Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Harry Windsor getting upset about Peter Phillips

142 replies

WhenTheDustSettles · 06/06/2026 10:31

Am I missing something? There is a story in the press today about Harry refusing to go to Peter Phillips's wedding, allegedly because he sold his first wedding to Hello (or OK) magazine. What am I missing here - these magazines have featured Kate and William's wedding, Sophie and Edward, Eugenie and Jack, loads of them. Including his own wedding to Meghan. I thought that's just what they do, so what's Harry's issue? Is it that Peter Phillips got paid and the rest didn't?

The excuse given by Harry is something to do with upsetting him about his girlfriend Chelsy Davy. He's supposedly so happy with Meghan, so why does anything to do with Chelsy bother him now?

For info, this is not a "royal bashing" "Meghan bashing" post. It's to get understanding of how these things work.

OP posts:
Arjan · 08/06/2026 09:18

Renamedefault · 08/06/2026 08:57

Let me guess, was the story from a “source close to [insert]” - if so, total bollocks.

We know they ALL have their favourite royal reporters to leak to.

We know, when Harry was single, he was shagging a Daily Mail reporter and giving her info about his activities and whereabouts, we know he was inadvertently revealed as the ‘source’ for a People magazine article, when some junior copywriter revealed the ‘source’ was a personal email from Harry,. We know Meghan uses her friends as sources to get her message out nd we know she and Harry were the source for Omid Scobie book. We know Camilla’s son is a journalist and Camilla, Eugenie, Beatrice are buddies with Jeremy Clarkson.

Harry and Meghan invite journalists into their home, allow friends to speak to reporters on their behalf, have curated a long list of media friends to push whatever agenda is of the moment.

H&M and the RF have PR teams working full time for them, Claiming ‘a source’ disclosed some information is not the utter bollocks people like to think it is.

Renamedefault · 08/06/2026 08:57

Let me guess, was the story from a “source close to [insert]” - if so, total bollocks.

TheBerry · 08/06/2026 08:53

I wouldn't be happy if somebody I knew sold a story of mine to the papers for personal financial gain. Would you?

I also wouldn't be happy if they were unpleasant to my ex, my friend, my partner, my parents, or anyone really. Would you?

LBFseBrom · 07/06/2026 23:31

LewKirtonHeavenInTheAfternoonNSOul · 07/06/2026 23:22

The Mail has a vendetta against most of humanity.

It really is a scurrilous rag.

LBFseBrom · 07/06/2026 23:30

WhenTheDustSettles · 06/06/2026 10:31

Am I missing something? There is a story in the press today about Harry refusing to go to Peter Phillips's wedding, allegedly because he sold his first wedding to Hello (or OK) magazine. What am I missing here - these magazines have featured Kate and William's wedding, Sophie and Edward, Eugenie and Jack, loads of them. Including his own wedding to Meghan. I thought that's just what they do, so what's Harry's issue? Is it that Peter Phillips got paid and the rest didn't?

The excuse given by Harry is something to do with upsetting him about his girlfriend Chelsy Davy. He's supposedly so happy with Meghan, so why does anything to do with Chelsy bother him now?

For info, this is not a "royal bashing" "Meghan bashing" post. It's to get understanding of how these things work.

That is nonsense, probably came from 'a source close to'. Harry would not have refused an invitation for that reason and, at the time, nobody thought much of it. There were a few sniffs but that's all, soon forgotten.

Zara and Mike did the same for their wedding. I remember seeing the photos in the magazine. Again, no big fuss.

The cousins have always been close. By royal standards this was a fairly simple, small affair, there were probably several people who couldn't go. It looked lovely.

LewKirtonHeavenInTheAfternoonNSOul · 07/06/2026 23:22

dnadiscoveryquery · 06/06/2026 10:33

I wouldn’t believe a word the Mail printed. They have a very clear vendetta against Harry and Meghan.

The Mail has a vendetta against most of humanity.

Teached · 07/06/2026 23:12

IAmBeaIDrinkTea · 06/06/2026 13:34

Lol, they've turned up.
Watch the thread descend into the usual batshittery 😂

Yes, what a complete surprise🙄 Literally no one missed the mad glut of '...I don't want this to turn into a H&M bashing thread BUT...'

The little knot of MNers who post inane crap at the mere mention of Harry and Meghan names never sleeps.

WhenTheDustSettles · 07/06/2026 23:02

Della19 · 07/06/2026 12:24

Why do you care?

I don't "care" but you don't have to really care about something to be able to talk about it do you. The main point of my question was what was the difference between Peter's first wedding appearing in a celeb mag and him getting grief about it and Harry, William, Eugenie and others not. That's been answered.

I'm now also enlightened that the rest of the stuff and spurious reasons put forward on the press about Harry not going are 🐂💩.

It also doesn't mean that because I wanted to discuss what's been printed that I believe what's been printed. It was obvious that bringing Chelsey into it was a big reach.

OP posts:
Boomer55 · 07/06/2026 16:29

It’s probably best to stop reading made up journalism. 🤷‍♀️

AmazingGreatAunt · 07/06/2026 16:12

Harry was not invited.
Probably for all the reasons posted above, possibly because the cousins are not that close and perhaps because he actually lives too far away (and would have found it difficult to cadge a lift in a private jet).
The gutter press loves to invent stories. Look for the words likely, could and might!

LoudTealHare · 07/06/2026 15:54

WhenTheDustSettles · 06/06/2026 10:31

Am I missing something? There is a story in the press today about Harry refusing to go to Peter Phillips's wedding, allegedly because he sold his first wedding to Hello (or OK) magazine. What am I missing here - these magazines have featured Kate and William's wedding, Sophie and Edward, Eugenie and Jack, loads of them. Including his own wedding to Meghan. I thought that's just what they do, so what's Harry's issue? Is it that Peter Phillips got paid and the rest didn't?

The excuse given by Harry is something to do with upsetting him about his girlfriend Chelsy Davy. He's supposedly so happy with Meghan, so why does anything to do with Chelsy bother him now?

For info, this is not a "royal bashing" "Meghan bashing" post. It's to get understanding of how these things work.

So because it’s in the press, it has to be true 🤦‍♀️ I think you will find they were not invited as although once close like the rest of his family he’s estranged from Peter!

Della19 · 07/06/2026 12:24

WhenTheDustSettles · 06/06/2026 10:31

Am I missing something? There is a story in the press today about Harry refusing to go to Peter Phillips's wedding, allegedly because he sold his first wedding to Hello (or OK) magazine. What am I missing here - these magazines have featured Kate and William's wedding, Sophie and Edward, Eugenie and Jack, loads of them. Including his own wedding to Meghan. I thought that's just what they do, so what's Harry's issue? Is it that Peter Phillips got paid and the rest didn't?

The excuse given by Harry is something to do with upsetting him about his girlfriend Chelsy Davy. He's supposedly so happy with Meghan, so why does anything to do with Chelsy bother him now?

For info, this is not a "royal bashing" "Meghan bashing" post. It's to get understanding of how these things work.

Why do you care?

Clearinguptheclutter · 07/06/2026 11:35

i wouldn’t indulge the mail with their ridiculous stories

but it’s true that Peter Phillips was paid for the whole exclusive thing with Hello and interview etc

for other royal weddings Hello would have paid for “pool” official photos, none were their own

JacknDiane · 07/06/2026 11:32

As if anyone on mn know op, I mean c'mon

Arjan · 07/06/2026 11:29

Talltreesbythelake · 07/06/2026 10:46

That doesn't apply to H though. They are very wealthy and have nannies and staff. They fly to many destinations each year for photo-ops. This would have been the money shot. H with Royal adjacency. Kerching!

This.

I absolutely think H would have rocked up solo if he had been invited (unless of course the elite tax payer funded security was not afforded to him). I think M would not have been seen dead attending it.

WhatTheHellsGoingOn · 07/06/2026 11:08

Tshirtking · 06/06/2026 10:35

He isn't going because he wasn't invited.

This

Mcdhotchoc · 07/06/2026 11:01

I'm sure there must be a thread somewhere" AIBU not to invite my husbands first cousin and wife to my wedding? They an 11 hour flight away and have 2 young children. I have never met them. They might also steal the limelight on my special day."
Equally "my fiancé's uncle has excepted but it leaving straight after the ceremony to go to the races."

Talltreesbythelake · 07/06/2026 10:46

Aethelredtheunsteady · 07/06/2026 09:17

I get on with my cousins but didn’t go to her wedding as it was the other end of the country and was going to be too tricky with family life.

That doesn't apply to H though. They are very wealthy and have nannies and staff. They fly to many destinations each year for photo-ops. This would have been the money shot. H with Royal adjacency. Kerching!

ReversedFerret · 07/06/2026 10:34

The issue with the 2008 wedding photographs was not just that Peter sold his own wedding photographs, but that the £500,000 deal included previously unseen candids of senior Royals and it was believed that this access drove the deal and constituted an individual making a personal profit off of being a member of the RF. Buckingham Palace issued a statement calling the sale of the photographs a serious error in judgment. Harry was front and centre in several of these photographs, so if he had/has an opinion I'd say he was entitled to it. The same opportunity probably didn't exist for Peter's younger cousins because HMQ reportedly instituted a strict explicit ban as a result of his actions.

ThatBlackCat · 07/06/2026 09:52

N/M

AHalfling · 07/06/2026 09:35

Yabu to believe anything you read in the Mail

Aethelredtheunsteady · 07/06/2026 09:17

x2boys · 07/06/2026 09:04

And its not like they live around the corner from each other
Could anyone be bothered with a longhaul flight for a cousin they dont really like?
If they had gone you csn gurantee there would be loads of accusations of them going so they can make it all about them.

I get on with my cousins but didn’t go to her wedding as it was the other end of the country and was going to be too tricky with family life.

Anarchy99 · 07/06/2026 09:16

Nadinesnotblowsy9 · 06/06/2026 15:36

There is always one poster on these threads who manages to squeeze in something really distasteful and nasty about Diana as well as kick Harry. I honestly wonder sometimes if they are working for the palace? 😬

How about sticking to facts before drawing unfounded, misogynistic, conclusions?

I can’t stand this revisionist narrative of Diana which is being encouraged by those currently in office, which neglects to mention the fact that she was rejected by her husband because of his ongoing affair, and that this rejection was played out globally in every newspaper and broadcast across the world, just about the biggest public humiliation anyone can suffer in their early twenties in other words, and yet she somehow ended up as the sole villain of the piece if your post is anything to go by Anarchy99, and because she is dead, she gets disparaged.

Diana lost her life aged third-six because the chauffeur of the car she was in had taken a combination of medication and pills.

They were being chased by paps at the time but this could have happened if they had been driven at speed along a motorway en route to an airport or hotel.

And she was chased by paps long before her marriage to Charles took place! She was chased by paps going to the gym fhs!

Affairs with married men did not directly lead to her death and it’s ridiculous to suggest such a thing.

Seeking affairs with unavailable men is a pattern of behaviour often carried out by women who experienced poor emotional attachment with their primary caregivers because it mimics the parenting they received as a child; a repeated pattern of connection and rejection. Diana’s mother, also much younger than her husbands, had to leave Althorp and her children when Diana was six.

It also is carried out by women who have experienced tremendous hurt and rejection in their most important romantic relationships. They seek out married men for the validation that they are still worthy of love and still attractive, while at the same time being in no danger of having to commit to something they regard as potentially unsafe, based on their recent experiences.

I am not justifying affairs with married men but to mention them without including Charles’s part in all of this and the subsequent ostracism Diana endured, and the context in which they happened, is not balanced or fair. Charles ends up married and someone at the epicentre of privilege and respectability, meanwhile Diana is dead and can’t answer back.

Edited

It’s not revisionist.

I didn’t claim that sleeping with married men led to her death. But she wasn’t some perfect angel.

Of course her marriage was shit and things were awful. but everyone talks about Camilla (who Charles clearly wanted to marry but couldnt) without acknowledging that she then embarked on affairs with married men. She did her tell all book by giving interviews and then denying it.

I’m not saying she didn’t feel justified (obvs the wives of the various men she shagged would disagree) but why do people only seek to justify the actions of those they like.

She was deeply flawed like everyone else.

UserNineNine · 07/06/2026 09:09

When I read it I thought ‘surely not one person would believe this and not realise that newspapers and their modern day equivalent, influencers, can just say any old nonsense’.

KiwiFall · 07/06/2026 09:06

I suspect they were not invited. I would say if you were Peter and Harriet wanting a quiet wedding (at least by royal standards) the last thing you want is Harry and Meghan attending. Whether they would mean to or not having them there would bring drama, both from a family point of view and media point of view.