As I write, it's roughly 5pm London time, which means that Archie Mountbatten-Harrison's apparently paid promotion for H&M Baby has been live for nearly 24 hours.
Yet I can find no major media organization that has reported on the unusual circumstance of three members of the Royal Family (Meghan and Harry appear in the ad) being used as a spokesmodels for a commercial business.
Strange.
Why no coverage?
Why are no outlets reporting on the ad? It's not a common thing.
According to Royal Family protocol, working royals - in other words, royals who are receiving a stipend from the taxpayers - cannot endorse commercial products.
(Zara Tindall, who is not a working royal, is an "ambassador" for Land Rover.)
According to Royal Family protocol, working royals - in other words, royals who are receiving a stipend from the taxpayers - cannot endorse commercial products.
(Zara Tindall, who is not a working royal, is an "ambassador" for Land Rover.)
One could argue that Archie is an untitled private citizen, but his parents certainly aren't.
In fact, they're currently on a taxpayer-funded tour of South Africa. And it was during that taxpayer-funded trip that the endorsement photos were taken.
In fact, they're currently on a taxpayer-funded tour of South Africa. And it was during that taxpayer-funded trip that the endorsement photos were taken.
Have the UK media been told to hold back?
Could the British media be holding its fire until Prince Harry's moment in Angola has its time in the headlines? Have they been told not to report the news for some other reason?
And even if they had, why wouldn't the US media or other non UK-media report it?
For them, a celebrity endorsement wouldn't even necessarily be a bad thing.
You could see one of Meg's favorite outlets - Harper's Bazaar or People - headlining a story "Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is the world's newest, smallest, supermodel" or some such nonsense.
Is it possible that Prince Charles even endorsed the commercial appearance as a way to "modernize" the monarchy and make lesser members pay their own way in the world?
For them, a celebrity endorsement wouldn't even necessarily be a bad thing.
You could see one of Meg's favorite outlets - Harper's Bazaar or People - headlining a story "Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is the world's newest, smallest, supermodel" or some such nonsense.
Is it possible that Prince Charles even endorsed the commercial appearance as a way to "modernize" the monarchy and make lesser members pay their own way in the world?
Fast fashion
Also, whatever happened to Meg and Harry's commitment to environmentalism?
H&M is in the business of "fast fashion", which is the source of an enormous amount of greenhouse gases and depletes non-renewable resources, including using massive quantities of water.
Granted, this particular line of baby clothes is supposedly "conscious" and some of the clothes are made of recyclable materials.
But why would H&M want to get involved in the ongoing discussion of the Sussexes' hypocrisy when it comes to environmental matters?
It seems like a bad fit from a corporate perspective.
I'm also not convinced that Archie sells many baby clothes. As of this writing, the 24-hour old Tweet has only 462 likes and 73 retweets.
I'm also not convinced that Archie sells many baby clothes. As of this writing, the 24-hour old Tweet has only 462 likes and 73 retweets.
Day 5, Separate Schedules
The Sussexes had separate schedules for Day 5 of their South African tour. Meg remained in Cape Town, doing some of the private, paid-for members' club appearances Enty has been discussing.
(It's a mystery to me who would want to pay good money to meet Meg, but apparently someone does.)
Harry, meanwhile, retraced Princess Diana's steps in Angola, where she bravely crossed a mine field to bring attention to the issue of land mines.
The mines have been removed
The mines in this area have since been removed, making Prince Harry look a bit foolish wearing full protective gear while walking down a standard dirt road.
If Harry wanted to show that he had the balls/ovaries of his late mother, he could have faced some real danger - greeing Ebola patients in DR Congo, for example, or meeting with Boko Haram in Nigeria.
Instead, he chose to CosPlay his mother, which was about as convincing as Jaden Smith dressing up as Will Smith. The offspring lacks the charisma of the original.
What did you think of Day 5?
Comments
Charles is supposedly in charge now, and he has always been conflict-adverse.
William probably has the gonads to do something (kidnap Harry and keep him isolated until he snaps out of it?) but the RF strategy now seems to keep William, Catherine, and their kids hermetically sealed off from the Harkles.
People are getting fed up with the BRF's lack of enforcement when it comes to Harry and Meghan.
https://twitter.com/someonehadto1/status/1177604042920468480
that is an excellent idea. We should all complain. I will get the info and post it here.
"Goodbye, England's Ruse" (to the tune of Candle in the Wind by Elton John)
(and with apologies to Bernie Taupin)
Goodbye England's ruse
May you grow up and get a heart
You were the grifter for yourself
Where lives were torn apart
You came out to our country
And you manipulated for your gain
You never belonged here
Nor the stars you like to name
And it seems to me you lived your lies
Like a candle in the wind
Always knowing who to cling to
When the papps moved in;
We didn't want to know you,
But Haz was just a kid;
His candle's burned out long before
Your merching ever did.
Someone on the yesterday post said something about how she is getting more open (cocky was the exact term) about this as there have been no visible repercussions.
However, as they write in investing documents; Past performance does not guarantee future performance.
I don't think the BRF would have someone that close in line merching and be ok with it. It is possible that was part of the optic problems of Andrew. So I don't see them going in that direction.
I would like to be a fly on the wall at a Come to Jesus meeting though.
William has the gonads (and the RBF to go with them), but unfortunately, he lacks the authority. Since he respects the chain of command in the Firm, he will not be seen to publicly vault over the Queen and his father, because dealing with them officially is supposed to be *their* call, no matter how distasteful. William has acted to the full extent which he is allowed . . . cutting Smug and Defiant off from his Royal foundation and the Heads Together initiative; keeping his distance and ensuring that his family does, too. He surely went to Granny at this time a year ago and apprised her that the living situation in KP was intolerable and begged to have the Harkles moved, and HM obliged him. Who knows what kind of private summits the senior royals are having re. further action, but William is probably picking his battles lest he come across to his grandparents like a whiner. The merching scandal and grotesque behavior from the Dumbass Duo is not his immediate concern, so long as his own children and wife are not be exploited, but in the long range, yeah, he's got to care about how it reflects on the BRF.
I really don't expect the Harkle marriage to endure until William becomes Prince of Wales; things are coming to a head sooner than that. But if Harry doesn't shape up, I wouldn't look for him to get a single penny out of the Duchy.
This joke of a tour may be the last time the Harkles are allowed out of the country on official business. It may be the 'Farewell, Sussex brand and working royals stipend' tour. If HM does not put her foot down definitively in some manner over their gross misbehavior, offensive to all, I'm afraid I will lose what respect I have left for her.
but the RF strategy now seems to keep William, Catherine, and their kids hermetically sealed off from the Harkles.
The next big question - looks like H&M jumped the gun - where is the disclaimer from the Sussexes/ RF.....
Yes, the images scream endorsement coming from the H&M site itself. It would be different if it was just the DM doing its usual merchandizing of all thing royal.
So i have questions......
Moving on, Harry needs mental health therapy STAT - or he is building his resume' for an acting career. How stupid to allow himself to do a recreation of his mother's walk - when there are no mines. Did anyone catch the next pix in the sequences of locals out on the road/ path without protective gear. And yes, we have the mournful, wistful pix by the tree.
I thought he was there to celebrate his mother's life........Harry talks about waking to daily burdens and mopes where his mother walked....GMAFB - the man needs help. And not from his wife.
William also sheepishly said, on his second visit to Catherine's garden that he'd 'smartened up' from the day before. On his first visit, he'd worn a short-sleeved polo shirt (no doubt top-of-the-line polo shirt . . perhaps from Ralph Lauren, who has an honorary knighthood from Granny) . . but Elizabeth had actually spoken to him about his shirt being too casual. I guess because his arms weren't covered.
Okay, Liz . . you are going to humiliate your direct heir over wearing a nice polo shirt to a *garden* where he was playing with his children, and yet say nothing at all when Harry's wife turns up at a mosque with bare arms, uncovered hair and a giant fake a$$?
I'm sorry, but these priorities are f*ck*d up. The ones that follow the rules and represent the family very well get reamed for tiny 'infractions' while the Harkles do and spend as they like. So disappointing.
'She (MM) talked about being a mother and having duties as a duchess and fulfilling what her heart desires — and that it can't just fade away now that you're a duchess,' Modise recalled.
'That you have to be true to who you are.'
The gauntlet has been thrown.
Also for the life of me I just can't fathom who would pay to have a meal with her. She's far from charismatic. I've seen her acting and it's dreadful. I'm a Hallmark addict and her two movies are my least favorite ones because she's so awful.
I can only believe she went with the brand H&M because it mirrors their initials.
I was grateful not to be eating or drinking when I read your comment in CDAN about endorsing Pepsi at your desk in the office of Coke.
So true. I had a boss who lived near Pepsi headquarters. During some neighborhood thing, boss overheard a neighbor (who worked for Pepsi) having a fit that the home they were all in had Coke, not Pepsi products in the refrigerator.
I'm also going to complain to Advertising Standards right now to ask that H&M remove that photo from their web & publicly apologise or admit that the Sussex's have received payment. I'll let you guys know if I hear anything back.
I can only imagine the torrent of venomous comments if the H&M story hits the Daily Mail.
Well, yes. Obviously she expects more of William . . . she has yet to display any expectations for Harry whatsoever. As far as I can tell, having followed his rather vainglorious progress through school and the Army is that Harry has never been made to do anything which he did not want to do. The price is being exacted now.
I only mentioned the shirt because it's an example of the way ER has always tended to focus on irrelevant minutae having to do with superficial perceptions of image instead of really important issues. It's been like this ever since she took the throne. She was quite a glamorous figure as a young Queen, and although very shy and private, is known for a wicked sense of humor with those she feels comfortable with. But nitpicking over a casual shirt in a garden when so much else is going wrong with her family is classic ER. She feels helpless to confront the big things--a phobia against confrontation--even to those she gave birth to, coupled with, I fear, what Jackie Kennedy noted as a profoundly incurious & pedestrian mind. Now that the Queen is 93, the scope of her attentions is limited to horses, dogs and propping up her favorite son. I'm not sure anything else gets in.
She criticizes a shirt because that is immediate and simple, even though William looked neat and presentable. It's not like he turned up in ragged jeans with his shirt untucked and undone by half the buttons . . . one of Meg's favorite outfits!
It just bothers me that in the context of a more casual engagement, with his family, the future King can't be dressed for fun or forget his station enough to relax for an hour with his children in Granny's eyes--she would have him in a three piece suit to view the garden.
Of course, being an engaged, present mother who ever enjoyed her children was never Elizabeth's bailiwick. William and Catherine have chosen the better way as parents. I just think Elizabeth's priorities are not the best priorities as her family crumbles around her ears. No one but her thinks less of William's abilities as a future king because he wore short sleeves to a garden.
Various individuals have since been blamed for the decision to make the boys walk behind her casket, and we'll never know the full story. But that decision would never have been made if not for the greedy crowd. Was there a public outcry against it at the time? No, it wasn't until much later that the public gave a thought to how Diana's sons might have felt about it. At the time they only wanted their apetitite fed. And so Harry and his brother eere forced to act out their grief to satisfy the masses who were baying for blood. No wonder he hates the public.
She won't be able to bring little Archie though.
This article was from Australian magazine New Idea online plus other gems thought to share as it contradicts much if what has been seen
.
Meghan Markle tells: ‘Archie’s been a wonderful baby’
She was ever the gushing mother! - by Chadielle Fayad
25 SEP 2019
Meghan Markle has revealed that her "transition to motherhood" has been 'easy' as her son Archie Harrison has been a 'wonderful' baby.
As part of their royal tour of South Africa, Prince Harry and Meghan paid a visit to a Muslim family living in the city of Cape Town yesterday, where they reportedly opened up about baby Archie.
Waseefa Majiet, a friend of the hosts Shaamiela and Ibrahim Samodien, told Hello that the Duchess "was speaking about motherhood and the transition and said that Archie was a good traveller. She said the transition was quite smooth because he’s an easy baby and he was an easy traveller, Harry said he slept on his chest almost 11 hours (during the flight)."
Nazli Ebrosss Fakier, who had also joined the royal couple for tea, told the publication that Meghan said, "He's just really, really happy and an easy traveller. He's having a ball of a time, screaming and shouting."
"His dad couldn't stop talking about him being so happy here in Cape Town and he's also so happy to be here with his family in Africa, which he loves," Nazli added
They spoil Harry because he was always the little lost one. How do you grow up to be a responsible person when your family assigns you that role? You don't. You f**k up, like Fredo in the Godfather II movies when you try to prove your worth.
I had to walk behind the coffin from the church to the plot in front of hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people. It was just a part of a difficult experience, but not one that necessarily jumped out by being so difficult. My
younger sister was extremely shy. She didn't think it was horrible either. The whole death thing was, however.
As for thinking that his grandmother and grandfather had killed his mother, I don't think he was aware of that at that age. He was probably bewildered by the nasty fights, separation and divorce.
He hates the public because he has to perform for them, i.e. he must try to live up to their expectations and he doesn't want that He wants to do as he pleases when he pleases and have them pay for it. After all, he's entitled - they killed his mother.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/prince-william-opens-princess-dianas-funeral-49269917
Maybe it's a royal trait to focus on what we see as trivialities because everything else in their lives runs on tramlines operated by other people. It's said that at any given moment, any reasonably senior royal can look ahead and know where he/she will be and what they'll be scheduled to be doing, and they'll also know the same for their relatives. They can only change the small stuff. But now, even the BRF functionaries have lost the plot. Maybe the future will be ... "HMTQ will be holding a garden party at Buckingham Palace, Prince William will be visiting a mental health charity, the Duchess of Cambridge will be walking in a forest with disadvantaged children and the Duchess of Sussex will be merching in a tent in Saudi Arabia, inappropriately dressed".
Also, as usual, she contradicts herself. She just said the other day it was hard traveling and being a working mom. Now suddenly the transition is easy?
And he doesn't travel easy if he is screaming and shouting. She had just said he slept the whole flight.
Word salad strikes again!
I went through photos of myself with my baby the other day (I have hundreds on my phone). There was not one where I was holding her arm out the way MM held Archie's arm - arm hyperextended with his hand clenched over with her hand. On reflection it seems like it would be quite uncomfortable for the tot, but it kept him from blocking her face from the cameras probably.
Is Megs going to be a Mommy Dearest?! Remember Joan Crawford dressed her adopted children up deliberately for what we now call the optics, incl. the girl Christina. Joan and Christina had these hideous, frilly OTT aprons over their hideous, frilly 1940s good little housewife dresses, and did regular weekend photo ops. That was merching for her image. Many stars did it. My beloved Glenn Ford even did it more than everyone else. But to give them credit, they had hardscrabble rises to fame in the best sense. They worked hard for everything they had. We can't say the same for Megs. She even went to Hollywood's Little Red Schoolhouse for God's sake.
And I don't buy the argument I read earlier today that this H&M ad is simply the first step on the road for Archie as a private citizen, who will have to make his own living, and that BRF inaction is for that reason. Babies do not need to start thinking about earning a living and they certainly don't need to actually START earning a living. He's not even a year old. And I don't see his parents opening a bank account in his name etc.! Also, what if he grows up and stuns the BRF by becoming a respectable engineer or scientist? He wouldn't be happy with this merching if so. Just as lots of Hollywood stars' offspring are unhappy and disturbed to varying degrees in adulthood, because their parents used them. Megs grew up watching that world, thanks to her Emmy-winning father. She knows this. It's unforgivable.
The rest of the population which had been in servitude during apartheid never saw any real benefits afterwards. They had a few more rights, but their standard of living never really increased. In fact, the mining companies have becoming even more oppressive under majority black ownership, as seen by the striking miners being shot and killed for better working conditions.
These black South Africans, the ones who are milking the system for all its worth, are the ones that Meghan Markle and Oprah are targeting. They are fabulously wealthy and now they seek social status, as do all nouveaux riches.
Most of JCrew things are manufactured in glorified sweatshops in countries where labour is dirt-cheap and standards are murky, and they remain notoriously opaque about it all. Can't imagine where he got the idea to start dressing in JCrew though...
The other statement about how difficult it is traveling is a statement to gain sympathy while also promoting your own positive traits. For example, say something first to get people to have sympathy for you (e.g. "traveling has been pretty tough, as is life as a working mom") and then say something to show how you're a strong, inspirational, positive person for moving forward despite the hardships ("but I'm managing and life is great"). You get people to cluck with concern/open up to you because they feel like you just confided something personal in them but then they still remember you in a positive light as a fighter and not just a negative complainer.
She did something similar with her "they don't make it easy" comment.
Look how she hard she presses her fingers into the baby’s sternum to control him.
https://mobile.twitter.com/julesverne12345/status/1177395365189996550
Perhaps it is because I live in an area rife with human trafficking, from Chinese to Venezuelans along with a smattering from the various Soviet satellites and African countries, that I wondered if she might have some governmental contacts that could expedite approval (for a price) from people who are desperate to get themselves or their children out. The problem for Afrikaner farmers is that so much of their money is tied up in their land.
However, it probably isn't something like that. I don't think she has the attention span for it.
(Too complicated and not a big enough payoff.) Buying government officials is easy. Buying their silence if they get caught, not so much.
Sarah
@someonehadto1
Advertising Standards Authority has upheld my complaint about this advert and will be contacting H&M. It is NOT ok to merch with a baby in your arms, he is not your meal ticket, he’s an innocent child. Please make it stop
@KTHopkins
@piersmorgan
https://twitter.com/someonehadto1/status/1177604042920468480
notice she sent it out to Piers Morgan and Katie Hopkins! LOL!
Unlike many people, he has a family support system and can afford therapy and treatment.
My mother is a narcissist and my father died when I was a teen. However, I attended a top University and made my own way in the world.
Childhood challenges don't excuse adult mistakes.
On a slightly different thought, what if H&M were told by her that the palace had no problems with this great photo op?
Another television advert had a woman sitting on a park bench reading while a man drove by in a VW car. This was considered sexist because the roles were too gender stereotyped.
But that’s what makes this situation sad. Harry is wasting some of the best years of his life with her, and now an innocent child is stuck with s narcissistic mother. Hoping Harry’s second wife is much better than Meghan.
No one pays her to do this - we don't have the really intrusive advertising that makes the Lizzie blog harder to follow. I appreciate that so much and I hope Nutty manages to keep the design this pristine. A lovely big space for us to share all our thoughts. And we have a lot of thoughts! Thank yoooouuu Nutty. :-)
I'm afraid I've reached the pinnacle of cynical.
I know it's meant to raise awareness...
I'm sorry, but I'm not feeling it. And I'm not saying that to be mean to Harry.
I'm actually quite terrified.
Plus karma.
Like a candle in the wind
Always knowing who to cling to
When the papps moved in"
It brings a smirk to my RBF
And then, this isn't exactly the only thing in life. One can have all kinds of personal appointments, personal needs and wants which may be going on.
And, sometimes, people just like to start something and see what others have to say or not do a whole lot of control as to which the direction the top spins. And for that, I'm grateful.
don't feel bad - if you read the comments at DM, pretty much everyone feels the same way you do. They even dragged out that poor little girl that Diana interacted with. She's now a grown woman and Harry tried the photo op with her. People were unmoved.
A) Harry seems extremely happy and engaged with Archers on the way into the Archbishop’s house. He keeps repeating, tot he baby, “Arch meets Archie” until the baby actually squeeks out something that sounds like Arch (what the hell??? He’s more than even six months!)
On the landing with the Archbishop, his daughter and Harry, MM turns to the side. To my dismay, she looks pregnant to me.
Pray not. Now the news of her “secret visit.” Another tone-deaf idea. Anyway I suddenly have less sympathy for Harry at the end of the day than I did at the beginning. And now I will truly take a break for a few days.
The DM commenters have a bad reputation for being determined to hate these two.
Just so everyone knows, we're not like that. It's probably me, not Harry. I have two brothers: one is nice (he even took me to Japan) and the other is abusive (nearly killed me once and is violent to even my mother). Somehow my parents always let him get away with it. Anyway, an incident just happened last Sunday and I realised that while my father lectured me and all the things he did to punish me (like even stop paying for my medical bills and threaten to sell the house I live in) I felt nothing. Just numb (probably also just accepting of what was to come because I'd already been warned in a dream). I wasn't scared and the really cutting things he said didn't hurt as much. It felt like, "life must go on."
It's like something in me changed that day. I think I just got better at dealing with the abuse.
But then now I see a guy walking on a field full of landmines and I feel nothing and it freaks me out because for a minute there I thought I'd lost empathy for others too.
Which would make me less human.
But I can assure you I DO feel guilty about feeling nothing.
And j just told that domestic violence story for context (please no sympathy, I don't want sympathy... that was not a sob story, I was just trying to make a point about how I'm not like *determined* to hate these two).
But if Meghan opens her mouth and says something condescending/shallow full of buzzwords about domestic violence or violence against women, I might seriously lose my sh*t.
I can't believe Meghan's crossed such a line again, the worst one yet. Started with the Vanity Fair 'Wild About Harry' photoshoot incl. cover before the engagement, which should have set red lights flashing and alarm bells ringing in all royal residences. Then the Vogue September issue and now the H&M ad. She's done masses of other things but these three stand out for me as being the same kind of transgression. Very public, in print, to advance her own agenda and we assume without permission. Three strikes and you're out.
But I'm not holding my breath.
Questions are: What did MM do... and for whom that she is being paid these outrageous sums of money? Treason?
Obviously, the BRF is the target and Harry was a means to an end. I do not consider the BRF wimpy. So, the stakes must be really high for them to *publicly* do nothing.
Until I see otherwise, they have my sympathy and my prayers.
BTW, it would suit MM perfectly well to be the widow of a prince. That's a role she would play into perpetuity. Maybe all the black poor-fits are a rehearsal.
May she fail at that as she has at everything else.
People like Meghan markle like to throw "misogyny" around when people dislike them for being a-holes. It's like a thing for actresses to accuse audience members of "women-hating" when audience members dislike a female character they portrayed or something (which was written by a man anyway).
Real misogyny is when the men in your family just leave dirty tissues/unwashed glasses (when there's no house staff to take care of it) because tehy assume whichever female family member will "take care of it" (clean after them).
Most of these SJWs don't even know what real patriarchy is.
They think rallying around in pink hats makes them special.
My girlfriends from middle school I send them videos/photos of evidence of domestic violence which they promised to keep for me in case something happens to me because I know my parents will defend my bad brother & cover it up. My friends don't wear stupid pink hats. They actually help another woman. And they don't say stupid sh*t like "you're worthy" or bake cupcakes that say #MeToo or talk in buzzwords.
Fake people like Meghan markle don't help. Tehy really don't.
There was a part of me which wondered if the baby hair was dyed too. I saw it and thought of the Ellen talk of it. And poof - there it is/was in living colour. How convenient I thought.
I can judge the effect she's had on me by the fact that I now comment on the DM! I wouldn't have dreamed of doing that in the past. But I'm so frustrated by what is happening, and the seeming inaction by the Palace, and when I see the sugars and trolls upsetting DM readers who feel as I do, I just have to pitch in. We're not bad, sad or ignorant people. Anyone can see how literate the contributions are here. Meghan affects many people in all walks of life. Your heart has hardened, even watching the photos in Angola, because Meghan has debased normal human emotions and values. It's not you.
If my baby slept eleven hours straight through, I would be taking him to the ER if for no other reason than he would be dehydrated by then. Littles do not have much reserve in their tanks. That is why they have to be fed so often. Lies, lies, lies by both of them. He does not have to participate in what she is up to, but he should refrain for the lies.
Here's a thought, maybe the BRF was waiting for her to display the real baby rather than the dolls used in other settings. Some say that she did not have the *live* baby in the UK and only collected him once she landed in SA.
I have never seen a royal baby in public without shoes. If she did collect the kid upon arrival, the fact that his socks were too small, but could be stretched to fit, might also mean that the shoes were too small and she could not get them on his feet properly.
Also, IIRC, Jay Z was rumored to be a co-owner of a surrogate baby farm somewhere in Africa until the end of 2018, when the country declared SB Farming illegal.
Who knows, maybe they couldn't get the tyke into the UK without leaving an obvious trail. So, MM had to come to Africa to get him. All supposition, of course.
I've formally complained to the Advertising Standards Agency in UK about the H&M ad on their Twitter. Apparently Royal's are not allowed to use under 18 (or 16?) yr olds for personal gain in advertising, there's a paragraph on this on the ASA website - I can't remember the exact wording.
https://www.asa.org.uk/search.html?q=royal+family
However, the BRF itself is perfectly clear on the matter. It's not allowed. Period. So we have to see if the BRF follows through.
I, too, was upset at how she was holding his arm down for so long. Grrr! Either for the perfect photos or to keep the little guy from grabbing the humongous earrings the nitwit was wearing.
You know what I wasn't numb about tho?
There's this photo of Meghan on the floor with some women and there's a woman on her left (stage-right to Meghan) and she looked like she WAS. NOT. HAVING. IT.
That woman looked pissed and had her back slightly against Meghan. I wonder what that was about. But I felt her annoyance and her pain (probably felt like she was being used as a PR prop for a photo-op). Just gross.
@Ava C: I hope she doesn't assign her trolls on this blog. Poor Nutty.
They're PR game is gross AF. Let me ask you all:
How many of you would actually chew and shallow a bloody freaking cookie with #MeToo frosting on it? I'd spit that sh*t out!
It's food waste Meghan. FOOD WASTE.
Go away.
If any of you want a good perspective on how USELESS these two are, go to YouTube and watch a South African YouTuber named The Hawk. He'll explain to you how her constant bringing up of race only further divides south Africans during a difficult time.
Selfish, self-serving a-holes these two. I'm glad I'm not their subjects.
I find it to be quite pleasant talking over what in the world the Harkles think they are doing with like-minded people who like to pick apart a mystery and are not content with what information appears on the surface. I'm so happy that I don't have to sort that lot out! I'm also so sorry for their relatives in the UK whose reputations they unthinkingly damage by their behavior.
Harry were first ‘dating’ she was wearing their initials on a gold chain around her neck? Subtlety has never been her strong point.
He threw her twitchy ass out of the garden party three days after the wedding. (I guess she didn't learn her lesson bc she was sashaying up the steps to Desmond Tutu's house again like a two dollar ho.)
Same with whatever PC said to the the sadist and her submissive at the PoW commemorative, and he seems to have shut the privy purse. That's a hat trick where I come from.
It was said on another blog that PH left in a separate car after the Misha Nonoo wedding along with his RPOs. She left by herself with no RPOs. So, they say.
She's gotta know that the show is about to close and she will be on the street, if not in gaol.
I hope PH finds his tall, blond, kind British lady and retires from public life. Since not wanting to live in the BRF goldfish bowl seems to be the biggest caveat as to why women reject him, I think that retiring and moving away would be good for both of them.
Like the only kind of people who would think it's okay to do #MeToo cookies are:
1. People who have never been #MeToo-ed (such as consensual casting-couchers)
2. Harvey Weinstein's PR firm.
I’ve been wondering how you’ve been since you
don’t seem to comment on CDAN anymore. LOL
@ ‘The Pinnacle of Cynical’. Please take care of yourself.
And thank you for the kind words. 💜
The blog's commenting format just changed. And nutty just addressed some commenting issues in a new post.
Big-money commercial websites like H&M often have algorithms that run a sophisticated version of A-B testing.
In other words, when an ad is clicked on more frequently, it runs more, while low-traffic ads are shown less.
The Tweet announcing Archie's modelling debut - "A ROYAL BABY FIRST 👑 Archie Mountbatten Windsor wears our H&M baby dungarees!
Shop now: (link) #HMKids #SussexRoyalTour @hm" - is still live.
But after nearly 36 hours, it has only 75 retweets and 470 likes.
That doesn't suggest that there is a lot of "grass roots" support for the Sussexes.
- A retweet without a comment is a neutral-positive statement (this is why people post disclaimers stating that any RT they make shouldn't be taken as endorsement)
- RT with comment depends on the content of the comment
- A ❤like I read as a bookmark (although Twitter has a private bookmarking function now). Maybe someone bookmarked/kept it because they wanted the link to use in a complaint to an ethics board or something.
The 470 don't necessarily translate to grassroots support to me, but maybe the 75 retweet do. IDK? Humans are weird.
@Scandi, no re Twitter. That's what tweeps do when they're trying to stir up interest, ask for different meanings between likes and RTs. Not commenting when RTing means nothing left to add. Liking means I like it, but not enough to RT it or I like it but I don't want everyone to know I like that, etc. IMO, any RTs without comment re the Dumbartons s/b considered support. Some RTs may have snark added.
I mean Archie is adorable and he's just a baby and he deserves to be loved and not measured by RTs and likes and I'm sure his grandparents love him very much.
His parents suck tho.
I agree that Archie's parents suck. I don't know that his grandparents have even spent time with him. I hope someone loves him. Tumblr likes are bookmarks of a sort, but Twitter likes are just likes.
@Nutty, your comments re the RTs signaling a lack of grassroots support is what I was saying about IG - the Dumbartons are holding steady at 9.5M even after the big Arch meets Archie. That's not a good sign for the Dumbartons' popularity. Contrast that to the bounce the Cambridges received after dumping H&M. I could give AFF about IG, but MM cares and SS measures IG response, I'm sure.
They are brutal.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/27/harry-meghans-africa-tour-storming-success-have-turned-corner/
Ironically, the article is headlined “Harry and Meghan's Africa tour is a storming success, but have they turned a corner with the public yet?“
Based on the comments, no.
The Telegraph is the most sycophantic newspaper regarding articles about Meghan. For example, about her Work Smart collection, they called it a "triumph" so it's a slap that the editors allowed readers were allowed to comment for a change.
Cute username. Good vibes. ✨
@magda,
It's tempting to think that they just now obtained a baby from outside the UK. Given how awkward they are holding him, and how distant Harry acts with him--the guy that makes a beeline for cute kids when he's doing a solo engagement, and they respond to him joyfully--it certainly appears that they do not know their own child. After nearly 5 months of parenting practice (which they claim to have), they would be far more natural holding the baby. Also no one who has ever cared for an infant believes that a baby of that age would sleep for 11 hours without moving, unless he is in a medically induced coma. The little guy we saw with Tutu is very active, and yet Archie seems to have the knack, according to MM, of sleeping for days at a time when it is most convenient to his parents' schedule.
But the baby we saw is the same baby we saw at the May 6th photo call and in the christening photos. It's him. As to who or what MM was pictured (at a far distance) carting around at the polo or on/off the private jet to Elton John's place or holding at the alleged pub lunch photo shoot . . those are too obscure, on purpose, to make an identification. If the birth mother has not given them custody, as it seems not, based on the complete lack of family bonding, she *is* for some quizzical reason making him available for pictures to sustain the illusion that the Sussexes have him full-time. But Meg has told so many lies, it's hard to believe our eyes when she actually holds a baby that resoundingly looks like both her and Harry's biological child. The bollocks about the nursing, for example, or how 'easy' mothering is. The only way I am able to sleep at night is to cling to the belief that someone else is taking care of this baby. But he was with them on the plane and we've seen him before, so they definitely have had access to him since before this trip. Not very much access, I don't think, but enough to take some pictures with him. In Windsor, allegedly, but WTF really knows.
the rumour I heard last night was that Harry and Meghan left Misha's wedding separately. He left with his protection officers, and she left completely alone. It's from Ashlee over at Danja Zone on youtube.
https://www.royal.uk/contact
I read that too, re. the separate leaving. For a guy who refuses to ride in the same car as his wife any more, he can put on a decent show of tonsil hockey and smiles for cameras when it suits. It has been floated by more than one source that the Sussexes do not live together and in fact have *never* lived together. Makes it interesting how they can go around holding hands and making out in public like they just rolled out of the sack and up to whatever engagement they are supposed to be doing. They were this sicky-making on their last tour, too, but I was still considering that they were newlyweds then. This has been a sham since Day 1. They are just less apt to hide how very little time they actually spend together any more. This ultimately gives Harry some plausible deniability that he knew, or had any control over, what she was doing since they are living separately. But that will only come out officially when the divorce proceedings begin.
Really, I can hardly imagine the daily hell Haz is living in, but my sympathies have dried up. It's his own damn fault. Archie is the only one I care about now.
Also, the photo of Meghan tying ribbons at Uyinene's memorial was typical Meghan. A photo of the young woman smiling or a photo of the memorial itself would have been wonderful if they truly wanted to "shine a light" on the story. But instead we get another glamour shot. Her recent spate of JCrew and Madewell (owned by JCrew) on this tour and recently before at the US Open makes me wonder if she's getting some Sussex Foundation donation from people high up there.
I think Harry is on a high....he thinks it’s “finally” his time to matter and screw the family. He’s eating this up. Addictive brains search for the next high, no matter the cost. His wife accommodates but for her own agenda.
You know, part of me wants to think she is a sweet loving mom and wife, or SS wants me to think so. But given the evidence....