Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News 3: February - May 2019


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is a clear ethical line that may have been crossed. Maybe they need to take the ethics training for public servants I had to take for my tax supported government job.
Just because other royals have been caught in ethical dilemmas in the past (most of whom did not make that mistake again) doesn’t mean it is okay.
And just because Meghan has been unfairly criticized an inordinate amount, and stories about her have been made up or exaggerated or spun negatively doesn’t mean when a mistake is made she and Harry should be given a pass.
There is a difference between being a member of a commercial enterprise or celebrity and being a public servant. Even if it is by an accident of birth, the working royals fall into the public servant category.
 
Ah I remember why I stopped coming into the Sussex threads now, blaming the birth of their cute baby for stepping back down the rabbit hole.

IMO this was a mistake, just as any royal promoting a friends for profit business will always be a mistake.

A few posts ago it was asked why is it wrong to promote this over Anxiety UK which also offers courses for a fee?
Well Anxiety UK is a not-for-profit charity that offers highly discounted courses and treatment for anxiety and mental health well being. It is recommended as a place to look for support by the NHS and is nation wide in its coverage. Prices start from as little as £12 for an annual subscription and treatments are offered for ££ prices. It seems to be away to offer treatment at a price most people can afford, sadly the UK NHS's offering of mental health support is poor and poorly funded so often people have to find their own support, this is a way to make it accessible to all. Anxiety UK is a charity registered with the UK charity commission so no one will profit from it, no one will get richer from people seeing it on the Sussex's instagram and purchasing its services.

On the other hand you have The Class, which is, from looking at the website, a for -profit gym class which is aimed at helping body and mind. Each class costs around $35 for an hour and classes sell out fast, so you can buy a $70 pass that helps you get to the front of the queue. In fairness the DM are being their usual extremist selfs saying the instagram post links straight to a £3,500 retreat but the essence of the story is true. It's a company run by a friend of Meghan so we can assume her friend would profit in the long run from any links , click throughs, that lead to a purchase.

The massive difference between the two is that one is a charity and one is a business run by a friend. Of course there is a difference and of course promoting your friends business is a problem, IMO even worse when you are doing so under the guise of metal health support. I'm sorry but Royals can not so obviously use an officially funded social media account to promote a friends business, whatever the details, what ever good intentions, no matter that its Meghan an Harry and they have a cute baby, they just can not do that. Saying that doesn't mean people don't like M&H, it means they hold them to the same standard they hold every other royal, and in fact every other publicly funded civil servant.
 
Last edited:
O-H Anglophile said:
There is a clear ethical line that may have been crossed. Maybe they need to take the ethics training for public servants I had to take for my tax supported government job.
Just because other royals have been caught in ethical dilemmas in the past (most of whom did not make that mistake again) doesn’t mean it is okay.
And just because Meghan has been unfairly criticized an inordinate amount, and stories about her have been made up or exaggerated or spun negatively doesn’t mean when a mistake is made she and Harry should be given a pass.
There is a difference between being a member of a commercial enterprise or celebrity and being a public servant. Even if it is by an accident of birth, the working royals fall into the public servant category.
Click to expand...
Some people have big problems with that idea. It's getting tiring for the normal royal watchers and the two camps of Meghan can do no wrong and Meghan can do no good should chill out and take a break.

It was a mistake. It happens. Everyone who in any way follows BRF knows that, we saw plenty of it. Now they should see that no mistake like this happens again.
 
tommy100 said:
... I'm sorry but Royals can not so obviously use an officially funded social media account to promote a friends business, whatever the details, what ever good intentions, no matter that its Meghan an Harry and they have a cute baby, they just can not do that. Saying that doesn't mean people don't like M&H, it means they hold them to the same standard they hold every other royal, and in fact every other publicly funded civil servant.
Click to expand...



The bolded part is not true. Meghan is being overly scrutinized by the media and a slew of naysayers, and held to an impossible standard, one that no one who matters in the royal family gives two figs about because they know her character and appreciate the difference she has made in Harry's life.

As I said before, if this is seen as something so egregious, the post will be removed and future postings highlighting helpful websites will be more carefully perused. We don't even know exact details about how the post was put together. Again, the biggest problem here is not that the friend's website was highlighted, the problem is this haughty and overdone reaction in the media and by casual observers, as if the posting is some kind of corporal offense!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's very interesting, that this whole thing started as "Look, Meghan and Harry's team made a mistake of including her personal friend in an Instagram post" and went to "maybe their team should be more careful" to "Meghan is under attack!!!".

Just because someone is pointing out a mistake done by a team, doesn't mean Meghan is being personally attacked.http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=2221172
 
MaiaMia_53 said:
The bolded part is not true. Meghan is being overly scrutinized by the media and a slew of naysayers, and held to an impossible standard, one that no one who matters in the royal family gives two figs about because they know her character and appreciate the difference she has made in Harry's life.

As I said before, if this is seen as something so egregious, the post will be removed and future postings highlighting helpful websites will be more carefully perused. We don't even know exact details about how the post was put together. Again, the biggest problem here is not that the friend's website was highlighted, the problem is this haughty and overdone reaction in the media and by casual observers, as if the posting is some kind of corporal offense!
Click to expand...

The first paragraph seems to be excusing a current ethical mistake by the Sussexes based on unwarranted criticism of the past and Meghan’s positive attributes.

Continued endorsement of friends’ commercial enterprises has the potential to be egregious. It is a big problem.

People that do not understand this problem should maybe read about public servants and ethics. The ethics line is much bolder for ethical public servants in these matters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
O-H Anglophile said:
Continued endorsement of friends’ commercial enterprises has the potential to be egregious. It is a big problem.

People that do not understand this problem should maybe read about public servants and ethics. The ethics line is much bolder for ethical public servants in these matters.
Click to expand...

Again, if it's that much of a serious problem, it will certainly be dealt with. There's a great deal going on in the royal firm at this time, as we all know, in preparation for a time no one is actually looking forward to. In fact, few people today have even experienced the passing of a beloved monarch. QE-II's reign has been extraordinary and record-breaking, and no one knows exactly what the future holds.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just want to wish The Duchess of Sussex a very Happy 1st Mother's Day! May she enjoy it with her new baby and her family. May she also heap praises upon her own mother, Ms. Doria Ragland.

For anyone else in the thread who is interested, Happy Mother's Day to you also.

Peace
 
MaiaMia_53 said:
The bolded part is not true. Meghan is being overly scrutinized by the media and a slew of naysayers, and held to an impossible standard, one that no one who matters in the royal family gives two figs about because they know her character and appreciate the difference she has made in Harry's life.

As I said before, if this is seen as something so egregious, the post will be removed and future postings highlighting helpful websites will be more carefully perused. We don't even know exact details about how the post was put together. Again, the biggest problem here is not that the friend's website was highlighted, the problem is this haughty and overdone reaction in the media and by casual observers, as if the posting is some kind of corporal offense!.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but respectfully I disagree. Promoting a friends business on a publicly funded and managed social media account is a problem and any other civil servant in a government ministry would be punished for doing such. So M&H (and actually their staff as they are paid to manage this) are being held to the same standard as 332,000 civil servants. There are also being held to the same standard as the Countess of Wessex was when she had her own PR company, the Earl of Wessex with his production company, Sarah Ferguson and her royal based enterprises, Peter Phillips for organising the Queen Jubilee lunch and another granddaughter-in-law of HM's family and their party business selling any royal themed merchandise. Each time the royals and business have flown to close to the sun the media have highlighted it.

I like H&M and respect they want to do good in the world, however, that does not mean I loose sight of objectivity - I do not think that means they are above making mistakes, no matter how good the initial intention. Like all the other royals they should expect the media to notice and make public that fact and deal with it in a sensible way e.g. on this occasion by ensuing future posts don't include for profit businesses and maybe removing the current link. The same would be expected and has been expected of other royals and H&M should be treated the same as other royals, I expect no more, no less. Yes the media are ridiculous in their coverage sometimes but, apart from a few over egged lines about being 4 clicks away from spending £3,500 etc, this article is based pretty much in fact and highlights, at best a mistake, at worst, poor practice from whoever is managing the instagram account.

Meghan is being held to the same standard as any new married in to the family, the difference was Kate lived in Anglesey for the first few years and let the fuss die down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe I amissing something. Harry nor Meghan promoted her friend's spa treatment. This post has been up for weeks and all she does is post inspirational quotes (like Meghan used to do).

I don't care for The Class and can see the issue of them being included but the over the top way they wrote about it makes me whatever about it. It just told me what the real issue was and it wasn't the fact they linked her to the OG page.


JuliannaVictoria said:
Well, it seems the DM is walking back on at least one of it's recent articles. However, the damage was already done, since we also had a back and forth sniping debate on this topic here also. This is why any news about Harry and Meghan that does not come from BP or SussexRoyal I take with a huge pile of salt.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7017171/Clarifications-corrections.html
Click to expand...

They lied? Is anyone shocked. I have really lost count how many of these retractions they have written about the Sussex in the last year. It is pathetic really how they go on for days with their lies on the cover page and then write a teeny tiny note in the back page saying "Oops my bad"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JuliannaVictoria said:
Just want to wish The Duchess of Sussex a very Happy 1st Mother's Day! May she enjoy it with her new baby and her family. May she also heap praises upon her own mother, Ms. Doria Ragland.

For anyone else in the thread who is interested, Happy Mother's Day to you also.

Peace
Click to expand...

Yes, very much so. Happy mother’s day To Meghan and the other mothers in this thread. While little Archie missed the U.K. Mother’s Day, he made it just in time for the US Mother’s Day.
 
ACO said:
Maybe I amissing something. Harry nor Meghan promoted her friend's spa treatment. This post has been up for weeks and all she does is post inspirational quotes (like Meghan used to do).
Click to expand...

Maybe I don't have things straight in my caffeine deprived head today but all this outrage is because there is a commercial (for profit) business that is seemingly being promoted by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in relation to their mental health campaign? Did I get that part right? A royal should *never* ever promote a commercial business or product or service. Right? Another point being that the owner of The Class is also a friend of Meghan's? Right? OK, if I have this all straight, would someone please steer me to understanding why its no problem for other royal incentives to have commercial backing and sponsorship which also gives for free advertising to stick in a person's mind.

Two examples I can think of is Harry's Invictus Games which strongly partners with Jaguar Land Rover. Even closer to the mental health incentive of Heads Together is the sponsorship of this incentive for the Virgin Money Race of 2014. We know the Bransons do have a friendly relationship with some of the royal family members. (Branson has sold his Virgin Money).

Am I missing something here?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Osipi said:
Maybe I don't have things straight in my caffeine deprived head today but all this outrage is because there is a commercial (for profit) business that is seemingly being promoted by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in relation to their mental health campaign? Did I get that part right? A royal should *never* ever promote a commercial business or product or service. Right? Another point being that the owner of The Class is also a friend of Meghan's? Right? OK, if I have this all straight, would someone please steer me to understanding why its no problem for other royal incentives to have commercial backing and sponsorship which also gives for free advertising to stick in a person's mind.

Two examples I can think of is Harry's Invictus Games which strongly partners with Jaguar Land Rover. Even closer to the mental health incentive of Heads Together is the sponsorship of this incentive for the Virgin Money Race of 2014. We know the Bransons do have a friendly relationship with some of the royal family members. (Branson has sold his Virgin Money).

Am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

I just read the post on the SussexRoyal insta page and it says this:

May is Mental Health Awareness Month in the US and May 13-19 is Mental Health Awareness Week in the UK.

To pay tribute to all of the incredible work people across the globe are doing in this space, we are hoping to shine a light on several Instagram accounts that promote mental well-being, mental fitness, body positivity, self-care, and the importance of human connection - to not just hear each other, but to listen...
Click to expand...

I have no idea what it said at first, but currently the only link to this website is the photo. That’s it... No names, no tags, nothing else but the photo that’s apparently linked to one of Meghan’s friends who has some mental health thing. Unless the post has changed, I would say this a storm in a teacup and people are (again) trying to find fault.

Edit: unless the DM article has also been changed, the text on the insta page hasn’t been. I can’t really find a difference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hallo girl said:
That is a good point, the protocols. That is what a number of people are not fully grasping. It is not a vendetta against Meghan or her team, we want her to succeed, but the problems appear to be arising due to a lack of understanding of the protocol of the BRF> very true, maybe that was the idea.... even if it was removed today, they have the publicity.
Click to expand...

What protocols has Meghan broken exactly? Where are they written? Who made up the protocols? Critics tend to resort to that terminology when there is no proof that she has broken anything.
 
BaiSoSo said:
What protocols has Meghan broken exactly? Where are they written? Who made up the protocols? Critics tend to resort to that terminology when there is no proof that she has broken anything.
Click to expand...

Its the unspoken, often imaginary, rules people drum up

Just because it hasn't been done before, doesn't mean there is a rule against it. Like having a social media account for instance. It just means that some of the royals have remained in the traditional era of the queen, and others have started progressing with modern times. No rules against it, just personal choice. The queen clearly has no issue with it, as she has appeared with Harry on social media for Invictus.


Archie's tiny feet posted on the Instagram with happy Mothers' Day wishes. :)

https://www.instagram.com/p/BxXS3l4pz2j/
Click to expand...

What a sweet photo. I love the added touch of the forget me nots in the back. Lovely nod to Diana.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just another clickbait article from the Daily Mail, not worth reading. Probably in a few days, they’ll put a clarification on the back page. There’s a reason why it’s one of the most unreliable papers.
 
Where was it ever insinuated that Meghan wants to be a "global leader"? As far as I know, she wants to make a difference globally and that's what her philanthropic work was centered on before she met Harry.

As I see it, both Harry and Meghan work together as partners since their marriage less than a year ago. The Foundation, the Commonwealth being the main focus for both with each of them having their individual incentives much like all the other royals do. I don't see a need for them to be "controlled" because there isn't one thing in either of their "royal incentives and duties" that hasn't been backed up by The Queen and The "Firm" or has the blessing and support of The Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

If the super stardom that is alluded to is the astonishing results that have come about because of these two people, I think we have to remember that its not Harry and Meghan, themselves, that are reaping the benefits but the charities and the projects they sponsor.

Then again, its the Fail once again and all tabloid fodder and its just another angle to criticize the couple and "bring them down a notch or two". Doesn't hold water with me at all.
 
JuliannaVictoria said:
Just want to wish The Duchess of Sussex a very Happy 1st Mother's Day! May she enjoy it with her new baby and her family. May she also heap praises upon her own mother, Ms. Doria Ragland.

For anyone else in the thread who is interested, Happy Mother's Day to you also.

Peace
Click to expand...
Happy Mother’s Day To Meghan and the other mothers:heartflower:
I love the photo https://www.instagram.com/p/BxXS3l4pz2j/
 
Osipi said:
Maybe I don't have things straight in my caffeine deprived head today but all this outrage is because there is a commercial (for profit) business that is seemingly being promoted by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in relation to their mental health campaign? Did I get that part right? A royal should *never* ever promote a commercial business or product or service. Right? Another point being that the owner of The Class is also a friend of Meghan's? Right? OK, if I have this all straight, would someone please steer me to understanding why its no problem for other royal incentives to have commercial backing and sponsorship which also gives for free advertising to stick in a person's mind.

Two examples I can think of is Harry's Invictus Games which strongly partners with Jaguar Land Rover. Even closer to the mental health incentive of Heads Together is the sponsorship of this incentive for the Virgin Money Race of 2014. We know the Bransons do have a friendly relationship with some of the royal family members. (Branson has sold his Virgin Money).

Am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

The difference is sponsorship of a charity by a company versus the Royal friend promoting the friend's business. The company can get publicity by donating to or sponsoring the charity, but the Royal cannot personally promote the company. Harry or the Royal Foundation cannot personally endorse Land Rover.

This may be a tempest in a teapot--I haven't actually seen the actual post with the alleged promotion. My posts on ethics are based on the promotional scenario that was described.
 
Last edited:
Love the baby feet! That boy has some big feet too...figure he will be tall!

The Forget Me Nots were lovely.

LaRae
 
"How will Harry's craving for a quiet life fit with Meghan's dream of being a global leader? The Prince's biographer Angela Levin asks if Buckingham Palace's attempt to control the superstar Sussexes can possibly succeed"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Sussexes.html


An interesting view from Harry's biographer
Click to expand...

Yes they want Archie to have a more normal life. That doesn't mean either parent is going to disappear from the limelight either. Certainly Edward and Sophie never did, though their kids are kept out.

Harry never said he wanted to abandon royal life all together. He simply needed to forge his own path. He isn't the future king, so he isn't needed for the more traditional roles. It is clear from his focus on things like Invictus, Sentebale and African parks, as well as his and Meghan's Commonwealth appointments, their path is going to lead them in a slightly more outward direction.

Both Harry and Meghan light up around kids. Hate all the focus is on Harry being the natural with kids, and not Meghan. It doesn't mean they aren't going to continue their work and path.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As someone who is not a Meghan naysayer, I do see the problem with her promoting her friends business and I also wish they would stop giving tabloids ammunition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
  • Sticky
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -
36 37 38
Replies
1K
Views
134K
Curryong
C
Marengo
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Notification - Additional Rules for the Wales Forum
Replies
0
Views
690
Marengo
Marengo
An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
King Felipe, Queen Letizia and Family, General News, Part 3
Replies
6
Views
2K
Blog Real
Blog Real
Somebody
Infanta Margrita and The Zurita Family General News: June 2024 -
Replies
1
Views
1K
iceflower
iceflower
Somebody
Family of the late Infanta Pilar, The Gomez Acebo Family, General News: June 2024 -
Replies
1
Views
3K
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom