Royals and American media coverage

[ButteryPuffin]

Saw this cover posted on Twitter and noted that it seems the tabloids do indeed exist in the US (amazing, huh?). This is pretty much what you'd expect from the source, and I think it's pretty deplorable, but I am interested to see how the American media in general cover the presence of the former royals who've now arrived to make their home there. Of course we can discuss their coverage of other Royals too and related topics. All welcome.

Link to cover story - please note I'm not endorsing it, I'm just sharing it:
66.media.tumblr.com/79912301ec9c6e0f2cbf902a7a42a540/da60395e577b1897-aa/s540x810/61af854a1eed0d02b6bfa026133d16f8bdb87f41.jpg

Great posts Winterlife.

Lol @ your comment on my understanding of totalitarianism and your sniffy remark on how I make my living.

No sniffy remark on how you make your living, as I don't know how. But based on your posts, you certainly don't understand totalitarian systems.

Fair enough, a trademark.

The Telegraph is reported to have obtained references to 'educational materials, clothing, stationery and a nutrition and general health website, possibly modelled on Meghan’s successful The Tig lifestyle site, which she shut down following her engagement to Harry' according to the Guardian. Other outlets refer to all of that plus a mental health slant.

Trademark or patent, the fact that they were forced to make a limited announcement because the Telegraph was waving a list and accurate speculation at them is not something you can seriously contest. The announcement they made, with its references to the pandemic, is clearly designed to create a negative image for any outlets continuing to pursue this story before they are ready to launch their site. The fact that they hadn't yet nailed down a url for their site is yet another indication that they were forced into premature publicity.

No, @mathanxiety. That description is directly from the trademark application, other than the comparison to the Tig (named after MM's favourite wine, Tignanello - she didn't know "g" is silent). It's very broad, as most not for profit objects are. It doesn't mean that all those matters will be carried out by archewell, ever.

I know sniffy when I see it, Winterlife, and your comment on how I make my living was sniffy.

Unlike you, I am not about to announce specifics. It's a chat forum after all.

But I will enjoy many a good chortle about your certainty on the topic of my understanding of totalitarianism in the comfort of my (book lined) study. Thank you for that.

I think it's a form of AI, Dandy. That is the actual scoop.

I don't follow you @OVienna
AI means Artificial Intelligence.
Do you mean IP? Or am I missing something?

Is the scoop is that the Sussexes are going to create clothing that has hidden GPS tracking devices in it?

You don't understand it in practice, or even, based on your posts here, from the books in your study. If you did, you wouldn't have made the ridiculous assertions you did about populations living under totalitarian rule.

(This is DandyPenguin under my new name btw. Just in case anyone can't work that out.)

Ah, I read something deeper into OV post about AI, bot-related?

They're creating a line of Sussex bots?

Nobody has stated anything definite about what Archewell will do but that is not the point about the discussion of the way the publicity came about, a discussion that is clearly just a means of passing scathing comments about Meghan Markle for some (the silent G, 'Amateur hour').

Journalists usually gather information and make inferences from several sources. A trademark application here, a blog there, maybe an interview with a former staffer or two. Put it all together and you can generate a few inches of type and hopefully get a statement from the parties involved, and when nobody else has that story you have a triumph of investigative journalism. Huzzah for the free press! We need this sort of nose to the grindstone enthusiasm about what really matters at a time like this.

You don't understand it in practice, or even, based on your posts here, from the books in your study. If you did, you wouldn't have made the ridiculous assertions you did about populations living under totalitarian rule

On another fred, someone has posted a comment from The Times where the journo says 'Archewell' sounds like a toilet brand. Not the high end Sandringham or Balmoral, but the bog-standard kind. Made me

@yoloPenguinsEatfish
I too was disgusted that he didn’t turn up for the marine memorial.
But what I didn’t understand, and maybe you can shed some light, is why they all clapped him at his final engagement (When Meghan was wearing the matching red dress). Did they do it through gritted teeth?!

Yes, a form of Artificial Intelligence. Don't mind me.

as in maybe they're creating one.

Ahhhhhh
Gotcha
Yes

Back to media coverage.
Wills & Kate did an allegedly extremely well received virtual visit to a school.
Can’t see any H&M news this morning, but have only done a very quick scan.

@mathanxiety, no one outside The Telegraph's editorial board, knows whether or not anything would have been reported. That's all speculation on your part.

I hope you are more detail oriented in your area of "expertise".

TMZ, a gossip news show, reported on the archewellfoundation.org link, which apparently has now been taken down.

www.tmz.com/2020/04/08/meghan-and-harrys-archewell-url-hijacked-for-kanye-s-gold-digger/

Fizz, My understanding is that it is routine to applaud the representative of the crown at such events and to stand as part of that protocol.
I don't think they were clapping him, although it was reported that way.

Just because someone has a book lined study doesn’t mean they have read the books. Slinks off to lurk and expects to be deleted.

I doubt senior army members would strop and let personal feelings get in the way of duty, hence the applause.

I doubt senior army members would strop and let personal feelings get in the way of duty

7 you just need to 99.9% in front of 'army members' and you have the case...

my (book lined) study