Harry and Meghan Netflix documentary

[Karin1984]

I don't think that any of us can say that since we don't live his life. None of us has experienced what he has, but so many are quick to judge. How do you KNOW that what he is saying is not true? I can't imagine that kind of life. How horrible it is to constantly be stalked by photographers. Having the flash of the camera in your face while you are walking is unnerving. To have these rags say nasty things about your wife and children.

I think that the Royal family has completely botched how they deal with the press going back many decades. The queen was old school and believed in a "stiff upper lip", but she was from a different time. Especially with what happened with Diana, the palace should have put their foot down on what kind of access the press has to the Royal family. They never should have been allowed to say all of those nasty things about Megan and even going back to when Catherine started dating Will. By not putting a stop to it, it is like feeding a monster. And I do believe that Camilla(through her aids) is reporting to the tabloids personal conversations.
Why is no one asking who all of these "palace informants" are? The staff all signs NDAs and I can't see some low paid aid risking their future over some gossip. It is clear that this vitriol is coming from someone high up in the family.

Regardless of what anyone personally thinks of Harry or Megan, the reality is that none of us truly know what it is like to be in the spotlight and see the horrible things said about you day after day after day. Just because you have money, does not make you any less human. The way some people talk about H&M is vile. And why? Because they are speaking out against the tabloids and how their family chose not to protect them from it? As if anyone should be supporting these publications who's sole purpose is to create scandal and descent all just to make a rich man even richer. This whole thing was mismanaged by the Royal family right from the start. If they would have stood behind Harry and Megan, then none of this would have happened. He obviously feels betrayed by his family. I don't envy them that. I think that it is easy to be nasty to them because hey, he is rich and "spoiled" and so that makes him a "brat", forgetting that he is human like the rest of us.

The Royal Family has a way of dealing with the press. It has worked in the long run. There is, and according to me still is, no reason to change it. They didn't change it for Diana, for Fergie, for Camilla, for Catherine. Yes, it's unpleasant and there are terrible downsides to it. But the press is part of their lives.

And I'll say it once more: (until now) it is not WHAT Harry and Meghan do/say, it is HOW they do/say it.

Every article about the book basically starts with: Harry had a terrible youth due to Diana's death, but that's no reason to be petty about that your brother didn't want to talk to you in highschool. They all understand that Harry and Meghan wanted to leave. It's the way they did it.

Harry could have written a perfectly fine book about how he dealt with Diana's death. It's what people want to read. But it's all the little things about baldness and your brother not wanting to talk to you in highschool. All these details take away from the story they actually want to tell. And what could be a powerful story.

Also there is a sign of hypocrites. Meghan's father got exiled for selling personal stories about Meghan. They do the same now. They say the Royal Family didn't react to negative stories about them. They do the same now that 1,5 year after the Royal Family is racist because of Archie's skin colour, they say 'no that wasn't a racist remark'.

And that they take 0 accountibility, nothing is ever their fault. That ticks people off as well. Where there are two people fighting, two are to blame. Harry wants the royal family to apologize, why not be the bigger person and be the first to say 'I'm sorry'.

 

[Lilsia]

Though Lilsia, that again comes back to how much control does Harry wants or expected the RF to have over them throughout his life vs what the RF can realistically do

They have more control than they are letting on. And their way of not responding also makes it worse. If the Royal family had stood together, condemning the way the rags spoke about first Catherine, and then even worse, Meghan then it would have died down much quicker. They could have easily denounced the horrible things that were said but instead they stayed silent. I think that was the catalyst for Harry. He is obviously traumatized by what happened to his mom and when he saw the same thing happening to the woman he loved, I think that made him extremely angry. I believe him when he said that he had many meetings with his family to get them to help deal with press. I think that any one of us would feel betrayed when your family refuses to help you and stand united with you against that onslaught.

 

[Lilsia]

The Royal Family has a way of dealing with the press. It has worked in the long run. There is, and according to me still is, no reason to change it. They didn't change it for Diana, for Fergie, for Camilla, for Catherine. Yes, it's unpleasant and there are terrible downsides to it. But the press is part of their lives.

And I'll say it once more: (until now) it is not WHAT Harry and Meghan did, it is HOW they do it.

Every article about the book basically starts with: Harry had a terrible youth due to Diana's death, but that's no reason to be petty about that your brother didn't want to talk to you in highschool. They all understand that Harry and Meghan wanted to leave. It's the way they did it.

Harry could have written a perfectly fine book about how he dealt with Diana's death. It's what people want to read. But it's all the little things about baldness and your brother not wanting to talk to you in highschool. All these details take away from the story they actually want to tell. And what could be a powerful story.

Also there is a sign of hypocrites. Meghan's father got exiled for selling personal stories about Meghan. They do the same now. They say the Royal Family didn't react to negative stories about them. They do the same now that 1,5 year after the Royal Family is racist because of Archie's skin colour, they say 'no that wasn't a racist remark'.

I don't agree with you. I don't think that how they deal with the press is right. And we are not even talking about the legitimate news agencies here, we are talking about the scandal rags. They can easily use their influence to have the laws changed for this type of thing if they truly wanted to. There is absolutely no way to defend what the rags do. It is libelous and defamatory. But some believe that just because of their position, that they are open game. I don't agree with that, especially for the children and those who marry into the family. If you want to take your digs on the Queen/King, that is one thing, but leave everyone else out of it.

 

[Karin1984]

They have more control than they are letting on. And their way of not responding also makes it worse. If the Royal family had stood together, condemning the way the rags spoke about first Catherine, and then even worse, Meghan then it would have died down much quicker. They could have easily denounced the horrible things that were said but instead they stayed silent. I think that was the catalyst for Harry. He is obviously traumatized by what happened to his mom and when he saw the same thing happening to the woman he loved, I think that made him extremely angry. I believe him when he said that he had many meetings with his family to get them to help deal with press. I think that any one of us would feel betrayed when your family refuses to help you and stand united with you against that onslaught.

I believe Harry as well when he says they had many meetings about the press. The Royal Family only wanted to play the long game, as their experience said that works best. We will never know if it would in Meghan's case, because they left before that.

 

[Lilsia]

I believe Harry as well when he says they had many meetings about the press. The Royal Family only wanted to play the long game, as their experience said that works best. We will never know if it would in Meghan's case, because they left before that.

What "long game" are you referring to? The one where they ignore it and hope it goes away? That was the Queen's way and with all respect, the Queen truly was not living in modern times. Even when this whole thing started years ago, I thought that the palace handled this situation poorly. I never understood why they didn't condemn this kind of false statements. We have seen over and over how this kind of vitriol spreads like wild fire. And in this day and age, it is 100 times worse than it was in Diana's time. People are crazy. Them getting death threats because of what is written about them should never be tolerated.

 

[Karin1984]

What "long game" are you referring to? The one where they ignore it and hope it goes away? That was the Queen's way and with all respect, the Queen truly was not living in modern times. Even when this whole thing started years ago, I thought that the palace handled this situation poorly. I never understood why they didn't condemn this kind of false statements. We have seen over and over how this kind of vitriol spreads like wild fire. And in this day and age, it is 100 times worse than it was in Diana's time. People are crazy. Them getting death threats because of what is written about them should never be tolerated.

Yes, it was also the way for Diana, Fergie, Camilla and Catherine. They all started out with bad stories about them, but through hard work they all rose above that. The press turned.

Compare how nature works. After Winter comes Spring. The royal family knows there are ups and downs and the downs can take years.

And you have to think about the future. The press will always be writing negative stories. It is part of the free press. If you go against it once, you will have to go against it every time. Harry didn't want them to just react to the truly vile stories. He also wanted them to react to what the press said about Meghan's outfit on their first official date out as a couple and that Kate was the one who made Meghan cry.

While I agree with you that the climate is changing, I do think that "don't complain, don't explain" in the case of the royal family is the right motto.

It is the Streisand effect, the more Harry tries to control the media. The more the press draws attention to everything they do.

 

[barkley]

I think that any one of us would feel betrayed when your family refuses to help you and stand united with you against that onslaught.

yes i would feel betrayed BUT if i then felt that i needed, for the mental health, physical protection and well being of myself/spouse/children to step away and create a separate, secluded and private from the public and media life-i would not intentionally solicit and court further public and media attention/ coverage by calling continued and heightened attention to myself/my spouse/children by writing tell all books, doing autobiographical documentaries, making personal appearances, doing talk-show blasts and the like.

it has and continues to be possible for VERY HIGH PROFILE individuals to live very private lives. it entails not soliciting and calling attention to themselves every waking hour. i get that the u.k. is different but now that h&m live in the u.s. IT IS achievable-i lived for decades among the highest achieving celebrities and politicians where they were not constantly under media pressure. i now live nearby to one of the most currently popular places for similar individuals to purchase and build homes-again, you might see a small mention of a 'sighting' on the local news but they largely go absent attention UNLESS THEY start posting on their own social media and call attention (which at least one large attention hungry family is prone to).

But some believe that just because of their position, that they are open game. I don't agree with that, especially for the children and those who marry into the family. If you want to take your digs on the Queen/King, that is one thing, but leave everyone else out of it.

i agree that children should be off limits-but if you marry into a circus you know the clowns and sideshow that comes with it.

 

[NotUrsula]

Yep: if you want to fly under the radar, you shouldn't make a habit of doing aerobatics.

 

[EMom]

from his interview with tom bradby-

"We're six years into it now and I have spent every single year of those six doing everything I can privately to get through to my family. And the thing that is the saddest about this, Tom, is it never needed to be this way. It never needed to get to this point," he said. "I've had conversations, I've written letters, I've written emails, and everything is just, no, you, this is not what's happening. You are imagining it.' And that's really hard to take."

"And if it had stopped by the point that I fled my home country with my wife and my son fearing for our lives, then maybe this would've turned out differently," he said.


even if doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is NOT insanity it could drive one towards it, and hyper focusing on real or perceived wrong doings from external forces for years on end vs. moving away and moving on is just unhealthy. i fear for the children being raised in this environment.

Poetic justice would be for Archie or Lili to one day write a tell all book about their whining, narcissistic, victim-identifying, family-alienating, opportunistic parents.

 

[Karin1984]

New news! Harry didn't like that Diana's butler wrote a book about his experiences. It made his blood boil (The Express)

Below is deliciously ironic. Harry trusted this man, and now he was giving away all the personal details! It was a betrayal!

Prince Harry said that his mother Diana's former butler made his 'blood boil' when he released a book about her following her death.

In his controversial memoir Spare, The Duke of Sussex said Paul Burrell was 'milking' Diana's death for money when he published 'A Royal Duty' - which made a series of private revelations.

Mr Burrell, 64, served as a footman for the Queen and was later butler to Diana for 10 years until her death in 1997.

He said in December that the Queen, who died aged 96 in September, would be 'very upset and unhappy that Harry was saying so much, showing so many private things'.

Back when the book was published in 2003, Mr Burrell, who the duke does not name in the autobiography, drew strong criticism from the royal family.

A statement issued by the brothers from Clarence House accused Mr Burrell of 'a cold and overt betrayal'.
In response, Mr Burrell welcomed the suggestion of meeting with the princes to justify his book and tell them about parts of their mother's life they had not witnessed, adding: 'I'd love to give them a piece of my mind.'

In his memoir Spare, Harry describes how he learned of the book when he was working as an unpaid farmhand in Australia aged 19 in 2003 after leaving Eton.

He writes that he received a package from Buckingham Palace, which was full of memos from the Palace communications team about 'a delicate matter'.

'Mummy's former butler had penned a tell-all which actually told nothing,' he said.

'It was merely one man's self-justifying, self-centring version of events.

'My mother once called this butler a dear friend, trusted him implicitly. We did too. Now this.

'He was milking her disappearance for money. It made my blood boil.'
Harry writes that he wanted to fly home to 'confront' Mr Burrell but Charles and William talked him out of it, saying all they could do was 'issue a united condemnation'.

The duke also claims that he had 'nothing to do with the drafting' of the Clarence House statement and that he would have 'gone much further'.

On a meeting with Mr Burrell, Harry wrote: 'He wanted to give us a piece of his mind?'

Harry said he 'anxiously' waited for the meeting but it never happened, writing: 'I didn't know why; I presume the Palace quashed it. I told myself: Shame.

'I thought of that man as the one errant steer that got away that summer.'

 

[Karin1984]

It has finally happened: The New York Times is finally noticing H&M fatigue (Daily Mail)
In the last few years the New York Times have been criticized for constantly criticizing the UK.
They are/were supporters for H&M, Meghan wrote a piece about her miscarriage for the newspaper and every nugget about racism in the Royal Family was used as ammunition against the UK.

But now... They have written a piece that H&M's ways might have been a tad too much.

Now even US media turns on Prince Harry with New York Times branding his remarks 'repetitive and tiresome'​

• The paper’s former London correspondent Sarah Lyall yesterday wrote a piece
• It was headlined ‘Has Prince Harry’s Confessional Tour Run Its Course?’
• Asked whether the 'tide seems to be turning' in US attitudes towards Sussexes
• It comes after the paper developed a reputation for being critical of Royal Family

It has recently developed a reputation for being critical of the British Establishment.

So it may come as a surprise to learn that even the Left-wing US newspaper The New York Times has run an article suggesting that Americans may be tiring of Prince Harry’s complaints.

The paper’s former London correspondent Sarah Lyall yesterday wrote a piece headlined ‘Has Prince Harry’s Confessional Tour Run Its Course?’, asking whether the ‘tide seems to be turning’ in US attitudes towards the Sussexes. She said people in the US had a ‘soft spot for royals in exile’, but added that ‘there are only so many revelations the public can stomach’.

She asked if their ‘troubles’ had become ‘so repetitive or even tiresome’ that they had ‘eroded their personal brand’.

Miss Lyall wrote: ‘Once they have exhausted the topic of themselves, what is left for them to talk about?’

In 2021, Harry and Meghan did a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey for the CBS television network.

This was followed by the couple’s six-part Netflix documentary series which was released last month.

Now just weeks later the duke has been doing a series of TV interviews to promote his new memoir, Spare, including on ITV.

The New York Times article admitted that Harry, who was revealing private family details, was presenting a ‘stark contrast’ to William and Kate, who have publicly said ‘exactly nothing about any of this’.

It quoted a public relations expert, Jeffrey W. Schneider, who said there had been an ‘overload’ of Prince Harry and Meghan and questioned whether ‘maybe there is a natural limit to that’.

Crisis management expert Howard Bragman told the paper that ‘you can really only tell your story once’ and that their media activity ‘feels a little reality-television-y to me’.

Miss Lyall’s piece noted: ‘Something has changed, judging from the response so far.

‘Even in the United States, which has a soft spot for royals in exile and a generally higher tolerance than Britain does for redemptive stories about overcoming trauma and family dysfunction, there is a sense that there are only so many revelations the public can stomach.’

 

[Captain UP]

When Elizabeth died, Meghan should have been named Queen.

Listen to the people, England!

 

[BayouQueen]

I don't think that any of us can say that since we don't live his life. None of us has experienced what he has, but so many are quick to judge. How do you KNOW that what he is saying is not true? I can't imagine that kind of life. How horrible it is to constantly be stalked by photographers. Having the flash of the camera in your face while you are walking is unnerving. To have these rags say nasty things about your wife and children.

I think that the Royal family has completely botched how they deal with the press going back many decades. The queen was old school and believed in a "stiff upper lip", but she was from a different time. Especially with what happened with Diana, the palace should have put their foot down on what kind of access the press has to the Royal family. They never should have been allowed to say all of those nasty things about Meghan and even going back to when Catherine started dating Will. By not putting a stop to it, it is like feeding a monster. And I do believe that Camilla(through her aids) is reporting to the tabloids personal conversations.
Why is no one asking who all of these "palace informants" are? The staff all signs NDAs and I can't see some low paid aid risking their future over some gossip. It is clear that this vitriol is coming from someone high up in the family.

Regardless of what anyone personally thinks of Harry or Meghan, the reality is that none of us truly know what it is like to be in the spotlight and see the horrible things said about you day after day after day. Just because you have money, does not make you any less human. The way some people talk about H&M is vile. And why? Because they are speaking out against the tabloids and how their family chose not to protect them from it? As if anyone should be supporting these publications who's sole purpose is to create scandal and descent all just to make a rich man even richer. This whole thing was mismanaged by the Royal family right from the start. If they would have stood behind Harry and Meghan, then none of this would have happened. He obviously feels betrayed by his family. I don't envy them that. I think that it is easy to be nasty to them because hey, he is rich and "spoiled" and so that makes him a "brat", forgetting that he is human like the rest of us.

I really don't understand H&M's relationship with the press. On the one hand, they seem to hate them, but on the other hand, from the get-go, they kept juicy tidbits private, like christenings, secret god-parents, etc., only to sell or release these bits later on. So is it an effort or need to control? Or figuring that if anybody is gonna make money on them, it will darn well be themselves?

I truly do not understand this.

 

[HopperFan]

she obviously knew nothing of her.

if m. had any knowledge of grace's marital life she would have learned that grace was VERY mistaken, surprised and disappointed to learn that by becoming a royal she did not have the choice to pick and choose to selectively separately live her royal vs. hollywood life. it has been documented by multiple biographers that grace mistakenly believed that after she married her prince she could pick and choose the occasional pet movie project to do-only to learn that when one marries into a royal family one accepts the obligations and limitations as well as the benefits.

grace kelly did not act after she married in 1956. it wasn't until 1966, after all 3 of her children were born that she even established her own philanthropic foundation. with marriage into a royal family she became the royal designation she obtained with marriage. grace's philanthropic achievements and accolades were born of her own dedication and hard work. i believe m. thinks it's just a perk of 'the job'.

Only meant American turned Princess.

And naturally she would have thought the rest of the story would be of her doing.

 

[Karin1984]

I really don't understand H&M's relationship with the press. On the one hand, they seem to hate them, but on the other hand, from the get-go, they kept juicy tidbits private, like christenings, secret god-parents, etc., only to sell or release these bits later on. So is it an effort or need to control? Or figuring that if anybody is gonna make money on them, it will darn well be themselves?

I truly do not understand this.

Need to control, for sure. Harry especially feels like he has no control over his life and over what is being said about him / them.

And money second. To a certain degree I can agree with them that if everyone is making money of them, let the money go to them as well. There is some logic to it.

 

[Captain UP]

I really don't understand H&M's relationship with the press. On the one hand, they seem to hate them, but on the other hand, from the get-go, they kept juicy tidbits private, like christenings, secret god-parents, etc., only to sell or release these bits later on. So is it an effort or need to control? Or figuring that if anybody is gonna make money on them, it will darn well be themselves?

I truly do not understand this.

I once saw an extremely famous actor from a massive TV show sitting alone in an airport. He had set himself up in a restaurant where he could be seen by everyone walking by- at a high top table facing out towards the concourse.

And he proceeded to scowl and shake his head whenever someone greeted him or even glanced at him.

This remind me a lot of what these two are doing right now. So what is it? I guess narcissism and power. They get full control. They get to have it both ways.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I agree with Kate on Charlotte’s dress. It’s too baggy.

Like Meghan's dress...baggy and ill fitting Her wedding dress was hideous. I've seen girls in discount house (gowns) look more beautiful. Itdoesn't seen like Megs takes advice from anyone

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

I agree with “The Cut” characterizing Harry’s public "memoirs" as “pure chaos.” It sounds familiar though. Diana had had a lot of chaos too.

 

[Karin1984]

Harry's PR team has worked very hard. Also the frontpage of People Magazine.

https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...ccount-good-bad-everything-between-interview/

The one thing the tabloids pick on is that he says that he had to tell his full story in Afghanistan because veterans should talk more about their experiences.

Yes, we agree with that, Harry. But that doesn't need to include your killcount and you do not put that somewhere everyone can read it. Including your enemy.

 

[RoseGold]

And we are not even talking about the legitimate news agencies here, we are talking about the scandal rags. They can easily use their influence to have the laws changed for this type of thing if they truly wanted to. There is absolutely no way to defend what the rags do.

Huh? I can "defend" what the scandal rags did. The press made fun of her clothes, called her lazy, didn't fawn over her dumb cookbooks and fashion crap, made fun of her job and her background, said some rude stuff, and some morons on Twitter are racist. That's what I learned from Netflix was "destroying" Meaghan. Opinions. Maybe dumb or rude opinions, but just opinions. Someone was supposed to change the laws so you can't make fun of royals and their very dumb job? The UK was supposed to shut down racist idiots on Twitter?

A lot of the bad press they earned, like the private jet stuff. They're straight up hypocrites, and still are. Haven't heard a peep about the jets in any of this media coverage, and poor Kate is still having to fly commercial because of it.