Meghan Markle Archetype podcasts & interviews

[susan12345678]

As the last thread filled up & there's plenty of discussion of Meghan's interview in The Cut, seems worthwhile starting a new thread!

A read yesterday that a series of media interviews are planned to promote the podcasts. Should be very interesting if The Cut interview is anything to go by!

The reporter then also goes on to say Archie seemed to know like clockwork what time his mum is coming for him.

You mean at the end of the school day? I mean it’s not hard!

Ah who’s making things up now! Yes there was a book, written with the Queen’s permission. The rest of your post is wrong.

She has and she’ll threaten to use it every chance she can.

I've realised who she is now reminding me of: Michael Scott.

He would have told stories suggesting he was a bit like Mandela, or explain that he sometimes gives things to poor people, all with a side eye to the camera to check everyone is picking up on what a great guy he is.

She is now beyond parody.

A lot of fantasising here.

I don't think they will divorce any time soon. Don't hold your breath.

Harry is not idle or useless. Meghan supports him for his Sentebale and Invictus. I can see why she would not go to Africa with small children as that was several countries at one time. All big projects.

And the Mariah Carey story: that she almost stopped being a fan, and sweated in confusion at the joke, until she realised with relief Mariah meant she was fabulous.

Oh God I want to hide behind the sofa.

I have read the Angela Kelly book. It was written at the Queen's approval. There is literally no gossip in it about any Royals or household members - it is very discreet and just talks about what her job entails, memorable events and tours etc. She is very polite about everyone.

I’ve read it too and would agree.

There are always Meghan fans reaching to explain how a particular situation happened. Those two random Mums don't normally do the pick--up?!!!
It's like in the early days when they fled to the safety of Canada, there were people falling over themselves to say 'book, they'll never write a book', 'never be an Oprah interview' - you're all horrible liars for even suggesting such a thing. Why would you say such vile things about such a lovely young couple?'

At least Meghan has shown through her own words what she is.

The message is clearly ‘if you don’t wholly approve of me I won’t like you’.

I was listening to the radio yesterday and they were reporting on the comment MM made about Harry saying he'd lost his father.

It irked me because they reported it as "Meghan said in an interview she hoped Harry's relationship with his father would last unlike hers" - when actually all she said was that he'd said that to her, and she said 'it doesn't necessarily have to be that way for them but it's his choice'. That's a completely neutral statement on her part that doesn't at all suggest she hopes for reconciliation.

It was a much more charitable reporting by the BBC than what she actually said. They then followed it up with the claim Harry made in the Oprah interview about Charles stopping taking his calls.

Just very odd for them to deliberately misquote her to paint a more positive picture - and actually made the RF look bad.

And the back packs are given to the security to hand out - now I know that from a security perspective they can't have Meghan or Archie wandering the streets but the optics again are awful. I drive past in my chauffeur driven blacked out car back to my vast mansion whilst my security pass out little bags to the poor on the way.

Makes you wonder if those reports were true that they sent security out on errands when they had them in Canada.

Reading the cut article, particularly the repeated descriptions of the opulent wealth and Meghan luxuriating in it... it somehow reminds me of one of those hello/ok magazine type interviews with a WAG - showing off a new baby or wedding photos or whatever. People with little insight of their own beyond looking attractive and procreating with a footballer or whatever. It could so easily have been the case if she had got with Ashley Cole or Rory McElroy instead.

I also wonder if the pressure to maintain status and stay interesting and relevant leads to the temptation to more outrageous statements and behaviour (I also wonder if this is how wagatha Christie came about).

If she had done a more serious, humble piece/podcast and put in the time and graft to build a reputation as a skilled interviewer like Oprah, then she would have the potential of a longer and more respected career. As it is, she's opted for sensationalist short cuts and most people are seeing through it and tiring of the moaning from the mansion.

The thing about gathering content is interesting. There was a blind item just before they left the RF about MM being caught taking secret selfies with Cambridge children on her first visit to see W & K.

I didn’t believe it at the time and thought it was silly. But everything MM is saying now makes me believe that she would be the first person to exploit an opportunity.

As previous poster has already pointed out. The RF threw open the doors for her. Welcomed her in to their inner circle and the story at the time was that she had no family and she would be joining them (which seemed very hurtful to Doria). She was invited to Christmas at Sandringham as a non-family member (which was unprecedented) and then had a lavish televised wedding (which hasn’t really happened before for marriages outside the immediate line of inheritance.

There seems to be a lot of ‘me,me,me’ and grabby behaviour but not a lot of gratitude.

I mean come on. She’s a highly privileged, famous woman who married a prince who seems to adore her, had a fairytale wedding, was airdropped straight into the heart of the royal family, given a beautiful cottage (which was decorated initially at someone else’s expense).

And she is now bitching and moaning about feeling trapped and not listened to. No one made you marry him or join the royal family.

I would say that what went wrong here is she eventually discovered that she wouldn’t be allowed to monetise her status while a working royal and she couldn’t stand not to be bragging on socials about her privileged life. And I can’t say I blame her for not want to lives but some else’s rules. But please stop with the poor persecuted princess routine. It rings very false.

Would be much better to give money to a charity who assesses what people actually need rather than giving out random stuff. But then I suppose that would be done quietly.

Meghan is too brittle to laugh at herself (again like Trump).

The anecdote about dancing in the streets is something Trump would say too. The Obamas and frankly anyone else would never repeat this anecdote seriously. What would the posters on here he saying if Trump said it.

There is a type of personality that social media and modern society has brought to the fore. Trump and Meghan share similar traits, they don’t care about anyone else but themselves but so many people lap it up and detach the persons words from their actions They both think all publicity is good publicity, and they very thin skinned and will unleash revenge on anyone they feel wronged them.

What I think will happen is that their access to the RF will be very much curtailed/controlled, even if they wish to re establish it. Harry will obviously know much more than Meghan was able to discover in the less than 2 years she was part of it and they are thought to still be close to Eugenie at least, but at some point anything "new" will dry up. It's a sort of grey rock, I suppose and I can imagine the whole process would be painful for Charles at least.

They've got another problem with this series and especially the timing of Harry's book publication. The Queen is 96 and her health is deteriorating. They were heavily criticised for the Oprah interview taking place when Philip was (as we now know) dying and I think this would be magnified many times over if any particularly explosive "truth bombs" were dropped at a similar time for the Queen.

I agree about the lack of sense of humour and potential for misunderstanding. Also about the persecuted princess routine. I bear MM no ill will, and think she could do good things using her position but I am not sure what her focus is apart from herself and her RF gripes. The veiled threats, grandiose self-comparisons, and veiled comparisons with Kate's parenting style are for me a particularly low blow.

I'll take your word as I never read it, just from people who read it and said she had been bullied herself and said there was a gossip culture in the palaces.

Just channelling the same energy with the same faux outrage you all have about H&M 'cashing in' when talking about their own lives. When even the staff is cashing in, let alone the biographies and bitchy tabloids.

Didn't you all get outraged when Harry was asked about an article from the times talking to William. When asked if it's true that they had a call and made up, H goes erm....no. Goodness me that caused outrage towards him spilling beans about the family. No one asked how the reporter even know about the call to begin with.

I listened to the Serena podcast. MM’s presenting style is cringe worthy, but what jumps out more than that is that on more than one occasion she mentions how she alone, as an 11 year old, managed to get an advertisement changed from saying ‘women all over America’ to ‘people all over America’. She wrote a letter and that letter forced the change. At no point does she consider that perhaps the company received hundreds or maybe thousands of similar letters and hers was just one of them. Pure narcissist.

@notanotheroneagain I bought that book for my mum for Christmas. There is no gossip in it whatsoever.

I don't follow much of your last post.....can you explain what you mean about W and the times??

…you have been uncharacteristically calm on this thread @Roussette is it because your own bullying tone has had your posts repeatedly deleted recently? Turned over a new leaf and learning to discuss and debate reasonably - keep it up - it suits you and you will be heard and have more impact.

'Ok so you’re the bullying police? Rather condescending that you think you must put everyone in their place constantly.'

It surprises me that even now, with all the new guff podcasts and articles, that some posters hang on desperately to the 'bullying' claims. There hasn't been any bullying just scrutiny and opinion on what this bitter pair keep dishing out.

I stand (sit) by my armchair diagnosis of yesterday. Grandiose personality traits.

People like this are able to exude a certain level of charm for fairly lengthy periods of time, to carry ‘followers’ along with them for a while. Often the followers themselves have reactive attachment issues from childhood, like Harry.

Those that see it find it astonishing that others don’t - once you see it, you can’t unsee it. Rapprochements are impossible so family/former friends might as well forget it. It’s like a cult of personality.