Skip to main content

The New Yorker: "Prince Harry and Meghan's Fractured Fairy Tale"

The New Yorker - which, for non-US readers, is seen by many as the journal of America's educated elite - took on the Meg and Harry story today with a story entitled "Prince Harry and Meghan's Fractured Fairy Tale."

The story is currently at the top of the New Yorker's "most read" list.

It is somewhat sympathetic to the Sussexes:

According to royal experts, the only approximate modern precursor to Megxit—the term that was inevitably coined for the Sussexes’ departure—was the abdication crisis of 1936. Then, King Edward VIII stepped down from the throne in order to marry the twice-divorced Wallis Simpson, of Baltimore, Maryland; he became the Duke of Windsor and retreated into a long exile of decadent mooching, in France and elsewhere....Harry’s retirement from the family business does not affect the succession. It has, however, inspired a collective reckoning, for which the British public has been especially primed by three seasons of “The Crown,” in which the soul-crushing nature of the institution has been amply depicted. How bad must being an H.R.H. be in order to make someone want to quit?

The story is long, and covers many of the usual bases of the Meghan story - even Princess Michael's blackamoor brooch makes an appearance, as does the notorious "Straight out of Compton" headline.

Less flattering details, however, are absent - such as the excessive spending on clothing, the constant staff turnover, the mystery surrounding Archie and the "Nobody asks if I'm OK" interview.

What do you think?


Comments

Unknown said…
I just wonder why they are running the story.
Nutty Flavor said…
It's an odd choice for the New Yorker, isn't it? They're one of the few publications that is doing well during this downturn. They don't depend on advertising, and their readership has plenty of money for subscriptions. I don't know that they're impervious to PR, but they're not dependent on it either.

I see that most of the comments on their Twitter account are along the same lines - why are you writing this?
Anonymous said…
I second what @Charade asks? Why bother with this? Now I have to go over to their Twitter account and see the comments, but why?

@Nutty, is there anything new in it at all?
Nutty Flavor said…
@Elle, nope, not really much new. Even the DM struggled to find a useful excerpt.

It's flattering to Meghan, but less so to Harry.
Nutty Flavor said…
Here's the New Yorker Twitter post about the story:

https://twitter.com/NewYorker/status/1250118809303887875?s=20
IEschew said…
Err, how to dance around the can of worms that this is? You say “educated elite,” Nutty, and as you know, most Americans say “liberal elite” (maybe “educated” is code, although I for one dislike the assumption in the US that educated means liberal - I am both educated and ardently independent and suspect many readers here are, too). So this topic is politics laden and I am not injecting politics other than to say that context is part of the New Yorker’s decision to run it.

They are speaking to what they believe is a woke readership in need of fluff. I would also suggest they needed filler because there is a dearth of their usual topics in current affairs/cultural openings at the moment. They might’ve had a nudge or two from a certain Ms St Laurent weeks ago, and I think it’s just as likely she has since realized the err of her course, but too late for a publication schedule so they are running with it because what else do they have that isn’t COVID-19?

They ran a huge risk putting that in, and I hope for their sakes it was calculated. The magazine has already lost many once-devoted but independent readers like me with proven, biased hatchet jobs. I can cite some if anyone cares, but again, I don’t want to raise politics beyond the very fact of the magazine’s being considered a political flag.

So fluffy filler encouraged by a now-regretful St Laurent is my guess.
Not much news going on other than COVID-19 so they have to write something to fill the void. And so writing about the grifters is what they consider new and noteworthy. Alrighty.
Nelo said…
@Nutty, it's the usual rehashed racism allegations. Nothing to see and it's obviously from Sunshine Sachs.
CookieShark said…
Perhaps they're dismayed they're not taking in the cash, so they need to rewrite history.

Imabug said…
I find it a very interesting choice for The New Yorker. They tend to be "above" all the gossip / tabloid stories.

Especially, with no new information. Very strange, indeed.

I would say, just generally, at least before moving to L.A. in the middle of a pandemic, Harry and Meghan were seen as sympathetic figures by many Americans. I think most of those people were all so confused by the whole moving from a safe spot like Vancouver Island to LA in the middle of coronavirus as desperate, strange and just plain crazy.

My mom told me the story of how she saw the Duke & Duchess of Windsor leaving a country club in Palm Beach, FL as a kid. It was clearly kind of a big deal if she remembers. She remembers people were always talking about how stylish they were.
From all the information I've read about Wallis Simpson, that does seem like a universal trend. She was clearly very stylish for her time.

I personally believe Meghan loves when she is compared to the Duke & Duchess of Windsor. First, they are actually higher royally than her and Harry. Second, she sees them as this great love story. Third, they were quite stylish during their time. Fourth, Americans do generally see them as sympathetic figures.

Of course, many Americans forget the Duke & Duchess views towards the Nazis, or that the Duke seemed incredibly unhappy in his later life. David was incredibly spoiled, popular, and fawned over his entire life, it was eye-opening for him to have that taken away and being banished from England. I really believe that they thought they would leave England for a few years and come back a few years later, more popular than ever. Brits would beg them to come back. I also don't really seem them as this great love story, at least not from Wallis' perspective.
Tom C. said…
Long-time lurker on this excellent blog and first-time poster (and I suspect one of the rare male posters).

The NEW YORKER piece is most definitely slanted to avoid mentioning any of the egregious behaviour of the Sussexes. The magazine has published many warts-and-all profiles, so I am a bit bemused at the publishing of what is more like a PR piece for those being profiled than it is real reportage.

I haven't a clue why they've abandoned any pretence here of objectivity or in-depth reportage. They don't seem to me to be in need of the Sussex's "good will". But that's what the magazine has done with this shallow, lame, rather boring piece.
IEschew said…
@Imabug, re: I personally believe Meghan loves when she is compared to the Duke & Duchess of Windsor. First, they are actually higher royally than her and Harry. Second, she sees them as this great love story. Third, they were quite stylish during their time. Fourth, Americans do generally see them as sympathetic figures.

Agree! Except on point 4. I always grew up hearing what a horrible shrew Wallis was and thought most people felt that way and saw David as a simpering fool. I was actually surprised to learn how adored he was as the Prince of Wales. But I have family from Baltimore.

I think Meg agrees on you with all 4 points, especially 4, and that is her vision of the whole thing. She thought she added diversity to this tale and thus it would be a winner! Sold! To witless Harry. LOL.

Nutty Flavor said…
Welcome, Tom C. I agree that the journalist seems to have danced around any information that is unflattering to the Sussexes.

In particular, it doesn’t ask why they suddenly fled a safe house in Canada for California at the height of the pandemic, or why Archie has made so few public appearances.
Unknown said…
As a long-time subscriber of the New Yorker, this article is not typical. Then I looked up Rebecca Mead. She is British-American and resides in the U.K. She was intentionally sloppy and I am guessing she wants the inside scoop on the Sussexes for a book.

Doesn't she know Meg only reads the Economist.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Lmao 😂😂

It's like watching Frasier & Niles Crane indulge in a trashy low-brow reality show/gossip show & then disingenuously act like they never paid enough attention to know about the Sux-Exes' bad behaviour.

Come on, Frasier... we know you watch all the episode religiously, you know every single detail of every single plot-line... *wink-wonk*

I'm cracking up. They're pretending they were above following the story before this & know nothing about the dirt.

Deliciously pretentious, because it's so transparent~
Scandi Sanskrit said…
Really enjoying the image of Frasier & Niles Crane secretly indulging in a day-time soap as a guilty pleasure, by the way. 💜💜🍹
I've noticed that there are fewer and fewer articles about the Harkles - not only has the pandemic taken center stage but they're also becoming increasingly irrelevant. They have committed so many missteps since their announcement in January. They remind me of a couple making their way across a pasture and stepping into one cow patty after another. It's really quite ironic that the coronavirus hit just as they were about to launch their plans to become their commercial empire; it not only put the kibosh on their plans but it also highlighted just how vacuous and self-important they are, in stark contrast to that of the other members of the BRF. It's almost as if God is a monarchist.
Tom C. said…
@charade - Perhaps, if Mead resides in the UK, she is aware that the BRF, for all their private anger at this debacle, still doesn't want Harry, at least, smeared in the "legitimate" press and is trying to straddle a fence, and not p.o. royals whose sensibilities Mead still needs to respect. Especially if the BRF is still cherishing hopes of a return by Harry at least - although they'll accept Meghan back if it means getting Harry back.

If the latter is their view, then they are more foolish than I at first thought watching them handle this.

Alternatively, Mead is, as so many others in the non-UK media arena do who don't understand what the Sussexes did in the UK, too afraid of being accused of racism by being more truthful - i.e., outlining Meghan's role in prying Harry away from his family, flouting protocol, insulting the Queen and the rest of the family with nasty leaked stories, flipping the bird to Eugenie at her wedding, and all the evidence that she took the UK taxpayer for about $40 million in less than two years whilst all along planning to leave as fast as she good with her title and her global stardom.

I suppose we'll find out, eventually.

@Nutty, thank you for the welcome.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
Very good point @Tom C and welcome to the blog! Oh the politics of everything on Earth :)

@Scandi LOL. Fraser and Niles totally know all the juicy tidbits of everything Sussex Royal.

P.S. I second your 140-proof Quarintinis requirement. It's the only way to be healthy and super happy.

P.P.S. Okay, I got to stop with the procrastinating. Time to be good and get my work done.
Hikari said…
Found this online through Hello’s sister publication, Hola. It disingenuously trumpets a Harry sighting in L.A. Well, sort of. Scroll down for the photo.

https://us.hola.com/celebrities/20200415fmize0gufg/coronavirus-trending-latest-viral-updates-day-35

Welcome, Tom! Our other regular male poster Vince will be happy to have another guy join us. As are we all. :)
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fairy Crocodile said…
It is a paid story, isn't it? You can tell by absence of negative facts. They need to create the positive perception of Megs, otherwise she doesn't have many chances. Especially after Disney declared her "controversial".
Anonymous said…
Okay, I really must do something constructive today, but before I leave, I'll send out this SOS: We need a Quarantini recipe, Nuttiers. NEED.
Fairy Crocodile said…
Quarantine
First attempt: espresso, Baileys, vodka, ice???
Fairy Crocodile said…
I meant Quarantini.I hate autocorrect!!!!
Anonymous said…
@Fairy Crocodile. I think that could be a perfect combo for the Morning Dose of Quarantini lol.
KCM1212 said…
Quarantini=

Vodka + EmergenC powder (vitamin C and zinc) with a vitamin c gummy as garnish?

Ha!
IEschew said…
@Elle Yes, connotations about magazines clearly are interesting. My eyebrow, aka malarkey radar, shot up when I read Meg’s claim that she reads The Economist. I am sure their editors, not wishing to be Markled, had fully furrowed brows upon reading it.
KCM1212 said…
Oooh, Fairy...yummy!
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
RE: "Why publish such a fluff piece (in the New Yorker yet) now?"

One issue -- Advertisers throughout the press are unwilling to have their spots next to stories about COVID-19. Therefore, the New Yorker and others are scrambling to find anything that results in extra clicks, as the Harkles clearly do (albeit negatively).

Quarantini -- A nice belt of Irish whiskey / vodka of choice / hot toddy (oldie but goodie) -- the KISS method of drinks ;)
xxxxx said…
The New Yorker, economically it is very viable because the readership skews older and these olders get the dead tree edition. This subscription brings in the money for the NYer. With the paper edition you get all access to the electronic archives. I suppose they might send their log on and password to their grandchildren to read this M/H piece and others.

The New Yorker website is very clean and organized. They should be in business for a long time
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
xxxxx said...
The New Yorker, economically it is very viable because the readership skews older and these olders get the dead tree edition. This subscription brings in the money for the NYer. With the paper edition you get all access to the electronic archives. I suppose they might send their log on and password to their grandchildren to read this M/H piece and others.

The New Yorker website is very clean and organized. They should be in business for a long time
____________________________________________

Agreed re: older readership. The publication I write for also skews older (older veterans) and is also dead tree.

Not sure whether subscriptions bring in enough revenue. Advertising has always brought in the *real* bucks.

I also notice that the New Yorker circulation is 1.2 million, out of a nation of 320 million, most of whom are seduced by many, many publications. To be sure, the New Yorker has a certain history and cachet that may keep it going for a long time, as you say. But advertising, in the long run, is key.

My publication has a guaranteed revenue stream. Even if subscriptions drop to zero, we will remain in business. Not willing to divulge our advertising base here, but suffice it to say it is catastrophe-proof, not just recession-proof.

Having said all that -- I personally think it's a shame the New Yorker felt it had to pander to the Harkles. Perhaps it may not be so much pandering as trying to stay relevant in a world where the Gruesome Twosome's train wreck is the only guaranteed readable story these days that is non-COVID.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
AliOops said…
@Fairy Crocodile

If it isn't an out-and-out "paid story", I'd be willing to bet it's at least a quid pro quo one. Perhaps the magazine/author has been promised access to someone else represented by HRH The Duchess, if they just did a tiny little favour first?

One thing that struck me was that while the article itself is about the couple, it felt like it was doing two separate profiles of two separate people. I really wonder if this is more drip drip from her camp pushing her individual image. Harry doesn't come over very well in it at all, and I think this is going to be her divorce narrative. The terminology used frequently to describe Harry: protective, less educated, mentally fragile, can very easily segue into smothering, not intellectually stimulating, and emotionally exhausting.

And, oh to have been a fly on the wall of Beavis and Butthurt's Malibu mansion when herself clocked Princess Anne on the cover of VF!
AliOops said…
***represented by her management
Rainy Day said…
Check out the DM, folks! Anne got the cover interview in the new Vanity Fair!
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Elle, Reine des Abeilles said...
@KCM lol, PERFECT for BRUNCH Quarantini! So we have 7:00 am - Breakfast Quarantini and 11:00 am Elevenses Quarantini.

So now, we only need five more:

9:00am – Second Breakfast Quarantini recipe
1:00pm – Luncheon Quarantini recipe
4:00pm – Afternoon Tea Quarantini recipe
6:00pm – Dinner Quarantini recipe
8:00pm – Supper Quarantini recipe

(And yes, for you Hobbit/LOTR fans out there, those are Hobbit mealtimes lol)



And @Tom C Two compelling points:

if Mead resides in the UK, she is aware that the BRF, for all their private anger at this debacle, still doesn't want Harry, at least, smeared in the "legitimate" press... Especially if the BRF is still cherishing hopes of a return by Harry at least...

If the latter is their view, then they are more foolish than I at first thought watching them handle this.

And I'm more in line with this re the article:

...too afraid of being accused of racism by being more truthful - i.e., outlining Meghan's role in prying Harry away from his family, flouting protocol, insulting the Queen and the rest of the family with nasty leaked stories, flipping the bird to Eugenie at her wedding, and all the evidence that she took the UK taxpayer for about $40 million in less than two years whilst all along planning to leave as fast as she good with her title and her global stardom. .

Of course, we know the flip side of this: not calling out her behavior because of her racial mix is benevolent prejudice, but that's a tough bridge to cross.
___________________________________________

It shouldn't be. There are plenty of famous figures of color who exist very happily in what should be a post-racial world. Two examples that come to mind are Princess Angela of Lichtenstein and Iman, wife of David Bowie. Not to mention Oprah et al. Markle didn't even identify as biracial until she married Harry. The race card is one of the very few she's got. People are getting wise to this. Read many of the comments in the tabloids and even the broadsheets.

9:00am – Second Breakfast Quarantini recipe
1:00pm – Luncheon Quarantini recipe
4:00pm – Afternoon Tea Quarantini recipe
6:00pm – Dinner Quarantini recipe
8:00pm – Supper Quarantini recipe


Okay, as a former soldier I'm not exactly a five-star chef, but this is fun, so can't resist chiming in! --

9 a.m. -- Second Breakfast -- Scones with clotted cream and blueberries (got this one from the Sound of Music, when Friedrich tells his father, "we actually gathered strawberries, but it was so cold, they turned blue" LOL) (kind of fits in with coronavirus)

1 p.m. -- Nothing else for it but a good old English pub lunch. Nice thick sandwich, ham or roast beast, chips, Stilton, apple slices and a pint.

4 p.m. -- Afternoon tea -- Cucumber sandwiches, crusts sliced off (naturally), seafood paste sandwiches (crusts ditto)
Humor Me said…
good morning all!!
Just scanned the New Yorker piece.....IMHO (and I am American) please take in mind this was written from an American view point. The very things that everyone finds irritating most Americans would not understand. The red dress at the Royal Marines concert on the final weekend was the most glaring example. I must admit I was clueless (like Megs, the horrors) of the dress code for wives; I thought she looked lovely, like the author, because what she wore complimented his dress uniform. We are Americans - forgive us. I enjoyed the comparisons to the other Duke of Sussex and his desire to live his own life. I get the code of the firm - duty and honor, and family, and I get it and am disappointed in Harry for his choices. Most Americans who will read this do not understand the royal family - they see Diana - and will go with that as to why Harry wanted to leave.

I enjoyed the article, but I also read the British press, and have tried to stay informed on the Harkles. At least the article was in People. It would not have made the cut.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
6 p.m. Dinner -- Poached fish or smoked salmon, potatoes au gratin, asparagus or other veg of choice, Mom's apple (or other) pie -- all of which requires lots of cooking, hence obliteration of germs :)

8 p.m. Supper -- Anything that requires lots of onions. Not only is the ascorbic acid/Vitamin C content an immune booster, but it's also a good excuse for your significant other to run for the hills from your breath ;)
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
abbyh said…

Wow, those little positive smiley missiles keep being lobbed at us. This. Next week the latest installment for tv.

What's next? a movie version?

Another piece which was probably in the works before April 1.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Humor Me.
Hey, that is fine, you have not been assigned millions of pounds worth of advisors to teach you every fine point of the royal protocol. It is fine for you to not know. In fact I suspect if you did know, you would be happy to follow the advice. I have met MANY Americans in my line of work and they were very happy to follow local traditions and customs. Heck, they were more respectful to it then the locals themselves! That is why Megsy did such huge disservice to Americans, she made you look like ignorant haughty disrespectful folk, which is not the case. She represents the worst culture of disrespect, and not every American is like her. Amen.
This NYer piece is certainly PR. It's the.kind of "legitimizing" PR that SS is good at. Being profiled in the NYer would be the equivalent of being profiled in the Telegraph in the UK (although these days I'd take that with a grain of salt. But you know what I mean)

So it seems to me that MMs now definitely aiming for the American, woke audience and working on targeting the woke Alist audience. Hence the New Yorker.

One that's been most glaring to me since they moved to LA, and esp in this article is the complete emasculation of Harry. Some other posters here have noticed that too.

All we now read about him is how he is lonely, missing home, has Jo friends day there, has difficulty adjusting, has no job, has been told to get a job, is so lost that he has only Jane Goodall to.talk to (ffs!) Etc etc...
All the while MM is painted as the go getter, ambitious, super woman who.is going to fulfill her life long dream.of bagging an Oscar.

It's preemptive damage control already. Won't be surprised if the moment this lockdown is over we hear about Harry being in Cotswolds.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Elle, Reine des Abeilles said...
@Lt., now I'm starving lol! I'm glad you're having fun, but I wish I were having breakfast.

And by "tough bridge to cross", I meant calling out the benevolent prejudice and defining it. I'm not sure that would go over well on any side, although I do believe that is what is in play here, in addition to fear. But this is just an IMO kind of thing, and certainly, I am not mainstream America in terms of PoV or current life experience (as in, I skew off the midpoint on most curves b/c of life choices, not because anything I do is interesting/outrageous).
______________________

Hehehe, I lived in Blighty for 3 years, and have to say that all who say British cuisine *isn't* haven't really tried it :)

As far as prejudice goes -- it is well past time that this should be an issue, IMO -- I grew up in the late 60s and early 70s, and Dr. Martin Luther King, for all his faults, left the marker for the next generation -- *content of character rather than color of skin* -- nowadays, there is division everywhere. Discouraging.

What is more discouraging is that our universities, and our press, seem to think this is the way forward.
Fairy Crocodile said…
@Elle, KCM1212,Lt.
Would love to get you guys for lunch, or dinner or whatever with lots of quarantini.
Elle, your lavender version sounds great! I went to try the espresso one, it works!!! Couldnt do lavender as I lack the lavender liqueur, but my gut feeling is this should work great!
Himmy said…
This is the work of Sunshine Sachs. Sunshine Sachs can "polish a turd" and this was the reason Harvey Weinstein and Harkles hired them. I doubt the readers of The New Yorker care much about the Harkles. They are part of the Eurotrash crowd now.
IEschew said…
DM is running a story about Meg’s high school boyfriend who is a realtor in Pasadena, which is essentially between Santa Monica and Malibu. What’s odd is the pap photos are pre-COVID 19 lockdown So why now? Is this another case of filler since there isn’t much “news” for the DM or is there some other reason to run it?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8221505/Meghan-Markles-high-school-sweetheart-Luis-Segura-spotted-LA.html
Dallas Alice said…
Though not a unique recipe for a Quarantini, this video of Ina Garten making a giant Cosmo at 9:30 AM makes me LOL every time I watch it: https://youtu.be/PrlfO7_XUes
bootsy said…
Quarantini idea:
It's called a whisky mac.
Get a big shot of cheap whisky.
Get a big shot of ginger wine.
Serve over lots of ice and stir between 5-10 times.
Sit down, drink and get absolutely smashed:)
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dallas Alice said…
Omg, @Elle!! You just reminded me of something: lately, I’m seeing so many sponsored ads for people who sell Reborn dolls on Facebook. MM’s claw is ever-reaching. 🤣
Seabee666 said…
I grew up in a New Yorker household. It was a venerable bible to my mom. I liked the cartoons but found the reviews, essays and poetry zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. So this amateurish fluff piece on the Harkles was odd. Beginning with a gushing description of the March money shot, it read like a slightly edited press release from Megxit herself (who seems hellbent on pushing their shenanigans off on Hapless Harry). She comes off quite sympathetic - her endless schemes and foibles minimized as simply racist criticism for not wearing nylons. Rebecca Mead broke the first rule of journalism, Fact Check! And the second, don't put yourself in the story. And the third, be unbiased. The New Yorker is a Conde Nast sister publication of Vogue. Maybe that explains the long-winded, meandering narrative of the two Dukes of Sussex and their older, inappropriate wives. I agree with Tom C, politics are at play. As anti-Trumpers, the Harkles will be buoyed by the media.
Lurking said…
I'm late to the party, but thought this take down of Smeg's humanitarianism was very good.

https://keepingupwiththeroyals.tumblr.com/post/164702029785/anonymoushouseplantfan-keepingupwiththeroyals

As for the New Yorker article, well, what a load of rubbish. The New Yorker isn't just light reading for the elite, its audience is east coast upper middle class liberals who've never venture out of their bubble. I haven't read it in years and decided I made a good decision not to read it again... got through the first sentence and gave up.
MustySyphone said…
Agreed about Harry being emasculated. All the PR is about her her her. Does Harry even get he's left out?

As for MeMe wanting A list parts etc., never gonna happen. She's Gilligan now. Bob Denver could never get another (decent) part after playing Gilligan because all people saw was Gilligan. He was Gilligan for the rest of his life. MeMe will never be anything but MeMe. She is Gilligan.
@ Imabug and @ I Eschew:

In 1986, I was having lunch at a restaurant in Montreal when I struck up a conversation with an elderly lady sitting next to me. The Duchess of Windsor had just died, and the lady told me that she had been a store clerk in Eaton's department store in the 1930's and remembered everything about the abdication very clearly. She and her coworkers admired Mrs. Simpson, whom they considered to be very stylish and fashionable. If MM wants to emulate Wallis Simpson - well, WS was always impeccably put together and well-groomed, whereas MM often looked as though she only put minimal effort into her outfits. Just grabs something, never mind whether it fits or not, puts her hair up in a messy bun, and she's off to represent The Queen.

As for the Duke of Windsor, he was very much admired by the public because he had a very glamorous image (the real person was someone only those close to him knew about). There was a popular song in the 20s which went "I danced with the man who danced with the girl who danced with the Prince of Wales"; he kind of had rock-star status long before there were rock stars.
Artemisia19 said…
@Lurking I used to be an avid reader of The New Yorker. I stopp6about 20 years ago. Your description of their reader base is spot on.
Artemisia19 said…
Princess Anne on the cover of Vanity Fair. I love it. She is one of the people I've gotten to know more about in the past year. I just admire her sharp mind. And it is about time that the millennial generation see women like her from another generation who had incredible barriers to face daily and they did it without the need to constantly brag about yourself.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Animal Lover said…
The New Yorker has a distinct point of view it leans "liberal" and appeals to educated elites and wannabes.
I used to like their cartoons but not anymore.

Bring back the old CNN which did straight reporting years ago.
Now I read multiple news sites to get the truth.

After the British tabloids are racist claims, I began reading the Mirror a Labor supporting paper.

The stories they carried were the same as the DM and Sun.
Readers of the Mirror hold the same opinion of the Sussexes as the DM.

I'm not sure she can repair her reputation. There's too much documented material on her.

Typing on phone excuse typos.

KCM1212 said…
@lurking

Incredible article, Lurking!!! Wow!

I wish every media outlet in the UK, Canada and the U.S. Would carry that.
Especially when we are getting whined at for protection and other funds.

The cheek of her! And her PR!

Lawyers used to be reviled for their dishonesty. I guess PR is the up and coming most-loathed career. My apologies if anyone is in that field.

And lavender liquor?? I NEED some of that for my dreamy cream tea quarantini!

What a creative bunch!

Seabee666 said…
@Artemisia19 said…
Princess Anne on the cover of Vanity Fair.

----------------

All the sweeter since Meghan floated that she and Archie would be the cover for his first birthday.
KCM1212 said…
@Elle

The shade of that DM piece! Lol

Wills and Kate are getting all the rich donors while Megs and Harry are digging through the sofa cushions for spare change.

Ha!
brown-eyed said…
The New Yorker story surprised me, as it was just what MM would want, except for a couple minor snarks.

The English author lived in the US, became a US citizen, and then returned to England where she now lives. The teaser for an article about the author suggests her return to England had to do with President Trump’s election. The info about her is in the NYorker, I think, but behind a subscription paywall. This puff piece would be expected to be in Vanity Fair. I got the impression the author did very shallow research.

What MM did at Wimbledon still makes me furious. That Wimbledon would kick a whole section of people out of their seats at the last minute during a major tennis event still amazes me. And the blue jeans were such a nice touch. When we were in London our young teenager kids would wait outside the gate and leavers would give them their seat tickets. This was also during the finals of the British Open. My kids were incredibly thrilled and those two tennis days were the highlight of the trip for them.

Welcome, @Tom.
Royals and racism:

Not one us,presumably, wishes to have the slur of racism slung at us but I wonder if there's an even stronger reason for the RF being averse to such criticism?

If such mud were chucked at them, could it also have a disastrous public effect, given the likelihood of trouble makers exploiting it by stirring up those who enjoy a good riot?

https://uk.yahoo.com/style/princess-anne-cautions-against-new-ways-back-to-basics-135556618.html

This interview will make MM go ballistic. What might she do to get back at Anne?
HappyDays said…
IEschew said...
@Elle Yes, connotations about magazines clearly are interesting. My eyebrow, aka malarkey radar, shot up when I read Meg’s claim that she reads The Economist. I am sure their editors, not wishing to be Markled, had fully furrowed brows upon reading it.

@IEschew: One of Meghan’s “secret” but not-so-secret Twitter accounts is named ThisLittlePetal, (probably a hint for the reader who may be aware that Doria’s childhood nickname for Meghan was “Flower”) constantly retweets lefty items from The Economist, which I’m sure are plucked specifically for their wokeness value when Meghan isn’t sucking up to the likes of socialist America-hating and therefore beloved Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and their ilk or other woke heroes and causes of the uber-left highbrow pinheads.

Meghan makes a huge effort to portray herself as the all-around perfect woke mother, wife, and just for fun she drops broad hints she’s very wealthy who lives what she describes as a “perfect life’ at the top of her profile for this Twitter handle.

If you know anything about narcissists, especially female narcs, they go out of their way to construct a facade to fool people into thinking the narc is perfect in every way. They do this for several reasons, but in this case it is a control mechanism. For those who know it’s Meghan’s account, it is a public relations ploy. But moreover, she’s trying to elevate herself to the peaks of perfection that is basically unobtainable except by pristine and elite beings like her. Too bad it likely hides an empty, angry, jealous, vapid, insecure narcissist. She is also hoping those who don’t like her who read it will become jealous.

But like everything else in her life, Meghan is forgetting that many people are actually happy with their lives. They do not look to pretentious toxic people like her for a sense of themselves and status by materialistic possessions and faux friends.

Most emotionally-balanced people know it’s rather pointless to be jealous of a cheap, artificial, vessel of emptiness.
Nutty Flavor said…
@AllyOoops

One thing that struck me was that while the article itself is about the couple, it felt like it was doing two separate profiles of two separate people. I really wonder if this is more drip drip from her camp pushing her individual image. Harry doesn't come over very well in it at all, and I think this is going to be her divorce narrative. The terminology used frequently to describe Harry: protective, less educated, mentally fragile, can very easily segue into smothering, not intellectually stimulating, and emotionally exhausting.

Good point. Also, we're hearing less about them as a couple and more about them as individuals - particularly about Harry as an individual. A lonely, lost individual.

Sunshine Sachs presumably works for Meg, not Harry.
Fairy Crocodile said…
As for the fluff piece in New Yorker: doesn't matter. I recall all the praise she received in UK media in the beginning. She was hailed the best thing to happen to the royal family ever. It took them less than a year to destroy all this and turn anybody capable of critical thinking and bs antennae against themselves. Unless Harry and Megsy change the same thing will happen again and again.
Lurking said…
@HappyDays.... ThisLittlePetal is no longer an account on Twitter. It wasn't Smeg anyway. She posted a picture poolside of some run down gaudy hotel, claiming it was in the South of France, included her feet, which don't match Smegs. Her entire intent was to wind people up.
Nutty Flavor said…
@Elle, thanks for looking up the information about the New Yorker's subscriber base and measuring its readability.

@Lurking, I agree with you that the New Yorker readership does skew left, just like the readership for the National Review or American Spectator skews right.

Here's a Media Bias Rating Chart for the US media plus UK media that is widely read in the US.

I don't agree with all of their rankings - the NYPost isn't far-right, in my opinion, and I can't think of anything more far-left than The Guardian - but it's a good general guide.
Lurking said…
Re: New Yorker Article... picture, the picture... Harry is cut out.

Has anyone else noticed she is ALWAYS at the center of pictures.

This one she looks demonic... https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/oxxvaKSk.eN60RVM0Ho1JQ--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAw/https://media-mbst-pub-ue1.s3.amazonaws.com/creatr-uploaded-images/2020-03/0ec20990-60c6-11ea-abf7-fd0017224884
CookieShark said…
@ Lurking - that picture is disturbing indeed.

Don't forget the one from SA where she is in a blue dress. Terrifying.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&id=C43F96973F6AF7D1EDED857BFA2CC9F2910C16A0&thid=OIP.L2J7qizLE-JX6RFYgjkuJAHaD3&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.amomama.com%2F7b51bf4ac40c4ffc8543d154eaae1aff2687751569364831.jpg&exph=340&expw=650&q=meghan+markle+blue+dress+south+africa&selectedindex=12&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&eim=0,1,2,3,4,6,8,10
CookieShark said…
@ Happy Days re: MM & the Economist

Thank you for bringing this up. It raised my hackles as well. I remembered she was papped holding a copy of the Economist in a very prominent way. She also made a very rude comment to the moderator at the International Women's Day roundtable, I believe, when she said something like "I read the Economist, I'll give you that."

It was an insulting way to speak to anyone, but especially so given the forum she was attending. I am sure the group of educated, poised and professional women surrounding her were put off as well.

Apropos of nothing, but the more people that speak to the press on H&M's behalf, the more cold hearted and evil she seems for disowning her father for doing the same thing. She just doesn't realize how hypocritical this seems.
Animal Lover said…
NPR is not centrist it's more left wing. I listen to it daily and it does good reporting but has an obvious bias.

Princess Anne's comment about not reinventing the wheel is a nice contrast to the foolish Sussexes and their babble.
brown-eyed said…
From another article by R. Mead in the New Yorker on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle:

Prince Harry’s and Meghan Markles Royal Flush,”

“That the monarchy is an intolerable institution can be widely agreed; the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are merely the latest and loudest to say it, just as George IV, with his bedizened escape hatch by the sea, was one of the most flamboyant to express it. There are many reasons to argue for the monarchy’s abolition; it is only lately that the human rights of those born and married into it have come into focus as among the most compelling arguments for the institution’s obsolescence.“

Link to article: https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-royal-flush
Christine said…
Ummm those quarantinis sound delicious! I am considered 'essential' read that as sacrificial, so I can't enjoy an afternoon quarantini, but definitely later!

The New Yorker article is fishy. It stinks of Meghan's PR but so much negativity regarding Harry. I can't really put my finger on what the article's purpose is? A New Yorker article about H&M is too important to just be a fluff article. Agree with above poster...sorry I can't find the wording right now... that says that it could be part of a future spin on motives for a divorce.

Now the Vanity Fair article with Princess Anne is wonderful! Clearly, VF is somewhat pandering to those who don't like Meghan by labeling Anne as the Rebel Royal. I really hope it sells a lot of copies. That cover will infuriate Meghan. I also like Anne's subtle yet clear language about the younger royals trying to 'reinvent the wheel'. Good stuff! I just cannot imagine H&M have a happy life going right now. As we all always say...poor Archie! Hope the little guy has a conflict free life.
About the Mountbatten concert for the Royal Marines: wearing a red dress wasn't even the worst of MM's fax pas. A couple of weeks ago, Monstermarkle put up a video of their arrival. Remember, this was HIS event and she was only supposed to be there in a supporting role as his spouse. Instead, she elbowed Harry out of the way and then strutted in front of him, smiling and waving (!) as though she was on the Oscars red carpet, with Hapless Harry trailing behind. It's both horrifying and hilarious at the same time.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Quarantine coffee -- It's just like normal coffee, except it has a Margarita in it, and also no coffee.

;)

(seen on a meme)
Anonymous said…
Lt. I'll have a grande, no whip :)
Portcitygirl said…
Lt.,

Thanks for the first lol today😂
Animal Lover said…
I looked up Rebecca Mead and found an entry in Wikipedia. She's well educated and states her views are left wing.

What puzzling about all the supposedly left wing writers and politicians is why they're championing Meghan, a frivolous social climber. One would think she'd be the last person they'd approve of. It's very curious they can't see through her cries of racism when the tabloids don't treat her with kid gloves.

If someone doesn't support a monarchy that's understandable but to have those views and then state they most admire the member of BRF that's frivolous reality star material is baffling.
Crumpet said…
Hello Nutties!

Is it afternoon tea time yet? Not where, I live, but oh well. It is afternoon, so that means another G&T!

Re the New Yorker piece for SMegs, in addition to hopefully stirring up support for the downtrodden refugee couple struggling to make it in LA in a subsidized million's mansion, I am sure MM is hoping to soften her next mark, those well off old dears need a foundation to give their change to. Who needs plebs, not the Harkles. They want bluehairs, millionaires, billionaires. I am sure they will continue to push for articles in higher end publications, in addition to People, US, etc.
Anonymous said…
I am puzzled by this push by the New Yorker, which is clearly tabloid-esque, but with a veneer of sophistication about it. Condé Nast was hemorrhaging $$$ before the shutdown. I wonder if they are trying to expand the New Yorker base as they contemplate jettisoning yet more magazines. This smells of Anna Wintour to me. Remember when she put Kim and Kanye on the cover of Vogue, thinking it would broaden the magazine’s appeal. Those of us who are subscribers (for two decades, speaking of myself) should write to them (which I am going to do today), and ask in no uncertain terms whether they are going to tabloidize the New Yorker and if so, cancel my subscription.

I believe that the writers whose work appears in the magazine should write a letter of protect, much like the authors of Hachette protested the publication of Allen’s autobiography.

The real problem with this article is that knowing what we know, just flat out facts, it is clearly in PR territory. If Ms. Mead is an anti-monarchist, this has a bias that is really unacceptable. Always, I find it terribly ironic that the woman who is trying to destroy the best parts of the monarchy is guilty of using the tools of the monarchy that are usually listed as being why they should be abolished.

::Off to type my letter of protest.::
CookieShark said…
I wonder if MM knew about the magazine cover and floated her own story
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…

Animal Lover said…
I looked up Rebecca Mead and found an entry in Wikipedia. She's well educated and states her views are left wing.

--------

What puzzling about all the supposedly left wing writers and politicians is why they're championing Meghan, a frivolous social climber. One would think she'd be the last person they'd approve of. It's very curious they can't see through her cries of racism when the tabloids don't treat her with kid gloves.

---------

If someone doesn't support a monarchy that's understandable but to have those views and then state they most admire the member of BRF that's frivolous reality star material is baffling.

----------
______________________________________________________

NOT well educated.

American universities and colleges (and British ones, I have a good feeling) have not taught a complete education for decades. Instead, the disciplines have splintered. No one has even the most rudimentary knowledge of civics (i.e., the workings of our Constitutional Republic (NOT a democracy) ). Only read the tweets of the so-called mainstream media, mostly left, but also right, or the so-called "opinion" pieces.

Some time ago I wrote here that back in the 1990s, it was decided that journalists would "interpret" the news, rather than report it.

Gone are the classes in great literature, such as Shakespeare, Goethe, Schiller, Thomas Paine, poets like Keats, John Donne and so many others.

They are "white," you see. Therefore "wrong."

Gone are the analogies to regular life that these great authors, and so many others, gave us as guideposts for higher thought.
-------------

Why champion Meghan? She's easy, and fits neatly and without resistance into the Hollywood bubble of champagne and fashionable leftism. Crying the racism card is a get-out-of-jail-free card for all of these types who would rather cut off their right arms than examine their value systems.
-------------

They're okay with Meghan being in the "monarchy." She's THEIR royal. It's different with them, because reasons.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
wizardwench said...


The real problem with this article is that knowing what we know, just flat out facts, it is clearly in PR territory. If Ms. Mead is an anti-monarchist, this has a bias that is really unacceptable. Always, I find it terribly ironic that the woman who is trying to destroy the best parts of the monarchy is guilty of using the tools of the monarchy that are usually listed as being why they should be abolished.
_______________________________

Do an Internet search on Saul Alinsky. He has been the guiding light on certain members of American politics. He issues a lengthy guide on how to destroy one's enemies. One of the main issues is "blame your enemies for the very things you are doing."
pi said…
I don't get this. Why is 'well-educated' akin to 'liberal'? Hello? The New Yorker is a magazine aimed at more intellectual types. This is a crime? It has nothing to do with politics. And if 'well-educated=liberal" does this mean that less-educated=conservative? So simplistic and logically dumb.

The New Yorker piece is a fluff piece. And anyone with half a brain will dismiss it.

IMO this piece is being derailed by politics. Is this site for politics or gossip?
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
pi said...
I don't get this. Why is 'well-educated' akin to 'liberal'? Hello? The New Yorker is a magazine aimed at more intellectual types. This is a crime? It has nothing to do with politics. And if 'well-educated=liberal" does this mean that less-educated=conservative? So simplistic and logically dumb.
______________________________

When I was in basic training, we had a live-fire exercise with grenades and machine guns.

This …. princess …… boo-hooed and baa-haaed up the wazoo.


She came from a privileged family, and I recognized that.

But she DID HER BIT. She re-ammo'ed our machine guns, and threw grenades into the pillboxes we were supposed to re-take.

I liked her. She was a princess, but she came out of the Army as a regular woman. I won't forget her.
Nutty Flavor said…
IMO this piece is being derailed by politics. Is this site for politics or gossip?

It's about the Sussex saga, so let's focus on that instead of the New Yorker's readers.

(FWIW, Uhura, I think you've overestimated the unfashionability of Shakespeare. The most far-left person I know, a young non-binary person, is also a Shakespeare scholar. They and their friends put on regular Shakespeare productions, including "Drunk Shakespeare", which is very big with their early-20s friend group.)
Fairy Crocodile said…
@wizardwench

I was charged 22 pounds for three tomato plants today because everything is shut and nowhere to go to buy things for my garden to grow things. This is what matters now, not the PR efforts of two pip squeaks stuck in LA desperately trying to stay relevant.

When the world will emerge things will change so much Sussexes will look like they belong to the past century. Priorities are shifting, values go back to where they should be. Who is Meghan and what good has she done? Duke of Westminster donated 12.5 million pounds to NHS. This what speaks to me and millions others.

I come here because I like people on this blog, not because I pay attention to HazMeg. They can continue wasting Charles's money on PR, mansions, bodyguards - whatever. They are losing lies with UK, USA doesn't need them, their celebrity buddies care for themselves first. I think it doesn't matter what NY writes. Royal Family continues together with the nation, who the Harkles continue with? Hollywood? It turned out to be the elephant's fart. The best thing they can do is try and build their own little family for Archie's sake.

Wouldn't you agree?
intheknow said…
@Animal Lover Wikipedia is never a reliable source. Check out her husband's family ties to SOHO house.
Nutty Flavor said…
Let's return to the Sussex saga.

The DM has a hot new story: "EXCLUSIVE: Crushed Meghan and Harry are forced to scrap plans for a celebrity-filled bash to celebrate Archie's first birthday".

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8218801/Meghan-Harry-scrap-plans-celebrity-filled-bash-celebrate-Archies-birthday.html
Nutty Flavor said…
"Harry and Meghan have been forced to shelve plans to host a celebrity-filled birthday bash in Los Angeles for their son Archie, DailyMail.com can reveal.

A source close to the couple said the pair had hoped to mix their son's first birthday on May 6 with a welcome to LA party - the perfect opportunity for the couple to mingle with family and friends."

Oh, Jeez. That's just what a lot of celebrities want to do with their time - celebrate a mysterious baby who cannot be photographed. If they're going to show up at a party thrown by a couple of strangers, they're going to want Instagrammable images to make it worth their while.
Platypus said…
There is a new Harry Markle up today, everyone!
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
@Nutty said -- (FWIW, Uhura, I think you've overestimated the unfashionability of Shakespeare. The most far-left person I know, a young non-binary person, is also a Shakespeare scholar. They and their friends put on regular Shakespeare productions, including "Drunk Shakespeare", which is very big with their early-20s friend group.)
_____________________

"Unfashionability?"

Uh, no. "There is nothing new under the sun." (Shakespeare)

Plenty of us try our best to re-interpret Shakespeare, and fail miserably, and I am GLAD. No one will ever have a hope of re-interpreting the master.
Nutty Flavor said…
OK folks - heading to bed now, will leave the comments open.

Please try to stay focused on the Sussexes and their many foibles.

If we should have an unkind or misbehaving person visiting the board, please do not engage, and I will delete the comments tomorrow morning.
pi said…
"Harry and Meghan have been forced to shelve plans to host a celebrity-filled birthday bash in Los Angeles for their son Archie, DailyMail.com can reveal.

A source close to the couple said the pair had hoped to mix their son's first birthday on May 6 with a welcome to LA party - the perfect opportunity for the couple to mingle with family and friends."


More fantasy fodder. They can say anything hoping people will buy it. "Oh we are so special and our fantasy party with all the bigwigs is cancelled, meanwhile we are stuck here doing dope and booze and making up stories for fun while Papa pays for PR ha ha, whatever sticks, please please don't forget us and our magical presence and influence, we are royally special without lifting a finger and we know everybody who matters. ".
Nutty Flavor said…
BTW, @Browneyes, thanks for the other New Yorker article about the Sussexes. I'll check it out tomorrow.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nutty Flavor said…
Ha ha Elle! I think they would be getting a lot of creative excuses.

The Kardashians have a lot of kids. I wonder if one of them might have been willing to attend Archie's party - if photographs were allowed.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
pi said…
@Elle

While it's a real shame we won't get the photos of Archie at 1 (and the Dumbartons won't get the cash from selling their son as a photo op), at least the Duke and Duchess won't have to explain the plethora of celebrity RSVPs that read "I wish I could, but I don't want to."

This made my day! Thanks!
Anonymous said…
You're welcome, @pi. It's one of my favorites, and it's easy for me to remember it because I think it on a very regular basis, but I've learned to do an edited version of it, "Oh, I wish I could!" (and then I just think the rest lol).
AliOops said…
Haha! I'm dying at this twaddle! "Family and friends", etc.... There is exactly ONE member of that wee boy's extended family in Los Angeles who may or may not have had any interaction with him within recent memory. He has dozens of relatives in the U.K. (who at last report might have been on speaking terms with his parents, or could pretend to seem to be, at the very least.)

Who the hell throws a "Welcome To" party for THEMSELVES? Certainly not short-arms-long-pocket-Harry!This smells of NY baby shower grasping, with a side of "I could've been a contendah".
They are just so awful.
Crumpet said…
@AliOpps!

Fantasy toddler:

Yes, who throws a welcome party for themselves, exactly! So, Archie and celeb friends having a big party [supposedly] is cool, but the Dumbartons would not allow the Aussies to name a plane after their child [in honor of supposed child].
KCM1212 said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8222365/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-arranged-money-wedding-broadcast-charity.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490


WTH is going on here? DM claims that the BBC is donating 90k "surplus"from H&M wedding broadcast to a charity that helps feed people. Okay good so far...

So why are H&M taking credit for this?

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have arranged for money generated from their royal wedding broadcast to be used to help feed children during the coronavirus pandemic.

Harry and Meghan asked for £90,000 - the excess profits from the BBC's broadcast - to be given to the charity Feeding Britain.

A spokesman for the couple said they had been moved to hear of the organisation's work during the coronavirus crisis.

Harry and Meghan, who have now quit as working royals and are living in the US, phoned the Archbishop of Canterbury, who conducted their marriage ceremony in 2018 and who is president of Feeding Britain, to discuss the donation to the charity's countrywide projects."

"The BBC covered most of the costs of the wedding broadcast, and used money raised from transmission rights and subsequent sales.

It was agreed at the time of the wedding that if there was any excess, a percentage of the profits would go to a charity nominated by Harry and Meghan.

The independent charity Feeding Britain works to eliminate hunger and its root causes from the UK.

It has warned that 'schools are the first line of defence against hunger for so many children - at both breakfast and lunchtime. We cannot allow coronavirus to breach that defence'.

A BBC Studios spokesperson commented: 'As agreed from the outset, BBC Studios is donating all profit arising from the commercial distribution of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding ceremony to their charity foundation.'


I don't understand this...they waited two years to donate the "surplus" ? I am so deeply suspicious of this
AliOops said…
@Crumpet

Well, there were no Dollars, Pounds, or Euros going into the Archewell NFP to do some vague thing that might make an elusive difference in some ephemeral, yet impactful way......

I sincerely hope the Oz brigade calls that helicopter Archie McMarkleface!
AliOops said…
@KCM1212

They couldn't get the Beeb to funnel the money into any of their shambolic "charities". They are using this to make it seem as though they are contributing. It's the BBC's profits from the airing of the wedding (which no entity was meant to profit from - unless you count a certain couple's ego). The BBC was always committed to directing said profits to a cause of the newlywed's choice. The bride and groom just thought they'd have their ducks in a row and be in a position to launder it through their light-shining own structure.

Literally not one single pence, penny or yen of that 90k came out of their own pockets. not one.
KCM1212 said…
Thanks AliOops

They really have no shame. Not one scintilla.

Humor Me said…
I see the Harkle press team has been hard at work:
make up tips...
Mansion- hunting with former boyfriend....
and the best - their welcome party and/ or birthday party for Archie scuttled by C-19.

Who the H*!! throws their own welcome party??????
AliOops said…
@KCM

I should clarify that I don't know what's really going on with these two. I'd be amazed if they do! It's all supposition at this point.

What isn't supposition though is their erratic and confused messaging, their utter disconnect to the plight the entire planet is trying to bash through. But the private citizen son (who's birth was shrouded in unnecessary, ridiculous, and wholly unwarranted mystery) isn't having a star-studded FIRST birthday party?! GTFO Dumbartons.
Sandie said…
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32161077/prince-harry-video-calls-families/

Harry talks to families connected with WellChild ...

It is the sort of thing that William and Kate are doing so I wonder if there was some kind of co-ordination?
lizzie said…
@Humor Me wrote:

"Who the H*!! throws their own welcome party??????"

I thought it was quite odd too.

Although sometimes they look like (and are) gift-grabs, people do throw their own housewarming parties. But that's probably bad form when couch surfing in someone else's house. After all, you'd probably have to invite the actual homeowner to the party to "warm" his/her own house!
Sandie said…
It's the peachy beige-coloured wall again, but this time with some kind of door and cabinetry on the one side in the background. I can't quite articulate why but there is something odd about the room that he uses for these video calls.

Perhaps there is a deal with the owner that they will not use videos and photos of their house? But surely it is not difficult to create a background that does not give away much about the house but looks a bit more professional? Although, I have noticed that William and Kate try and use a neutral background for their video calls to the extent that one cannot be sure where it was filmed (maybe the Burberry guy will work on changing that?).
abbyh said…

The Birthday Party - well, maybe it was easier to move there since they were getting all that flack about taking private planes?

Ok that was joking. The date of then next big documentary, however, doesn't appear to be. That was coldly strategic.
pi said…
@Sandie

Harry talks to families connected with WellChild ...

It is the sort of thing that William and Kate are doing so I wonder if there was some kind of co-ordination?


I think you know by now that the Harkles try to scupper any royal and their events.

Also if anyone out in the professional ether accepts that this high school graduate has import I would wonder about their legitimacy.

AliOops said…
Harry was allowed to leave the laundry room for this inspiring and inspirational gem! He was permitted to film in the second assistant's office with the slightly upgraded cabinetry. You've really got this Beavis!

I can't recall a more IMPACTFUL message of hope and kindness being broadcast from the housekeper's pantry in a time of pandemic, ever. Thank goodness for that intrepid journalist OWbrows Scobie - imagine if this had never had a light shone upon it!?
Crumpet said…
Just to put some numbers in perspective:

"Royalty" The BBC/Smegs/Harry donate, £112,000.
Nobility The Duke of Westminster, over £ 12 million
Commoners The war hero walking on a zimmer frame in is garden raised £10 million in donations from the public.

Scandi Sanskrit said…
I just think it's interesting because as of JANUARY 2020, the New Yorker was still taking a piss: https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/introducing-meghan-and-harrys-etsy-shop

Under zero pretense that they were too high-minded to know what's up.

the disingenuity of this more recent piece is probably more a reflection of the individual author rather than the publication in its entirety (although I don't see why the editors wouldn't love the tone).

You know how sometimes you'll read something & you sense the person writing it carries an entire bag of chips on their shoulder?

And you just kind of know it's someone dealing with their own issues rather than a reflection of society?

For some reason, this author's omission of the court jesters' bad behaviour reminds me of that time an Asian author wrote a piece about how white women's "strange" crushes on Rishi Sunak really made them closet racistz: https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rishi-sunak-conservative-crush-vogue-white-women-flora-e-gill-a9456036.html

(☝🏼 I mean really by those standards, HRH Just Harry is a racist. LOL.)

You read the piece and get a sense the author has issues of their own to deal with. Maybe she feels threatened by white women fancying Rishi Sunak? Who knows with people these days.
AliOops said…
Hahaha! I sincerely hope Captain Tom gets an OBE for his birthday after this. I'd actually be
chuffed!
Scandi Sanskrit said…
I don't care what any PR puff release from the BBC says.

They inappropriately fueled a class war during a pandemic & it made me lose all respect for that Emily Maitlis person.

The fact that this virus is indiscriminate & even Boris can catch it in undeniable.

As is the fact that essential workers are more vulnerable.

But to fuel a class war during times like this is disgraceful & gross.

It's like they wanted the 1998 Indonesian riots to happen in England or something. Imagine a riot on top of a pandemic.

In Jakarta, we have a BBC London segment on the local radio. I remember in late February, the local Jakartans on the radio invited in a veterinarian (a classmate of my mom's in uni when my mom studied nutrition 😂😂). Anyway, the guy is a bird flu expert & he was telling listeners to increase their turmeric/ginger intake to protect them from the Coronavirus.

Among other topics including the criminalisation of surrogacy in a new family law & an omnibus law that screws blue-collar labourers over.

Then on comes the BBC London segment talking about Goop-y pole-dancing of all things.

Don't get me wrong, you can pole dance all you want, I don't judge but that was a reflection of their disconnect with every day reality in Jakarta. It was right there and then I understood why many English people felt resentment about paying their BBC licence fees.

It's like England's PBS or TVRI but you pay to look at Goop-level elitism.

And they have the nerve to fuel a class war.

No CSR PR they do will ever win me over.
Scandi Sanskrit said…
I think I'll have to take a break from everything relating to HRH Just Harry & his American Psycho bride.

It's not just the court jesters that infuriate me with their Corona-inappropriate behaviour, it's the BBC, Netflix, everything.

I'll be back when the pandemic is over.

Take care of yourselves, everyone.
Stay well & healthy.
Don't lose your minds like I did.

Xx 💜💜🍹🍸🍾🥃🍷🍺🍻🥂
Crumpet said…
@Sandie Sanskrit!

The Emperor Has No Clothes

Hear! Hear! To what you say! Perhaps, elitism, [however it is manifested, and there are many types of manifestations, a pantheon of elitists Gods], the time has come for an evaluation of this ism. One part, of the backlash, against the Sussexes, is the hypocrisy of elitism.
AliOops said…
@Scandi

I have always enjoyed your comments and observations. i hope to see you return well soon.
Sandie said…
@AliOops: Harry was allowed to leave the laundry room for this inspiring and inspirational gem! He was permitted to film in the second assistant's office with the slightly upgraded cabinetry. You've really got this Beavis!

There does seem to be a similarity with the paint, but that cabinetry definitely indicates an upgrade ... still in the service section of wherever he is but no longer in the actual laundry room.

Are the service sections of mansions all the same because there does seem to be a similarity between the background walls in this video (supposedly filmed in LA) and the one he shot about Invictus Games (supposedly filmed when he was in Canada).

Am I being paranoid in detecting an odd pattern:
* First phone call to 'Greta': New Year's Eve, traditionally a time to be partying with loved ones.
* Video call for WellChild: Easter weekend, a religious and very much a family time for the royal family and Americans.
* Video statement about Invictus Games: Timing determined by external events.
* Second call to 'Greta': I am not sure when this took place but he comes across as uber arrogant i and Meghan at the time?
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Too much of " Lost homesick Harry" and "Brave independent fearless Meghan" articles happening lately. Especially in the US media. Like most posters here say, it's become way too obvious that it's their latest PR angle. They don't stand to gain anything right now. If anything it's making them seem tone deaf and desperate. So why this, why now I ask myself?

And the answer seems to be that this obviously is a long term strategy, thinking ahead of when the pandemic would be over and they really would have to get their shit in order.

Here's my theory -

Harry's homesickness is genuine and he is lost. He is also a royal, the country is in crisis and their 1 yr review is ongoing. So quite likely, he is going to have to come back to the UK post Corona and do some engagements and serious work. If for no other reason than to earn his quaterly pay-cheque.

There's also the issue of his Visa, he'll have been away from the country for a whole. Not to mentiom Archie's visa, who is presumably a UK citizen and has been away from.the UK for nearly 6months now without returning. (I know they could apply for his US citizenship while in LA but practically speaking that seems tricky right now. It would be tricky if it was one of us and our regular kid in the same situation so I'm assuming the same rules apply to them.)

So I'm thinking they do need to be back, and this time they do need to bring Archie to the UK. Which is why this nonsensical, Harry bashing PR is being undertaken.

Harry is likely being convinced that it wouldn't do him any damage anyway since he is everyone's favorite. And it's good to tell the world that he is missing family and wants to return. That numb nut doesn't realize this is also a divorce narrative.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sandie said…
It is not an upgrade ... it is the same wall as the other video. Both videos were filmed in the exact same place:
* 9 March: Final engagement in the UK ... Meghan supposedly returns to Canada immediately followed by Harry after a couple of days.
* 19 March: video about cancellation of Invictus Games (must have been filmed in LA or wherever Harry is now residing)
* 30 March: news breaks that Harry and Meghan have moved to LA
* 16 April: video about WellChild

This is bizarre as it seems that they have been in LA since at least mid-March ... maybe no one noticed they had gone for more than a couple of weeks so Megsy leaked the story?
Sandie said…
By the way, I think the payment from the BBC was delayed because the Harkles did not want it to go to the Royal Foundation that Harry shared with William and Kate and they had no other legally acceptable charity set-up to pay the money to (and still do not). Legally the BBC can donate to a charity of their choice but waited all this time for the Harkles to nominate a charity.
Anonymous said…
@Sandie, that is really bizarre then about the videos. So, do you think they've been in LA awhile and just lying per usual?
Anonymous said…
@Charade? how did I miss @Hikari's link?

@Hikari how did I miss your link?
Unknown said…
@Scandi You will be missed. I hope I see you back soon. May you and everyone you love be safe, healthy, and happy.

@Elle @Sandie I think he read the comments where we thought he was in a broom closet last time. This time he wanted to make sure we didn't think he was bunking with Harry Potter in the Dursley's closet under the stairs.

I will say the medium brown entertainment center? looks dated. It makes me think he's in England even more.

@Hikari's link to that article of a sighting of Harry in L.A. didn't come off as cutesy as it should have. Maybe some people think that graffiti art is a good stand-in for the live CMJHFKAP.

He looked pale, dejected, and out of sorts. A few times he was zoning out and forced a smile.
Unknown said…
Whoops, sorry @Elle. I deleted my comment because of grammar mistakes. Here's the post:

Hikari:
Found this online through Hello’s sister publication, Hola. It disingenuously trumpets a Harry sighting in L.A. Well, sort of. Scroll down for the photo.

https://us.hola.com/celebrities/20200415fmize0gufg/coronavirus-trending-latest-viral-updates-day-35

Welcome, Tom! Our other regular male poster Vince will be happy to have another guy join us. As are we all. :)
Anonymous said…
Okay, I found @Hikari's link and I had seen that one. I thought there was a new one. So where is the Duke of Malibu CMJHFKAP's recent proof of life (well, at least I hope he's living and not just existing now)
Unknown said…
LOL @Elle :) I honestly think that article and that video is supposed to be proof of life for CMJHFKAP.

I wonder how much duress Meg is under staying out of the picture and Harry's videos.

Harry looked like a ghost to me in that video today.
Anonymous said…
So, where is the proof of living or just existing video? If he looks that bad, maybe she's already dumped him?
I agree with @Sandie ... The latest Harry video seems to have been shot in the exact same place! Same wall, same wall cabinet. And the lighting ...! It just looks so much like England.

Harry looks like he hasn't slept in days btw. It's almost like you can see the light going out of him. This is bizzare!

Someone needs to go check out that place I'm Cotswolds that they had supposedly leased when they got married. If only we could get a view of and from whatever window is to Harry's left in this video...! I'm pretty sure we'll see some sheep grazing outside of his window if only we could get a look.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
CatEyes said…
If this is the video;
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32161077/prince-harry-video-calls-families/

I am amazed at how animated Harry is, what withal the hand waving and gestures. I have only seen a accouple of videos before so I don't know this is out of character for him, but it was rather a frenetic display of exuberance of him talking tho. The cabinet in the background looks cheaply made and unremarkable in style and wood choice with just a little knob of brass (at best). I don't know how anyone can determine where it was videotaped.

He was sure talkative and his speech seems much faster than other tapes I have seen of him. I don't know if the tape went much longer but the other participants (besides the woman who talked) looked bored IMO.
HappyDays said…
Lurker posted this earlier in this thread. It’s really worth a look. As Lurker says, it’s quite a takedown of Meghan’s alleged charity and humanitarian work.

This was during the time she was stalking Harry to create the facade of Diana 2,0.

https://keepingupwiththeroyals.tumblr.com/post/164702029785/anonymoushouseplantfan-keepingupwiththeroyals
Sandie said…
https://www.wehoville.com/2020/04/15/hail-to-harry-the-prince-and-meghan-markle-deliver-free-meals-to-the-needy-in-weho/

I believe this report is genuine and that the Harkles needed to get the story out to boost their humanitarian credentials and thus be able to attract donations to whatever foundation/charity/whatever they are going to try and launch. However, I do have some questions:

1. Are the lockdown rules quite relaxed for LA? I checked:

Everyone is required to stay home except to get food, care for a relative or friend, get necessary health care, or go to an essential job. If you go out, officials say you need to keep at least 6 feet of distance.

How could this be classified as an essential job? It was something they did for a day. Did no one question why they were breaking lockdown rules or did they register as essential workers and thus have a permit for themselves and their security team? Perhaps someone in California could ask questions of the governor?

2. Why would the drivers want to get time off? This is what they do all the time, and under lockdown it is probably much easier as traffic is much less. I don't understand the thinking behind Harry and Meghan doing a great deed for drivers by taking over deliveries for one area for a day.

3. Why would Harry wear a tiara? Meghan has never worn a tiara (it was a bandeau that she wore on her wedding day.) Do American people really think that Meghan is some kind of fairytale princess? And did the person who received the delivery not find it strange that it was not one of the usual drivers, nor that Harry speaks with a Sloan Ranger British accent?

I find this story very odd indeed. Evenin the UK, where members of the royal family have delivered parcels to people, they have actually collected the items, got stuff donated to make up the parcels, and put together the boxes, then delivering them to the recipients. Harry and Meghan just hijacked a delivery run from a charity in Hollywood! They really are cheapskate!

Nutty Flavor said…
Good morning, all. Seems to have been a busy night.

I have deleted the majority of comments related to personal disputes to make the blog easier to read for people who are not involved in those disputes.

Haven't had time to watch the video, but I thought it was a bit odd that Harry says, "Having just one kid [myself]—an 11-month-old...”

Why mention "Archie's" age, when it isn't relevant to the overall context? Is he trying to convince us of something?
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Elle, Reine des Abeilles said...
Okay, I found the videos. Same place. He sure doesn't look like he's been
"...out there having fun
In the warm California sun"
So, where is he? Rehab? The Cotswolds? The Cupboard Under The Stairs, 4 Privet Drive in Little Whinging, Surrey?
_______________________________

They are having to produce a LOT of *stuff* ….. I have always said, Harry is a party animal, and this is where his public persona is seen.

Drugs, drink, same thing.
Nutty Flavor said…
Thanks for the link to the West Hollywood article.

I quickly tried to search for "John Daniel Harrington-Tyrell" and "Dan Tyrell", the man quoted in the article, who looks like an actor, but I wasn't able to find any trace of him online. Has anyone else had better luck than me?

Also, to quote from the article, “I thought that tall red-headed guy looked pretty familiar, and that girl was very pretty" but "They had masks on."

Very hard to judge if a "girl" is very pretty if she is wearing a mask.
Jdubya said…
My favorite part - black SUVs with the security guards behind them.

“They were both nice and very down-to earth people,” Tyrell said. “They had masks on, and they were dressed down with jeans, but very nice jeans.”

“I thought that tall red-headed guy looked pretty familiar, and that girl was very pretty. Then I saw the large black SUVs with the security guards behind them.”

Jdubya said…
I'm curious - Nutty or anyone - have you heard if the RPOs are completely done and they only have private security now? I wonder if the RPO's have returned to England or are stuck in US
Nutty Flavor said…
Also, "“They were both nice and very down-to earth people,” Tyrell said. “They had masks on, and they were dressed down with jeans, but very nice jeans.”

Masks are fabulous medical devices, but it's very hard to tell if someone is "down to earth" while wearing one. That's why many medical personnel are pinning non-masked images of themselves to their medical gowns while dealing with COVID patients.
Nutty Flavor said…
That's a very good question, @jdubya. No, I have not heard anything.

On Twitter this morning, however, an LA-based person was saying that he is starting to see more traffic in the Los Angeles area.

Los Angeles airport is open and so is Heathrow, so it seems the RPOs could have flown home if they wanted to.
Nutty Flavor said…
FWIW, Richard Ayoub, the other person mentioned in the article about Meg and Harry delivering in West Hollywood, does exist online.

He has apparently run Project Angel Food for many years. In addition, his LinkedIn lists dozens of TV jobs, including one with the online tabloid Extra: "Go to guy for stunts and special events that garnered the most publicity Extra has seen and huge ratings success."
Jdubya said…
Nutty - interesting. the "go to guy for stunts" Must be on their payroll. they are always pulling stunts. Midnight here, time for bed. Good night all
@Scandi, It's like watching Frasier & Niles Crane indulge in a trashy low-brow reality show/gossip show & then disingenuously act like they never paid enough attention to know about the Sux-Exes' bad behaviour.

You made my day with this! As a huge Frasier fan I can imagine this!

My take on the article is that it sounds like a syrupy un-noteworthy PR fluff piece. This is why so many of us Brits kinda throw our arms up at the foreign press over their handling of bad and false narrative about the Sussex’s, and the royal family etc. It’s not okay and is very wounding.
xxxxx said…
An obvious fake and fantasy as others have posted. An obvious product placement by Megsy or a confederate who will work for free:

DM EXCLUSIVE: Crushed Meghan and Harry are forced to scrap plans for a celebrity-filled bash to celebrate Archie's first birthday after Los Angeles extended coronavirus lockdown
________

But new for today is this in DM:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224495/Prince-Harrys-family-time-LA-home-lockdown.html

Prince Harry's 'family time' in LA home under lockdown: Duke tells of 'rolling around in hysterics' with baby Archie in first glimpse of new life in California with Meghan Markle in video call with British families of disabled children
Harry conducted video call with families caring for seriously ill children at home
The Duke of Sussex spoke to British families from his lockdown bolthole in LA
Told families he 'felt almost guilty' about how much 'family time' he was havin
Mel in SoCal said…
Pasadena is in no way close to Malibu and Santa Monica. Santa Monica. Pacific Palisades. Topanga. Malibu.
lizzie said…
The meal delivery story could be real but I doubt it happened the way it's being reported. I agree there's no way to tell if a person in a mask is pretty. I also found it odd both Tyrell and Ayoub described the duo as "down to earth." And just how nice did their jeans look and just how close to H&M was Tyrell that he felt the need to mention their jeans were "very nice?" (Most Meals on Wheels services I know of are doing contact-free delivery...and Project Angel Food serves people who are already "critically ill" according to their website which we are directed to in the story...hmm.)

If it's true I think its stupid. I do not know what the exact LA rules are right now, but H&M doing the task requires many more people to be out and about and in close contact with each other because of their security team and that's just dumb IMO. (Last month I criticized Kate's trip to the grocery store with her kids for the same security personnel reason.) No matter who is guarding them, I feel sorry for their security team members if they had to risk their own health to be part of a mostly bogus for-show charity scenario. I also wonder about having security remain with the car, especially in that neighborhood.
Mel in SoCal said…
@lizzie: It's one thing for Catherine to go marketing near Anmer Hall where she is well known and loved. But it's quite a different thing and you can't compare Meghan and Prince Moron delivering food in drug and vagrant infested WeHo which is totally an unknown entity.
I really doubt this story. I need proof by photo.
L.A. is still pretty quiet. Face masks are mandatory by law in public places and the beaches are also still closed. We can't even bike along the strand.
The 405 freeway is Always, Always jammed up, but on Monday at 9am it was deserted. Same with the 10 going to and from the beach from Downtown. People are staying home and ordering in.
A couple of Big Blue Bus drivers tested positive for the virus so even public transportation has been cut back.
I can't believe the Sussex duo is out and about and if for some reason they are, there is no way they schlepped all the way from Malibu.
They are not in Malibu!
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
xxxxx said...
An obvious fake and fantasy as others have posted. An obvious product placement by Megsy or a confederate who will work for free:

DM EXCLUSIVE: Crushed Meghan and Harry are forced to scrap plans for a celebrity-filled bash to celebrate Archie's first birthday after Los Angeles extended coronavirus lockdown
________

But new for today is this in DM:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224495/Prince-Harrys-family-time-LA-home-lockdown.html
______________________________________________________________

Comments are withering, as usual.

This is the first time in my experience that PR keeps self-flagellating like this. Who wants constant negative publicity?
Crumpet said…
Hello Nutties,

I find the food delivery story hard to swallow. Perhaps, they paid a girl and a guy in jeans, to show up for five minutes somewhere.

Normally with MM, there is at least a photo op [usually with women, even if after the event in secret!] perhaps an arty shot or two, perhaps with MM wearing a lovely necklace or giggling. Serving critically ill people, not really her style either.
This is just another take on the couple who came across Harry and Megs hiking on Victoria Island--when the couple needed help taking a selfie.

Perhaps, the Sussex duo are feeling the pressure, Fergie, Andrew [even], Eugenie, Kate, Wills, Anne...all getting press right now...helping out...so they need to be 'seen' doing something.
H's background looks like a very ordinary British kitchen to me(B&Q's best, perhaps? That sort of level anyway) - I'd have said that `window' is a microwave - it got the right kind of curve to it.

I know gingers have pale skins and don't tan easily but H looks like a plant that been trying to grow in the dark. I thought California had sunshine/ Unless it's wrapped in photochemical smog???
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Wild Boar Battle-maid said...
H's background looks like a very ordinary British kitchen to me(B&Q's best, perhaps? That sort of level anyway) - I'd have said that `window' is a microwave - it got the right kind of curve to it.

I know gingers have pale skins and don't tan easily but H looks like a plant that been trying to grow in the dark. I thought California had sunshine/ Unless it's wrapped in photochemical smog???
_____________________________________

I'm convinced they're camping out on someone's couch. Not even the expensive Gates woman can put lipstick on this pig. They can't afford her, and she will be gone soon, as were the other ones. Soon Scooby Doo will be the only PR person they will have, IMO.
Unknown said…
Like it or not JH has scored a PR win .....the RF have been badly advised during this crisis....apart from The Queen they have looked irrelevant and entitled, hiding out in their country piles....I said previously that W should have gone back in some form to the Air Ambulance and K should and could have become actively involved....she could have helped out as an assistant on a ward (The Duchess of Kent worked as an auxiliary at a local hospice for years) or she could train to work as a 111 call handler...they are amazing and admirable but they work from a script and template in order to escalate the cases to qualified staff ....a hard job but something someone of K's intelligence she could achieve....I so wanted them to step forward and look relevant but they haven't....a photo of daffodils at Kensington Palace and, presumably, a cute pic of Louis on his birthday ain't going to cut the mustard.....there was a saying after WW1 that someone had " had a very good war" to describe someone who had served with credit....I fear at the end of this the RF will not be able to say that about themselves
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224693/Captain-Tom-Moore-finishes-100th-lap-garden-raising-12million.html#newcomment
Portcitygirl said…
https://mol.im/a/8224495

Look who is trying to stay relevant.
Portcitygirl said…
Unknown

I disagree. The Queen and her family have all spoken words of encouragement to the world and their people. And JH and his family are holed up in a malibu squatters pad. Let them go serve soup to the homeless. He's just trying to stay relevant. Probably saw the low numbers on his new money making scheme.

Also, apologies for posting redundant news. Haven't been keeping up as of late.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Portcitygirl said...
Unknown

I disagree. The Queen and her family have all spoken words of encouragement to the world and their people. And JH and his family are holed up in a malibu squatters pad. Let them go serve soup to the homeless. He's just trying to stay relevant. Probably saw the low numbers on his new money making scheme.

Also, apologies for posting redundant news. Haven't been keeping up as of late.

________________________________________________________

Agree with your disagree. The Queen may be 93, but she has stepped up once again.

As for redundant news, no worries.

Just read about Captain Tom and let your heart be light for just a bit :)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224693/Captain-Tom-Moore-finishes-100th-lap-garden-raising-12million.html#newcomment
Unknown said…
I did say APART from the Queen!! Believe me I want W & K to come out of this looking totally relevant, leading from the front...but they are not....Melinda Gates has been on the radio this morning talking very passionately about how to enable those organisations which will be at the forefront of the battle against this virus, she has great understanding. William could do something similar fronting up and being visible He's just become patron of a co-ordinating organisation and he could promote that on the national media
It's not what I want and to me Harry looked disheveled and slightly wired but the BBC have been all over it and as I say it's a PR win for them
Believe me the recent comments on articles about W & K have not been universally positive....
Sandie said…
I disagree with Unknown above about what the BRF should and should not have been doing. They need to have a security detail with them wherever they go so if they are handing out food parcels and whatever you suggest they should be doing, they are putting a handful of people at risk of being exposed to the virus, and people will want to come out and see the royals so even more people will be leaving lockdown and putting themselves at risk.

The best thing the BRF can do is boost morale and raise funds, plus make sure charities that can help people are doing so. Are vulnerable people getting help to get supplies and a hot meal? Are vulnerable people getting medical attention when they need it (that is a big one that everyone seems to have missed)?

Acting as a driver/delivery person for meals on wheels is a PR exercise to do a job that would be done anyway (I would volunteer to do that just to get out of lockdown!).

This organisation that Harry and Meghan did deliveries for stated that funding has been tight since lockdown. Did Meghan and Harry help out on that front, by either donating themselves or getting on social media and putting out a plea for online donations (oh yes, they no longer have social media and depend on news and gossip outlets to publicise or announce anything for them)?

In the UK, what the BRF have been doing is mostly behind the scenes (getting donations, making extra funding available, putting people in touch with other people who can help solve a problem) ... and the videos are about lifting morale (so people do not feel so alone in lockdown and feel that there are people out there caring and working to help out and it will all be ok).

Maybe Harry and Meghan are stir crazy and wanted to get out and do something, anything, and the only thing they could find to do was through Meghan's Hollywood 'business team' who were able to put her in touch with someone who put her in touch with someone ...? What is really sad is that instead of communicating through an official IG account, they get the story out (grab good PR when you can get it ... all the royals do that) through some local and obscure LA media outlet and some idiotic person talking about tiaras and not sounding believable at all (social distancing, face masks ...!).
lizzie said…
@Mel in SoCal wrote:

"It's one thing for Catherine to go marketing near Anmer Hall where she is well known and loved. But it's quite a different thing and you can't compare Meghan and Prince Moron delivering food in drug and vagrant infested WeHo..."

No, I agree it's not the same thing. I thought the rest of my comment made that clear.

Kate and her children being "well known and loved" in Norfolk really wouldn't have had anything to do with the risk of COVID-19 exposure a mere month ago. For example, there have been many cases reported in the news where the virus was unknowingly passed among family members at family reunions.

Kate shopping in Norfolk with her kids is comparable to the H&M situation in one way...the security personnel involved (more needed because of the kids in the Norfolk grocery, likely more needed in iffy WeHo) were potentially at risk of exposure and likely had no input about the outing.

The public may be kept far away from the protected ones (say in the grocery store) but the security officers aren't necessarily far away from the public in that setting. And then the protected ones and at least one of the security officers may get into a car together....so the protected ones could be exposed too...

H&M pulling this stunt (assuming they really did it) and Kate taking her children to a grocery store do have that one common element--that of involving more people in an outing because of security needs. But otherwise, no, the situations aren't comparable. I can argue both were unnecessary though. I'm sure the Cambridges have a housekeeper who shops, for example. And we know Kate sometimes shops alone and we've heard they have groceries delivered because George helps carry them in. And if H&M wanted to benefit Project Angel Food, a donation of only $500 provides 100 client meals.
Unknown said…
Don't disagree Sandie but unfortunately they or more specifically he has has great press this morning across all the national channels whereas, as you say,whatever the BRF is doing is behind the scenes...or silly season stories like Eugenie can have s much bigger wedding to "lift the nations spirits" LOL!!!! Are you all absolutely certain that the woman the BRF are meant to have snatched back from the Harkles wasn't actually useless at her job all along and now we're seeing it plain and clear
By great press do you mean he is in a lot of articles today? Or that he is on the front pages? (Which he isn't!) Quality isn't the same as quantity and it's been proved time and again in the Sussex case. So, by tomorrow, or a day or so, they will be dragged by the same press for being transparently PR hungry. And also for their false claims of givuythe BBC money to charity (which is such a load of bull, tbh!)

The BRF does a different kind of work as most people would expect them to do. As nice as it would be to do see their pretty faces on zoom calls every day, that is not their only work as patrons. They seem to be doing their actual work, which is mobilizing their resources. Let's be mindful that this is an actual crisis for the country currently so it is very important that the day to day workings, finances and manpower on the ground at the charity organizations nneds to be organized most efficiently. And that's what seems to be the priority for the BRF, ceratinly for the Cambs.
And wills can't just decide to go back to his job as an air ambulance pilot! Lol... As heartening as that might come across as that would be most irresponsible. He probably hasn't flown a helicopy in ages! He needs his medical I'm order to say the very least, he needs to train, simulations, tests of all sorts. Nahhh... That's not happening any time soon.

And for the same reasons, Kate can't just decide to be a 111 operator. These people are properly trained! For ages! And they have actual, well qualified counselors doing that currently.
Sandie said…
The thing is, other than Prince William as the pilot for an air ambulance team, none of them have any special skill that they can offer to the community - not Kate, or Harry, or Meghan, or Charles, or Camilla ... not any of them.

The public appearances they usually do are not appropriate and they should rather use videos (which the senior royals are doing) if they want to boost morale and motivate people. Getting donations is what they can do (they know people with lots of money) and they have the connections to make the calls and know where the donations are most needed, plus senior royals actually have money they can direct to where it is needed from foundations and personal funds.

Meghan has no role to play at all but in typical celebrity mode she will try to find a PR opportunity. Harry has tried with the video calls to keep in touch and motivate organisations that he still feels a connection to. However, he has no money to donate and no vehicle through which to get and funnel donations to where they are needed. They had the money from their wedding and although it was not much, it did go to relief effort in the UK. To me this is a sign that he feels deeply that he wants to help but is stuck in the USA without a team or a media channel or any means to raise and donate funds.

My impression is that Project Angel Food does not provide meals for the homeless but for people who are living with debilitating conditions and are unable to make a hot meal for themselves (they might also be short on funds but they are not homeless). Handing out meals that someone else has paid for is an easy way to score points for doing charity work. It is a actually quite sad to hear of Harry doing this because he has been brought up with the tradition and has a track record of devoting time and effort to create something that had depth and longevity and a specific focus that he has a deep connection to. That is what royalty do. Helping out on charity day is what ordinary folk like me do (I do not have the money or influence to do much more) ... helping to build a house for Habitat for Humanity; helping to build dog kennels for an animal shelter; volunteering for a reading programme for poor readers who are being left behind at school ... Maybe royals can do that kind of stuff when they are young or to bring attention to something, but generally by the time they are in their mid to late thirties they are supposed to help at a different level.
@Sandie

I absolutely agree with you. The royals are doing what they do best. They do seem to realize that having their faces all over socialedia, esp right now is t what anyone needs right now.

Meghan's problem is and has always been that she is much more concerned about how she comes across, and doesn't seem to put in any work beyond that. We'll likely be seeing more of these so called charity/feeding the homeless drive in the coming days. Remember, we had all speculated that we'll be hearing some version of this around Thanksgiving?? Well this is just that.

Too little too late, and definitely fake.

Harry is clueless. He seems to be doing the work that he would be expected to do but it does seem that he hasn't actually been keeping up with his charities all these past weeks. At the beginning of the call it becomes apparithat this call has been set up just as some " hi-hello-whats happening your end" excery. Harry doesn't seem to be keeping up with his patron duties and just looks and sounds too anxious on the call.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Really, no one has anything good to say about this?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224693/Captain-Tom-Moore-finishes-100th-lap-garden-raising-12million.html#newcomment
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Right, I will say something good about it.

This gent spent his young years defending Britain.

Now he is spending his last years defending Britain.

I think this is the best thing I have ever seen.
gfbcpa said…
Regarding magazine subscription sales - I am an accountant for two medical practices and when one first opened up, we were targeted by a company called EBSCO to sign up for magazine subscriptions for the waiting room. I think the docs picked out Sports Illustrated, Good Housekeeping and Time. They asked me if they should get more and I told them "No, just wait."
A year later we were getting twenty different magazines we never signed up for and were never charged for - People, New York, Golf, Better Homes and Gardens, the dreaded Us Weekly, Architectual Digest(????), Popular Mechanics, Real Simple, Martha Stewart Living....sometimes multiple copies of each one. I didn't renew the original three magazine subscriptions and they just kept coming anyway.

Interestingly, three magazines none of the practices ever got for free...The New Yorker, Vanity Fair and Oprah. If we wanted those, we had to subscribe.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224693/Captain-Tom-Moore-finishes-100th-lap-garden-raising-12million.html#newcomment

GO, Capt. Moore.
@Lt. Nyota Uhura, I think he's great. I posted something about him earlier on the virus blog, so I'll copy/paste it here:

I have so much respect for this gentleman, at his age he'd be forgiven for taking it easy through the crisis but he's been out there doing his bit to raise money for the NHS and it's truly amazing what he's achieved. I still can't get over the amount he's raised (and it's apparently still climbing quickly) so respect also goes out to everyone who's donated their hard earned money.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52303859

-------
Belated Quarantinis:

I've inspected my alcohol stash in the shed and I have... Kahlua, Amaretto, Chambord and Southern Comfort. I can donate the Kahlua and Amaretto to add to the Breakfast Quarantini recipes.

Perhaps something using the Chambord would be apt - blowing a raspberry at C-19. I guess the Southern Comfort might also work with raspberry(has anyone tried them together?). What time slot would be best for "fruity"?

I've never even opened the Chambord lol it was one of those "ooh that's a pretty bottle, let's add it to the Christmas drinks stash" impulse purchases that never gets drunk because nobody knows quite what to do with it and/or are too reluctant to waste it by experimenting.
Forgot to add: the Harry video, does anyone else think his face looks very smooth and shiny? My first reaction was to wonder if he'd had some work done, although I'm not anywhere near knowledgeable on things like that so I could be totally wrong.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Lurking With Spoon said...
@Lt. Nyota Uhura, I think he's great. I posted something about him earlier on the virus blog, so I'll copy/paste it here:

I have so much respect for this gentleman, at his age he'd be forgiven for taking it easy through the crisis but he's been out there doing his bit to raise money for the NHS and it's truly amazing what he's achieved. I still can't get over the amount he's raised (and it's apparently still climbing quickly) so respect also goes out to everyone who's donated their hard earned money.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52303859
__________________________________

Thanks, Lurking With Spoon -- This man will go down in history, I am thinking :)
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
What a wonderful, wonderful man.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-52303859 Lurking With Spoon said...



SirStinxAlot said…
Interesting. I didn't watch any of the videos but...

https://youtu.be/VysO6l7QJM0
xxxxx said…
comment from you-tube-vid

Gay Larned
35 minutes ago (edited)
Henry is the picture of a completely crazed and destroyed man. It looks like he's had a complete mental break down. I think also that there is a misperception that Rachel is "running through Henry's money." The reason Charles is paying for so much this year is so she cannot get a dime of his inheritance, $38 million dollars from Diana and the Queen's mother. Charles is protecting it because she would run through it over night. She has also s*****d herself in Calif., if she's there. She thinks that a divorce means she gets 50/50 of his inheritance. Calif. specifically blocks inherited monies from being on the 50/50 table. The only thing she gets is 50% of the money they made while married. This mean 50% of nothing.
Welcome Dave but excuse my beauty, I'm one of those man-people too, you know! CHECKS INSIDE PANTS TO BE SURE. Yup! ;-)

Yes, us penis have-ers can be fascinated by the century long telenovela that is the Mountbatten-Windsors, especially those of us who are also a) gay, AND b) Episcopal.

Getting back on topic....I grow weary of Briefcase Girl Number 5. I don't even feel fazed by any of the few still flying her #ThatsRacist flag. It's not her skin color, it really really really isn't. It's her. It's not us Meg, it's you. Go AWAY.



Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Gay Drunk Patriots Fan said...HAHAHAHAHA go on with you, cheeky LOL Gay Drunk Patriots Fan said...
-----------------

xxxxx said...
comment from you-tube-vid

Gay Larned
35 minutes ago (edited)
Henry is the picture of a completely crazed and destroyed man. It looks like he's had a complete mental break down. I think also that there is a misperception that Rachel is "running through Henry's money." The reason Charles is paying for so much this year is so she cannot get a dime of his inheritance

---------------

Yes, indeed. This is what I have been saying for yonks.
Harry has had work done?? Hmm...possibly.

I first thought he just looked flushed and shiny, as in sleep deprived, hungover. Come in...that hair!! It's a whole new story in itself. His looks like a tiny duckling just hatched and got dunked in the pool.

But yeah, he could have had some work done. I've noted that I'm this blog some time back. He looks too shiny, his wrinkles seem to be gone, sort of. Lips are Fuller. Eye sockets are fuller. I swear, I have never scrutinized any other man's face so thoroughly before. Not even Will's! Not even my own husband's! But yes he looks off.

Both rach and H have started looking like a boiled egg got tanned in the sun too long. So oval. And shiny. And bronzed.
Lt. Nyota Uhura said…
Gay Larned
35 minutes ago (edited)
Henry is the picture of a completely crazed and destroyed man. It looks like he's had a complete mental break down. I think also that there is a misperception that Rachel is "running through Henry's money." The reason Charles is paying for so much this year is so she cannot get a dime of his inheritance

__________________

This is EXACTLY what I have been saying about his Royal Lowness for many, many months.
CatEyes said…
@xxxx said...
>>>The only thing she gets is 50% of the money they made while married. This mean 50% of nothing.<<<

Up for grabs of 50% could be money Harry earned from 'Barefoot speech' at Davos and pricey speech at Morgan Chase along with any other renumeration he got for his involvement with Ophra (if it happened) and the SA documentary, Likewise Meg has possible earnings from merching, SA appearance with select people, and SA documentary along both of them having been paid for their dealings we do not know about since their marriage. I am quite certain we do not know all the facts of their financial dealings (heck we aren't even sure where they live!).
Fairy Crocodile said…
Am I the only one who feels that Harry bragging about frolicking with his child to mothers of disabled children is incredibly tone deaf? That they found any good words for him speaks volumes about their good souls. Wouldn't it be a lot more appropriate for him to listen and cheer them up instead talking of his own (healthy) kid? What is wrong with that guy?
KCM1212 said…
Are you kidding me?

Harry is criticizing the British Government

Prince Harry takes swipe at government for abandoning British families of vulnerable disabled children during the pandemic - as he releases footage of video chats he held with them from his LA mansion

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8224495/Prince-Harrys-family-time-LA-home-lockdown.html#comments
abbyh said…

Good day

Project Angel food, two people and bad neighborhood

Set up and questionable to me if they visited any others than the ones mentioned

Real protection officers would not be sitting or leaning against the black SUVs. They would be right there and almost in the face of the person being handed the food.

They should not be carrying a purse or what you just purchased because if something happens, they need to respond/react. Therefore, being back at the SUV means you would have a delayed response "if something happened".

I don't know whose idea it was to publicize it but apparently it was not Richards. So ... whose was it?

The comments under it sound a little hokey in their praise.

switch: Chambord is a raspberry liqueur which I have had added as a splash to champagne.
@FairyCroc

To be fair, at least one of them is talk excitedly about the little bub. Otherwise for all intents and purposes Arch is more super secret than Coronas origins.

This is Harry's small tall from.jow on, so we'll just side eye him and let it pass. He doesn't seem to have much tact as a royal patron anyway.
abbyh said…

CatEyes - yeah but that 50% of what they/he have earned is still peanuts compared to the wedding, the clothing, the staff and the "renovations at FC".

And, he could claim 50% of what she picked up as well.

The finances reminds me of how I still wonder how they are handling the US taxes. That is one tangled and unfun necessity of needing to handle.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
CatEyes said…
@abbyh said...
>>>>And, he could claim 50% of what she picked up as well.<<<

I already anticipated you and other people's past response, that is why I mentioned her 'merching', alleged SA 'alleged fees' taken in for meeting people. etc..
Anonymous said…
@AbbyH switch: Chambord is a raspberry liqueur which I have had added as a splash to champagne.. It is too early to drink here, but I think you have inspired me to finally get the cherries and the vodka alone together.
I found the finger wagging at the start of the video disturbing. Why is he giving his audience a virtual beating, for that's what it really signifies?
1 – 200 of 677 Newer Newest

Popular posts from this blog

Is This the REAL THING THIS TIME? or is this just stringing people along?

Recently there was (yet another) post somewhere out in the world about how they will soon divorce.  And my first thought was: Haven't I heard this before?  which moved quickly to: how many times have I heard this (through the years)? There were a number of questions raised which ... I don't know.  I'm not a lawyer.  One of the points which has been raised is that KC would somehow be shelling out beaucoup money to get her to go "away".  That he has all this money stashed away and can pull it out at a moment's notice.  But does he? He inherited a lot of "stuff" from his mother but ... isn't it a lot of tangible stuff like properties? and with that staff to maintain it and insurance.  Inside said properties is art, antique furniture and other "old stuff" which may be valuable" but ... that kind of thing is subject to the whims and bank accounts of the rarified people who may be interested in it (which is not most of us in terms of bei

A Quiet Interlude

 Not much appears to be going on. Living Legends came and went without fanfare ... what's the next event?   Super Bowl - Sunday February 11th?  Oscar's - March 10th?   In the mean time, some things are still rolling along in various starts and stops like Samantha's law suit. Or tax season is about to begin in the US.  The IRS just never goes away.  Nor do bills (utility, cable, mortgage, food, cars, security, landscape people, cleaning people, koi person and so on).  There's always another one.  Elsewhere others just continue to glide forward without a real hint of being disrupted by some news out of California.   That would be the new King and Queen or the Prince/Princess of Wales.   Yes there are health risks which seemed to come out of nowhere.  But.  The difference is that these people are calmly living their lives with minimal drama.  

Christmas is Coming

 The recent post which does mention that the information is speculative and the response got me thinking. It was the one about having them be present at Christmas but must produce the kids. Interesting thought, isn't it? Would they show?  What would we see?  Would there now be photos from the rota?   We often hear of just some rando meeting of rando strangers.  It's odd, isn't it that random strangers just happen to recognize her/them and they have a whole conversation.  Most recently it was from some stranger who raved in some video (link not supplied in the article) that they met and talked and listened to HW talk about her daughter.  There was the requisite comment about HW of how she is/was so kind).  If people are kind, does the world need strangers to tell us (are we that kind of stupid?) or can we come to that conclusion by seeing their kindness in action?  Service. They seem to always be talking about their kids, parenthood and yet, they never seem to have the kids