Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder why Prince Harry got annoyed with Sky News reporter?

865 replies

elprup · 03/10/2019 13:30

It seems very out of character for Harry? Confused I wonder if he misinterpreted and thought she was asking about the lawsuit...

twitter.com/TheRoyalExpert/status/1179155649898467329

OP posts:
BertrandRussell · 06/10/2019 18:35

What, the entire crowd? Grin That’s a fab conspiracy theory!

EntropyRising · 06/10/2019 18:42

Really? You don’t think running virtually invisible high level security for 4 incredibly high profile people at a football match would be a bit of a nightmare?

I can't tell what you're implying. Is it that the Cambridge's faux laid-back PR hijinks are less honest than H+M, i.e. MM clearing the seats at Wimbledon made it much easier for everyone?

BertrandRussell · 06/10/2019 18:43

Not implying anything! Just saying it must have been a security nightmare.

CurlyWurlyTwirly · 06/10/2019 18:50

The Cambridges were probably sat in the executive box. You can see that there are security people from the club on either side of them and everyone in the box must be vetted. They probably didn’t announce their arrival either; they are in the back row so can exit easily.

BertrandRussell · 06/10/2019 19:07

Yes- I did think it was a shame George couldn’t sit at the front.

Jillyhilly · 06/10/2019 19:20

I totally agree with your interpretation RoseQuartzGlow and Octonaut.

But they are effectively civil servants and hugely subsidised by the tax payer, so if the press calls them to account, I’m afraid that’s the job description.

This is the key point. Do you think this was explained in any way to MM when she got engaged to Harry - how Royalty differs to celebrity, the careful tightrope she’d have to walk between her private ventures and the public interest? The likely press intrusion and how to handle it? Or did they just think love would conquer all?

I totally agree that they HAVE to consider their own role in what’s happened. I don’t see any good at all coming out of the legal action.

Octonaught · 06/10/2019 19:37

Do you think this was explained in any way to MM when she got engaged to Harry - how Royalty differs to celebrity, the careful tightrope she’d have to walk between her private ventures and the public interest?

Probably not. Harry would not have a clue, as he has been privileged from the moment he was born. I think Diana tried to inculcate it in her boys, it seems to have worked a bit more with William, as he seems to appreciate the normalcy of a relationship with the Middletons. ( As far as millionaires are normal; but to their credit; they are self made.)
Harry was probably too young.

The Sussexes have been through quite a few advisors, for various reasons. Some were due to move on, others left. However the current team seems to be pulling in different directions. The commas director, Sarah Latham has her eye on the US audience. I am not seeing the influence of the Sussexes new Private Secretary, who is a British former diplomat. If I had worked hard on the SA tour and had no idea of Harry’s statement, I would be thoroughly exasperated.
Purely my opinion, but I don’t think this is the first time the Sussexes thought they knew better than the Royal advisors.

MissEliza · 06/10/2019 19:37

It is really sad that MM's father is 75 l, nearing the end of his life, and there looks to be no chance of a reconciliation between them. I know lots of people on MN think it's ok to go NC with family but the thought that a parent should never see or speak to their child ever again is horrible. What could he have done that was that bad?

Ibiza2015 · 06/10/2019 19:43

This is the key point. Do you think this was explained in any way to MM when she got engaged to Harry - how Royalty differs to celebrity, the careful tightrope she’d have to walk between her private ventures and the public interest? The likely press intrusion and how to handle it? Or did they just think love would conquer all?

I think they thought love would conquer all. Harry is not very bright, he had the best education money can buy but he still failed all his A’Levels except art. I think he met this woman who was quite a bit cleverer than him with a lot of grandiose ideas about changing the world. He thinks she’s amazing and hangs on her every word and he can’t understand why everybody else doesn’t see her genius. The problem is, although she’s dazzled Harry, she is an actress and occasional activist who doesn’t really have any qualification to politically lecture citizens of a country and culture she doesn’t really seem to have much of an interest in finding out. The only qualification she has for influence is who she married, and that is a jarring anachronism in the modern world.

There are good reasons why Royals don’t get involved in politics. Neither of them appear to understand that reason. Harry is particularly dopey because he has had two perfect examples of what not to do from the previous two spares to the heirs (Margaret and Andrew) but he is bungling along just as they did.

Margaret was indulgent, fond of luxury and imperious, sunning herself on Mustique with various celebrities. The Sussexes are overspending and hob nobbing with celebrities who use them for publicity.

The situation with them now is almost a mirror of the early days of Fergie and Andrew, she was pilloried for her faux pas and indulged herself in royal privileges too much. Apparently it was ‘a party everyday’ when she lived at Buckingham Palace, and that was taxpayer funded. He really is silly not learning from the past.

BertrandRussell · 06/10/2019 19:47

So are people saying that Meghan should have chosen different charities to support? That they are too “right on” and she should have taken something like the RHS gig?

Cohle · 06/10/2019 20:03

I thought her Royal Patronage's were the National Theatre, the Association of Commonwealth Universities, Mayhew and Smart Works?

None of them strike me as particularly controversial or "right on". The first two had previously been held by the Queen for decades.

I think her charity work has been generally well received, and I think they seem like a good fit. The 'writing on bananas' episode was the only questionable moment I think but I can't say I was outraged personally.

Ibiza2015 · 06/10/2019 20:07

I can only recall one criticism of her charities, the cookery book which had links to a mosque associated with terrorists. The other criticism has been the virtue signalling in Vogue, picking left wing women that she admired is far, far too political and partisan for a royal. The royal family are supposed to be an apolitical body that unites the country. It really does jeopardise the very existence of the royals if they start getting political, it completely undermines the whole concept of constitutional monarchy.

MissEliza · 06/10/2019 20:13

I bought that cookery book! There were some really good recipes in it. Probably the best thing she's done

PierreBezukov · 06/10/2019 20:15

Sweet to see you are such an ardent royalist and fan of Meghan, Bertrand. You're obviously very heavily invested in the Royal family. But it has blinded you a bit to their faults.

Harry and Meghan can't be too bright as they have now turned the press against them. The timing of the statement has overshadowed the SA tour and will now be all it's remembered for.

His 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' approach has meant that he's pissed off even the likes of Sky News and the Sunday Times - the ST has very pointedly got a big photo of the Cambridges at a football match on the front page today, with a pointed dig at Harry in the caption.

Shame the Sussexes weren't bright enough (or wise enough to take advice) to see this coming

Pitterpatterpettysteps · 06/10/2019 20:19

What does the caption say, @PierreBezukov?

Puzzledandpissedoff · 06/10/2019 20:38

PItterpatter I don't know about the print version, but the online Times on Sunday says "The Duke of Cambridge demonstrated conclusively yesterday that it is still possible for members of the royal family to enjoy a great day out without any sign of controversy"

In fairness, it's hard to see how it could have been more pointed ... and the Times isn't exactly the usual type of tabloid rag

Jillyhilly · 06/10/2019 20:43

The other criticism has been the virtue signalling in Vogue, picking left wing women that she admired is far, far too political and partisan for a royal. The royal family are supposed to be an apolitical body that unites the country.

I agree with this. Of course Royals should be plenty involved in charity work, but it seems so ill advised to do stuff that can so easily be interpreted as political and partisan. And going near the environmental stuff, unless you’re going to spend each and every single holiday for the rest of your life in Balmoral, is just nuts because it lays you wide open for charges of hypocrisy. It’s like they’re not thinking (or being advised) about this at all.

RoseQuartzGlow · 06/10/2019 20:44

The only qualification she has for influence is who she married, and that is a jarring anachronism in the modern world.

Yes, particularly for someone who makes it her business to talk about feminism and women's rights. More hypocrisy.

BertrandRussell · 06/10/2019 20:56

Out of interest, who were the left wing women on the Vogue cover? Except for Jacinta Aherne- who i assume was there for her response to the terrorist attack rather than her politics.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 06/10/2019 21:03

Wasn't it in Cardiff that Meghan reportedly told a member of the crowd "Harry's a feminist too"?

Which seemed to me to be scampering along the margins of the surreal ...

Ibiza2015 · 06/10/2019 21:09

Out of interest, who were the left wing women on the Vogue cover? Except for Jacinta Aherne- who i assume was there for her response to the terrorist attack rather than her politics.

Jacinta Aherne, Michelle Obama, Greta Thunberg, Sinead Burke. Almost every woman on the list had connections to woke left wing activism.

The full list is here, you can google them:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/07/29/these-15-women-have-been-named-an-inspiration-by-meghan-markle.html

Ibiza2015 · 06/10/2019 21:12

It surprises me that people can’t see the problem or don’t want to see it because they like her politics.

If the royals start getting involved in politics the Kate might come out next week and say she was a massive fan of Brexit and Nigel Farage. I think most of the people who defend Meghan’s politics would be very displeased about that and complain Royals shouldn’t be politically involved like that.

Jillyhilly · 06/10/2019 21:16

Is Archie a feminist yet, do we know? And if not, why not?

RoseQuartzGlow · 06/10/2019 21:22

Which seemed to me to be scampering along the margins of the surreal ... (grin)

RoseQuartzGlow · 06/10/2019 21:23

Smilie fail. First attempt..