More Archwell Podcasts

[susan12345678]

With another podcast set for release this week, The Sunday Times has a piece addressing Harry and Meghan's apparent strategy:

Courtiers are bemused by the Sussexes’ determination to rage against the past. As Davis observed of Meghan in her article: “She has taken a hardship and turned it into content.” A source who knows the Sussexes questions why Meghan “is constantly looking back at how awful it was to briefly be a royal. What does success look like, is it a number in the bank? Is it that they’ve killed off the monarchy?” Another Palace source says: “Ultimately they are bashing the institution that has put them in the position they’re in, the longevity of that strategy is not sustainable.”

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/harry-and-meghan-keep-bashing-the-monarchy-because-its-good-business-royals-believe-nq29p6g7z

I'm curious about their strategy, too. They seem to think that criticizing the royal makes them look better - it really doesn't. Instead, it just makes them look petty and increasingly irrelevant.

Not yet- so far the focus is on Mindy who had her two young children while single by donor, and is in her 40s without a partner. The whole episode is about singleness so it would be very off if Meghan started talking about Harry.

'This episode also features New York Magazine writer Rebecca Traister, who unpacks the many archetypes that have followed single women for generations.'

Spotify’s blurb on the latest podcast. Stereotype, STEREOTYPES, STEREOPTYPES!!!!

Archetypes is just wrong and doesn’t even make sense in this context. It’s so fucking irritating.

Are people not allowed questions or do you just not know the answer?

I find the whole using ‘archetype’ when you mean ‘stereotype’ really irritating and grating now.

it’s shoehorning the word in as it matches your brand name - style over substance, which is pretty much the brand anyway

Now Meghan has asked Mindy about fashion and attending the Met Gala, and asking what dress Mindy was wearing. Is Meghan fishing for a Met invite? Not sure why she would ask someone like Mindy such a boring question when the conversation was already so interesting.

Talking of charity, I am puzzled by the concept of the charity polo match. Anything that involves highly trained horses, equipment and travel of those horses costs an absolute fortune to stage. Where does the money come from? Sponsors? Harry is basically having fun in a field with his mates in one of the world's most expensive sports. And it is called charity.

Also, if Meghan wanted to discuss actual archetypes, in the true sense of the word, it would have been a much more positive podcast series.

For example, Serena being the archetype of a ambitious sports superstar.

Mariah Carey being the archetype of a diva in the true sense of the word, ie a performing goddess.

Mindy Kaling being the archetype of a successful woman who has decided to live a solo life as a solo parent.

Instead by muddling stereotypes with archetypes, you get a mess of negative discussion and clichéd platitudes.

Yes I'm fascinated by who provides polo ponies for the Royals to ride @StartupRepair

Polo ponies are expensive to buy, keep, you need lots of them, there are usually six chukkas in a match and usually a different pony will be ridden in each although at a lower grade each pony might be ridden twice, you need spares to cover for injury, loads of grooms running around sorting the ponies and their equipment. I'm not sure but I think back in the day Prince Philip and Prince Charles played enough that they may have had a handful of ponies, I believe Princes Anne's horse Doublet, on which she had considerable success in the early days of her eventing career was originally bred to be a polo pony, so that suggests they bred a few for themselves. But moving into the days of rocking up for occasional charity events, they just don't play enough to justify a string of polo ponies. Jolly nice of their team partners/mates to subsidise their hobby. You could almost call it charity!

I suspect the charity itself is more invested in what Meghan looked like than in what she said.

They want the publicity she brings. Who even heard of One Young World before now? Papers are more likely to be interested in clothes than content, sadly.
I've read what @HeddaGarbled has written and the blog they attached. I'm all for charity so if this is a worthhwhile one, that's great. But I'm not convinced by that blog. He paid or someone paid for him to go to a summit where he likens listening to a speech as being mentored. Which it isn't. He got nothing from One Young World. He's doing a gofundme instead, which I guess OYW will claim as part of their "social value" just because he attended the summit. The blog is really just part of his cv and he seems a motivated young man which he deserves credit for, but there doesn't seem much content from his attendance or his present work in an outreach centre.
I guess lots of charities you can see where the money is actually going. The Markles gave money to Afghanistan women so you could see that it would go towards education, health, business, etc. But I don't see where the money is going here but, to be fair, that could just be my ignorance. I wonder how much the speakers get paid?

Thanks for posting the link @DFOD
I love Bob Geldof and his speech was a blinder. Imagine having to follow that!

These threads do not just sound demented, but they are sinister too.

MM did a great job and most people have been welcoming of her and H. The podcasts are great. The speech was perfect (a proper speech writer analysed it, and pointed out all the ingredients you need to make a good speech - my story changes to our story, etc.).
The bm spliced and chopped up her speech to make it seem it was all about her, just as they counted her words, forgetting that the job of the host is to narrate, say what your part is in all this (instead of quoting abstract people who are already great than us, and we would never reach their standard - Churchill,King etc)

All this trying to make out MM is a crook.
Imagine having such a concerted effort to tear down a woman who is trying to do good for 4/5yrs and watching your efforts go up in smoke. You must be sick, sick to your stomachs. The more you deride H&M, the brighter they will turn up their light, and you will have to cower, running for cover. The rest of us will just bask, appreciating all the good.

H looked incredibly proud of his wife and quite touched.

Tell you what, how about you fill up lots threads about the royals you actually pay your tax for and go on a forensic nitpicking.
To help you start, here is one of them making a speech. You can also be forensic in your 'critic' about the way they travel too.

twitter.com/KaindeB/status/1445189610259329031

Mindy is styled by Jessica Mulroney, previously regarded as Meghan’s best friend, although the closeness of their friendship is hazier now, so that may have been the reasons for the discussion?

Did you watch and listen to the same event as the rest of us ?

The job of the host is to narrate

Meghan wasn’t the host. She was a keynote speaker. Completely different role.

This. Not just applicable to them though but to all the celebrities who preach on the subject.

Not , I watched it live on Reuters, no chopping all the way through, not the dm , so please don't misrepresent the evidence in this case also saying posters are demented and sinster are personal insults and not in the spirit of mn chat!

To be fair to MM , following Mary Robinson and Sir Bob was a huge task.

You know very well, I'm referring to the podcasts.

But you are used to twisting.......................

This whole bloody thread is not in the spirit of MN or any 'woman supporting' site.

I think your mention of "the speech" suggested to me at least, that you were talking about the charity event rather than the podcasts @notanotheroneagain Your text references the podcasts and then has a full stop before moving onto "the speech". I wouldn't refer to a podcast conversation as "the speech"

Your words, exactly as you wrote them below, nota. If actually you meant to refer to the podcast in this section, you know most people would actually include the words “podcast” in it, not just “speech” which is clearly all it refers to. It’s pointless throwing jibes out against other people when they can so easily be refuted.

The speech was perfect (a proper speech writer analysed it, and pointed out all the ingredients you need to make a good speech - my story changes to our story, etc.).

The bm spliced and chopped up her speech to make it seem it was all about her, just as they counted her words, forgetting that the job of the host is to narrate, say what your part is in all this

I've been lurking for a very long time , I've read everything on all these threads I've seen nothing that would make this thread to be different from any other celebrity discussion thread , yes mn supports women but no person is above criticism and being a woman doesn't mean we can't criticise actions we don't like or agree with .

God on another thread I've seen a poster start a thread to criticise Carrie Johnson clothes and say they are see through!

This morning's dress was!

Reminded me of the famous Diana photos ...