Harry to sue BBC

[Viviennemary]

I just read Harry is going to sue the BBC for announcing the Queen wasn't consulted over the name Lilibet. They said she was told of their plans . Maybe told isnt quite the same as consulted. When is this all going to end. Seems to be getting worse instead of improving.

At the end of the day they're secondary royals, and their profile is going to diminish further over time as George and his siblings grow up. Harry admitted as much. How they thought they could publicly dictate terms to the queen is quite remarkable

He is, in effect, Princess Margaret. Archie is Viscount Linley (now Earl Snowdon) and Lili is Lady Sarah - it's said that they, particularly Lady Sarah, are very close to the Queen, but they have next to no public profile, though do some charitable works and she is vice-president of the Royal Ballet (akin to a patronage?)

Would many of the public be able to name their DC? Or recognise pix of them? Or know what they do for a living?

It probably was taped, and the reason it has not been leaked to the press is most likely because H is correct and it works against what the RF are saying.

I disagree, if phone calls are taped then whatever that shows I’d imagine it would take a far more serious issue than this to prompt leaking of it. Because that would surely be the end of any civility between them.

@esterwin

They may be very mentally healthy and happy, they may not. But why would they tell us if they were not? I don't even tell my work colleagues if my mental health is not good, I certainly would not tell the general public if I was famous. And lets say Harry was the only one to suffer mental health problems. Is that something to criticise him for? Because that seems to be the implication.

My point is PP is saying the GC seem well adjusted - I'm saying we wouldn't know- we just don't have a clue / (not we should know) because it will be well hidden!

He is, in effect, Princess Margaret. Archie is Viscount Linley (now Earl Snowdon) and Lili is Lady Sarah

I'd say he's less than Margaret.

Margaret was the young, beautiful only sibling of a reigning queen. There was quite a long time when the only high profile adult royals were HMTQ, Margaret, Philip and the queen mother. Margaret also had a rather interesting romantic life which kept her in the headlines for decades.

By contrast, Hary is already borderline middle aged. By the time William is king, he'll likely be in his 50s or older. By that time, George and his siblings will be young adults, close to the age Margaret was when Elizabeth became queen. All the focus will be on them, not on their ageing uncle, even if he was still a full member of the royal family.

Would many of the public be able to name their DC? Or recognise pix of them? Or know what they do for a living?

In the case of Sarah's son Arthur actually, yes I would!

That's him in the pic. He works as a trainer, in case you were wondering!

@IcedPurple

He is, in effect, Princess Margaret. Archie is Viscount Linley (now Earl Snowdon) and Lili is Lady Sarah

I'd say he's less than Margaret.

Margaret was the young, beautiful only sibling of a reigning queen. There was quite a long time when the only high profile adult royals were HMTQ, Margaret, Philip and the queen mother. Margaret also had a rather interesting romantic life which kept her in the headlines for decades.

By contrast, Hary is already borderline middle aged. By the time William is king, he'll likely be in his 50s or older. By that time, George and his siblings will be young adults, close to the age Margaret was when Elizabeth became queen. All the focus will be on them, not on their ageing uncle, even if he was still a full member of the royal family.

Would many of the public be able to name their DC? Or recognise pix of them? Or know what they do for a living?

In the case of Sarah's son Arthur actually, yes I would!

That's him in the pic. He works as a trainer, in case you were wondering!

i am way too old for him but

i am way too old for him but

Well, grandma Margaret had a thing for younger men so maybe he has a thing for older ladies too?

Goodness, Arthur is handsome!
Anecdotally, Margaret spent her life being extremely unhappy and dissatisfied with her lot despite loving parents and access to an incredibly privileged lifestyle her whole life. She constantly needed the validation of being a 'senior royal'. Lessons for all perhaps?
She did seem to have had two really lovely, low key children in David and Sarah. They seem to have maintained stability in their lives and balanced being a wider member of the RF with private lives.

I always thought it was really sweet that the Queen had her niece’s children as her pageboys for a few years - if you look at photos of the State Opening of Parliament from 10 or so years ago you’ll see a very solemn young Arthur Chatto holding her train. He also performed the role on Garter Day and similar events. And then he grew into that…!

Why the hell is the BBC reporting about the name of the child of the 6th in line to the throne in the first place.

I support the BBC to the extent that what passes as the British news landscape will probably get even more useless in its absence but it’s an absolute travesty really and has been for a decade plus...

The idea that the BBC is any way subjective is beyond laughable.

@BalloonSlayer

Jeremy Vine is about to have a phone debate about "was there a baby name choice that tore your family apart?" so doing his bit to smooth things over

Ha ha!

Seriously though, can he not just let it slide. Enjoy the baby

Thread moved on! The grin was for Serenster!

Unlike the usual trajectories though, Harry (and Archie and Lilibet) will actually ascend in the line to the throne before they move downwards. Once the Queen dies, William will become 1st, George 2nd, Charlotte 3rd and Louise 4th - Harry will move up one place to 5th. Then he’ll be 4th in turn, assuming William becomes King before any of his children have children. And he’s undeniably big news in the UK right now.

Slightly off-topic (as in the thread title), but it struck me today that, whilst Meghan appears to have disowned her own family, she actually hasn't uttered a word about them in the last few years. It's as if they don't exist.
Yet with Harry's family, it's a different modus operandi. They appear to be just as "wronged," and resentful, yet there's plenty of their opinions being expressed. Meghan was adamant that her interaction via letter with her father should be kept private. Yet it's OK to splash interactions with Harry's family all over the world?

That’s because there is nothing to be made of them. No one is interested and no one will pay to find out about them .

Exactly my point I suppose.

According to a poster up-thread, H&M had "no alternative" but to go public in a massive way to "clear their names."

But not for Thomas/Samantha Markle. They seem to be adopting the RF mantra of "least said, soonest mended" with them.

esterwin

It makes me laugh those declaring that other grandchildren are well-adjusted and happy. How would you know?

Laugh away. I said they seem well adjusted. I don’t know. Did I say I did?

My sibling has mixed in the same circles as one. No petulance, no showing off, no delusions of grandeur. An all round good egg as far as they could see.

One we have seen be petulant, disenchanted and a bit precious.

So just so I can laugh along, how do you know they are not well adjusted?

I can only see one looking like a total plum at moment.

And no, I’m not criticising Hal for his health but you put words in my mouth if you like.

This is just a clusterfuck in my opinion. Meghan does not get on on with her family - ( Dorian excepted ) that is meant to be OK - . Because Harry's family is famous and ( like it or not somewhat important ) quite OK to criticise them and to use the titles etc to earn money . Ach well - good luck to them both but it feels a little grabby & can we earn something out of this . ( just my opinion I do not know either of them )

What I do think is that 1) I am not sure Harry could not have got help for his wife's MH - given he was in touch and speaking to people about it - by which I mean MH organisations ) but I do not know 2) obviously they have said things which were not true 3) Could they not just , if they want to be a private family - I do not care about how much money they earn - just tone down the trading on the RF.

That said I shall get some pasta for diner without benefit of Oprah , Geoge Clooney , Omid Whats his name and Netflix and CNN. ( It is possible to live a life outside the public eye - ha ha ) - Am I the only one. ?

dinner not diner

@amusedtodeath1

Way back when Charles and Diana were ripping each other to shreds in public there was a lot of anti monarchy feelings at the time. I was one of them, the RF was irrelevant to me as a teenager. The whole splashing their personal lives in public thing was embarrassing and I felt we'd be better off without any of them tbh.

I'm 47 now and feel very differently, the legacy of over a Millennium is important to me these days.

The longer I've lived the more I value the past and it's influence on modern culture.

People change as they age.

I agree with every word here.

•you look at photos of the State Opening of Parliament from 10 or so years ago you’ll see a very solemn young Arthur Chatto holding her train. He also performed the role on Garter Day and similar events. And then he grew into that…! grin

Carrying regal trains must be a good workout 🏋️‍♂️

I can only see one looking like a total plum at moment.

Well he's taken the spotlight off the venal Peter and Zara, yes.