To be completely bored of the constant coverage of Harry and Meghan

[Frenchpastry]

It's just too much! Way too much media focus on a them and all their drama. There's a global pandemic, explosions, oil spills etc. etc. etc. There are so many more important things going on in the World than a bunch of over-priviledged plebs and their family drama. It's not interesting, it's not relevant to the rest of the World and it's not in any way beneficial to anyone to keep speculating about them. I get that some people may find it interesting but so interesting it dominates headlines for months on end?!?

I should point out, I'm moaning about the media's obsession rather than them as an individual couple; whilst I'm not a fan of theirs by any stretch, it's the ridiculous number of articles I've seen about them across different news sites that's bugging me. Surely there's not that much to say about them?!

Maybe Frogmore should be offered to Eugenie and Jack, in return for some support for the older working Royals? I think Bea and Edo are ok for money, but I wouldn't think E & J have loads to spare - especially with Andrew no doubt finding things a little tighter now!

Non-working Royals are meant to pay a reasonably rent for their properties.

They might not want to spend that much! It would easily be upwards of £15k a month

Also Frogmore Cottage might be closer to Andrew and Fergie than E&J (or B&E) like.

mental.

Maybe Frogmore Cottage could be offered as a hostel for the homeless. Role models for the nation, that they presume to lecture.

Just a suggestion.

Just don’t read it. I’ve managed to keep up with the ‘important’ news without reading one single article about them. Why can’t you?

Ah now there's an idea @Pepperwort! Their new place has a few extra rooms too, I believe.
Ah, unless they'll pull the usual, 'do as I say not as I do' thing and wish they were mere mortals like the rest of us, struggling and plodding through life. I bet that's a huge regret of theirs, that they're just too darn famous and important to be able to risk their own safety (the excuse given for needing to take so many private jets) to help others. Maybe they could do a documentary where they spend a day on the streets, interviewing homeless people, then Meghan can complain about her struggles with needing her big house with big walls around it because she's so famous and important.

@Pepperwort

Maybe Frogmore Cottage could be offered as a hostel for the homeless. Role models for the nation, that they presume to lecture.

Just a suggestion.

Better still, give BP and Balmoral to the National Trust. Limit the senior royals to one house each and cut out half their lackeys.

Apparently Prince Charles has similar views to open up Buckingham palace more. www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/prince-charles-buckingham-palace-changes-queen-dies.html/

I am indifferent and tend to be oblivious to celebs and royals etc unless it is saturation news as with ongoing historic royal (and presidential) child abuse scandals etc.

I also assume this particular pair despite supposedly internal firm antagonism is courting media when it suits and suing when it does not suit personal agendas. I am however not surprised in Megxit but why join British royalty if no intention to accept and adopt the local British royal lifestyle and duties to meet with subjects etc. I am possibly not understanding the hypocrisy of needy and opinionated preachy powerful high net worth types as evidently they are not necessarily self made but been heavily monetarily supported by tax paying British subjects? Am I correct in this regard? And as one of them has previous history including parental and family issues with a particular person located in Mexico and cut off from a family relationship - are they the best placed to instil family and parental values etc.

I am indifferent but don't believe this couple with new born is necessarily milking the system to enjoy all the paid for trappings but possibly not giving much value or positivity to an otherwise heavily damaged brand. Andrew would be with Maxwell if not for royal privilege and the fake tan orange man also (obviously) heavily involved in systematic wrong doings to now living adult victims. Some people are evidently above the law with a comfortable margin of protection.

Bit of a royal saga and suitable for a movie especially if there is an actress involved.

Alongcameacat

The authors of the book spoke to the couple? They haven’t said what parts of the book they spoke about. They could have asked the couple one very vague question and tgg hg at ticked the box of speaking to them.
I get that some people love to read gossip but don’t take it as fact. Use your common sense. Imagine if an ex neighbour wrote something about you as fact and everybody repeated it. You’d be either appalled or in disbelief that anybody would be so gullible.

Who do you think told the authors about MM's comfort breaks in the African forest? The birdie in the tree? Who do you think told the authors about the totally intimate and private tea with HM? Her Maj having a gossipy moment? If MM wasn't totally happy with the entire contents of FF then it would have been pulled while another law suit kicked in. I hope the media frenzy dies down so they can sort themselves out in private.

The thing is, the Sussex’s should not be a brand at all. They are part of the British Royal family . They have had titles bestowed on them by the Queen. They are not a brand nor ever should be. Though it’s clear that’s what they think they are.

Exactly. They shouldn't be a brand. If they want to make money out of being Harry and Meghan, they need to completely renounce the titles.
I'd like to see them do that........... Their cash cow will still cough up because Harry is still is son.

I totally agree that they shouldn't be a brand. Without the royal they are nothing. And they should not be trading on that.

I am not pro nor anti royal but given their ultimate privilege status - are this couple now seemingly permanently in exile from the rest of the royal firm brand. Are they not making a hypocritical error by trying to leverage themselves as a sub brand for greed? They then hypocritically play the get involved in charity card. Surely these gifted trust fund high net worths (paid in part by loyal subjects!) can afford to actually give their financial resources away if they were genuinely charitable by heart and not for marketing self promotional reasons. Same with all high net worth celebs asking for poor public to always pay for others in need whilst they give public rallying calls in fine surroundings and barely contributing much as usually very tax efficient. This is fine if the rich and famous don't do as I say not what I do nonsense. We all secretly want to get to the top table ourselves as that's what motivates and inspire so many. Though more real charitable along the likes of Gates Foundation saving lives etc as that is the example for rich and famous not keeping national royal loot (UK and Spanish current examples) and living the high life with a select few of their maters while ignoring usual royal obligations. Turned into a bit of a rant but I am neither a royalist nor republican as head of state is necessary and adds Brextania prestige and strategic value but when lesser royals run off and or are involved in dodgy systematic paedophilia it gets unpalatable especially to a mother with young child and really dilutes the firm branding. Any thoughts on this? Not sure if agreeable to all on MumsNet. I may be off the mark possibly.

I may be off the mark possibly. I think you're dead on the mark.

@derxa

I may be off the mark possibly. I think you're dead on the mark.

What's more appropriate as curious to gain a better insight from your more knowledgeable understanding. I also don't want to type foolish ignorant crap. Thanks.

Obviously ignore previous comment as seems reading and eyesight is not on the mark as one prefers these days! Sorry.

@ResIpsaLoquiturInterAlia. That’s one hell of a name you have there! What does it mean?

[quote LaundryBasketOfHell]@ResIpsaLoquiturInterAlia. That’s one hell of a name you have there! What does it mean?[/quote]
Res ipsa loquitur is Latin and is literally translated "the thing itself speaks", but the sense is well conveyed in the more common translation, "the thing speaks for itself"

Inter alia is Latin and means "among other things".

Hope this helps. Lawyers will of course know as instinctive to jurisprudence.

So are we allowed to post on this thread, MNHQ?
It’s almost as if you want to lose long-standing members.

@OverUnderSidewaysDown

So are we allowed to post on this thread, MNHQ? It’s almost as if you want to lose long-standing members.

I think they do. Have you not seen how the member numbers have massively increased on various other forums in recent months?

Thanks @ResIpsaLoquiturInterAlia - sorry for tagging you but it’s a very long name to type out and to put into bold!

Why are we only allowed one thread?

LaundryBasketOfHell

Why are we only allowed one thread?

It's odd isn't it?

I suppose there is one other thread over on The Royal Family board, but it's specifically about their house.

Maybe threads about specific items about them could run concurrently.

Eg:
"AIBU to wonder whether the Duchess of Sussex is better described as:
A) a beautiful feminist humanitarian
or
B) a beautiful humanitarian feminist?"

Something like that might be allowed, perhaps?

There are 3 threads AFAIK. Finding freedom and a no deletions allowed thread. These are both in the royal section. And this one in AIBU. Take your pick.