sussexes info with a grain of salt.

Eh, "sources close to the Sussexes" have consistently thrown out titbits about them and others that they wanted out there IMHO. Including things that turned out to be true like the Netflix doc dropping in December. I think it was absolutely put out there by her new PR people to cover the Spotify news and get her several days of good press and photos next to Diana. Which it did. When the other side denies it or it turns out not to be true a spokesperson then says "well *we* never said it was" covering themselves and splitting hairs.

The article in The Times a couple of weeks ago about how Meghan was about to become a Super Influencer who could generate a huge amount of money for luxury brands was clearly organised by her agency and setting the stage to tempt someone like Dior and set her up as "someone with high end appeal to Kate's Holly Willoughby". :

https://archive.ph/2tCyl

They could have denied it days ago but only agreed that the story was false once The Telegraph contacted Dior and Dior openly denied it. They rather had to make that statement at that point.

That’s interesting. Is it normal for someone like Dior to pointedly deny rumors? They certainly wanted it known they are not working with her. Can’t say I blame them really. How many weeks ago was that car “chase” statement along with the demands from their lawyers to Backgrid? Among other issues imo with her.

I've seen it happen before with certain celebrities and brands/projects but most of the time they probably wouldn't bother. But Sussex stories tend to be very extra on all sides.

 

[Granada]

Heavs, thanks for the information and Telegraph article refuting claims that Meghan would be a Dior Brand Ambassador.
A "testing of the waters" to see what interest is out there by her new agents at WME ? Or just made up by the Media ? Who knows.

Maybe Givenchy, who created Meghans Wedding Dress, will show interest ?

Speaking of attire, Meghan always wears Diana's Cartier watch. I know She has the gorgeous Aquamarine ring too. But it seems I never see her in ANY of Diana's other fabulous jewelry. Nothing.

Emeralds, Pearls, Sapphires, ect..... I thought the jewelry was split between William and Harry. I've seen Kate in Diana's Sapphire Earrings and Pearl Earrings too, but Its strange ( to me) that those OTHER beautiful pieces never appear. Same as Diana's Pearl Chokers, or Charm bracelet from Charles.
Kate just wore Diana's stunning double drop Sapphire Earrings this weekend at Trooping The Colour.
If anyone has more information, I love to know.

 

[muriel]

Heavs, thanks for the information and Telegraph article refuting claims that Meghan would be a Dior Brand Ambassador.
A "testing of the waters" to see what interest is out there by her new agents at WME ? Or just made up by the Media ? Who knows.

You may be right, and WME may have been watching reactions to the supposed Dior deal to determine which direction they could channel their efforts.

Speaking of attire, Meghan always wears Diana's Cartier watch. I know She has the gorgeous Aquamarine ring too. But it seems I never see her in ANY of Diana's other fabulous jewelry. Nothing.

Emeralds, Pearls, Sapphires, ect..... I thought the jewelry was split between William and Harry. I've seen Kate in Diana's Sapphire Earrings and Pearl Earrings too, but Its strange ( to me) that those OTHER beautiful pieces never appear. Same as Diana's Pearl Chokers, or Charm bracelet from Charles.
Kate just wore Diana's stunning double drop Sapphire Earrings this weekend at Trooping The Colour.
If anyone has more information, I love to know.

It remains unclear how Diana's jewellery may have been split. My guess is anything received from overseas royal families and governments may be retained by the Royal Collection.

The other point to note is that Meghan doesn't have many places to wear any serious jewellery. And her royal career only lasted 18 months.

 

[Granada]

muriel, yes, Meghan certainly doesn't have lots of opportunities for Big Events, but in the last six months She did have two Gala Events in NYC.
The Ripple of Hope Awards, which She wore a glam White Dress, and in May at The MS Foundation Ceremony She wore a glittery Gold Dress.

I'm just really, really surprised that more of Diana's jewelry (like the Blue Sapphire on The Pearl Choker) isn't seen. The giant Blue Sapphire was supposedly a Wedding gift from The Queen Mother. Harry touched on so much in Spare, more than most wanted to know....LOL. I wish he had talked about his Mom's jewelry collection and what happened to it.

 

[FigTree]

muriel, yes, Meghan certainly doesn't have lots of opportunities for Big Events, but in the last six months She did have two Gala Events in NYC.
The Ripple of Hope Awards, which She wore a glam White Dress, and in May at The MS Foundation Ceremony She wore a glittery Gold Dress.

I'm just really, really surprised that more of Diana's jewelry (like the Blue Sapphire on The Pearl Choker) isn't seen. The giant Blue Sapphire was supposedly a Wedding gift from The Queen Mother. Harry touched on so much in Spare, more than most wanted to know....LOL. I wish he had talked about his Mom's jewelry collection and what happened to it.

I don't think Harry is that interested in jewellery.

 

[Curryong]

Kate seems to have received the lion’s share of Diana’s jewellery and Meghan very minor pieces (apart from the Cartier watch and one bracelet) as far as I can see. Kate certainly received most, if not all, of the sapphires Diana had in her private collection, I think.

This may have been because one brother was married and the other not when the jewels were divided up when the two Princes were around thirty. Meghan wasn’t in the picture then. And to be honest I don’t believe she cares. She seems to prefer very delicate jewellery anyway rather than the large pieces Diana wore so well.

 

[Heavs]

Heavs, thanks for the information and Telegraph article refuting claims that Meghan would be a Dior Brand Ambassador.
A "testing of the waters" to see what interest is out there by her new agents at WME ? Or just made up by the Media ? Who knows.

Maybe Givenchy, who created Meghans Wedding Dress, will show interest ?

Speaking of attire, Meghan always wears Diana's Cartier watch. I know She has the gorgeous Aquamarine ring too. But it seems I never see her in ANY of Diana's other fabulous jewelry. Nothing.

Emeralds, Pearls, Sapphires, ect..... I thought the jewelry was split between William and Harry. I've seen Kate in Diana's Sapphire Earrings and Pearl Earrings too, but Its strange ( to me) that those OTHER beautiful pieces never appear. Same as Diana's Pearl Chokers, or Charm bracelet from Charles.
Kate just wore Diana's stunning double drop Sapphire Earrings this weekend at Trooping The Colour.
If anyone has more information, I love to know.

I doubt it was just made up by the media. The Times article that I later linked (which was written almost 3 weeks ago) dripped with "quotes" from WME "sources" which touted Meghan as a luxury brand ambassador with a lot of metrics about how a Victoria Beckham etc dress sales soared by such and such % right after Meghan was spotted whilst saying Kate was on par with Holly Willoughby. That sort of thing will only have come from PR people. I don't work in fashion or celebrity but I work for a large company and it's familiar as a basically a reworded press release/talking points.

The Sussexes profess to loathe the DM, if they had wanted they could have issued a statement that said "even though it is a positive piece we are rebutting it because it is untrue DM pot stirring." But they don't because The DM is still one of the most visited sites in the US as well as the UK and it was likely a plant. It should be noted that the DM is perfectly willing to write/copy puff pieces on the Sussexes for clicks.

The person who Meghan worked with at Givenchy has now left and since reception on a lot of the pieces was mixed it seems unlikely that they would work with her again but who knows?

She's worn a lot of luxury brands since becoming DOS but not always particularly well IMHO and not necessarily iconically again IMHO. Some of my favourite dresses have been from lesser known designers like Safiyaa or that yellow one by Karen Millen.

Perhaps she could partner with a lesser known brand and work with them/invest with them as she herself has said she loves to do. They could even do "ethical" lines dedicated for those of a slightly awkward shape like herself. Of course, that wouldn't be the easy pay day of established brands and goes back to the fact that they haven't accomplished a whole lot of positive content in 3 years.

As for Diana's jewels, I doubt they just handed over half of everything to Harry and Meghan for their own keeping (don't know though). As others have said, somethings may have been considered part of the Royal Collection, Official Gifts or lifetime loans. I believe we may have seen more from Meghan at some events if she had access but I don't know.

Perhaps Harry was given a payment in lieu long ago or there were conditions set on it that we don't know about. I think if the BRF was preventing Meghan from accessing what was rightfully "theirs" then they'd have said something about it in one of the 10 projects on the subject of how they were wronged.

 

[Curryong]

From the Guardian. Comments from the judge on certain editors and journalists.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Mr Justice Fancourt listed the names of more than two dozen people he felt could have been brought before him, “in no particular order”, in the case against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN); the publisher of the Daily and Sunday Mirror and the Sunday People.

“There’s a question in my mind whether any of the individuals on my list could and should have given evidence.” They included the former Daily Mirror editor Morgan and Neil Wallis, the former People editor.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-asks-why-piers-morgan-has-not-given-evidence


Referring to that pair in particular, he said they “relatively recently had a lot to say about this matter outside of court”.

 

[Hallo girl]

Kate seems to have received the lion’s share of Diana’s jewellery and Meghan very minor pieces (apart from the Cartier watch and one bracelet) as far as I can see. Kate certainly received most, if not all, of the sapphires Diana had in her private collection, I think.

This may have been because one brother was married and the other not when the jewels were divided up when the two Princes were around thirty. Meghan wasn’t in the picture then. And to be honest I don’t believe she cares. She seems to prefer very delicate jewellery anyway rather than the large pieces Diana wore so well.

Just because we have not see Meghan wearing other pieces it does not mean that she did not receive them, as you say she appears to prefer a more pared down look with regards jewellery. It could be held for their daughter.

 

[Hallo girl]

From the Guardian. Comments from the judge on certain editors and journalists.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Mr Justice Fancourt listed the names of more than two dozen people he felt could have been brought before him, “in no particular order”, in the case against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN); the publisher of the Daily and Sunday Mirror and the Sunday People.

“There’s a question in my mind whether any of the individuals on my list could and should have given evidence.” They included the former Daily Mirror editor Morgan and Neil Wallis, the former People editor.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-asks-why-piers-morgan-has-not-given-evidence


Referring to that pair in particular, he said they “relatively recently had a lot to say about this matter outside of court”.

I am not sure how these things work as it is a civil rather than a legal case, who calls the witnesses?

Can somebody be forced to testify?

Since certain people were named and serious accusations made against them I would have thought both sides would have wanted to question them to either build up the case against them or to clear their name.

Because somebody knows how to do something, even discussed how to do it, does not prove they did it.

Yes people have made accusations but is there clear proof, or is a possibility enough in a civil case.

I am always a bit dubious of the ' nobody else knew' scenario. person A in the conversation possibly didn't tell anybody but the other party might have mentioned something somewhere, however innocently but it was still out there. Soap stars being photographed in coffee shops etc, it does not mean they were being stalked or phone hacked. PR people also like their 'stars' to be seen out and about.

 

[Ghost]

From the Guardian. Comments from the judge on certain editors and journalists.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Mr Justice Fancourt listed the names of more than two dozen people he felt could have been brought before him, “in no particular order”, in the case against Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN); the publisher of the Daily and Sunday Mirror and the Sunday People.

“There’s a question in my mind whether any of the individuals on my list could and should have given evidence.” They included the former Daily Mirror editor Morgan and Neil Wallis, the former People editor.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-asks-why-piers-morgan-has-not-given-evidence


Referring to that pair in particular, he said they “relatively recently had a lot to say about this matter outside of court”.

“He also said questions had been raised about why “three or four associates of the Duke of Sussex” had not given evidence in the case against MGN.”

What goes for the goose goes for the ganter also.

 

[Hallo girl]

“He also said questions had been raised about why “three or four associates of the Duke of Sussex” had not given evidence in the case against MGN.”

What goes for the goose goes for the ganter also.

That is interesting.

 

[Maryrose]

I am wondering if some of these people that the judge is referring to about not giving evidence in the case are waiting to see if the case will move forward before putting themselves out there. JMO

 

[Granada]

The hits just keep on coming......more People are speaking out against The Sussex's. Here in America, Steven Smith a popular Black Sports Analyst with ESPN (Entertainment And Sports Network) and has his own Podcast too. Saying how he doesn't give a damn about The Royal Family, but He found the Podcast Spotify - Meghan Markle situation worth talking about.

He just slammed The Sussex's on it, saying "If Harry and Meghan aren't complaining about the Royal Family, I don't know if anyone cares about what they say". Smith goes on to say "Princess Diana seemed like a very, very nice lady" and that he admitted that there isn't anyone on the planet that is less interested in The Royal Family than me".

Talked about his former colleagues Bill Simmons remarks too.....maybe they went to far He said, but surmised that it was because Simmons said more, because his comments came from a "personal place" ..... interactions with them.. Ouch.

Kelly Osborne tore into Prince Harry too. "You dressed up as a Nazi now you want to come back as The Pope "? And slammed him as a "whining, whinging, complaining, woe is me.....like he's the only one who ever had mental problems....my life was so hard". I CANT post the "colorful" other words Kelly used to describe his ( to her) nonstop pity party.

Looks like Meghan's new Agents, WME have there work cut out for them. Big time. Not only representing The Sussex's, BUT the rehabilitation of their plummeting reputations. A giant nose dive.

South Park, Chris Rock, Seth Meyers, Jimmy Kimmel, Bill Simmons, Steven Smith, and now Kelly Osborne. In the last six months ALONE, have taken aim here in the States at The Sussex's. All of them of a "liberal bent" too.

If they lose Netflix, and The Executives there decide to cut their loses like Spotify did, and separate, what then ? If I were them, I would be very anxious.

 

[victor1319]

The hits just keep on coming......more People are speaking out against The Sussex's...

Yeah, some people jumping on the anti-Sussex-bandwagon... So what, the news-cycle will continue to spin and in 14 days is all forgotten!

This is the celebrity dilemma, that you permanently have to offer the media something for not getting forgotten.

But Prince Harry and to a certain degree his wife are not celebrities - They are Royalty! And as long as this does not change, they will be on the safe side.

 

[OwlBranch]

The Sussexes profess to loathe the DM, if they had wanted they could have issued a statement that said "even though it is a positive piece we are rebutting it because it is untrue DM pot stirring." But they don't because The DM is still one of the most visited sites in the US as well as the UK and it was likely a plant. It should be noted that the DM is perfectly willing to write/copy puff pieces on the Sussexes for clicks.

The tabloids write stories about the Sussexes on a daily basis, it would be exhausting to try and refute every article. Plus, Harry is already suing DM plus several other newspapers.

 

[Maryrose]

I think part of the issue is the timing of all the projects. They had signed contracts with different businesses and then covid hit and everything was delayed or pushed back. The queen passed away and more things were either canceled or put on hold during the mourning period. A lot of things were released in a short time period. They have a lot of defenders and folks who like working with them. Its just the negative talk that gets more press.

 

[Granada]

vctor1319, respectfully disagree. Doesn't seem to me that in 14 days all will be forgotten. I'm American and they are viewed here as now controversial "Celebrities" and wanna be "Influencers" in the global sphere. Which so far they haven't been able to crack. At all.

The "nearly catastrophic car chase" as they described it last month WAS a PR debacle for them. Mocked and laughed at from News Outlets, The NY Mayor questioned their description of it, and on The View TV Show, based in NYC, the Hosts said it was preposterous.

Royalty has a certain "mystique". Unfortunately all the tawdry allegations, grievances and stories The Sussex's can't stop sharing have thrown them here into a tabloid atmosphere of curiosity and interest. All while they slam, insult and demean The Windsor Family and The Institution . That's their selling point seemingly. Nothing else resonates.

And that's a place neither wants to be. The very same "tabloid culture" that The Sussex's rail against.

Many People here are just fed up with it.....I don't think they are at all "on the safe side". I think they are in treacherous waters that will take skill to navigate actually. Especially in Harry's case. An unfamiliar new home Country, with limited support systems in place too. His Family--Friends aren't here to protect OR advice him either, do to his own actions too.
I guess we will see over the next six months to a year if they are successful.

 

[Hallo girl]

Yeah, some people jumping on the anti-Sussex-bandwagon... So what, the news-cycle will continue to spin and in 14 days is all forgotten!

This is the celebrity dilemma, that you permanently have to offer the media something for not getting forgotten.

But Prince Harry and to a certain degree his wife are not celebrities - They are Royalty! And as long as this does not change, they will be on the safe side.

But they do not wish to lead a royal life, they want the celebrity life but with the royal perks,

 

[Hallo girl]

I think part of the issue is the timing of all the projects. They had signed contracts with different businesses and then covid hit and everything was delayed or pushed back. The queen passed away and more things were either canceled or put on hold during the mourning period. A lot of things were released in a short time period. They have a lot of defenders and folks who like working with them. Its just the negative talk that gets more press.

What did they postpone or cancel during the mourning period.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

Actually, all of the negative press against TRH The Sussexes is a blessing in disguise for them because they're constantly being talked about.

If Kelly Osbourne and others are so tired of TRH The Sussexes' antics and feel that they are overexposed, then why talk about them? If readers of the Daily Mail are tired of hearing about TRH The Sussexes, then why do they constantly read articles about them? Even though TRH The Sussexes get most of their prestige from the British Royal Family rather than the other way around, British tabloids feel the need to mentioned them in many independent articles about the BRF. Why is that?

Basically, celebrity is a two-way street. You can't maintain interest in yourself unless there's an audience invested in you one-way or the other. People may argue that they're infamous not famous. So? Infamy sells. People may argue that other famous people are starting to mock them now. At least they're talking about them at all, so it keeps them in the news. People may argue that the canceling of the Spotify deal and the shakiness of the Netflix deal means there is diminishing returns on interest in TRH The Sussexes. Probably. But, titles or not, TRH The Sussexes are still the son and daughter-in-law to a king and brother and sister-in-law to a future king. There will always be a subset of society that will find them relevant.

 

[Maryrose]

What did they postpone or cancel during the mourning period.

From what I read her new episodes of her podcast were delayed a bit for the mourning period and also she canceled an appearance on the Jimmy Fallon show as a guest.

 

[Prinsara]

Basically, celebrity is a two-way street. You can't maintain interest in yourself unless there's an audience invested in you one-way or the other. People may argue that they're infamous not famous. So? Infamy sells. People may argue that other famous people are starting to mock them now. At least they're talking about them at all, so it keeps them in the news. People may argue that the canceling of the Spotify deal and the shakiness of the Netflix deal means there is diminishing returns on interest in TRH The Sussexes. Probably. But, titles or not, TRH The Sussexes are still the son and daughter-in-law to a king and brother and sister-in-law to a future king. There will always be a subset of society that will find them relevant.

There's a point where relevancy turns into schadenfreude and the only interest many people now have in them is "What have they done now?"

Contrary to the adage, all press isn't necessarily good press, and the Sussexes' way of operating hasn't proved helpful for either their "brand" or for maintaining any ties to actual functioning royalty.

 

[Hallo girl]

From what I read her new episodes of her podcast were delayed a bit for the mourning period and also she canceled an appearance on the Jimmy Fallon show as a guest.

One appearance in one programme. As for the podcasts it has taken them months to deliver them so I do not think 2 weeks of mourning for the Queen made much difference there.

 

[Maryrose]

Negative stories sell. Whether you like them or not there is a huge interest in the Sussexes. Even on this forum there are mostly negative things said about the Sussexes but there are 66 people viewing this sub forum compared to 1 for King Charles and Camilla and less than 10 for the Wales. They definitely have made some mistakes but I don’t think the abuse and pile on they have been receiving is deserving to what they said or did.

 

[Maryrose]

One appearance in one programme. As for the podcasts it has taken them months to deliver them so I do not think 2 weeks of mourning for the Queen made much difference there.

You asked me what was delayed.

 

[Prinsara]

Negative stories sell. Whether you like them or not there is a huge interest in the Sussexes. Even on this forum there are mostly negative things said about the Sussexes but there are 66 people viewing this sub forum compared to 1 for King Charles and Camilla and less than 10 for the Wales. They definitely have made some mistakes but I don’t think the abuse and pile on they have been receiving is deserving to what they said or did.

There's almost no one on this forum who's "buying" anything from the Sussexes. People come to this forum to see "What have they done now?" not to purchase anything they've put out there or, with very rare exceptions, support them in any way. You seem to think they deserve the numbers (for "something", as opposed to their misjudgments), but not the negativity (as opposed to abuse, which is not allowed here).