In what capacity are Harry and Meghan visiting New York

[IsabelBeck]

They are no longer working members of the Royal Family so have they gone to New York as private citizens?

How do they get to meet with Chelsea Clinton at the WHO offices and UN officials and politicians?

According to the Mail (I know, I know) they had federal protection.

Do Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (as they are styled there) have much clout in the US? Why?

@Roussette. I am talking about a long time ago. I am aware this has not happened in recent history. It was a light hearted remark. So not a stretch😀

Oops. Sorry @Rousette. I misunderstood your post. No I didn’t get it from the DM. I read it in several places but that was not one I read. And Diana did always stay at the Carlyle. So not a stretch really as they always mention the Diana angle themselves.

The watch wasn't worn during the NY trip then? Nor the hotel?

You call it 'deliberate, staged and schmoozing'. And 'fake it till you make it' and 'milking the Diana connection'

Light-hearted???
Come off it
Remind me not to make an enemy if you if that is "light-hearted' !!

I don’t know how to say this to you. They are REALLY not that well known in the US or New York. Neither are Kate or William. Or Charles or Camilla. When I moved here many years ago I was shocked at how few British celebs are famous here. Ed Sheeran and Adele yes. But Stephen Fry for instance, nope.
As I said there has been virtually no/minimal coverage of this NY visit. I only realised this was a ‘thing’ from MN. Same as that 40th birthday video. And I am a fairly well informed person. People watched the Oprah interview but beyond that they don’t have a recognisable US brand. But even amongst those who watched that, it was more about ‘oh wow the monarchy is awful’ rather than ‘these guys are poised to be superstars.’ I think a few
months on most would be hard pressed to name them. Meghan Markle was recognisable in her own right but not a superstar. But if you ask most Americans how exactly Harry is related to the Queen they would struggle.

As someone originally from a Commonwealth country they have more name recognition there and might also do in Canada. But then so do other members of the royalty.

@StartupRepair I haven't read the article fully but isn't it just more of the same ?- this writer is presumably being PAID for this article about M&H who she thinks are not doing anything worthwhile. So why is she writing about them when I am sure there are more worthwhile causes for her. Because it's quick money and the writers are paid well, otherwise they would move on and wherever M&H went they would not follow. But it's quick and easy money and too tempting.

AHH ok smilesy

Personally, how lovely his wife can wear his Mum's watch.
And stay where she stayed

That's interesting, @LuchiMangsho.
I got the impression that they had a high profile.

No no @Roussette. We were talking at cross purposes. I thought you were referring to a later post of mine. Yes she did wear the watch in New York. That post was not the one I was referring to as light hearted. Hope that makes more sense now. I did say in my next post that I had misunderstood what you were referring too.

@Maireas

I don't think the watch is an issue. Harry inherited it, so gave it to Meghan which is understandable, she wears it, which is nice. I think that's seperate from any kind of ambition.

Meghan also has a Cartier Tank of her own, she bought it as a celebratory gift for herself when Suits was picked up for a third season. I kind of hope that is the one she is currently wearing (I am nowhere near an expert on Cartier watches to be able to distinguish between models ) as that’s also a lovely story.

I'm totally confuzzled smilesy but no worries

Ok @LuchiMangsho looks like you are affirming what MM said, that she did not know much about the RF, being American.

Afterwards, however, more Americans were more aware of the RF because of her American link. And as I said it's not just the US (the US is not the world). So over 50M people worldwide, and over 17M in the US. While that is not sports viewership levels, it is very much a respectable number and I know very famous people who reach nowhere near as much.

True, @Serenster - thanks! That's also a nice story as you say.

As I was saying earlier the mainstream US press has barely covered this. CNN. MSNBC. Wa Po. NYT. Even the LA Times. There might be some tabloid coverage. But nothing I have seen on the news. Yes the Oprah interview got some considerable traction but again it wasn’t seen as earth shattering as it was in the UK.
I asked my People magazine reading MIL (who lives with us) if she knew who Harry and Meghan were and she was a bit confused for a while till she remembered them from the Oprah interview. I would say that’s the main name recognition they have which as a brand building exercise is a hard place to start from.
So I can totally see why they wanted to do this NYC thing but for eg people know about the Clinton Foundation or Gates etc. Literally no one I know will be able to tell you whose foundation Archewell is. Or even the names of their kids. (More people would
be able to name Tom Cruise’s daughter and Kim K’s kids). So if they are to make it big in the long term they will need the name recognition as they build any philanthropic brand.

Also that above article is in an Australian newspaper…as I said they (and other Royals) will have name recognition in the Commonwealth.

@LuchiMangsho
Ok thanks for putting it in perspective- so it is still a UK tabloid media obsession with them. Maybe the UK tabloids know that they will still attract readers and followers if they put anything negative in their papers.

Of course they do, though, @PreparationPreparationPrep!

Tabloids are desperate for readers given the way the print industry is dying on its arse. There is a reason why the Daily Mail has as many different articles as possible on its website about the Sussexes - because they are a hugely polarising couple and people will click on the stories to read them, whether to tut or applaud. Clickbait is basically the business model of many publications these days - and it’s not limited to stories about this couple.

They seem to have been extensively covered in the US. Maybe just as I never saw them on the UK news, in particular the BBC - who covered KM tennis the other day, you may have missed it.

The Australian newspapers are just as bigoted as the UK media.

I don't know if these are all gossip mags, but Reuters and AP are not and they are the global news agent.

apnews.com/article/united-nations-general-assembly-arts-and-entertainment-new-york-meghan-markle-united-nations-8ca4f3bdb79aa47c001479cf048a960f

www.reuters.com/world/uk/when-harry-meghan-met-un-chief-new-york-2021-09-25/

www.nbcnewyork.com/entertainment/entertainment-news/harry-and-meghan-visit-un-during-world-leaders-meeting/3291810/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_NYBrand

AP and Reuters are wholesalers of news stories though- they sell stories and pictures to newspapers and other media worldwide who won’t have their own journalists on the ground in (for example) New York. You’d need to see their own sales figures for those stories to be able to assess global interest.

Sorry to disappoint you but this is the filler stuff that plays on the TV at the gym at 6:30 am. I didn’t say they didn’t have any coverage but I don’t know how to convince you that more Americans this week will know who Gabby Petito is than Prince Harry or Meghan Markle.
And that was one article on the NBC entertainment section.
I also googled. There was a similar slightly more critical piece on Fox News.

Reuters and AP cover global news. Of all kinds. This is Reuters US.

www.reuters.com/world/us/

And this is Reuters UK

www.reuters.com/world/uk/

(If you scroll down on the UK one there is indeed H&M coverage).

There are many still
Insisting that M&H are seeking and using their RF connection in bold - So how come they don't have the same response as they do In the UK. It seems like they are just getting on with their work to earn a living and the fact they they are RF connection is not a big deal for the US where they are. So maybe the RF connection which they can never disconnect from is
Not earning them as much as the UK would like to think going by @LuchiMangsho post - being RF goes over the heads of most American and now the wedding has passed Meghan is more Known for her role jn Suits. So we can all calm down and let them be as it appears being a Royal in the US is not as lucrative as we might think.

And Reuters US has no mention of them.
This is US CNN (where there is mention of Prince Andrew)
us.cnn.com/?hpt=header_edition-picker

Which @PreparationPreparationPrep which is the point I made. That only people in the UK are worried about what capacity they are doing this in. (Which was the original question). My point was that most Americans don’t know what they are doing let alone why.

If they really are filming for Netflix, I would be interested to know the extent to which they are ‘in hock’ to the company and are obliged to get out there and generate content. Harry, in particular, looks rather uncomfortable in some photos. Maybe he’d rather be back home communing with the chickens and the children. But they are schlepping round New York wearing masks, glad-handing bigwigs and hugging other people’s offspring. I don’t know. Is it really completely their own choice to do all this right now?

@Serenster

AP and Reuters are wholesalers of news stories though- they sell stories and pictures to newspapers and other media worldwide who won’t have their own journalists on the ground in (for example) New York. You’d need to see their own sales figures for those stories to be able to assess global interest.

Don't know what your point is, but I am saying that Reuteres are distributors, so they covered this and distribute it all over the world. News have access to it, if they want. I have read from people in other continents commenting on this, meaning it was distributed to other countries and other countries did have an interest.

What does it flippin' matter? Whether they're known, not known, famous, infamous, etc
I know some posters are desperate for them to sink into oblivion, but what will you post on them then?
Perhaps we'll go back to avocados and one shoulder dresses!

They're happy and doing their own thing. Let them go!