The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 -

[US Royal Watcher]

Very interesting read. Kensington Palace released a statement denying the Duchess of Cambridge uses botox, but wouldn't release a statement when the media was perpetuating a significant lie to the major detriment of a senior Royal? A statement over botox? Seriously? Something so damn trivial. Wow. No, of course The Firm weren't fuelling hate toward Meghan

The royal family has three communications shops, for the three principles: the Queen (Buckingham Palace, Prince Charles (Clarence House) and William (Kensington Palace.

Harry and Meghan fall, like other royals who are not in the direct line, under the jurisdiction of Buckingham Palace. Buckingham Palace rarely issues denials. As you noted, the denial came from Kensington Palace, which is controlled by Prince William.

Harry and Meghan are well aware of that, so Meghan's email is disingenuous.

How did Omid get the emails?

 

[QueenMathilde]

What about this from Hilary Clinton? Is this the exception rather then the norm? She sounds incredibly ill informed.

Hillary's the only politician I've heard in the US to say anything. You'd expect her to. But the others in the US should stay out of it for the same reason Harry and Meghan should stay out of US politics. I don't care if I agree with them or not. They shouldn't get involved in British politics.


But I haven't heard boo from all those other "pro meghan" celebrities. Maybe they're still hoping to get invited to Buckingham Palace.


On a side note is there a comedy video out there of a parody of the royal family watching this? People seem to think it's real and I can't believe it is.

 

[tommy100]

I suspect from the same people who gave him lots of the inside scoops for his book.

I also think there is a difference between the botox story and the story of the fall out - the botox story is denied because it is completely untrue so it factually incorrect in every way. The story about the fall out is getting involved in personal issues within the RF and issuing statements about them and actually in the process confirming something had happened but using staff to change the narrative to ensure 'the right person' in Meghan's eyes gets punished - why would any communications team want to do that? They would then be expected to play the same game on every personal drama and effectively become narrators of the RF's daily private lives. As many said at the time of the story emerging - if it was true it may well have been flatly denied by KP or BP but there was truth in it wasn't there, Meghan wanted them to comment because in her eyes she was looking bad out of it but she wanted them to what, say no no it was Kate that did it hate on her? Well where do we stop with that? The idea there would be an official comment about a falling out/argument between two members of the RF issued by the Royal Communication team is absurd unless the whole thing was made up (which Meghan confirms it wasn't).

 

[Osipi]

Their “ be kind” slogan is a hypocritical joke now IMO.

As one that was really hoping that the Oprah interview was going to be focused on the more positive aspects of going forward and talking about Archewell and their plans, hopes and dreams, I have to agree that the "slogans" they've been trying to establish as their "brand" took a detrimental hit with that interview.

You can't drive a car forward if you keep putting it in reverse. The onus of "The War of the Wails" is going to stick on them for a very long time.

William, I think handled his question very well. The part where he says that he hasn't talked to Harry but plans on it emphasizes the Queen's statement that the channels of communication are open and will be resolved privately.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

The royal family has three communications shops, for the three principles: the Queen (Buckingham Palace, Prince Charles (Clarence House) and William (Kensington Palace.

Harry and Meghan fall, like other royals who are not in the direct line, under the jurisdiction of Buckingham Palace. Buckingham Palace rarely issues denials. As you noted, the denial came from Kensington Palace, which is controlled by Prince William.

Harry and Meghan are well aware of that, so Meghan's email is disingenuous.

How did Omid get the emails?

No it's not. Kensington Palace could have easily released a statement as it involved Catherine. Obviously they are more concerned about perceptions on Catherine potentially using plastic surgery

 

[Prinsara]

On a side note is there a comedy video out there of a parody of the royal family watching this? People seem to think it's real and I can't believe it is.

No idea, but there is this great parody with Biden's dogs:

 

[Durham]

Hillary's the only politician I've heard in the US to say anything. You'd expect her to. But the others in the US should stay out of it for the same reason Harry and Meghan should stay out of US politics. I don't care if I agree with them or not. They shouldn't get involved in British politics.


But I haven't heard boo from all those other "pro meghan" celebrities. Maybe they're still hoping to get invited to Buckingham Palace.


On a side note is there a comedy video out there of a parody of the royal family watching this? People seem to think it's real and I can't believe it is.

Thanks for the information about US politicians.

 

[teruterubouzu]

Very interesting read. Kensington Palace released a statement denying the Duchess of Cambridge uses botox, but wouldn't release a statement when the media was perpetuating a significant lie to the major detriment of a senior Royal? A statement over botox? Seriously? Something so damn trivial. Wow. No, of course The Firm weren't fuelling hate toward Meghan

It seemed clear that part of why it was refuted was because it was a claim made by a business who was implying she used their services.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

I suspect from the same people who gave him lots of the inside scoops for his book.

I also think there is a difference between the botox story and the story of the fall out - the botox story is denied because it is completely untrue so it factually incorrect in every way. The story about the fall out is getting involved in personal issues within the RF and issuing statements about them and actually in the process confirming something had happened but using staff to change the narrative to ensure 'the right person' in Meghan's eyes gets punished - why would any communications team want to do that? They would then be expected to play the same game on every personal drama and effectively become narrators of the RF's daily private lives. As many said at the time of the story emerging - if it was true it may well have been flatly denied by KP or BP but there was truth in it wasn't there, Meghan wanted them to comment because in her eyes she was looking bad out of it but she wanted them to what, say no no it was Kate that did it hate on her? Well where do we stop with that? The idea there would be an official comment about a falling out/argument between two members of the RF issued by the Royal Communication team is absurd unless the whole thing was made up (which Meghan confirms it wasn't).

The story about Meghan making Catherine cry was incorrect and factually wrong. Catherine using botox is an extremely personal issue. One warranted a statement, the other didn't.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Very interesting read. Kensington Palace released a statement denying the Duchess of Cambridge uses botox, but wouldn't release a statement when the media was perpetuating a significant lie to the major detriment of a senior Royal? A statement over botox? Seriously? Something so damn trivial. Wow. No, of course The Firm weren't fuelling hate toward Meghan

CPJ, do you not see the difference here? (This is an honest question not meant to be taken sarcastically. I ask because perhaps you do fully see and appreciate the differences and still feel this way, and of course you are perfectly entitled if so.)

One is a true or false story about the actions of a person, either she does or does not do a thing. I agree with you that is is utterly trivial.

The other is a story about the interpersonal dynamics between two women. Denying it raises questions about the relationship and dynamic of the two people and invites speculation of all manner and kind. Although I am inclined to agree with you that this is arguably a true or false situation, many here (and I am guessing there) disagree. I cannot agree that is a "significant lie."

As for your conclusion that this is The Firm fueling hate towards a member, know that whether you or I agree that they should or should not comment when a situation involves interpersonal dynamics, they simply do not, and it has nothing to do with Meghan. How do we know? There is a rumor about Catherine that is so heinous we cannot even mention it here on TRF, and the palace has refused to step up to her defense. They simply do not comment on interpersonal situations. Meghan, and her "defenders," spinning that like "The Firm" is singling her out for special treatment in this manner is just inaccurate.

 

[TLLK]

It seemed clear that part of why it was refuted was because it was a claim made by a business who was implying she used their services.

Thank you for pointing this out. A business is trying to drum up new clients by implying that Catherine is a client when she wasn't one.

 

[Queen Ester]

What about this from Hilary Clinton? Is this the exception rather then the norm? She sounds incredibly ill informed.

Hillary will take any interview she can, she has been completely forgotten here, I would not pay any attention to what she says, she is irrelevant, perhaps, she wants to jump on the bandwagon

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

CPJ, do you not see the difference here? (This is an honest question not meant to be taken sarcastically. I ask because perhaps you do fully see and appreciate the differences and still feel this way, and of course you are perfectly entitled if so.)

One is a true or false story about the actions of a person, either she does or does not do a thing. I agree with you that is is utterly trivial.

The other is a story about the interpersonal dynamics between two women. Denying it raises questions about the relationship and dynamic of the two people and invites speculation of all manner and kind. Although I am inclined to agree with you that this is arguably a true or false situation, many here (and I am guessing there) disagree. I cannot agree that is a "significant lie."

As for your conclusion that this is The Firm fueling hate towards a member, know that whether you or I agree that they should or should not comment when a situation involves interpersonal dynamics, they simply do not, and it has nothing to do with Meghan. How do we know? There is a rumor about Catherine that is so heinous we cannot even mention it here on TRF, and the palace has refused to step up to her defense. They simply do not comment on interpersonal situations. Meghan, and her "defenders," spinning that like "The Firm" is singling her out for special treatment in this manner is just inaccurate.

The reason why I am highlighting this is because of the exact reasons you mentioned. The RF could stopped the hero-villan narrative between Royal sisters-in-laws. Instead they added fuel to the speculations and perceptions of a false bad interpersonal dynamics between two women, which is incredibly unfair to BOTH of them. And they did it on a lie and allowed people to believe the lie was actually a fact. We have no idea the interpersonal dynamics between Meghan and Catherine, but helping a perception that one person is what they are not is very very very wrong.

 

[Erin9]

I suspect from the same people who gave him lots of the inside scoops for his book.

I also think there is a difference between the botox story and the story of the fall out - the botox story is denied because it is completely untrue so it factually incorrect in every way. The story about the fall out is getting involved in personal issues within the RF and issuing statements about them and actually in the process confirming something had happened but using staff to change the narrative to ensure 'the right person' in Meghan's eyes gets punished - why would any communications team want to do that? They would then be expected to play the same game on every personal drama and effectively become narrators of the RF's daily private lives. As many said at the time of the story emerging - if it was true it may well have been flatly denied by KP or BP but there was truth in it wasn't there, Meghan wanted them to comment because in her eyes she was looking bad out of it but she wanted them to what, say no no it was Kate that did it hate on her? Well where do we stop with that? The idea there would be an official comment about a falling out/argument between two members of the RF issued by the Royal Communication team is absurd unless the whole thing was made up (which Meghan confirms it wasn't).

This is a really good sum up of the differences between the 2 PR issues.

Besides- I don’t think there’s agreement that Meghan’s revised version is completely true either. She’s St. Meghan in that one.....

 

[fabaunty]

A few thought's that have come to me whilst reading the many post's both before , and after Oprahgeddon .
I can well believe that even a woman of Meghan's age , and life experience would have difficulty adjusting to the high level of expectation she faced on joining the BRF, despite her intention to hit the " ground running " . She was was basically "alone" except for her husband .Her mother ,close friend's were on another continent , different time zone's .I think the "Grey men " at the palace were delighted to welcome someone who they did not think they would have to walk on egshell's around .
However , she was more than willing to close her blog , turn down another collaboration with Reitmans , and not sign on for another series of Suits , in order to pursue her new relationship .
Oprah etc had over a week to edit the approximately 4 hrs of footage they took , surely in that time both Harry , and Meghan must have realised that they had thrown his " beloved grandparent's "under the bus with their comment's of depriving Archie of the HRH , no PRO etc because of the potential colour of his skin !!It took Harry until the day after the "interview " was shown to contact Oprah to clarify that it was not his Grandparent's who had speculated on what particular skin tone any potential children might have . By then HM had already been accused on the Today show of "gaslighting "Meghan . .If that is the kind of love , and respect he has for HM , and the D of E heaven help the rest of his family .
It was stated that they had given this interview to "draw a line " on their time as working royals . Well all I can say is that their truth / line has not stopped moving . I wish them well in their new reality .

 

[Erin9]

As one that was really hoping that the Oprah interview was going to be focused on the more positive aspects of going forward and talking about Archewell and their plans, hopes and dreams, I have to agree that the "slogans" they've been trying to establish as their "brand" took a detrimental hit with that interview.



You can't drive a car forward if you keep putting it in reverse. The onus of "The War of the Wails" is going to stick on them for a very long time.



William, I think handled his question very well. The part where he says that he hasn't talked to Harry but plans on it emphasizes the Queen's statement that the channels of communication are open and will be resolved privately.

“War of the Wails”..... I hadn’t seen that one yet. Appropriate though. Especially since the wails keep coming via other interviews in TV and in print...so much for one and done....

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

The reason why I am highlighting this is because of the exact reasons you mentioned. The RF could stopped the hero-villan narrative between Royal sisters-in-laws. Instead they added fuel to the speculations and perceptions of a false bad interpersonal dynamics between two women, which is incredibly unfair to BOTH of them. And they did it on a lie and allowed people to believe the lie was actually a fact. We have no idea the interpersonal dynamics between Meghan and Catherine, but helping a perception that one person is what they are not is very very very wrong.

Thanks for sharing your perspective and explaining. I understand what you are saying.

The fact is, though, that they have had countless opportunities such as this one in the past with other members of the family. It sounds like you are saying you disagree with their policy to not interfere in situations such as this in general, which is certainly a very valid view.

What is unfair, IMO, is for Meghan to portray this as they didn't step in because it was her (and to imply, in the process, this had to do with her race) when it fact they also did not step in when it was: Beatrice vs. Catherine; Sophie vs. Catherine; Diana vs. Sarah; and many others I am sure I am missing.

The fact is they didn't step in because they don't step in to resolve "interpersonal dynamic squabbles" and portrayals in the media, and history proves this. Instead, Meghan spun it as if they didn't step in because they wanted to sacrifice Meghan and protect Catherine. It isn't so. This is how this incident played out and how the media chose to portray this duo, but sometimes Catherine loses, sometimes Beatrice loses, sometimes Sophie. But when Meghan lost, it had to be: 1. personal and 2. down to her race.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

The reason why I am highlighting this is because of the exact reasons you mentioned. The RF could stopped the hero-villan narrative between Royal sisters-in-laws. Instead they added fuel to the speculations and perceptions of a false bad interpersonal dynamics between two women, which is incredibly unfair to BOTH of them. And they did it on a lie and allowed people to believe the lie was actually a fact. We have no idea the interpersonal dynamics between Meghan and Catherine, but helping a perception that one person is what they are not is very very very wrong.

I don't understand how not responding, which is there usual practice, fueled the "speculations and perceptions" of the relationship between Meghan and Catherine. The issue is that once they issue a denial for one story, if they don't do so for the next story, they are perceived as confirming it.

Obviously, this story really upset Meghan. But you also have to look at it from the royal family's point of view, they have seen a lot worse over the years. It's unfortunate but the employees were not paid by Meghan and Harry and their control was limited. I don't think this story was in Finding Freedom so, until now, they decided to let the story stand.

 

[Hallo girl]

If this is correct that they have passed over e mails to Omid Scobie they have hit an unbelievable low. her pal appeared on morning tv the other day, saying nothing much until at the end she did mention there were emails that proved everything although I picked it up as being the request for help with mental health issues.
There is a pattern here again of behaviour, the interview with Tom Bradbury , which he followed up with mention of big interviews and books, which have happened, on the tv the other day the mention of e mails and would you believe it Omid has e mails. Demanding privacy on one hand but divulging private e mails on the other.

They have the cheek to talk about privacy, sued about articles and letters.
Meghan is obsessed with Kate.
I am now beginning to think that these are all threats via the media, about what they are going to do next.
Give us what we want or else.

I don't understand how not responding, which is there usual practice, fueled the "speculations and perceptions" of the relationship between Meghan and Catherine. The issue is that once they issue a denial for one story, if they don't do so for the next story, they are perceived as confirming it.

Obviously, this story really upset Meghan. But you also have to look at it from the royal family's point of view, they have seen a lot worse over the years. It's unfortunate but the employees were not paid by Meghan and Harry and their control was limited. I don't think this story was in Finding Freedom so, until now, they decided to let the story stand.

It was mentioned in the book, did not detail what had took place just that something had, the emphasis was on who had leaked the story to the newspaper.
They named who was in the room, one of whom was no longer working for them. They then go on to say they suspected a former employee who they were glad had left their employment.
So the reader knew who they suspected for the leak, the argument itself was secondary.

 

[TLLK]

Thanks for sharing your perspective and explaining. I understand what you are saying.

The fact is, though, that they have had countless opportunities such as this one in the past with other members of the family. It sounds like you are saying you disagree with their policy to not interfere in situations such as this in general, which is certainly a very valid view.

What is unfair, IMO, is for Meghan to portray this as they didn't step in because it was her (and to imply, in the process, this had to do with her race) when it fact they also did not step in when it was: Beatrice vs. Catherine; Sophie vs. Catherine; Diana vs. Sarah; and many others I am sure I am missing.

The fact is they didn't step in because they don't step in to resolve "interpersonal dynamic squabbles" and portrayals in the media, and history proves this. Instead, Meghan spun it as if they didn't step in because they wanted to sacrifice Meghan and protect Catherine. It isn't so. This is how this incident played out and how the media chose to portray this duo, but sometimes Catherine loses, sometimes Beatrice loses, sometimes Sophie. But when Meghan lost, it had to be: 1. personal and 2. down to her race.

Thank you for pointing this out because historically the BRF and to my knowledge other royal families DO NOT publicly announce to any branch of the media that they are stepping in to resolve interpersonal issues between family members. I'm certainly old enough to recall tabloids and weekly magazines headlines with _____ vs _____ on the cover and the various palaces remain silent. At the most you might read a "We do not comment upon personal matters." If anything they expect the family members to resolve their own issues with each other like reasonable and mature adults.

 

[duchessrachel]

The title of that article is: American 'supermarket tabloid' celebrity gossip magazines used on Oprah to show British media bias

Thank you.

 

[Denville]

I think if the Met or another threat analysis team said "Sir, your son is in critical need of security. it's life or death!" Because of his high profile, wife and army service, Charles would probably still be paying it.

Especially Harry really couldn't afford it.

TAnd there are a lot of very vulnerable people at risk who could never afford any type of security and wouldn't be offered it by the police.

Charles might for a time but I think he's not going ot to do it forever. Security in LA is expensive and since his son claimed that he wanted to leave royal life to make more money, then I'd say its up to Harry to make that money adn pay his own expenses, including security. If he can't make more money, then downsize and live somewhere less expensive and hire a few security guards....

 

[Hallo girl]

I have read part of Omid Scobies article, can Meghan and Harry go any lower, they obviously can.
I struggle to believe that this is what Harry wants.
He is allowing his grandmothers reign of nearly70 years to be destroyed I cannot see a way back from this.
She is devoted to the Commonwealth and he does this to her.
I didn't agree with them losing their titles but now, I am not so sure.

 

[leticia.h]

They might forgive and forget but they're fool if they're ever alone with either of them again. Just like meghans father you can't trust Harry and Meghan not to run to the nearest reporter and say nasty things.

right? I would be afraid to talk on the phone with them, especially with Meghan, who clearly has an agenda against the royal family.

 

[AC21091968]

Harry & Meghan's interview with Oprah has definitely overshadow The Earl of Wessex's 57th birthday (10th March). Not only he gets painted under the same brush of racism allegation, but his children who are old enough to understand and probably be talked about at school (returned on the 8th March).

I don't see Harry and Meghan appearing at Trooping of the Colour nor even attending The Queen's Platinum Jubilee nor the private celebration Prince Philip's 100th Birthday, after effectively throwing the royal family under bus. I think the Sussexes have burnt their bridges with the royal family and even possibly the British public.

 

[TLLK]

Harry & Meghan's interview with Oprah has definitely overshadow The Earl of Wessex's 57th birthday (10th March). Not only he gets painted under the same brush of racism allegation, but his children who are old enough to understand and probably be talked about at school (returned on the 8th March).

I don't see Harry and Meghan appearing at Trooping of the Colour nor even attending nor The Queen's Platinum Jubilee nor the private celebration Prince Philip's 100th Birthday, after effectively throwing the royal family under bus. I think the Sussexes have burnt their bridges with the royal family and even possibly the British public.

I do feel very badly for the Wessex children and the Phillips girls who are very likely old enough to also understand that their family members are being accused of racism.

 

[Erin9]

The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 -

Harry & Meghan's interview with Oprah has definitely overshadow The Earl of Wessex's 57th birthday (10th March). Not only he gets painted under the same brush of racism allegation, but his children who are old enough to understand and probably be talked about at school (returned on the 8th March).



I don't see Harry and Meghan appearing in Trooping of the Colour nor even attending nor The Queen's Platinum Jubilee nor the private celebration Prince Philip's 100th Birthday, after effectively throwing the royal family under bus.

Excellent points about James and Louise. I hadn’t considered yet what this would put them through. Kids can be cruel. Hadn’t realized Edward’s birthday was this week. Ugh

I imagine Peter’s girls are old enough too to be upset by this.

But....Harry and Meghan are kind and compassionate, right?

The more I think about it- just how many bridges have they burned- permanently. Everything else aside- no parent is going to easily let go of their child suffering the fallout of this heartless interview.

 

[SadieKelly]

And now Scobie has access to the emails. There can really be no doubt anymore that they provided all the scoop for his book. Is there anyone in their circle with a clear head? With the ability to tell them to stop and think about their actions? It's starting to look vindictive. I'm beginning to wonder how much of the rift in the Markle family wasn't Meghan's fault.

 

[Eskimo]

Hillary's the only politician I've heard in the US to say anything. You'd expect her to. But the others in the US should stay out of it for the same reason Harry and Meghan should stay out of US politics. I don't care if I agree with them or not. They shouldn't get involved in British politics.


But I haven't heard boo from all those other "pro meghan" celebrities. Maybe they're still hoping to get invited to Buckingham Palace.


On a side note is there a comedy video out there of a parody of the royal family watching this? People seem to think it's real and I can't believe it is.

I guess Hillary is truly retired now and no longer going to play any role the the US political arena.

 

[Hallo girl]

Rightly or wrongly Meghan feels aggrieved and she is going to make the royal family pay. Goodness knows what she has gathered with her when they left to use as ammunition.
What is Archewell about again oh I know.
Compassion and kindness.
They actually need to be careful as they are going to damage their brand, compassionate and kind they are not.
They are showing nasty, vindictive behaviour.