Twenty-four hours before broadcast, Duchess Meghan's first television interview since her departure as a senior Royal is the top story on the New York Post online version.
(This may be because it's easy for the Post to run ads on stories that have no relation to the corona virus. Many advertisers refuse to have their ads next to corona-related stories.)
The interview will be broadcast on Good Morning America, which is on the ABC Network, owned by Disney.
FWIW, Meg's old friend Jess Mulroney also does fashion segments on GMA.
The topic will supposedly be the elephant documentary Meg narrated for the new Disney+ network. Importantly, she is being billed as Meghan Markle, not the Duchess of Sussex.
Or will she broadcast from home, and appear next to the brown 1990s-style cabinetry that appears in all of Harry's videos? (It's the same cabinet, whether the video is supposedly being sent from "Canada" or "California.")
And will the GMA people do Meg's makeup and hair?
What are you expecting from Meg's TV appearance?
(This may be because it's easy for the Post to run ads on stories that have no relation to the corona virus. Many advertisers refuse to have their ads next to corona-related stories.)
The interview will be broadcast on Good Morning America, which is on the ABC Network, owned by Disney.
FWIW, Meg's old friend Jess Mulroney also does fashion segments on GMA.
The topic will supposedly be the elephant documentary Meg narrated for the new Disney+ network. Importantly, she is being billed as Meghan Markle, not the Duchess of Sussex.
Studio or home interview?
It's not clear when and where the interview was recorded. Presumably Meg will not be flying to the GMA studios in New York, but what about being driven in one of her multiple rental cars to the ABC studios in Los Angeles?Or will she broadcast from home, and appear next to the brown 1990s-style cabinetry that appears in all of Harry's videos? (It's the same cabinet, whether the video is supposedly being sent from "Canada" or "California.")
And will the GMA people do Meg's makeup and hair?
What are you expecting from Meg's TV appearance?
Comments
Now about Megs and her interview. What do I expect? Word salad of course, no hard hitting questions obviously. A platform to talk about herself, more about herself, then some more, add in a bit more word salad and it’s done. Will she talk about the Disney gig? Probably because her and Harry’s hearts are in Africa, it meant so much to them, blah blah. The words humanitarian, philanthropy, shining a light, empowerment, feminism, being a women of colour....as much word salad as she can shoehorn in. If I’m wrong I’ll be very surprised! And if anyone actually thinks it will all give an insight, nah, don’t think so.
Meg doesn't interview well, she always comes across as condescending and smug. I think her PR team has been infiltrated and are secretly trying to sabotage her. Either that or she ignores their advice and plows ahead like a bull in a china shop. In any case it has been entertaining watching her fall from grace.
A big part of it is conflicting messages they send. The now pretend to be just old pals Harry and Megs - while styling themselves Duke and Duchess, living off Prince's money and using taxpayer funded security. People are no fools, they can see hypocrites miles away. This strategy would work if they completely dropped their titles and taxpayer prop. As it stands they are open to criticism and scrutiny.
I won't be able to watch Meghan's interview which will be broadcasted tomorrow because it won't be available in France. I look forward to your future comments on this.
Reading this blog is a delight of relevant, funny, interesting and sometimes humorous comments.
Thank you Nutty and all of you for entertaining my confinement period.
A tight skirt & blouse, “suits” style & multi merching trinkets.
Doesn’t matter what she says as she talks in circles, & her teeth have a life of their own.
It’s a constant battle between her lips, teeth & tongue.
Can’t wait!!
Another possibility is she needs Harry to help her relaunch as Meghan Markle 2.0. This time she hopes people will notice her and Harry can go back to being as private as he wants with Archie.
Everything from Nazi uniforms, cheating in school, drinking beer out of prosthetic legs, drug parties with strippers, hot tubs loaded with women, racist commentary, bigotry, save the planet hypocrisy, insubordinate soldier,tone deaf at every turn, the list just goes on and on.
Harry and Meghan both try so hard to hide what horrible selfish human beings they are. All while preaching to the pheasants and begging for hand outs. They bring nothing of value to any organization they are associated with. Just hypocrite word salad speeches and empty promises.
I would bet money Meghan secretly hopes one or both of them catch Covid19. Oooh the sympathy!!! I also don't think Meghan is planning a divorce anytime soon. She would rather be a widow. Harry will open doors for her whether they are married, divorced, or widowed. Maybe more so if he dies of overdose or Covid19. I suspect drugs may weaken the immune system. Sad to say,she will suck air out of the room for the rest of her life.
"Wordsalad" came to mind immediately but others brought out some nice points.
Debra - she doesn't interview well. When I think back, you are right. I wonder what she will say that come back to bite her in the ankle the way it often has so far?
Artemesia19 - Absolutely. People are scared about what will happen to them and their loved ones. It is a "Let them eat cake." moment.
CookieShark - She is quite good at always getting the conversation to spin around and back to her, isn't she?
I think it will be a lot of soft questions.
I think it will be a nice way for her to start the week of PR leading to the Wednesday night TV show.
She is probably still going by down to earth Meg. I expect loose hair and some casual clothes. After all it is all about elephants, she will try pretending same way they pretended it was her on that picture with elephant.
Don't think Harkles are valued very high now if they have to do this
@Sandy, when did her team beg Sun to cover them? I think it's Chris Ship of ITV you were referring to
There are individuals who are 1) delivering meals to the shut-ins when there is not a pandemic, 2) individuals who walk dogs for a living because their owners must hold down a 9-5 job, 3) actors who do voice-over works because it is a job and not a paycheck, and 4) individuals who call families with chronically ill family members on a regular basis to lend mental support as well as pitch-in when the family is at home.
All this without fanfare or indepth interview. And this is just in Hollywood.
Now multiply the above X a million.
Now who cares about H&M?
"Meghan Markle is set to give her first television interview as a relapsed commoner."
immediately following article is the suggested link "Brits uninterested in Harry and Meghan returning to royal duties: poll" 😏
So The Sun is reporting that the Sussexes are renting an $8million dollars house near Elton John's.
I've said it repeatedly that they are not as wealthy as people assume and they can't afford to buy or rent anything above $10m.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8233791/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-renting-8million-LA-mansion-near-friend-Elton-John.html
Yes! And on the next run, she was touching Harry's back with her gloved hand! He was wearing the same shirt that he was walking the dogs in! Ugh! And they are back to holding hands.
Of course, since these two Mensa candidates have decided its not as bad as the media portrays, I guess it doesn't matter that they aren't even wearing the proper masks. If anyone gets sick as a result of this nonsense, they should be held accountable.
I would think Project Angel would put a stop to this very quickly...this doesn't make them look good. It's true about everyone in HW being a slave to PR.
I guess one reason they don't believe anything in the media is because they know how easily it is manipulated. Thanks to the Bank of Pa. And a few lawsuits keep many outlets in line.
Megs will manage at least one soupcon of media bashing and self pity in her interview. The court case is ramping up and she has to make sure the narrative is out there.
I really hope that as a result of the court case, one journalist tells the real story. At least as much as we know.
I don’t think she’ll be able to resist the temptation to paint herself as a victim, which given the state of the world, won’t go over well.
I’m American and I see through her BS. I don’t know why people think that we don’t. It is truly embarrassing to me as an American to see her destroy the Monarchy and act like such an entitled fool.
This GMA appearance will be a bunch of word salad nonsense and faux caring faces about the situation we are in. She better hope it’s in studio so that the hair and makeup team can try to make her look halfway decent. Her hair looked like a rats nest in a pony tail on those pap shots yesterday.
For the clueless here at Nutty's blog ... this evil virus has had low impact in California. So the Dumped will be back, and sooner than you think.
Pimp Mama K is in control of the K-biz empire. One must respect some one making millions off the dumb who can barely make the payments on their mortgaged Apple iPhones. CardiB has the latest one, Apple model so they (her minions) imitated monkey style.
Kardshians sure look like they pay off DM for product placement.... Simple thinking says Megs and/or her pick up team PR are doing the same. With the DM being nice and not charging the nearly Destitute Malibu Two that much
One of my favorite comments on DM re the backlash against JH’s remarks downplaying the seriousness of the virus in the U.K. and dissing the British media:
From the day he was born we were totally mislead about him. From him purposefully riding his bike into servants. To his exam cheating at Eaton which was only revealed due to a employment tribunal case. Then came the fact that when in Afghanistan he spent most of the time playing video games, and the patrols were staged for the media, and those with him weren't squaddies but his 30 man strong security detail. Then it was disclosed he failed his helicopter pilot exams yet he still wears his wings. He is a embarrassment.
Welcome!
It's pretty easy. I'm going to dothe simple method, you are probably way beyond my fumbling directions.
Upper right corner to my account
Click on Manage My Account
Tab at top that says Personal Info
Change name, add picture etc
Ta da!
Lol! Yours is super easy!!
I have a feeling it was recorded weeks ago, before everything hit the fan. She would have had hair and makeup done. Its going to be her boring drivel about herself--I mean elephants.
We are going to be deprived of the sanctimonious cow holding forth on COVID-19 and how important it is for us to help each other and shine a light on things.
Oh, another tip for Ashley is when you’ve written a comment and you see the Captcha baloney thingy, just ignore it and click ‘publish’. That Captcha thing can get stuck and you’ll never get out of it, so just ignore. After all, ‘you’ know who you are...lol
He rode his bike into servants?
I hadn't heard that one yet.
That would indicate a problem well before losing his mom.
So what's the feeling in L A about these two? I recognize you have more important things on your hands, but any buzz about them and the avalanche of PR?
-Ashley
And Ill working on fixing my name.
-Ashley
SUNDAY, APRIL 19, 2020
Blind Item #3
When she couldn't get the $1M she wanted, she at least hoped a news organization would be willing to "buy photos" which is a way for a news organization to say it didn't pay for an interview, it just paid for use of photos. They wouldn't go along with that either. So, she ends up doing a plug on a company for the product of the parent company.
That hair!!!!
Will I be disappointed with the interview? I doubt it since I won't be tuning in cause it will be a waste of a half hour/hour of my time when I could be doing something more productive and enjoyable like... work, laundry, playing Sims or EQ2, reorganizing my other closet (already reorg'd my main one) you know - stuff :) I'll read the blow by blow from someone who will take one for the team and tell us all about it, or read it in one of the other blogs/forums.
Welcome to all the new posters that I've missed and most recently UnknownAshley.
As to the One World: Together at Home program, that was lovely as I watched it last night and so glad they weren't on there. I mean what could say other than word salad and oh how tough it is to be in HW right now.... blech!!
OK back to laundry and lurking for me. Keep healthy and stay safe Nutties!!
If it was, I suppose the GMA anchor will introduce it with a little info about Harry and Meghan's weekend doings with Project Angel Food, and then say, "We spoke to Meghan last month about the documentary..." and go into the prerecorded package.
That's probably the best-case scenario for her. They can edit out a lot of word salad, and she would have had the benefit of the GMA glam squad if it was shot before the shutdown.
"ABC’s “Good Morning America” has promoted an upcoming feature by promising “Meghan Markle with an exclusive first look” at her new documentary on African elephants — but the relapsed commoner won’t actually appear live when the spot airs Monday.
"A voiceover on the promo, which included Markle’s voice, had promised “On ‘GMA’ Monday, Meghan Markle with an exclusive first look at her new documentary ‘Elephant.'”
"But Markle, who narrates the documentary, did not do a sit-down with “GMA,” a rep clarified Sunday."
The film hasn't gotten huge attention, and in any show biz contract, even when the fee is donated, actors are expected to cooperate in "promotional efforts". For Disney and Meghan, this works out well: Disney gets a name to try to drive more viewers to the film, which costs it nothing, as Disney owns ABC), and Meghan finally gets national PR in America on her own - i.e., not as, you know, the Duchess who married the Prince and is only famous because she did. Even though we all know that's the case.
So it's hardly a shock event.
As for predictions: I agree with other posters that Meghan is constitutionally unable to refrain from making every topic self-referential. She simply cannot control herself. So she'll do the minimum required to talk about Doing Good but when the number of times she utters the word "I" is counted up after the interview . . .
-Ashley
This was probably done in a studio in L.A., Meghan was probably alone in a room, one of those set-ups. After all, people don't want to see her in a mask, and taking a flight to New York and back for what is probably a five-minute interview would have looked, well, unseemly.
Disney played this right and Meghan probably got it.
It's the quality of her work that has probably warned Disney off her - that is, if they have any brains. It's not as if just her presence turned the film into a docu-hit.
I can just see it getting nominated for an Oscar next winter.
Oh, dear God - I need a brandy.
So Meghan is about, yet again, to make a point of trampling on yet another news cycle of the Cambridges.
The HarryMarkle author is right: the Queen and Prince Charles have no business complaining about this, because it was within their power to restrain the Sussexes quite a bit more; indeed, to avoid bringing the Trojan Mare through the gates of the city and gifting her with a global platform and a royal title.
They didn't. They will have to assume responsibility for the damage that Meghan will continue to inflict upon them till the end of the chapter.
5 million! Not easy to quantify that, and the sugar declined to try. 😊
I'm guessing MM required a private jet, a weekend at the Four Seasons, a Dior wardrobe and an Hermes bag for agreeing to participate.
Plus hair and makeup services (supervised by Anna Wintour), as well as a spa day and yoga sessions with the Dalai Llama. Also vegan catering (complete with a roast beef bar), a wine and avocado steward and macarons flown in from Paris.
Plus the copyrights for the documentary and the interview, as well as any stills and a dinner meeting with David Attenborough.
Ha! The Trojan Mare
Good one!
Even though Meghan did a poor job, was reportedly a diva, and did not come the recording sessions prepared, she is an easy “get” as far as booking a celebrity interview goes. It will most likely be done from whatever couch she is currently crashing on.
The interview was most likely part of the original contract between Meghan and Disney, but due to the pandemic, most of any press availability and perhaps a premiere party of some sort that she was contracted to participate in had to be scrapped, and it won’t be rescheduled. Disney and its affiliated divisions have other much larger projects in the pipeline that require their money and attention.
She reportedly recorded the narration around October, and the thought of making her triumphant return to LA via a Disney documentary probably left Meghan drooling at the thought of a round of interviews on the late night chat shows and other media outlets.
Perhaps it even contributed into talking Harry into the rush to move Megxit forward so she could parlay the Disney gig into much larger and lucrative entertainment projects. She’d be in narcissistic heaven at the thought of swanning around on a small press tour spewing a word salad about her and Harry’s love of these magnificent creatures, and in her mind, using it as the springboard to build her empire that makes Oprah look like she’s living in Meghan’s shadow.
So now that it’s been a few weeks removed from the bad reviews of her narration skills and the pandemic shelter-in-place orders still exist with no definite end date, Disney probably told Good Morning America to book her for tomorrow’s interview before any more mold grows on this project and there is less and less of a reason to be chatting with her about a product that won’t be able to be termed “new” for much longer. In essence, for Disney, this interview is a salvage operation that will allow them to bury it and move on.
Disney has no reason to make a big deal of this project. It’s not as if Meghan has spent the last decade in a steady campaign to save elephants in the manner that Diana campaigned for HIV/AIDS awareness or against land mines.
In reality, Meghan never once showed any interest in saving elephants prior to dating Harry.
Before Harry, the only comparison to elephants that impressed Meghan were the physical attributes of the men she slept with.
I don't think Disney+ could really prove they got 5mil subscribers as a result of her documentary. Hadn't they just offered some free streaming deal due to COVID? I think both happened pretty close to the same time so it would be hard to differentiate.
@KCM1212...
I don't think Disney+ could really prove they got 5mil subscribers as a result of her documentary. Hadn't they just offered some free streaming deal due to COVID? I think both happened pretty close to the same time so it would be hard to differentiate.
Cat’s Meow and KCM1212:
Meghan had nothing to do with the number of subscribers Disney+ signed up when it first became available on November 13, 2019. Tge The number of subscribers who signed up for Disney+ on that day was reported by Disney as 10 million.
Subscribers were attracted to all the Disney conglomerate content including Hulu, Marvel, and ESPN+. A mediocre actress who snagged a dimwit prince and proceeded to p-whip the daylights out of him is not likely going to attract 5 million subscribers. Maybe 5, but not 5 million.
At that time, it was not generally known by the public that she had done the narration a few weeks earlier in about October.
Of course ABC isn't having Meghan in a live featured interview. It would entail Meghan agreeing to be filmed in a room inside the rented mansion and under less than stellar lighting conditions. Don't think Meghan would have gone for that option. Another explanation being that she simply wasn't asked to do any coveted live featured interviews. This fluff piece was probably done for mainly promoting the documentary, but expect her to interject self-referential promotions into the segment. The interview might have been done with the expectations of follow-up interviews pending public reception and demand. But COVID-19 hit and the Sussexes have now shown themselves to the public as hypocrites trolling for attention amidst a pandemic.
Meghan can't act, not even as a voice actress because she can't even fake it with her voice. Successful voice actors make a lot of money for the small amount of time they spend doing it. $550K a year easy for a top voice actor, but not the $1 million that Meghan got in donation from Disney. If she's expecting that level of payment or more per project then she's delusional with a capital D.
"I don't know if MM could have shot her "interview" earlier in a studio before the pandemic really kicked up. Didn't she fly into California right when they were shutting everything down?"
I don't think we know when M went to LA. From a supposed friend we heard about the desperate last minute "fleeing as Saigon fell" account that said the couple and Archie "had to get out" of Canada before the border was closed. But the cabinetry in Harry's videos suggests either they weren't together for a fairly long period of time or they went to LA sooner than admitted.
Either way, I find it insulting to the BRF YET AGAIN by these two that they don't use Mountbatten-Windsor as their family name. If the HRH is gone, call yourself Harry and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.
The fact that they don't shows me they continue to thumb their noses at the Queen, and her husband, and all the good work they have done in their public lives as well as being matriarch and patriarch of the family.
I'm sick of both of them. I enjoy this blog, but I can't wait until they are so non-noteworthy that there is no need of Nutty's blog because no-one is covering these two useless carbon-based life forms anymore.
Yes to the Harry -Markle of today And I give you an easy press on
linky as respect to Harry Markle blog which is so extensive. Harry Markle blog
smelled a rat early on/ As in liberated outraged and three years doing this with
an archive. I love your alliteration baby. My shout out!
OK, the NYPost has clarified a little.
"ABC’s “Good Morning America” has promoted an upcoming feature by promising “Meghan Markle with an exclusive first look” at her new documentary on African elephants — but the relapsed commoner won’t actually appear live when the spot airs Monday.
"A voiceover on the promo, which included Markle’s voice, had promised “On ‘GMA’ Monday, Meghan Markle with an exclusive first look at her new documentary ‘Elephant.'”
"But Markle, who narrates the documentary, did not do a sit-down with “GMA,” a rep clarified Sunday."
April 19, 2020 at 10:41 PM
"Isn't Just Harry, Duke of Malibu supposed to Be Harry Mountbatten-Windsor? Or is that just for great-grandchildren?"
I don't believe that is Harry's last name despite the recent stories in the press. It is not just for great grandchildren though...the Wessex children use it if they need a last name. (They are grandchildren.) But from a long article found here https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name
"It was therefore declared in the Privy Council that The Queen's descendants, other than those with the style of Royal Highness and the title of Prince/Princess, or female descendants who marry, would carry the name of Mountbatten-Windsor."
"Just Harry" is still a Prince of the Realm and is still a HRH even if he's not using the HRH. So not using Mountbatten-Windsor as a last name is about the only thing Harry's done recently that isn't wrong IMO. (And who knows if Philip would really want him using Mountbatten :-)
Uh oh, I hope y'all are sitting down... The Sussexes are throwing another tantrum directed at the media! Harry and Meghan have written to the editors of 4 major UK tabloids (The Sun, Daily Express, Daily Mail and Daily Mirror) vowing never to work with them again and banning all access to them in the future.
One wonders if a big story is in the works/about to drop and this is their attempt to get out ahead of the coming media fury?
What they won't do is offer up themselves as currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion
https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/1252009109446176769
I will now take bets on how likely she will produce a version of Archie for this interview? Considering she has the personality of a bespoke mashed banana she will need something to hook in the audience.
Yes, it was reported they barely made it out of Canada before the borders closed. Saigon falling or the Von Trapps climbing into the Alps, take your choice. But...the cabinets in the background of Harry's video about in the cancelled Invictus Games in mid-March (when he supposedly was in Canada) appear to be exactly the same cabinets as the cabinets in the background of his video chat over Easter weekend with Well Child parents. And while not quite as compelling, the wall color in both those videos appears to be the same color as in Santa Harry's appearance for Scotty’s Little Soldiers in Dec.
Here is the story about the bike. He sounds like a proper brat.
"Fun-loving Harry’s sense of humour, like his charm, runs deep. As does his frequent disregard for consequences. I remember him as a three-year-old riding his tricycle at top speed along a corridor in Kensington Palace. At the far end he spotted the tall figure of a splendidly accoutered senior cavalry officer who was making an official call on Princess Diana, Colonel-in-Chief of his regiment.
Little Harry accelerated to full ramming speed and caught the officer a cracker, full on the shins. Being a man of steel, the colonel barely winced before bowing formally to the delighted Prince, whom he addressed – with a twinkle in his eye – as ‘Your Royal Highness’. After a thorough scolding from his embarrassed mother, the Prince pedalled away, visibly uncontrite. Of course, Diana gave him extra cuddles later. "
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7876719/PATRICK-JEPHSON-Palace-tough-Harry-Meghan-strip-titles.html
I'm glad someone else noticed the poor food handling/gloved hand placement of MM. Looking through the photos, seeing her touch his back and shirt with the gloved hand, etc etc etc, it was like "nope, nope, nope, bad, bad practices." It boggles that this organisation ditched their usual, trained volunteers for these two who either weren't trained or didn't pay attention. Maybe it was for some quick "I'll scratch your back" PR, but they've likely done some damage to their organisation. As an outside, neutral-ish observer, it looks bad and leaves me with a lot of questions about how they handle their training, food, and delivery, especially to potentially immunocompromised people in need, and how much they are willing to compromise and for what. I hope they think it was worth it.
The roll-back for lack of better term by ABC-that must make Markle not a happy camper. It was being inflated into this big thing and then they were like "Yeah, it's not. Sorry." Popped a balloon. I am going to bet it's a mash of spliced together pieces and wasn't a "real", even if taped, interview.
Agree, Elle, 3 cheers for Captain Tom! What a legend!
Have a good night, everyone. I hope you are all well.
@Mischief Girl: Due to Meghan’s profound narcissism, I believe she will be one of those people who just can’t give up the spotlight. She is a good candidate to be one of those people who hang around long after whatever made them well-known in the first place.
It’s similar to the professional athletes who stay with the team a few seasons too long as their athletic ability fades due to age and injuries, or the actress who at 50, still thinks she can play the roles clearly written for women 25 years her junior, and has the plastic surgery to prove it.
As long as Meghan draws breath and is able to roll her wheelchair in front of a camera, she will attempt to generate the attention, drama and discord her narcissism requires. It is her fuel.
Thanks for the explanation on the name. And I, too, thought the background in Just Harry, Duke of Malibu's videos looked very similar.
These two are pathetic, truly. Just go away already!!
Uh oh, I hope y'all are sitting down... The Sussexes are throwing another tantrum directed at the media! Harry and Meghan have written to the editors of 4 major UK tabloids (The Sun, Daily Express, Daily Mail and Daily Mirror) vowing never to work with them again and banning all access to them in the future.
It sounds like something very major and delusional happened behind the scenes. Paps found their rented home? Those four papers are about to print something about MM's court case against MOS that she doesn't want to get out? The Sussexes have officially flipped out.
Yes! The "exclusive photos" to the Sun and another.
They are going to regret this move. If only all the media outlets would band together and do a total blackout on coverage.
@Margery
Thanks for that story!
Wasn't that a scene in The Omen?
Yikes!
@Constant Gardener33
😁
Wow. Just wow.
The tantrum with the 4 UK tabs. Well, she's suing the SDM (so their out) ... the others? maybe she thought they ought to pay to print (and they didn't)
Odd she would choose to go after them when she clearly has an easy in because in print, they aren't really C 19 and therefore more easy to place.
As for the cutting off an A list to get that job - I'm stunned at the thought she didn't realize just how the city/finding work (as an actress) is a game often played by piranhas. Maybe because her dad's work was more steady/easy to place she missed that.
Or, maybe the talk of the timeline crushing them with the C 19 being relentless like tsunami (with all their plans to ride from one peak to the next) is reality. I'm leaning that way.
It would make sense that she/they would think that the elephant v/o would lead to all this bigger/better/higher status which would then end the need for money flowing west to them to stop checks from bouncing.
"What they won't do is offer up themselves as currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion
https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/1252009109446176769"
Fascinating! Do they think that The Telegraph or other non-tabloid broadsheets are going to give them the daily multi-story headline coverage they crave and need to boost their image/SEO? No. The PukeDuo need those tabloids, more than the tabloids need them--at least the online version of the tabloids [print version, another story}. Tabloids, like most other websites, can provide a short synopsis {such as The Daily Express often does} pulled from another site to generate traffic, if I am not mistaken? Just as Google or any other sites have images and links to stories about the Duo. I am not sure that this threat from the PukeDuo, like the threat to the BRF will work out well for them.
They said they were opting out of the Royal Rota and intended to encourage "up and coming young journalists" by giving them exclusives. (Read: censorship and sycophantic journalists. A veritable armada of Omid Scobies!)
One mistake the dopes keep making is blaming the tabloids for the comments. Even a neutral story now has thousands of blistering commentary. Are they trying to only work with media whose comments they can control?
Welcome to the gulag my friends.
And I'm dreaming here
It's finally THE KRAKEN!!!
I don't know, maybe the Duo did not like the lastest 'expert' article in The Daily Express. From the article, "But the Duke of Sussex is said to be under additional pressure from Meghan to keep up his own physical appearance. Spencer Stevenson from SpexHair.com explained Meghan who is well-known for being incredibly attractive and glamourous could mean Harry will look to work on his own appearance." These experts, so-called, quoted in The Daily Express or the DM and just spout their opinion to get free press for their business. The tabloid journalists don't have to do any work, the website gets lots of hits for advertising, and the PR team can report the numbers to the Duo who can justify their ability to generate interest/press to potential business partners [of the reality tv sort]!
before fleeing to Bel End??
Yes, I found the quote about Meghan being incredibly attractive AND glamorous quite hilarious. Maybe this guy is a blind barber!
So, the first leave us alone manifesto was shortly before the engagement, the second one issued last October, then shortly after the announcement they needed a six week break from royal duties, hmm, so what is coming down the pike--is it the impending court case procedures against the tabloids or something else....
@Magatha, please share the link. I'll get the popcorn ready.
Link is on Charlatan Duchess, enjoy 😉
We may look back at this moment in years to come and whisper:
"it was the day of the white stretch pants"
The thing is, the Daily Mail, in particular, seems to have good sources. There’s a terrible story in Canada right now - 16 shot dead, including an RCMP officer, and the Daily Mail online has more up-to-date details than the national Canadian news outlets.
This is either a major hissy fit because they aren’t doing any better in the US than they did in the UK, or because we didn’t like the white pants, or Dan Wootton’s got another exclusive coming down the pipe.
My bets on Dan Wootton??
Sorry I can’t post the tmz link I’m on my phone, slowly turning blind!!
Seems to me they’ve finally twigged that they’re not as bankable/popular as they thought.
Megs imploded, Harry responded with another ridiculous “letter to the editor”
Re: the tabloids, one of the first things I was taught in my career is to evaluate source based on not just where it comes from, but the info it contains, even how it is framed. While I wouldn't completely buy everything the tabloids say, I wouldn't rule them out either. Sometimes some of the most accurate info I received on the job was from sources that many would find...umm...uncredible to say the least. Also the tabloids won't give a patoosh about credibility and often their legal department is quite robust and good.
The Sparkdoms seem to lack impulse control. If you go over all their rants over the last year or so it is usually at the same time as something about to drop against them. There is either something big about to drop or they are just so totally off their heads on various substances they lack some basic common sense.
BTW yeah I am back,. been busy working extra hours through this pandemic :)
Loved the comments about feeling that they would have been taken care of better in Canada, and it was harder than they thought it would be...
So living for free in a mansion with no duties at all and your expenses taken care of by your father is also:
Too hard? (Imagine echo effects there)
It's just mind-boggling.
Hahahaha, yes, Too white... we should be asking “you alwhite Megs”
Welcome back! Glad to see you are okay
As The Duke and Duchess of Sussex now settle into the next chapter of their lives and no longer receive any publicly funded support, we are writing to set a new media relations policy, specifically as it pertains to your organisation.
Like you, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex believe that a free press is a cornerstone to any democracy-- particularly in moments of crisis. At its best, this free press shines light on dark places, telling stories that would otherwise go untold, standing up for what's right, challenging power, and holding those who abuse the system to account.
It has been said that journalism's first obligation is to the truth. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex agree wholeheartedly.
It is gravely concerning that an influential slice of the media, over many years, has sought to insulate themselves from taking accountability for what they say or print-- even when they know it to be distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason. When a power is enjoyed without responsibility, the trust we all place in this much-needed industry is degraded.
There is a real human cost to this way of doing business and it affects every corner of society.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have watched people they know--as well as complete strangers-- have their lives completely pulled apart for no good reason, other than the fact that salacious gossip boosts advertising revenue.
With that said, please note that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not be engaging with your outlet. There will be no corroboration and zero engagement. This is also a policy for their communications team, in order to protect that team from the side of the industry that readers never see.
This policy is not about avoiding criticism. It's not about shutting down public conversation or censoring accurate reporting. Media have every right to report on and indeed have an opinion on The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, good or bad. But it can't be based on a lie. They also want to be very clear: this is not in any way a blanket policy for all media.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are looking forward to working with journalists and media organisations all over the world, engaging with grassroots media, regional and local media, and young, up-and-coming journalists, to spotlight issues and causes that so desperately need acknowledging. And they look forward to doing whatever they can to help further opportunities for more diverse and underrepresented voices, who are needed now more than ever.
What they won't do is offer themselves up as a currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion.
We are encouraged that this new approach will be heard and respected.
All white...good one!
Interesting (sorry if duplicate) the comment he has deserted the country will get play and will not look well short or long term
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8234071/Row-Prince-Harry-claims-UKs-coronavirus-crisis-better-led-believe.html
That narcissistic rage rings true. She is just blindly acting out.
How is she going to merch all her crap without the tabloids? Is the Economist going to have a link to Meghans Mirror?
Is it Archie time?
@elle, thanks. I will make certain there is extra butter on the popcorn.
Then, while all this is going on, and they have an active lawsuit on rather shaky ground, these two idiots decide to pap stroll this week. Fine. They aren’t the only ones calling the paps on themselves (Ben Affleck and Ana de Armas, I’m looking at you), but LA is literally full of paparazzi, it’s the thirty mile zone after all, and there have been a few stories about how the pap industry is struggling because all the celebrities are staying home. Any one of the literally hundreds of paps in and around LA would have been happy to show up and snap a few pictures and instead these two absolute morons decide to call up the SAME guy who took the fake pap photos of her dad! You know, the entire triggering incident for the falling out with her old man she claims has absolutely devastated her. Same guy! You seriously cannot make this stuff up! So now you’ve got her dad (or her) on the stand, under oath, and you start asking about this pap specifically. Maybe you cal the guy himself and see what he has to say. And all of this is a lot of how the sausage gets made but none of it is going to make her look very good and she did it all to herself. With Harry’s help. It’s AMAZING.
So, what to do? Ah, yes, remind everyone what a filthy tabloid the MoS is and how it killed your mother (can’t quite bring himself to mention Mummy by name this time, which is a new twist for him, but the message is still the same). They just keep having to find a new villain to cover their increasingly idiotic tracks. I hope the MoS absolutely destroys them. They will have done it to themselves.
This part of Harry and Meghan's letter makes me think they are very nervous about the upcoming trial. Maybe some direct communications between Meghan and the DM/MOS journalists will be revealed as evidence? Yikes! How awkward for Meghan... especially if she fibbed to the BRF and claimed she had not been in contact with the tabloids!
With that said, please note that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not be engaging with your outlet. There will be no corroboration and zero engagement. This is also a policy for their communications team, in order to protect that team from the side of the industry that readers never see. (I am sure all of the journalists at the DM felt properly scolded and have dutifully deleted Meghan's hotmail e-mail address from their contact list.)
Here is the Daily Mail's article on Harry and Meghan's letter--at the end of the article, it mentions that Sunshine Sachs is handling communications on behalf of the Sussexes. The DM doesn't seem upset at all.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8235215/Harry-Meghan-announce-refuse-talk-four-UK-newspapers-groups.html
I’m genuinely baffled by this. If you have to say the same thing this many times, then clearly your message isn’t getting through. And obviously it’s not aimed at the tabloids even though they are named. So it’s clearly aimed at whoever they think their audience is but at the same time the fact that they just keep releasing the same statement suggests that they don’t think even their audience is “getting it.” But their only solution is just...more statements. It’s strange. Of course the DM isn’t bothered. They sound insane. And in the midst of a global pandemic too. Who is telling them that this bs is good for their image?
Yup, this is a flaming case of narcissistic rage. Reading Elle’s list from Psychology Today Is pure Meghan. Combined with the narc rage is the narcissist’s need for control. She masterfully achieved complete control of Harry so fast I feel the need to check my neck for whiplash.
Look at all the poor dear has had to contend with just short of two years after the wedding, and she’s
STILL NOT HAPPY.
I think the tabloids are just a convenient outlet for her her rage which comes from her inability to control so many things.
HMTQ tossed a QE2-sized wrench into her plans to use the Sussex Royal name after working on it since the I dos. Then Canada won’t pay their big fat security bill, and Charles apparently isn’t going to pay it forever, which means they have likely had to scale down the number of security people, which in the mind of a narc like her, means she is not as important without the large security entourage.
The COVID-19 shutdown of everything she cares about and needs to launch herself as she was planning to launch herself into the upper reaches of the A-list is probably angering her to no end. A worldwide pandemic is the ultimate loss of control for her. She can’t blame it on the media, the royal family, the citizens of the UK, Canada, or the US, racism, Trump, or her father.
Money may be running short, which is also a form of loss of control. She derives who she is purely by a variety of vapid, shallow status symbols that needs truckloads of money to acquire and maintain.
And the money’s not rolling in. She and Harry don’t seem to have a massive amount of extremely lucrative entertainment projects in the works (if they did, we’d hear it from Omid or her other minions) to fund this lifestyle, and the world doesn’t seem to be beating a path to her door to throw big projects worthy of the status she believes she deserves. Her narration gig wasn’t well-received, and there‘s not the slightest hint that Disney was so thrilled with it that they begged her for the privilege to do future projects with her, and tv commercials in Asia might not qualify as “brand Meghan.”
A serious lack of funding is a huge stressor for anyone, but if you are Meghan attempting to construct an entirely new fraudulent facade for the entire world to see, the lack of dollars is a form of loss of control. No money=no control=narcissistic rage.
Harry is likely the chief object of her rage, because he’s one of the few aspects of life she can control, but she can only emotionally abuse and devalue him to a certain point. Meghan still needs him for what shreds of status remain and the money from Charles. As for her public relations team, they specialize in image building and publicity, not miracles.
So she has to lash out at something or someone. George and Oprah are out of the question, and the fact that the tabloids have legitimately criticized her flimsy and obviously contrived food deliveries and dog walks gives her a reason to once more play victim in her mind. To Meghan, any criticism justifies lashing out in a poorly thought out attempt to assert control in at least one area of her grand lifeplan, which seems to be running off the rails.
The tantrum 100% has to do with next week’s lawsuit hearing.
Thank you so much for your posts. It sounds like this week in lock-down is going to be enjoyable!
Millicent Pfeiffenheimer said...
The tantrum 100% has to do with next week’s lawsuit hearing.
Thank you so much for your posts. It sounds like this week in lock-down is going to be enjoyable!
@Henrietta: Great thought! The upcoming hearing totally skipped my mind. Duh!
Meghan’s legal team might be giving her the feeling that this suit is not going to go well. It could very well be another embarassing, massive screw-up bybthe woman who is supposedly “whip smart.”
I'll have a Screaming Narc, please. Vodka, Kahlua, and Irish Cream! Bottoms up--especially for all those wearing skinny white jeans.
Oooh! You are so right! Sunshine Sachs was hired by Weinstein and Michael Jackson to spin/refute/discredit negative stories the press reported on their clients... so, it doesn't seem too far-fetched to wonder if Harry and Meghan called out these 4 UK tabloids because they fear that the tabloids will eagerly pay and publish tell-all stories from former employees of the Sussexes? Check out the part below... "gravely concerning" "insulate themselves from taking accountability for what they say or print"... "when they know it is distorted, false or invasive beyond reason"... "real cost of doing business"... "affects every corner of society"... If stories of horror emerge about what it was like working for Harry and Meghan come out, it would RUIN their chances of making $$$ and creating their brand/empire. No one would support/fund/associate with a pair of former royals who made the lives of their staff a physical and mental hellscape.
It is gravely concerning that an influential slice of the media, over many years, has sought to insulate themselves from taking accountability for what they say or print-- even when they know it to be distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason. When a power is enjoyed without responsibility, the trust we all place in this much-needed industry is degraded. There is a real human cost to this way of doing business and it affects every corner of society.
It will go over like a lead balloon.
Meg's "sources" will say that she said that stuff before these unusual times we are in. (ie, COVID)
Most people will accept it, but people like us will analyze the interview and find proof that the interview is current and Meg is really just that horrible.
And we will come on here to talk about it. And the regular DM reader, etc., will be none the wiser.
That's my guess, lol.
Press-bashing is often effective; Donald Trump has basically built his political career on it. (And he's not entirely wrong, but that's a topic for another day.)
The difference is that most readers already know the UK tabloids can't be entirely trusted, just like most people already know a fast-food meal isn't entirely healthy, but they consume them anyway.
I agree with many of you that the Sussexes are trying to play up that untrustworthiness before the MoS suit begins next week.
And the MoS, which I'm sure is as desperate for non-corona stories as any other outlet (check off this list of layoffs, including forcing Telegraph employees down to a four-day week) is going to ride and ride with any salacious information it can publish.
The tabloids could easily publish some of those emails to show how desperate Meg was for coverage, particularly before her marriage.
Chris Shern at ITV already showed his hand the other day on Twitter (referenced on yesterday's blog comments, I believe) - someone complained about him running a piece on the Sussexes, and he made clear that Harry's own "team" had requested that he cover the story.
Generally, if you’re paying a company like SS the big $$, you let them do their job. I’m sure SS are quite capable of dealing with the British media, and don’t need the Sussexes for protection. Which makes me wonder, are they letting SS do their job, or is SS finding that their client doesn’t like to stick with the game plan?
"Protect" "Keep Safe" "Causing Harm to" are all common expressions from the SJW/progressive cannon, and you see them come up again in Meg's writing, along with the words "kind" and "kindness."
While I agree that there are many people in our society that we need to "keep safe", the sharklike hacks at Sunshine Sachs are not among them.
She basically wants Meghan's Mirror served up to other people's circulations. And there's no market for it. At least not for her.
Even women of her age who really are A-list, like Reese Witherspoon, have to deal with non-flattering coverage. (Witherspoon just made a huge boo-boo when she offered 250 free dresses to US teachers and got more than a million requests.)
If you're going to get mass-market coverage, you're going to get criticism. That's the way it goes.
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not be engaging with your outlet. There will be no corroboration and zero engagement. This is also a policy for their communications team"
pointedly does not include the paps like Coleman Rayner which the Sussexes do business with. I would imagine that they make a nice chunk of change from arranging pap shoots, an income that would be severely reduced if the images no longer ran in British tabloids.
But I guess they are pretending that Coleman Rayner et al are purely external companies who "catch them unawares" doing charitable deeds, and therefore not covered by the "zero engagement" rule.
I agree that the tabloid press is unbelievable (I come from a country where one could not print such nonsense without being sued), but there is a strategy to deal with them effectively:
* Issue denials when something is attributed to you for saying or doing that you did not say or do. Just a one-line statement released without any fuss. Do this consistently. (However, be careful in doing so because in my country, politicians often/usually do this but those who are lying when they do so always get caught in the lie so we end up not believing such denials!)
* Issue apologies if something you said or did was misinterpreted, but be careful in wording ... e.g. 'I am so sorry that my statements ... were misinterpreted as ...' But acknowledge if you said or did something stupid that revealed an error on your part ... e.g. 'at the time of making the statement I firmly believed in the rightness of what I was saying but conversations with various people and on reflecting on information I have been given ...'
* Simply ignore opinions about you (good or bad) and carry on behaving and speaking with integrity, consistently. (My experience of life is that if someone has chosen to have a bad opinion of you and act on it, loudly, and persuade others, there is not much you can do about it except keep your head and carry on and just avoid dealings with that person or giving information to that person but to never give them a weapon by announcing any of this in any way ... smile and carry on!)
Personally, I think Meghan and Harry are obsessed with media coverage (getting it) ... it is all about the show for them, so they will want to control the media. Even if they do not rely on publicity to make money (e.g. Harry pre-Meghan), they are still obsessed with getting media coverage, being praised and adored, and never have anything critical about them said ever.
They're often not displayed at first, I find, but if you click `Add you comment' they do come up,eventually but you might have to scroll up/down a bit to see them.
When newspapers and tabloids get letters like this, they just laugh. They get letters such as this nearly every day, and know it's basically an,"I'll never talk to you again," stomping of the feet missive, usually fueled by rage from not getting the positive press that they want. Normally, it just goes into the wastebasket or is deleted, but because The Harkles are "international stars" in their own minds, they decided to print it in full.
What a stupid idea to put this in print and send it to the newspapers.The Harkles could have simply gone on as before, and nobody would notice, but they wanted to make a big deal out of this for more press. In reality, it means nothing. However, they've just blasted yet another British institution and have put in writing that they are attempting to control the British press.
This will not stop any of those news outlets from reporting on them, but it now gives them fuel to repeatedly print this tantrum at the end of every story about them. They won't have to do a "The Harkles and their spokespeople are not available for comment". Now, they can write that The Harkles have refused "to cooperate or engage in any way" with our publication, along with a long list of other British news outlets. Doesn't that sound a lot worse than "The Harkles were not available for comment?"
It will also open up the question as to just how The Harkles cooperated or engaged with these newspapers before this announcement. When was the last time you saw a direct quote from them in any of these newspapers? The only quotes you'll find are from "a source" connected to The Harkles, and that won't change. The Harkles can't control "a source," as much as they wish they could. How many of those "sources" came from The Harkles and their own PR team? There are always people who will talk, and the only people who won't talk are those who had been pre-approved by The Harkles- Jessica, Oprah, Elton, the hair dresser, et al.
I think this came about after Harry's repeatedly saying how "British" the public's response to COVID is, and repeating that "British" comment several times- from his bolthole in the U.S. He was blasted about that in the comments, and was yet again made to look foolish and uncaring about the country which has supported him for most of his life. So, this is their revenge, and it's petty and childish.
It will also make no difference in how those newspapers cover The Harkles, and it will backfire. Again, they look childish and petty with this missive, which basically says that they are mad because they didn't get what they wanted- all positive press and reader comments.
I think this was also planned to coincide with the upcoming lawsuits, and this letter will be used to try to explain just how horrible the press has been to them. What they don't understand is that they brought this upon themselves with their guerrilla marketing tactics, all of which have been sussed out by not only the press, but also by readers. The Angel Food debacle and the recent dog pap walk are just two examples of readers digging up the dirt on just how The Harkles arrange their own pap shots for publicity under the guise of "philanthropy".
The Harkles are so thin-skinned when things backfire on them when, in actuality, it comes from their own doing.
They have a delicate, delicate dance with the press, giving them just enough material to keep a narrative going, plus enough to distract from dumb but minor mistakes, like William's offhand "coronavirus" joke while greeting people in Dublin in early March.
I've said this before, despite their wealth and prominence, the Windsors are scared. Royal regimes can collapse very quickly, as they know from their relatives the Tsars, and Prince Philip began his life being smuggled out from a regime collapse in Greece.
They don't mind The Guardian calling for a republic - good for the republicans to have an outlet - but if The Times, The Telegraph, and The Daily Mail turn against the royals they will have a major problem.
The above statement from Meghan is a very clear example of 'the shadow' at work. Meghan's whole persona is built on popularity as measured on social media and other forms of media (how many watch the show, how many issues of Vogue were sold, how many followers she has, how many likes she gets ...). For years she has offered herself as currency for an economy of clickbait (I wonder who she stole that quote from?), including an overuse of the sexy pose (for what other purpose were those photographs and scenes?).
The persona that Meghan offers to the public is filled with distortion (the frills added to her story, the overblown use of incidents that are a normal, and often forgettable, part of a person's life). Her speeches and planted biographies are filled with outrageous elaborations and sometimes outright lies. She has built her persona using the very tactics that she accuses the tabloids of using.
People often find it very frustrating when they are at the receiving end of a person acting from their shadow but cannot pin point what is so annoying. Here are some Jungian beliefs about the shadow:
* Your shadow is unconscious, in that you are not consciously aware of this part of your personality/identity.
* It can be positive or negative (there can be positive aspects of yourself that you are completely unaware of).
* Judgement is always involved in projection: we judge things as attractive or repulsive, usually at an unconscious level, and then project that on others.
I came across a very useful example, in summary: You really hate people being late for an appointment. You are only late for an appointment when it is something that you feel very negative about (you don't want to be there because of some issue in your shadow). So, if someone is late for a meeting with you, you project your issue onto them, perceive it as them not wanting to meet with you (really hating to do so) and take it as a personal insult but then extrapolate it as a judgement on tardiness in general.
Think about:
* Meghan goes on and on about being kind but never acknowledges that in her shadow is a ruthlessly unkind person (e.g. ghosting of family and friends and how she does it).
* Meghan goes on and on about lies told about her but does not acknowledge that she is actually a consummate liar (even openly admitted so in a panel interview). Personally I think one of the reasons people believe she lied about her pregnancy and birth is because people unconsciously recognise that she is a liar.
* Harry makes a big drama about protecting his family but does not acknowledge the deep hurt they inflicted on their respective families and the damage they tried to cause (they fear that what they inflict on others will be inflicted on them).
I am sure commentators here can give many more examples of shadow projection from Meghan and Harry. It is powerful stuff!
A brilliant analysis of how unnecessary and stupid that statement was from the Harkles. They were throwing a toddler tantrum.
They could have stopped engaging with the tabloids (any media) by simply replying to enquiries with a 'no comment'.
How soon before Meghan needs the very tabloids (and why only the British ones?) that she has thrown a very public hissy fit about?
The timing would seem to support the above conclusions.
Meghan, in her letter, accused her father of not informing her that he was in hospital and that she had to hear from the tabloids that he had had a heart attack and that he was not coming to the wedding.
Thomas Markle has message stored on his phone that contradict this narrative of hers.
Also, there is no evidence that she had arranged a flight or pick ups for him, nor anyone to make a suit for him (just something about shoes).
I am surprised that Meghan is so blind and convinced of her own perspective and victimhood that she seems unaware of how damaging this law suit could be for her. She seems to ignore evidence that contradicts her narrative and just word salads along ...!
They don't mind The Guardian calling for a republic - good for the republicans to have an outlet - but if The Times, The Telegraph, and The Daily Mail turn against the royals they will have a major problem.
Not sure I entirely agree with this. I’m sure the real royals are concerned about the dubious duo’s behaviour, but why would the press feel differently about the Cambridge’s and the rest? No reason whatsoever. The Sussex’s issued that ridiculous statement, the dubious duo had already said they would no longer be part of the royal rota, the British media didn’t turn on the other royals after that.
Thanks for you post about narcissistic rage ... very insightful and informative. How they are behaving is not rational, mature or wise, and only makes sense if you see them for who they are: narcissists throwing a tantrum.
Someone in Vancouver Island took a photograph of the entrance to the property where they were staying in February (and had a good look around) and there was no security patrols, no barriers ... no security. I can't remember when in February but it was just after the stories and photographs about the extra security at the house.
Is this all connected to the lawsuit?
What was the injunction about and are we going to find out?
finance.yahoo.com/news/disney-stops-paying
BBC has reported this too.
As for not engaging with `the gutter press' as we used to call it -I bet they didn't refuse the royalties from the Mail.
https://www.ibtimes.com/ellen-degeneres-staff-calls-her-mean-urges-others-share-insane-stories-about-comedian-2945448
@Nutty,
I think the BRF has plenty of ammunition in their arsenal to squash the Harkles. Yes, they are scared right now, but when push comes to shove, my money's on the BRF. They are well aware of their own family's history and that other monarchies of the past, but they also have a quid pro quo relationship with the major news outlets in Britain.
The BRF has suffered negative press and callings for an end to the monarchy before. The days after Diana's death is just one example, but they have weathered every storm.
Look at how HMTQ's "we will see each other again" speech was met with high praise. She is beloved around the world as an example of giving her life to serve her country. Wills and Kate have stepped up to the plate to appeal to the masses. So has Charles and Camilla.
Yes, there will always be anti-monarchists, but the BRF will survive, with one caveat. They must act quickly to stop all funding of The Harkles. Harry has shown that he doesn't give a damn about Britain, his family or the British public. His recent words about how "British" the COVID response is, were just empty words, yet another word salad. They need to be cut off now, before HMTQ passes.
Charles will become king, but William should be the face of the BRF after HMTQ dies. I hope they are putting those plan in place.
Exactly, totally agree with your comment. 😍
Rotten Tomatoes gave it a score of 75% by critics, but that was for the photography. Most of the professional reviewers panned MM's voiceover attempt. Audience reviews don't count, as we all know that MM will have planted fake praise for her work.
HM is 94 tomorrow (and doubtless will be going through the Red Boxes of official papers as usual), Philip will be 99 in June, DV. Charles is 71 and Camilla 72. Anne is 70, nobody wants to see Andrew. Of HM’s cousin’s, the ages range from 74 to 84. For Pity’s sake – they’re all supposed to be doing what all the rest of us of 70 or over are asked to do – keep out of the way, apart from having an hour’s daily exercise.
There’s nothing we can do in any public kind of way, as far as I can see. I give surplus garden produce to neighbours, but that’s about it. In WW2, I’d have had an active role in the WVS, for as long as I was physically able. I’d also have been `Digging for Victory’, although too old for the Women’s Land Army. I might have done my share of fire watching against incendiaries. Were I frail, I’d have been knitting `comforts for the troops, socks, scarves, gloves & balaclavas. Not much call for knitting until someone produces anti-viral yarn for PPE.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/what-did-the-womens-institute-do-during-the-second-world-war
None of this is applicable in the current situation. The bombs got you whether you were at home or not and they didn’t discriminate by age.
Spouting about what everyone else should be doing, as per the Markles, would be counterproductive. The Cambridge children clearly keep their parents busy with home schooling but otherwise advertising their daily lives wouldn’t work either.
It doesn’t stop the knee-jerk reaction from the left though and I see the Markles current activity as being as dangerous as ever in that respect. There have been some pretty unpleasant comments from the US In the DM, damning us as a nation, all thanks to the Diabolical Dumb-Dumbs
JocelynsBellinis,
Exactly, totally agree with your comment
----------------------
So do I!
It reminds me of the mischief making of `Show Us You Care’ headline in the Express after Diana’s death – and I gathered that it was an Express reporter who started the moan about there being no flag at half-mast on the Palace.
It feeds a kind of mass narcissism - `What about US?’
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are looking forward to working with journalists and media organisations all over the world, engaging with grassroots media, regional and local media, and young, up-and-coming journalists, to spotlight issues and causes that so desperately need acknowledging. And they look forward to doing whatever they can to help further opportunities for more diverse and underrepresented voices, who are needed now more than ever.
https://twitter.com/danwootton?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Reece Witherspoon said the other day that her actions were "deeply embarrassing and dumb" during her drunken arrest in Atlanta several years ago.
Read her comments about this. It's another example of back pedalling and looking for good PR out of a bad decision. Her comments are ridiculous. It sounds just like something MM would say:
"It turns out I breathe air. I bleed the same way."
Not, "I was drunk and said, "Don't you know who I am" while drunkenly yelling at the police and trying to get out of an arrest based on her being a star.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8231613/Reese-Witherspoon-reflects-embarrassing-dumb-2013-arrest-admits-just-human.html
She should have said nothing about the arrest in this interview, just as MM should say nothing most of the time. It just makes things worse.
https://deadline.com/2020/04/good-morning-america-meghan-markle-interview-elephants-documentary-1202911992/
MM runs from her self-imposed bad press yet again. SMDH.
Link for those who didn't see it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCLagU-dr9A
---------
@Crumpet, I'll have a Screaming Narc, please. Vodka, Kahlua, and Irish Cream!
Omgosh... That sounds delicious! And I have one third of the ingredients too lol do you think if I just stuck the Kahlua in my coffee I could have a "steaming narc" instead?
And for anyone who happens to have a bottle of Chambord but no champagne... I found out last night that it goes quite nicely in a mug of hot chocolate ;O)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8235215/Harry-Meghan-announce-refuse-talk-four-UK-newspapers-groups.html#comments
Still top rated (edited by me for grammatical and spelling erroros)...
We're in the midst of a global pandemic and you're issuing this statement now? Just staggering. You have never been more irrelevant. Just wish said media outlets would do a blanket ban on reporting on this ridiculous pair - they'd never be seen again.
She is the most powerful woman in the world right now. You go girl! She has the entire world in her hands and she can do whatever she likes, not only is she helping to save lives right now she's an incredible mother, actress and businesswoman. Love her!