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?

The Oprah interview was done because it was the end of the one year extension from HMQ

The interview was done out of pure spite and revenge because they were told no to the half in and half out model they wanted. They were aggrieved and angry. Pure and simple. They could have offered an interview and made it positive and uplifting and interesting without reducing themselves and the rest of the family to toxic media fodder. A total lack of true class.

I’m not even going to start with this one. I mean, seriously?

They paid back Frogmore Cottage. The Security is because of Harry's proximity to Charles and William. Nothing they can do there. The Yorks do represent the queen on occasion, especially on patronages.

They were not going to get money from the taxpayer or Dutchy otherwise, unless specifically representing the crown, as should be.

Just like the Kents.

They simply laid out what took place. If they were treated spitefully by the RF, there is nothing they can do. They simply told us what happened. If the RF were nicer, the interview would have been nicer.

Yes they did. Only Harry complained his father wouldn’t fund him after the initial six months. So clearly they didn’t mean what they said.

The Yorks do represent the queen on occasion, especially on patronages.

When? Neither hold any royal patronages.

The Security is because of Harry's proximity to Charles and William.

So not like the Yorks then.

They were not going to get money from the taxpayer or Dutchy otherwise, unless specifically representing the crown, as should be.

But the Yorks do not represent the crown and do not get public money. They don't feature on the main page of the official royal family website.

So you seem to be saying that they wanted to be on the level of the Yorks, except for all the other perks.

They simply told us what happened

Oh I think you might be forgetting the very very large fee that they charged.....they simply didn't tell us for the greater good, a great deal of (blood) money exchanged hands first

And Oprah was not going to pay big bucks for insipid story about how lovely the RF are, no she wanted the dirt and grot and even if was made up or the absolute truth she wanted a headline busting expose and get her money's worth.
No doubt H&M also had one eye to all the other shady deals being made, and wanted to 'show' they could come up with the goodies and really create carnage. It would have gone swimmingly had the Obamas, Clooneys and every A lister decided this kind of toxic branding was not for them and promptly ditched Harry and Meg. And plenty of companies like Disney distanced themselves after Oprah not wishing to be any part of it. It did much more harm than good.

The Yorks have royal patronages.

Here is a list of some of them.

gertsroyals.blogspot.com/2017/04/princess-eugenie-patronages.html

notanotheroneagain

“Erm....... they specifically said, they would earn their own money”

Erm …….they still wanted f/time security . Which the Yorks and Kents don’t have. They also wanted to pick and choose what they did and which country they would live in so not quite the same.

Most people don’t choose to air their dirty laundry to total strangers in order to get their ‘point’ across. Especially since the family cant answer back.
Their version of events is simply that. It’s their version. That doesn’t make it true or accurate.

Those are private patronages, not royal patronages.

They are not in the gift of the queen, and they do not represent her.

You are really talking out your arse.

Oprah does not pay for interviews. No one has distanced themselves from anyone.

Oprah does not pay for interviews

And you can believe that if you want, but I certainly don't! You don't dish that kind of dirt for nothing, for sure there would be an arrangement of some kind. No one blows up their entire family for free unless they are totally and utterly insane.

The security has nothing to do with the job, but the proximity of the relations. If the Kents or Yorks were HMQ/PC children, things would be different.

The Kents also work all around Europe. Where do you think they get most of their work from. That is how they meet the Kremlin and how they do European documentaries.

And yes most A listers would not be seen dead with the Sussex brand now.
They have real reputations, built by true talent for decades and are not about to ruin their creditability by being associated with the desperate B lister airing dirty laundry. They pay good money to be advised well.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/meghan-markle-crushed-not-invited-24735395

Okay so if you were them and said the things they said about your family and broadcast it far and wide, how would your family react? Most families would never speak to them again.
of course it’s caused damage. That’s what they wanted and why they did it.

www.suggest.com/prince-harry-meghan-markle-left-friendless-in-hollywood-snubbed-by-a-listers/2572455/

Go look at that list again.

Right under the name of the patronage it tells you if it's royal or not.
eg. Tate's Youth, Coronet theatre etc. very specific.

"This week, the Globe reports Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are being “shunned by Hollywood A-listers” after their recent comments against the royal family. An “entertainment industry bigwig” dishes, “They’ve gone from must-see novelties to must-be-avoided egomaniacs!” adding, “The excitement of rubbing elbows with royalty has long evaporated for a who’s who of stars.”

"But the outlet insists other socialites are still upset about Markle and Harry’s “bombshell attacks” on the royals. “People are sick of them constantly painting themselves as victims,” snitches another insider, “Fed-up celebs are closing ranks and snubbing them.” The outlet reveals that certain A-list celebrities that used to be in the Sussexes’ close circle are keeping their distance before noting that the couple didn’t even make the guest list to President Obama’s 60th birthday bash despite the families"

“Meghan was devastated,” yet another source reveals, “She desperately wanted — and expected — to be the special guest at the party. Harry had a ‘special relationship’ with the Obamas but it was fractured in recent months by Meghan publicly attacking the royal family as uncaring racists who refused her help when she was suicidal.” According to the source, the snub is “public humiliation at the highest level for Meghan — and Harry. Now everyone knows they’re not in the power set — no matter how much they pretend to be.”

Harry and Meghan are openly described by those in Hollywood as 'D' listers. Not a good look if you want to secure multi million deals.

Go look at that list again.
Right under the name of the patronage it tells you if it's royal or not.
eg. Tate's Youth, Coronet theatre etc. very specific.

Where are the official announcements from Buckingham Palace about these patronages?

If you did nothing to H&M, you have nothing to be ashamed of. Just like Eugenie and possibly Edward, have shown publicity.

As for the dodgy articles the other pp linked, the source is the Globe (don't they say H&M are divorced every other week) and Angela Levin.

Anyway in answer to Op's original message: it now looks very very unlikely Harry or Meghan will be on the balcony (As confirmed by Harry during his news interview)

A big phew and nicely done, whoever engineered that! :)

The Duke of York used to have his own www page linked to the RF one, back then, the sisters also had their own pages. I looked it up. All of these were on there, but since too many people were referencing, I believe the rf decided to get rid of these pages. But they did state which royal patronages belonged to whom.
It looked something like the link. You will also note that they remain HRH.

I'm not sure why you insist on using screenshots rather than links, as they're a very poor way to support an argument.

But they did state which royal patronages belonged to whom.

I'm asking for the official announcement stating that such and such a patronage had been conferrred on Bea or Eugenie. If they were actual royal patronages, there would have been such an announcement.

The term 'royal patron' is often used loosely. Meghan was referred to as such by both The Mayhew and Smartworks, despite the fact that they were private patronages, both of which she kept after 'stepping down'.

The fact remains that the York sisters do not represent the monarchy, do not receive any public funding, do not have taxpayer security, did not get a grace and favour home and did not attempt to set up their own brand using the word 'royal'.

So saying that this is what the Sussexes wanted is disingenuous, to say the least. In fact, it's just wrong.