Netflix - Part One

It's finally here after all the salvos and claims of it being their story, their truth but has now shifted into not their lens.   So? whose is it today?  And tomorrow - is that someone else?

Given how hard and loose The Crown is (that they HAD to put up a disclaimer says something), with the trailer problems, will there also be a disclaimer on this?  

The interview had quite a number of statements which were found (fairly easily) to be known as untrue.  That was an hour long show.  This is six of these (possible longer as no commercials on NF) and they have already found several inaccuracies parading as truth to someone in just the trailer.  

What else will be discovered in the shows?  And how will they be explained away?  Already the claims are that this is just them telling a story and apparently those pictures are just shown to help create the mood for their story.  So what/whose authority of using photos which are are not from actual events relating to them/their story said that this is within the bounds of justifiable, and therefore to be encouraged?    If it is acceptable here, then what are the circumstances when it would not be?

One of the claims is that she had difficulty adjusting ... well, his mother had difficulty and then his wife had her own troubles, something with people having a different agenda than hers and behaved spitefully to her.  Every generation has a new spin on how the married in have a glorious rock star start and then it seems to become undone.   And, (sigh) it's always someone else's fault (just line up the usual suspects - death is no excuse).

As a side note, if they are claiming all women have/had difficulty adjusting, then why don't the men who marry in have the same "difficulties" adjusting and being named/photographed in multiple stories in the papers each day?  I remember seeing something about PP and that he had a bumpy start what with his MIL not happy he married in and was vocal about it.  He used that to go out and figure out something to do which also supported his wife and were things he liked.  He created his own job description.  But he wasn't the only male married in.  Sure things might happen once or twice to one of the others but never to the same degree as the women.  It is just odd that they never seem to have the same problems as the women do.

In the lead up, more and more comments are being allowed that people are more focused on paying the gas bill or buying groceries than interested in watching people whine about how their allowance (probably more than some annual wages) was cut off in their 40's while living in a multimillion dollar mansion.  Or the cost of their wedding, all the new outfits, the baby shower or, for that matter, all the trips.  The amount of money spent is breathtaking.  And jaw dropping at just how fast it was spent.

That's not reading the room.  

And, there are lots of calls to rescind the titles.  In print.  A tsunami is building.  

Heck.  Before the Queen passed, people were starting to show up with signs protesting them.  And that was the story in the news - not what the couple was there for.  I think the only reason it didn't get more traction at the time was that HM passed and people had respect for her and the new king.  Those are people who will not to be watching or reading to change their minds about the couple. 

And, more and more articles have are pointing out just how much the Palace tried to support and bring her into the fold so she wouldn't have these problems.  They had learned and wanted things to be different (as in better).  So there was handpicked staff.  Highly trusted staff who knew the system to best guide the newbie.  Those people haven't spoken much.  Yet.  It will be interesting to see how that is portrayed or will it get left on the cutting room floor?

So ...  pay attention to any clear suggestions about how to bring change.  It is one thing to say there is a problem.  Prove it.  Does it exist in reality and if so, proof is needed as is it an individual or a systemic problem as the change would be handled totally different based on what it was (providing it is real).  

The other thing is ... if you aren't offering concrete suggestions on how to fix a real problem, well then, why aren't you any part of the nuts and bolts of the solution?  Because if you aren't active in the fix, you are part of the problem.

By the way - just as youtube has a down arrow button, so does NF.  It will be interesting to see if it is present.

(oh, I did like the take away the Sussex title and leave them with the DB one idea.  All that stationary and business cards down the tube.  At least printing the replacements keeps people employed)