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.

Granted, there IS something quite satisfying about a mixed-race girl carrying the name of the Queen of England

Why? Why does race have to be brought into this?

Lilibet is a sweet family nickname but daft for an actual name. No wonder they have said she'll be know as Lili.

I think H and M are getting harder and harder to defend

That's probably true, but then TBF, so are the entire RF

Anyway this one's going nowhere; there've been so many inconsistencies that it's hardly safe to trust anything H&M say these days, and the Queen will probably say nothing

@ittakes2

Does this mean the Queen will be called to court as a witness??

No

That'll never happen

@museumum

I actually on this one feel that the palace / queen / bbc are all being really nasty.

Can you imagine if you named your child after their grandparent and instead of 'congratulations how lovely' everybody instead weighed in with 'but did you ask her permission?' 'and if you did, did she feel she had to say yes?' it's mean and petty. it's an honour to have a child named after you, any child, you don't get to 'give permission'.

More than one of her great-grandchildren have Elizabeth as a middle name, and if Harry had used the full name (Elizabeth) rather than the nickname there would still have been some eye-rolling as he'd just said the Queen's parenting was the cause of genetic pain in his TV series. But I do think there would have been less of a reaction to the full name rather than the very personal nickname Lilibet.

The other issue with using the name Elizabeth Diana is that W&K got there first with Charlotte.

I find the "palace source" talking about this with the media distinctly petty and unreasonable, whatever H&M have done (and I sure as heck don't support the way they're badmouthing H's family while continuing to use that connection to make money).

It would have been more dignified to say nothing. The stories this tiny baby is going to read about herself one day are unpleasant.

@MobyDicksTinyCanoe

I don't blame him.

His wife has just given birth for goodness sake and still they pick away.

Yes, his wife's just given birth to their daughter, their much longed for second child, and this is what Harry is spending his time on. Honestly. He should spend his time with his wife and kids, take Lili out in their lovely garden, go to the beach, and enjoy the immensely privileged life he has to the full, instead of spending the first few days of his daughter's life full of bitterness at the media. What's that saying about how living well is the best revenge?

I think they should stop reporting on these two. They can have all that ‘privacy’ they want them. We could all do with that peace and silence.

And all of this 'asked for permission' - is irrelevant, they should never have considered this name in the first place.

I can imagine how the call went. 'Granny, wonderful news blah blah.. and here is the best bit, in your honour we have decided to name her Lilibet, Lily for short - isn't that amazing? What do you think?.... [stunned silence]. Oh, wow well really darling? Such a surprise, I really wasn't expecting that, well er how lovely, gosh you have rather caught me by surprise. No darling I am fine honestly, just such a surprise.....'

How could you possibly say no or register any sort of unhappiness in a moment like that. Especially with the one member of the family everyone has to walk on eggshells around.

It's Royal Ascot next week...I suspect Her Majesty will be a little bit more interested in that.

I think I read that “Charlotte” was meant to be some sort of tribute to both Charles and Carole

How is the name Charlotte a tribute to Carole? They both start with a "C" I suppose

Surely the only people that know what was said are the Queen and Harry, surely he isn't going to drag her through that. Is he going to go on TV and say she is lying.

It must be so exhausting to be Harry - a battle a day!
So classy turning his kid's name into a brand name!

@Dongdingdong

I think I read that “Charlotte” was meant to be some sort of tribute to both Charles and Carole

How is the name Charlotte a tribute to Carole? They both start with a "C" I suppose

Carole is a derivative of Charles, as is Charlotte.

When is this all going to end

^This

TBH, it’s normally because he’s misunderstood something. Such as that incident in Canada in which Meghan grinned at the paps in the forest and walked straight towards them, and then Harry sent a bonkers legal letter saying she had been unaware of them

@RickiTarr You do realise that Harry and Meghan were actually successful in suing the press agency that either took or released those photos (can’t remember which one). It looks like Meghan is smiling and walking towards the camera but the photos were taken on a long lens, from the distance, so she had no idea they were there.

@VeilofWinterFog totally agree. It's a deeply personal nickname, and with Prince Philip dying there's now no one left to call the Queen by it. For the most estranged of her grandchildren to use it weeks after trashing her parenting and turning his back on everything she stands for is deeply crass and ungracious.

The BBC reporter this morning was saying that the Palace were annoyed that the Sussexes had briefed that the Queen had approved the choice of name. Time the Sussexes were called out on their lies.

Absolute BS. But entertaining enough for a sunny afternoon

@VeilofWinterFog

It feels like they are trolling the RF now. Of all the names they could have chosen this is probably the only one that would cause controversy or hurt to the family- maybe apart from 'Wallis'.

There is a sentimentality and 'ownership' to a nickname, especially such an intimate and historic one such as this, that does not exist within a given name itself. It is so deeply personal. A family nickname is wonderful gift and intimately bound with someone's history and identity. There is unique bond between the giver and recipient.

To take that name, particularly given the current family dynamic and use it as your child's given name is very provocative. They must know this. Then to attempt to copyright the name is just beyond. If feels like theft.

I think there is a lot of upset within the RF that has led to this statement to the BBC from a 'senior official'.

It will be very interesting to see if there is any official word from the Palace itself.

I agree with this., Highly insensitive given the stuff they have been saying , and the timing of Prince Phillip being so unwell while they were saying it. Using someone’s very personal pet name is quite a bullying thing to do as it is hard to object, particularly when relations are so fraught anyway. What on earth is wrong with Harry ?

Harry has got far too much time on his hands.

Queen must be heartily pissed off at their choice of name.

It worries me that he is even considering UK news 3 days after the birth of his DD, even giving it headspace. Who cares who asked who what? Why have they got Omid person spouting off? Instantly.

The reason is, they were waiting for discord. It strikes me as very worrying. As a PP said, they should be going to the beach, looking at how lucky they are etc.

He is not happy. Definitely not.

I can’t get over the fact that you would name your child after the head of a family who ignored your cries for help when you were suicidal.
Why oh why would you do that and remind yourself of the pain on a daily basis?

@GrouchyKiwi

I find the "palace source" talking about this with the media distinctly petty and unreasonable, whatever H&M have done (and I sure as heck don't support the way they're badmouthing H's family while continuing to use that connection to make money).

It would have been more dignified to say nothing. The stories this tiny baby is going to read about herself one day are unpleasant.

This. Was there really need for the alleged source to say anything at all? It was clearly said with malice and designed to make H&M lose credibility.

They announced a baby and name, and end of. The witch hunt about the name is truly sickening!

How will he ever prove that the “palace source” didn’t tell the BBC that, or weren’t a good source? The BBC clearly presented it as a quote from a source, not fact.

I don't know how the law works, but surely if you write something libellous about someone else, even if it's reporting the words of a "source" rather than you stating it as fact, that person can still sue you for libel. Isn't it up to the press to establish whether the source is telling the truth or otherwise? Are there any legal experts who could enlighten us?