The FT does cover some Royal Family issues, but if you want to stay abreast of such news, then the FT is not the outlet to choose because it is pretty sparse.
Where H&M confuse me, now I stop to think of it, is why they are involved with The Royal Rota at all. The Rota was designed to facilitate information on official engagements and official affairs. As H&M are no longer serving senior Royals, then presumably they have to work out their press relationship entirely separately from the Rota.
From that perspective what they may be attempting (I think clumsily) to do is to set up their own rota to indicate who will be their primary contacts , or perhaps, to be more precise, who will not.
As private individuals that is presumably their prerogative. But I found an article in Town and Country Magazine that discusses the issue and highlights the related question raised by the National Union of Journalists on whether it is appropriate for journalists only to be allowed to report on H&M if they have a Royal seal of approval.
And that is the point where, frustrated by H&M as I have been of late, I think they are in a tricky situation. If they are not serving Royals, then there is a strong argument that they should not be part of the Rota. But public interest being as it is, is it acceptable that a significant couple in the family gets to choose who does and does not report on them?
FWIW I think this does come back largely to the funding issue. If H&M receive public funding then opting out of the Rota should be a no-go. If they are privately funded, then who/how/how often/in what manner they conduct their relationship with the press, for good or ill, should be their choice.
www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a30480923/prince-harry-megahn-markle-royal-rota-system/