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

[Hallo girl]

I do not find anything on social media dignified, they are all as bad as each other.

 

[TLLK]

The Hollywood reporter are standing by their story.

I am not surprised because they likely have the proof from the former staffers. This story, like Valentine Low's, would not have been released if Hollywood Reporter didn't have "receipts."

 

[HenRach Dominion]

I do not find anything on social media dignified, they are all as bad as each other.

Thank you! The internet is filled with bad actors who thrive off of being acknowledged by either the people they stan or "haters" of those people. Acknowledging them in any way, even to condemn them, validates their hateful actions and encourages them to be more aggressive with regards to them.

The Sussexes and the BRF are doing the right thing by ignoring them.

This is why I like how Prince Harry is mainly focusing on protecting youth mental health as they navigate the internet and the, albeit harder, goal of getting better moderation of social media (at least to my understanding).

 

[kalnel]

I am not surprised because they likely have the proof from the former staffers. This story, like Valentine Low's, would not have been released if Hollywood Reporter didn't have "receipts."

Both claims are probably true — some former staffers were happy and some weren’t. Some described “Duchess Difficult” and some liked her.

 

[TLLK]

Both claims are probably true — some former staffers were happy and some weren’t. Some described “Duchess Difficult” and some liked her.

I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[carlota]

The Duke of Sussex spoke about the impact of social media on mental health of children during the Clinton Global Initiative Day 2 in New York City today, September 24:


** gettyimages gallery ** rex gallery **

Prince Harry reveals which family members feature on his phone lock screen

The Duke of Sussex delivered a passionate speech in New York

www.hellomagazine.com

a worthy cause for sure, very related to their alleged experiences, and i like that they are involved in this. it is so important. however, like all of the sussexes initiatives, it is half baked. they created the 'parents network' via archewell, which sounds like it would be something lofty, yet the link only has a few guides for parents on social media, and then links to existing resources for parents from other organisations. let's hope they put more effort into this.

Resources | The Archewell Foundation Parents’ Network

archewell.org

 

[soapstar]

The Daily Beast has another article about Meghan’s behavior with staff. Some quotes:

one courtier who worked for Meghan and Prince Harry as part of their service at the palace told The Daily Beast: “There have been plenty of difficult royals over the years, and I do think that after the ill-feeling of Megxit (when Harry and Meghan left the royal family), Meghan’s bad moments were amplified and distorted and blown out of proportion. Princess Margaret regularly got people to hold out their hands to use as ashtrays, for example, and that’s just laughed off as hilarious eccentricity. Look at Prince Andrew he was unbelievable to the staff.

That said, there definitely were bad, very bad, even psycho moments. I witnessed people being chewed up in person and over the phone and made to feel like s--t.”

“Another person who worked with Meghan in the run-up to her wedding told The Daily Beast: “I always thought she was a classic narcissist and getting her staff to tell a magazine how amazing she is only confirms that in my mind. She is lovely when it is all going her way but a demon when the worm turns.”

Another source told The Daily Beast a story of a florist who was “screamed at down the phone” for half an hour after they posted an insignificant detail online about a bouquet they were working on for Meghan (without identifying that Meghan was the client).

They vowed never to work with her again, despite the prestige of having her as a client. If you were working for her, you were often treated like a tradesman who could be treated like s--t.”

 

[Durham]

Fair enough.

At the end of the day, however, Prince Harry or the Duke of Sussex or Henry Mountbatten-Windsor was born special. He's admired or criticized for things he's done as an adult, but none of those things made him special in the first place. There are many people who have done the things that he's done with no fanfare. As soon as he was born to the future king of the United Kingdom, Harry was born special.

Harry was born into a society that places one family above all others due to the actions of their ancestors and was lucky enough to be born into that family. Just being born into that family made him revered, scrutinized, desired for different reasons, and influential.

Many have argued that being born into such privilege means that there's a greater responsibility to be the best person he can be to honor that privilege...but he never had to do anything to gain that privilege in the first place. He was literally born into it. He could have been a murderer or a drug trafficker and he would still be special because he's the son of a king, and the society he grew up in will not undermine the specialness of the one family on top for the sake of one person.

Harry will always be a prince. He will always be the son of a king. He will always be significant as long as the British Royal Family is still an institution that places value on those born within it. And people will forever want to associate with Harry regardless of his relationship with the BRF.

Luckily, Prince Harry is using his platform to bring more eyes and hopefully support to mental health in children and cyberbullying, two very important causes that will hopefully lead to discovering ways to interact with the internet, as ubiquitous as it is, in healthier ways.

This sounds very odd to British ears. Nobody thinks members of the rf are “special”. Maybe some us still think that the monarch is but not his relatives. They’re just people. I don’t know anyone who thinks the rf is “above all others”. I really don’t. Quite the reverse actually.

As for being a prince, well who knows what might happen in the future.

And ideas about about what the brf is for are very recent in historical terms. Really a late c19th & early c20th construct than reached it’s apogee under the late queen. I suspect the future will be very different & centred exclusively around the monarch, the heir & maybe their spouses.

 

[Maryrose]

I just find it a bit odd that THR article is coming out now. Seems to be a distraction from all that Prince Harry has going on in NYC this week.

 

[Hallo girl]

It is a shame that attention is being diverted, this is Harry at his best. He does appear more comfortable with this work, and it shows. He does not appear as comfortable in the celebrity circuit.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

It would be nice for the Duchess of Sussex to not give some people more reason to hate her or accuse her of ruining her husband's life.

 

[TLLK]

I just find it a bit odd that THR article is coming out now. Seems to be a distraction from all that Prince Harry has going on in NYC this week.

But the original article was released on Sept. 12, 2024 which was prior to Prince Harry's birthday on Sept. 15.

Why Hollywood Keeps Quitting on Harry and Meghan

Plus, how an Echo glitch turned Alexa into a “commie operative” and Dimitri, the million-dollar maitre ‘d, rides off into the Sunset (Tower).

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[soapstar]

Plus the US Weekly story came out yesterday, so if the Sussexes were worried about Harry’s trip being overshadowed, then it’s odd that they would allow their employees to speak while he’s on this trip. The US Weekly story has done nothing but fuel more headlines. So instead of the focus being on Harry and his work, it’s on Meghan.

 

[HRHHermione]

Plus the US Weekly story came out yesterday, so if the Sussexes were worried about Harry’s trip being overshadowed, then it’s odd that they would allow their employees to speak while he’s on this trip. The US Weekly story has done nothing but fuel more headlines. So instead of the focus being on Harry and his work, it’s on Meghan.

Prolonging the story with all of the rebuttals to it is really not great PR strategy and makes the story come off as both more credible and more significant.

 

[tommy100]

This shows their immaturity when it comes to the press IMO.
Its an argument they can not win because for every staff member who says they are lovely to work for the media will find two more to say they don’t treat them well. If they have encouraged staff to speak in their defence its only made what would have been a forgotten article turn into a whole media whoohaa or claim and counter claim. It shows their are bothered by it so the press are more likely to keep going with it.
It also strikes me as odd they choose an issue that is, rather like their claims about the RF, very much a question of interpretation and how people take things. Some people may find them good to work for others not for various reasons- its a very subjective thing. Some people like being given firm instructions, others see it as being bossed about. It’s not something black and white, right or wrong that one bit of evidence will prove otherwise for.
I suspect there are people who I am line manager for who say I’m wonderful and others who say I’m awful- its subjective so pointless to try to argue over.

IMO the most likely scenario is that they struggle most with those staff whose roles it is to tell them directly and straight what they should do. Hence these are the roles they seem to have a high turn over from. Those who get on with them may well be the more junior staff who are not in advisory roles but carrying out more direct jobs eg admin support, household support etc. I suspect its those staff who they should be able to have robust conversations and debates with to get the best advice from whom have the issues as I suspect neither Harry or Meghan are particularly good at taking advice or having different ways of doing things suggested to them.

 

[Hallo girl]

Prolonging the story with all of the rebuttals to it is really not great PR strategy and makes the story come off as both more credible and more significant.

It provides the media with an excuse to publish stories, even if it is just quoting articles from other outlets.

 

[Hallo girl]

This shows their immaturity when it comes to the press IMO.
Its an argument they can not win because for every staff member who says they are lovely to work for the media will find two more to say they don’t treat them well. If they have encouraged staff to speak in their defence its only made what would have been a forgotten article turn into a whole media whoohaa or claim and counter claim. It shows their are bothered by it so the press are more likely to keep going with it.
It also strikes me as odd they choose an issue that is, rather like their claims about the RF, very much a question of interpretation and how people take things. Some people may find them good to work for others not for various reasons- its a very subjective thing. Some people like being given firm instructions, others see it as being bossed about. It’s not something black and white, right or wrong that one bit of evidence will prove otherwise for.
I suspect there are people who I am line manager for who say I’m wonderful and others who say I’m awful- its subjective so pointless to try to argue over.

IMO the most likely scenario is that they struggle most with those staff whose roles it is to tell them directly and straight what they should do. Hence these are the roles they seem to have a high turn over from. Those who get on with them may well be the more junior staff who are not in advisory roles but carrying out more direct jobs eg admin support, household support etc. I suspect its those staff who they should be able to have robust conversations and debates with to get the best advice from whom have the issues as I suspect neither Harry or Meghan are particularly good at taking advice or having different ways of doing things suggested to them.

That is an excellent summary of the situation.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

This sounds very odd to British ears. Nobody thinks members of the rf are “special”. Maybe some us still think that the monarch is but not his relatives. They’re just people. I don’t know anyone who thinks the rf is “above all others”. I really don’t. Quite the reverse actually.

As for being a prince, well who knows what might happen in the future.

And ideas about about what the brf is for are very recent in historical terms. Really a late c19th & early c20th construct than reached it’s apogee under the late queen. I suspect the future will be very different & centred exclusively around the monarch, the heir & maybe their spouses.

Thank you for clearing a lot of things up.

So the current monarch and maybe their direct heir are seen as significant, at least in Great Britain. Everyone else are just regular people who just so happen to be related to one or two people who are generally significant.

Harry's just a regular guy who happens to be the son of the King of the United Kingdom. Since he's neither the king himself nor his direct heir, how he carries himself and whom he associates with isn't reflective on anything beyond himself and his own causes since only HM The King's (and to a lesser extant, HRH The Prince of Wales) only really matter in the eyes of the British public.

So the people who claimed that Harry was only getting invited to things because of the BRF are incorrect, because that would imply a significance with regards to being a part of said family that doesn't exist. That argument could be made if he was his father (the king) or his brother (the heir), but he's neither. Harry, therefore, is being invited to places like Nigeria, Colombia, and the UN General Assembly for his own merits since no members of the BRF are significant outside of monarch and heir.

Also, as a normal guy, he's free to continue looking out for his, his family's, and his organizations' best interest without regards to institutions he wasn't a significant part of in the first place. He can also champion causes and people and political beliefs that he believes because doing so only reflects on him.

Thank you once again for the clarity. I often forget that the opinions within this forum are often not reflected in real life.

 

[Hallo girl]

I do not totally agree with your summary, unfortunately Harry has lost the love and respect of a great deal of the British People, but a title can take you a great deal of places, whether you have influence or not within the circle. Let us look at the Duke and Duchess of Windsor as an example. They travelled the world as guests of honour at parties, he had no influence or contact with the Crown.
There are people who are impressed with titles, especially royal titles.

 

[GondorHasNoPants]

Prolonging the story with all of the rebuttals to it is really not great PR strategy and makes the story come off as both more credible and more significant.

Meghan seems to have a hard time knowing when to let go. Which I understand, especially when it's her personal reputation at stake. But sometimes, continuing to debate the point just makes things worse in the long run.

And it's nice that some of her employees are coming out to defend her. But all of them need to realize that their experience is not universal, and just because she has been nothing but lovely to them does not mean she has not been cruel or unprofessional to others.

 

[FigTree]

Thank you for clearing a lot of things up.

So the current monarch and maybe their direct heir are seen as significant, at least in Great Britain. Everyone else are just regular people who just so happen to be related to one or two people who are generally significant.

Harry's just a regular guy who happens to be the son of the King of the United Kingdom. Since he's neither the king himself nor his direct heir, how he carries himself and whom he associates with isn't reflective on anything beyond himself and his own causes since only HM The King's (and to a lesser extant, HRH The Prince of Wales) only really matter in the eyes of the British public.

So the people who claimed that Harry was only getting invited to things because of the BRF are incorrect, because that would imply a significance with regards to being a part of said family that doesn't exist. That argument could be made if he was his father (the king) or his brother (the heir), but he's neither. Harry, therefore, is being invited to places like Nigeria, Colombia, and the UN General Assembly for his own merits since no members of the BRF are significant outside of monarch and heir.

Also, as a normal guy, he's free to continue looking out for his, his family's, and his organizations' best interest without regards to institutions he wasn't a significant part of in the first place. He can also champion causes and people and political beliefs that he believes because doing so only reflects on him.

Thank you once again for the clarity. I often forget that the opinions within this forum are often not reflected in real life.

Harry is famous for being famous people essentially. He is famous for being a member of a famous family. Son of a King. Brother of a future King. Very famous mother. So people make a fuss. He is neither significant or getting things on his own merit. He is in a hard place.

 

[Hallo girl]

Harry is famous for being famous people essentially. He is famous for being a member of a famous family. Son of a King. Brother of a future King. Very famous mother. So people make a fuss. He is neither significant or getting things on his own merit. He is in a hard place.

That is so true, he is famous due to his birth, nothing else.

 

[Asteria12]

But @HenRach Dominion, you're forgetting the social climbers, the hanger-on's, and to use a modern term, the "Influencers" who all latch on to anyone famous!

If he were still living in the UK and a part of the BRF he'd have had something of a buffer against such leeches, but living in the land of the celebrity means he's wide open for exploitation by others. I'm sure he knows this and has even turned it to his advantage at times however.

 

[Mirabel]

I do not totally agree with your summary, unfortunately Harry has lost the love and respect of a great deal of the British People, but a title can take you a great deal of places, whether you have influence or not within the circle. Let us look at the Duke and Duchess of Windsor as an example. They travelled the world as guests of honour at parties, he had no influence or contact with the Crown.
There are people who are impressed with titles, especially royal titles.

Very true.
If not, why do people crave titles, and do everything possible to attain one?
It still matters, no matter what everyone says.
If it didn't, why do so many cling to defunct titles, like so many members of European nobility?
Without his title, what would Harry have left?

 

[Curryong]

Harry is famous for being famous people essentially. He is famous for being a member of a famous family. Son of a King. Brother of a future King. Very famous mother. So people make a fuss. He is neither significant or getting things on his own merit. He is in a hard place.

Well, Harry isn’t alone in that, although I would argue that Invictus Games and Sentebale for instance would not be so prominent without his input and patronage. And as for not being significant on his own and without being born who is is, I would say the same of many, many members of royal families everywhere. And of married-ins as well.

And without the title what would they have left?

 

[Alison H]

Is it really necessary to have all these childish remarks about "vile" British tabloids? Criticising Harry and Meghan does not make anyone "vile", and the constant harping about the British press as opposed to any other press is deeply unpleasant.

Due to their being born royal, the royals are very familiar to everyone, as we watch them grow up. Their partners are famous by association.

 

[Asteria12]

This is precisely why we have famous people who strive to become famous on their own merit. And we have famous people who are perfectly happy to live advantageously on the merit of their family who made them famous in the first place. Its also why we have people who come from famous families who try to make their mark on the world incognito, or at the very least, by styling themselves with a name that is not immediately recognisable.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Well, Harry isn’t alone in that, although I would argue that Invictus Games and Sentebale for instance would not be so prominent without his input and patronage. And as for not being significant on his own and without being born who is is, I would say the same of many, many members of royal families everywhere. And of married-ins as well.

And without the title what would they have left?

Harry had a lot of help and input from Palace staff in setting up Invictus Games which was based on the Warrior games. There are charities and organisations that function well without royal patronage and others that make the best out of the royal patronage. Many of the married-in royals have accomplishments prior to even marrying their spouses, and even if some of them were not married to their royal spouses some would still be remarkable people in whatever they pursue. When your aim in life is to do the best in whatever you do and present yourself well, chasing cheap publicity and fame to clap back and prove your worth constantly eats away at whatever credibility and good image you hope to get. Accomplishments or not, members of royal families who perform royal duties do the best to present themselves and their country well.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

I do not totally agree with your summary, unfortunately Harry has lost the love and respect of a great deal of the British People, but a title can take you a great deal of places, whether you have influence or not within the circle. Let us look at the Duke and Duchess of Windsor as an example. They travelled the world as guests of honour at parties, he had no influence or contact with the Crown.
There are people who are impressed with titles, especially royal titles.

Hey, I made that same exact point in an earlier post (that many people would deal with Prince Harry solely because he's part of the British Royal Family regardless of his relationship with them), but another poster stated that only HM The King and HRH The Prince of Wales were seen as special, and everyone else were seen as normal people (at least to the British public). Since they're British, I assumed that they would know more about their monarchy and how they're viewed a lot more than I, an American, would.

 

[FigTree]

Well, Harry isn’t alone in that, although I would argue that Invictus Games and Sentebale for instance would not be so prominent without his input and patronage. And as for not being significant on his own and without being born who is is, I would say the same of many, many members of royal families everywhere. And of married-ins as well.

And without the title what would they have left?

Obviously. What true for him is also true of others. Invictus Games captures the media in the UK so gets publicity. The warrior games for instance isn’t such a big deal. Sentebale isn’t that big a charity and certainly most people wouldn’t have heard of it.

The Queen and a Prince Philip were very aware it was their titles not them that were special. There is no real point here. Unfortunately some of them are not that clear sighted.