Harry and Meghan 'are invited to appear on Buckingham Palace balcony at Queen's Platinum Jubilee'

[NarcissasMumintheDoghouse]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10729859/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-invited-make-balcony-appearance-Jubilee.html

No source cited, so could just be made up news.

How do you all feel about this? Is it another refusing-to-fly-the-flag-at-half-mast-for-Diana misreading of the public mood? Does anybody actually care? And, if not, what does that signify?

God the whole thing is like a soap opera.

Eastenders with tiaras and parades. I've never known a jubilee be overshadowed by a petulant Prince.

Harry should display some humility and self awareness and stay away, he's blown it so many times how on earth are the rest of the RF supposed to act around him knowing that every comment will be repeated by H to earn his $$$.

Feel so sorry for the Queen but she seems to tip toe round him and let him do wtf he likes.

And why is everyone going on about Harry's hunting 18yrs ago

He was still hard at it just a few years back (and oh, look. A private jet again) :

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5169529/Day-Harry-pals-shot-dead-15-wild-boars.html

Didn't the Cambridges take George hunting like, last year

Yes. Usual hypocritical royal shitshow and failure to read or take public opinion into account.

I did find an interesting article calling on Harry to use his memoir to shed light on the killing of a pair of protected birds over Sandringham on an evening he and a friend were the only ones out taking potshots and also calling on him to expose criminal activity in the grouse shooting industry:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/aug/01/prince-harry-should-settle-bird-shooting-mystery-in-memoirs-say-campaigners

Wonder if the now ardent conservationist will act on either issue.

I suspect there’s a lot of guilt about what happened to Diana to be honest. They know he’s damaged because of that largely, and his father’s affair. Therefore they all make ‘allowances’ whilst rolling their eyes. Many families have someone like this who is always creating drama and never happy.

I suspect Andrew has been pandered to because he’s the middle son with no real role and a failed marriage.

exactly !

As if the DM would not go out of their way to expose the Sussexes for sending out stories. In fact, if they could, they would find ways to twist things to seem that way. They say Mid is the Sussex mouthpiece, yet he has never reported such things.

Just accept the fact that the press is obsessed with the Sussexes, and make lots of money out of them.

The honest headlines should really read that HMQ is so desperate to protect Andrew, she is snubbing around 30 royals for his benefit.

No one in their right mind would have Andrew and Harry in the same sentence .
One is married to a woman of colour and moved to America. The other was accused in the court of law of sexual assault. Give your head a wobble.

@notanotheroneagain ·
The honest headlines should really read that HMQ is so desperate to protect Andrew, she is snubbing around 30 royals for his benefit.

Well none of us know that do we ? It’s a well documented fact that PC wants to slim down the RF. As his reign draws closer , he has more influence.
Also remember that in 2012 there were only 6 people on the balcony - HM, PC, C, W,C and H. So there is precedent.

All this BANNED stuff in the DM is a load of codswallop. It’s obviously only to be working Royals for logistical reasons.

@notanotheroneagain

At the last jubilee it was only working Royals, as it is this time. Andrew isn’t a working
Royal, neither are the Sussex’s.

Just accept the fact that the press is obsessed with the Sussexes, and make lots of money out of them.

I guess it depends on what sort of press you read.

I hardly ever hear or read anything about these two unless I come to dedicated royal forums like this one. Possibly the tabloids enjoy winding them up, but I don't read those rags so I wouldn't know. I understand tastes in newspapers may vary however.

You'd have to live under a rock not to see the endless nonsense spouted about them. It is everywhere. I can only presume that MN is your only social media and you are not on twitter, FB or google because it throws up all these ridiculous headlines continually.

Hard to avoid when they're on the front page of every rag. Which I hasten to add, I don't read but it is pushed everywhere whether I like it or not.

So I agree totally with @notanotheroneagain There is a lot of money being made out of them.

You'd have to live under a rock not to see the endless nonsense spouted about them. It is everywhere. I can only presume that MN is your only social media and you are not on twitter, FB or google because it throws up all these ridiculous headlines continually.

Social media doesn't 'throw anything up'. You get recommendations and links which follow from your own usage and history. I don't follow any royal gossip on social media so I don't get any such headlines 'thrown up'. It really is possible to avoid them.

Hard to avoid when they're on the front page of every rag.

But they aren't. They really aren't.

And even if they are, you can easily avoid these 'rags' if you so choose. I manage it quite easily. The only time I see tabloid headlines is when I'm in the supermarket queue or looking at the press review on the news. And no, I don't 'live under a rock'. I just don't seek out tabloid articles to get outraged about. While of course not reading them.

Yes, I was just about to say that what you see on social media sites like Facebook and others is entirely customised to your own preferences based on what they can see you engage with. They are algorithm based, so two people can have very different headlines and posts shown to them.

You can say that all you like... but I do not click on the rubbish spouted about them by the likes of the DM.

On FB I also get funeral plans and incontinence pants... you'll tell me next that I've researched those! And no, I don't have my correct DOB on there so not that.

But they aren't. They really aren't

But they are. They really are.

You seem remarkably versed in the activities of H&M for not ever reading about them Purple
Strange that...

Even if 30 odd of them are 'missing out' there are still going to be more than enough for gawping and cap-doffing purposes.

I'm also seeing reports of a second balcony appearance as part of the finale which will no doubt give the slighted including the Sussexes their chance to shine.

You can say that all you like...

Say what all I like?

Social media is personalised. It is a fact that your feed reflects your activity and search history. This is very well known. So if tabloid headlines about the royals are being 'thrown up' on your SM, that is not a random occurrence. It certainly doesn't happen on my Twitter feed.

You seem remarkably versed in the activities of H&M for not ever reading about them Purple
Strange that...

That's not what I said, is it?

I enjoy royal gossip and sometimes read royal forums such as this one. I don't read tabloids and tend to only hear about their royal coverage on sites like this., invariably from people who claim not to read it. However, when I go a few days without reading royal discussion boards, I haven't a clue what 'H&M' or indeed any of the royals are up to. Because, unlike what you are claiming, it is in fact perfectly possible to avoid news about them if you so choose. Millions manage it every single day.

I'm also seeing reports of a second balcony appearance as part of the finale which will no doubt give the slighted including the Sussexes their chance to shine.

I think that's happened in previous Jubilees but with all the current controversy about who will or will not be waving at the plebs I can't see it happening this year. I think it will be one and done.

On FB I also get funeral plans and incontinence pants... you'll tell me next that I've researched those! And no, I don't have my correct DOB on there so not that

Don't think that just because you don't have your correct DOB on FB, advertisers don't have a good idea of how old you are!

I don't read tabloids

Neither do I. Which is why I said 'you can say that all you like'
Well done though on being so well informed from royal gossip and royal forums!

Don't think that just because you don't have your correct DOB on FB, advertisers don't have a good idea of how old you are!

Haha. I may be old but I'm not that old!

Just wondering who on earth reads tabloids given that absolutely no one wants to admit it ??

It would be interesting to know wouldn't it?

I admit to sometimes looking at the DM online < hides>

Ashamed to second that...

Waves to @Oceanus

I read papers right across the spectrum in the UK for work purposes, and haven’t the slightest shame about doing so (to be fair, that doesn’t often include the Sun and the Mirror, but that’s because they generally don’t write about the issues I’m interested in! The Mail does, though).

I don’t read the DM much, but I did click on to see about Putins 989m yacht being seized and the reaction to a potential Catholic first minister in Northern Ireland (funny)

Their website is very well funded so quick to publish news (although the ‘journalism’ is often terrible as a result). It’s a good source for ‘news’ which you can read about elsewhere 🤣

I do suspect they get paid by people like the Beckhams and the Kardasians to publish news and give them column inches as it seems such dross based on the headlines (never click), I’m not a fan of reality TV either or breakfast TV so there’s very little to click on.