The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 10: August 2024 -


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
People are obviously reading them.
Once again, the British Tabloid are showing that they have no insight or knowledge about anything related to Harry and Meghan:

Didn't the Daily Fail sent some reporter to California to find out about Harry's life? The article has an obvious click bait title that says "What does Harry do all day?" But if you read the article, it shows the reporter does not know either. They did not manage to speak with anyone working with Harry, just random people. Did they reach out to Oprah? She certainly did not tell them that Meghan was going to do this book event!

The tabloids were caught flat footed when Harry showed up for his uncle's funeral. The Spencer family knew but they don't talk. Contrast this to when Harry came over to see Charles after his cancer diagnosis. You can't help but to notice how much detail that visit was reported: such as how long the visit was, who was in the room.

Clearly the leak is not coming from Harry or the Spencers!
 
Not sure where to put this, but Givenchy have just announced Sarah Burton as their new Creative Director. Her first collection will be shown March 2025.

I loved almost everything Sarah designed for Kate but the Givenchy Meghan connection might make it difficult for Kate to continue wearing her and ditto for Meghan with the Kate connection (though it was more a Claire Weight Keller personal connection for Meghan.)
 
Once again, the British Tabloid are showing that they have no insight or knowledge about anything related to Harry and Meghan:

Didn't the Daily Fail sent some reporter to California to find out about Harry's life? The article has an obvious click bait title that says "What does Harry do all day?" But if you read the article, it shows the reporter does not know either. They did not manage to speak with anyone working with Harry, just random people. Did they reach out to Oprah? She certainly did not tell them that Meghan was going to do this book event!

The tabloids were caught flat footed when Harry showed up for his uncle's funeral. The Spencer family knew but they don't talk. Contrast this to when Harry came over to see Charles after his cancer diagnosis. You can't help but to notice how much detail that visit was reported: such as how long the visit was, who was in the room.

Clearly the leak is not coming from Harry or the Spencers!
Yet who told the papers that Harry stayed at Althorp? And what do you make of the articles in The Telegraph and The Times about Harry not soing much all day?
 
Once again, the British Tabloid are showing that they have no insight or knowledge about anything related to Harry and Meghan:

Didn't the Daily Fail sent some reporter to California to find out about Harry's life? The article has an obvious click bait title that says "What does Harry do all day?" But if you read the article, it shows the reporter does not know either. They did not manage to speak with anyone working with Harry, just random people. Did they reach out to Oprah? She certainly did not tell them that Meghan was going to do this book event!

The tabloids were caught flat footed when Harry showed up for his uncle's funeral. The Spencer family knew but they don't talk. Contrast this to when Harry came over to see Charles after his cancer diagnosis. You can't help but to notice how much detail that visit was reported: such as how long the visit was, who was in the room.

Clearly the leak is not coming from Harry or the Spencers!
Simple Answer, Do not read it then.It is not worth getting worked up about. People will believe what they want to believe. I couldn’t care less what Harry does all day, some of us have real issues to contend with.
As for leaks, well !!
 
Not sure where to put this, but Givenchy have just announced Sarah Burton as their new Creative Director. Her first collection will be shown March 2025.

I loved almost everything Sarah designed for Kate but the Givenchy Meghan connection might make it difficult for Kate to continue wearing her and ditto for Meghan with the Kate connection (though it was more a Claire Weight Keller personal connection for Meghan.)

I don't see any association, financial or familiar, between Sarah Burton, Meghan, Givenchy and princess Kate that would prevent the princess to stop using a garment from Givenchy. Is not like Meghan gets in direct deposit in California a percentage of any Givenchy sales in the UK. For Burton to be promoted to such a high position she has to know how to separate work from acquaintances, and in the case of these celebrities no one is really friends with anyone. They just do business with one another, not sleepovers at Montecito for a Rodeo Drive shopping together nor getting together with Kate for a cup of tea. Basically for a celebrity, Sarah Burton is like an employee that provides a service as any designer do.


Simple Answer, Do not read it them. It is not worth getting worked up about. People will believe what they want to believe. I couldn’t care less what Harry does all day, some of us have real issues to contend with.
As for leaks, well !!
That's the BEST advice I've seen in RFs. This place is like the royal version of the Associated Press, and we have no time to give it to the yellow press tabloids and their agenda.



And re the Netflix Polo Series from Archwell Productions and Boardwalk Pictures the later has a lot of experience producing miniseries and I assume, as we've seen Archwell do, they will do all the heavy lifting. Meghan will be doing red carpets, picking up awards or doing interviews about her experience coordinating compassionate social justice and fighting systemic discrimination during the game between the horses of different breeds.
Hopefully Harry gets the plus one invite on these events.

Kidding aside, I would have preferred a documentary on how education, or lack of access to it, is a key factor in communities still struggling in poverty despite of decades of social justice celebrities, and politicians saying something will be done about it this year or the next.
Now that would be a documentary by Archwell more worth watching than a polo match featuring Harry and Nacho's bromance again. If they spent the money on this documentary about Polo, we could assume Nacho will have lots of camera time on it.


ps. I was checking out the text box options on the toolbar above and finally discovered how to make a line to separate subjects! :)

 
Last edited:
I have no interest in the documentary (about Polo). But I admit I am curious about what sort of response it gets.
I don't know anyone who plays, or who has ever attended a match. But perhaps that might be an inducement for some viewers who'll want to see what it's like? I guess we'll find out.
 
I have no interest in the documentary (about Polo). But I admit I am curious about what sort of response it gets.
I don't know anyone who plays, or who has ever attended a match. But perhaps that might be an inducement for some viewers who'll want to see what it's like? I guess we'll find out.
I don't expect it to be a hit on Netflix. There aren't that many polo fans out there, especially in the US (at least not as a share of the total typical Netflix audience).

Again, Archewell can sell this type of programming only by hinting at a royal connection. For example, many people may watch it because they expect Harry, who is a polo player, to show up therein hanging out with his "mates" and so on. I wouldn't be surprised if the documentary were focused more on the social life and jet-setting around professional polo than on the sport itself. Even so, it is still targeted at a very niche audience in my humble opinion.
 
Polo seems very much an elite sport, so while it is clearly an interest of Harry, it seems to target a rather high society niche (and some Harry fans).

in which countries is it played somewhat regularly? I am aware of the UK and Argentina but I assume there are other countries as well where this is a favorite pastime of some members of the upper class.
 
in which countries is it played somewhat regularly? I am aware of the UK and Argentina but I assume there are other countries as well where this is a favorite pastime of some members of the upper class.

Polo is also played in the USA, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Dubai, China, Chile and Spain.

I think a series like this could do well if they could find a 'ridiculous rich people drama' aspect to concentrate on. I'm sure some people would happily tune in for that.
 
It's extremely popular in Argentina, and hasn't got the elitist image there that it has in the UK, but it's very much a minority sport everywhere else that it's played.
 
The Daily Mail is reporting that Harry and Meghan may be going on another 'tour' before the end of the year. No word on destination yet, but Lesotho and Botswana are being mentioned.

 
The Daily Mail is reporting that Harry and Meghan may be going on another 'tour' before the end of the year. No word on destination yet, but Lesotho and Botswana are being mentioned.

I have often wondered why H&M are undertake these tours and what they are trying to achieve. Is it a particular cause they are trying to highlight (eg, mental health, or empowering women or AIDS), is it to drive the local economy of the country or region they are visiting, or is it simply to collect footage for a documentary to be produced for a streamer? Or perhaps, they are just trying to mimic tours held on behalf of the British government who they no longer represent? don't have any clear answers in my mind, but I suspect nor do H&M!
 
I have often wondered why H&M are undertake these tours and what they are trying to achieve. Is it a particular cause they are trying to highlight (eg, mental health, or empowering women or AIDS), is it to drive the local economy of the country or region they are visiting, or is it simply to collect footage for a documentary to be produced for a streamer? Or perhaps, they are just trying to mimic tours held on behalf of the British government who they no longer represent? don't have any clear answers in my mind, but I suspect nor do H&M!
I personally believe that it's a combination of obtaining footage for future documentaries while doing some charity related visits. They tend to mimic the royal/British Goverment tours because that's the plan that they (primarily Harry) are accustomed to.
 
The Daily Mail is reporting that Harry and Meghan may be going on another 'tour' before the end of the year. No word on destination yet, but Lesotho and Botswana are being mentioned.

Lesotho would be cool as Prince Harry founded Sentebale with Prince Seeiso of Lesotho. Maybe the focus will be specifically on Sentebale and people living with HIV in general.

Then again, the tabloids were positive that Prince Harry wouldn't go to his uncle's funeral, so I'll take their reporting with a grain of salt.
 
There is a more logical reason for this tour - Harry's charity, Sentebale, operates in both of those countries. Maybe he feels it's time to check in and catch up with what's going on.
That makes sense. Will be interesting if he will still be the plus one to his wife, the royal Duchess, when she visits his charity.
 
Once again, the British Tabloid are showing that they have no insight or knowledge about anything related to Harry and Meghan:

Didn't the Daily Fail sent some reporter to California to find out about Harry's life? The article has an obvious click bait title that says "What does Harry do all day?" But if you read the article, it shows the reporter does not know either. They did not manage to speak with anyone working with Harry, just random people. Did they reach out to Oprah? She certainly did not tell them that Meghan was going to do this book event!

The tabloids were caught flat footed when Harry showed up for his uncle's funeral. The Spencer family knew but they don't talk. Contrast this to when Harry came over to see Charles after his cancer diagnosis. You can't help but to notice how much detail that visit was reported: such as how long the visit was, who was in the room.

Clearly the leak is not coming from Harry or the Spencers!
I suspect that both sides provide information to the tabloids. But I don't think it follows that the palace must be the culprit based on the news about Harry's visit to Charles. It could be that Harry didn't leak information about staying with his uncle but talked about the visit with the King. However, I think that the media figured out how long the visit lasted because they saw Harry coming and going. I am not sure that anyone else knows for sure who was in the room nor any details about the discussion.

What we know for an absolute fact: Harry has publicly discussed private family matters.
 
Last edited:
I'm intrigued to see how the Polo doc plays out - its not exactly a "woke" sport, its very tough on the horses and also very very elite and for the upper class. I can't see it having wide appeal, and that is before feeling people may have about the Sussex's.

The DM article was basically just a copy of one much more in depth one the Times or Telegraph had. It used a lot of the same info but not the direct quotes from 'sources close to Harry' which (And I feel it was more likely the Telegraph) seemed legit.
 
There is an article on the People website about Harry and his upcoming 40th birthday. Interestingly, the original version of the article included the phrase "In an exclusive email to People, Harry says..." but this line has since been changed, and now reads "Harry tells People via his spokesperson..."

So, he's definitely chatting to People magazine, which I consider on the same level as a tabloid. And chatting to them quite directly, if that original version of the article is anything to go on...

Original Version
Amended Version
 
There is an article on the People website about Harry and his upcoming 40th birthday. Interestingly, the original version of the article included the phrase "In an exclusive email to People, Harry says..." but this line has since been changed, and now reads "Harry tells People via his spokesperson..."

So, he's definitely chatting to People magazine, which I consider on the same level as a tabloid. And chatting to them quite directly, if that original version of the article is anything to go on...

Original Version
Amended Version
Reading the article reminds me of probably the biggest success of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex leaving the British Royal Family: the privacy of their children. No one can demand access to them based on being the ones paying The Sussexes' paycheck, and for Harry and Meghan, that's probably the biggest relief.
 
Reading the article reminds me of probably the biggest success of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex leaving the British Royal Family: the privacy of their children. No one can demand access to them based on being the ones paying The Sussexes' paycheck, and for Harry and Meghan, that's probably the biggest relief.
I am not sure I understand your post with regards access to the children. Nobody should ever be forced to display their children.
 
No-one is forced to display their children, but it's generally accepted that, as there's interest in royal children, photos of their christenings, their first day at school, etc, should be released to the media. No-one is demanding this, but it's what generally happens.
 
As an example, when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to present Prince Archie a couple of days after his birth, heck the fact they announced it several hours after he was born rather than immediately announcing it and presenting him within a couple of hours after his birth, many people got upset. For the days between Prince Archie's birth and his presentation to the public, people complained about not seeing him the minute he was born, accused the Sussexes of hiding him, saying that their tax dollars paid for their lifestyle, so they have the right to see him, etc...

Now, of course, we can't 100% say what would have happened if Harry and Meghan would have stayed working royal...but they still would have been provided for, at least indirectly, by the British people, and a subset of them would always feel entitled to access to their children, especially if it's common for other young working royals to provide yearly updates of their children to the public.

In the United States, they're not being funded by the American people, they don't have the thing that made them interesting to the American people in the first place (their identity as working royals), there are much bigger celebrities, and even then, interest in most celebrities outside of their works have gone down significantly in the last decades, let alone their families.

Therefore, IMHO, I feel that Archie and Lili will have more privacy as the children of private American citizens than they would have as the children of working members of the British Royal Family, at least until they were adults.
 
Reading the article reminds me of probably the biggest success of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex leaving the British Royal Family: the privacy of their children. No one can demand access to them based on being the ones paying The Sussexes' paycheck, and for Harry and Meghan, that's probably the biggest relief.
No one is bothered that they don’t show their children and they were hardly seen when they were in the U.K anyways. No one bothers about the Wales’s children, they show their children in appropriate situations, but for the most part, they are left alone.
 
There is an article on the People website about Harry and his upcoming 40th birthday. Interestingly, the original version of the article included the phrase "In an exclusive email to People, Harry says..." but this line has since been changed, and now reads "Harry tells People via his spokesperson..."

So, he's definitely chatting to People magazine, which I consider on the same level as a tabloid. And chatting to them quite directly, if that original version of the article is anything to go on...

Original Version
Amended Version
Very interesting, either a big error on People's part or not and a sign of just how much Harry and Meghan do work with some tabloids when they want to.
 
As an example, when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to present Prince Archie a couple of days after his birth, heck the fact they announced it several hours after he was born rather than immediately announcing it and presenting him within a couple of hours after his birth, many people got upset. For the days between Prince Archie's birth and his presentation to the public, people complained about not seeing him the minute he was born, accused the Sussexes of hiding him, saying that their tax dollars paid for their lifestyle, so they have the right to see him, etc...
The issue was mostly about providing false information: telling that Meghan was about to give birth when Archie had already been born.

Now, of course, we can't 100% say what would have happened if Harry and Meghan would have stayed working royal...but they still would have been provided for, at least indirectly, by the British people, and a subset of them would always feel entitled to access to their children, especially if it's common for other young working royals to provide yearly updates of their children to the public.

In the United States, they're not being funded by the American people, they don't have the thing that made them interesting to the American people in the first place (their identity as working royals), there are much bigger celebrities, and even then, interest in most celebrities outside of their works have gone down significantly in the last decades, let alone their families.

Therefore, IMHO, I feel that Archie and Lili will have more privacy as the children of private American citizens than they would have as the children of working members of the British Royal Family, at least until they were adults.
I don't think there is much of a difference. They were in line to the throne and they still are. It is not because their parents are working or non-working members of the royal family that they are relevant to the public; they are relevant because they are in line to the throne (and pretty high up: 6th and 7th currently; potentially 5th and 6th when William ascends the throne. If by the time Archie and Lilibet want to get married, their uncle is king and their cousins don't have children of their own, both of them would require permission to get married from their uncle (something that is nowadays only required of the first 6 in line)!
 
Back
Top Bottom