Harry and Meghan news

[callmeadoctor]

www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1292590/meghan-markle-prince-harry-la-career-plans-latest-royal-news

Yes. It says a source close to the couple.

Ye gods, how many times have you seen that written and famous people going apeshit because they had nothing to do with it.

We don't know

Maybe it’s me. I just can’t abide this Instagram generation, where life is superficial, selective, and seems to be about self-promotion rather than anything concrete. It’s hollow. This isn’t a commentary about H&M specifically, it’s the whole concept. There just doesn’t seem to be any substance to things, no profound thought or reflection. Just adulation, envy, reverence for a painted picture, which seems detrimental to the viewer’s interests and solely beneficial (perhaps even not?) to the posters’. What’s it all FOR?

Interesting ARose

It's a different way of talking. We're all stiff upper lip here in the UK, and I can't say I take umbridge at anyone talking about being passionate about a cause TBH

Everyone to their own

It’s not just you, I agree with everything you’ve said @ARoseInHarlem

umbrage!

Awful spelling before ooops

I agree with you about IG Rose

It tends to be very shallow and fleeting in some ways

Ye gods, how many times have you seen that written and famous people going apeshit because they had nothing to do with it.

Interesting that we never seem to read insights about the Cambridge's private activities from 'sources close to the couple'.

This is H&M's modus operandi. Anyone who has paid even passing attention to the RF over the past couple of years will be aware of their strategy by now. The same thing happened on the Queen's birthday when they leaked their plans for a Zoom call with HM.

It's all about making sure people know that they are still royal insiders - as well as Hollywood celebrities on the make - and that they haven't been exiled from the inner circle. So transparent.

Let's agree to disagree shall we?

That seems to be the easiest option all round AFAIC

There is very much in your last post I don't agree with. You have a view. I have a different one.

I agree with you too @ARoseInHarlem. All about appearance and image. No thought kept private, everything out for public consumption. Some people's lives are just one long performance.

Interesting that we never seem to read insights about the Cambridge's private activities from 'sources close to the couple'

That is a good point.

Two examples.
Meghan was part of 'I Won't Stand For' eight years ago. She picked racism for her topic and recorded a video for Erase the Hate.
She also wrote about racism for Elle magazine, including a family incident.

She has a history of volunteering and advocacy going back to a young age.

@thisenglishlife

Yes, famous people often do. I think they feel it offsets their ruthless and materialistic approach to life. Fame seems to go hand in hand with 'philanthropy' these days. Which is ironic as the rich and famous live the most cosseted and privileged life.

Is Meghan ruthless?

Yes, famous people often do. I think they feel it offsets their ruthless and materialistic approach to life. Fame seems to go hand in hand with 'philanthropy' these days. Which is ironic as the rich and famous live the most cosseted and privileged life. I agree and H&M are increasingly in the camp 'rich and famous' and less and less camp 'royalty'. I wish they would relax a bit and count their blessings. So much suffering going on here and in the USA right now. It's a sad situation not an opportunity.

@ARoseInHarlem
Totally agree. Even down to the name
“Influencers”.

Interesting that we never seem to read insights about the Cambridge's private activities from 'sources close to the couple'

Didn't that recent Tatler article do that or something similar?

Interesting that we never seem to read insights about the Cambridge's private activities from 'sources close to the couple'

True enough, though I'm sure we would if the media ever decided to stick the boot into either of them
"Sources" can sometimes be shorthand for "what we've made up", which is why I'd rather rely on what can actually be seen or heard

@SenecaFallsRedux

Interesting that we never seem to read insights about the Cambridge's private activities from 'sources close to the couple'

Didn't that recent Tatler article do that or something similar?

I've just been reading on another thread, about an aide to the DoC and some alleged relationship to a Sun journalist. Quite interesting.

Christian Jones is the Communications Secretary to both The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. His partner has recently been shown to have received at least two payments form The Sun for stories. The Sun has had a few Sussex exclusives.

There is nothing to necessarily suggest that The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are involved.

I was very struck by Princess Anne's recent remarks that she spent 10 years with Save the Children before she felt qualified to speak about the details of development work.

Yes Princess Anne’s remarks seemed rather pointed

Isn't 'a source close to the couple' now basically code for 'Omid Scobie'?

Also, interesting point on Andrew having given up, or being forced to give up, his 300 patronages. Who's going to take on that extra work? This is where the York sisters (and I apologise for calling them 'girls' in an earlier post) could be the most appropriate people to step in. It does cause a headache. And the Sussexes would probably have been in line to pick up some of those.

Yes at this point W and K and their DC are going to be the only royals in their respective generations. When you think of the support the Queen has had from all her cousins it is very slimmed down.

I believe it is well known that 'a source close to' or 'a friend of' pretty much certainly indicates it has come directly from the individual or from their PR camp. It creates the necessary distance for them to deny any knowledge if what is said is badly received.

They are taking a scattergun approach to causes they want to support. I think you can do this if you are a member of the Royal family as your job is to serve queen and country. You can also take this approach if you have another 'primary job' you are an expert at - such as a legitimate actor, author, singer, etc. It's an add on to your actual job and is basically good for your public image.

If you are marketing yourself as an 'activist' though and you don't really have any other 'proper job' - then you really need to focus on one or two key issues and get really deep into them at grass roots level. Otherwise you come across as a self serving publicity seeker.

If their intentions are genuine - it would have been far better for them to move to Africa. Harry could focus on Conservation and Meghan could have used her global stage to highlight and promote African causes outside of Africa. Naomi Campbell has done a lot of amazing work in this area.