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 too sure that Washington Post is left wing - I never read it, but am aware of NYP being right wing. So I always sideline anything with Post in it, but that is just my view. CNN has a lot of strife currently regarding their coverage of American politics and a lot of people are stating their disdain as they always viewed it as a fair publication.

The Guardian has always had both pro and anti H&M opinions. That is why I always value them as proper journalism. They would usually put the opinions side by side and not try to elevate one or the other. LBC I like too because all views are presented.

So saying that the left are now tired of them is not really true.

(Kate) at least had a general idea of what she was pursuing whereas I think for M it was a complete shock to the system. She should have been better briefed

I couldn't agree more, but more or less whirlwind romances don't leave much time for things like that - and anyway there's no guarantee she'd have listened if, as some believe, Harry was just an "opportunity"

As to the future, while having my personal views I prefer not to speculate about possible divorce, but I do have to agree with Farmageddon's remark that Harry would once again be enfolded in the RF - because he's a blood royal and that's how they behave

Prince Michael isn’t/ wasn’t a senior working member . Like Beatrice, Eugenie and others he only receives royal protection when acting on behalf of HM. H and M wanted to earn money and receive 24/7 protection .

Are these breaches also applying to Diana, because it's been years and we all know her movements on that day. Don't recall anyone being taken to task for recording them. We even have a documentary right now on Ch4 from the investigators both Met and French police showing her movements, and no one has been arrested for breaching any acts.

Rubbish. All the RF have had negative press. Meghan and now Harry’s problems is that they want to control ALL press reporting of them. They want only their unadulterated controlled “truth” to be out there that flatters them and their actions. That’s the protection they wanted and no body can deliver that in a democratic society

Yes, exactly. It’s interesting that many of their supporters seem to want the same thing - to simply shut down any dissent, or muddy any criticism. Several posters have criticised me for starting these threads, for example. But there’s obviously still plenty to discuss - the headline article in today’s Sunday Times was an opening gambit here.

The Guardian refers to the “New Yorker” not “The New York Post” - so you have muddled this up.

Two different and polar opposite publications.

I referenced the “New Yorker” as it is credible and liberal and not the right wing populist “New York Post” to make my point that award wining / high brow / credible / award winning journalists across this end of the US media spectrum (including The Washington Post which is as “left learning” in US MSM allows) are now challenging their behaviour and narrative.

Prince Michael was at some stage a working royal. He was later described as 'helping the queen'.

So, then H&M were asking for a demotion, why not grant them that.

I am enjoying ( most of ) the discussion .

I have never seen anything liberal in the New Yorker. They have always attacked H&M from what I had seen.

The New Yorker is very liberal, as is New York magazine (of which The Cut is a related publication). The Washington Post is also liberal. The New York Post is right way. HTH.

*wing, not way

Absolutely. On every thread about the royals, the ‘snouts in the trough’ comment is made. About every. one. of. them. Most often, from what I’ve seen, the Yorks. It is not a racist comment about Meghan.

However, in saying all that, Meghan married in surely knowing some of this, and Harry certainly knew this and should have warned her - and both were happy to go along with the rank, title, privileges, sparkly tiaras, fawning crowds and extravagance as long as it suited them. And now they seem still to want all of that, without any duties or responsibilities to the institution that bestows them. That's the hypocrisy.

Meghan seems pretty clued up so I’d really surprised she hadn’t done some research into the family she was choosing to marry into. As a bi-racial woman who feels strongly about equality for women, I’d imagine it could be hard to square marrying into not just a family, but an institution built with the suffering of black, slave labour and the empire building that goes with it. It wouldn’t take much research to see how women marrying into this family/institution are expected to live their lives and the subservience they are expected to embrace. The vile treatment at the hands of the media both mainstream and social doesn’t take much digging to find. I absolutely don’t doubt there is racism within the family. Why the fuck would you marry into that and expect you’d be able to modernise something as archaic and tradition dependent?

Maybe it's her relentless narcissism?

Here you go - I will own my snout in the trough phrase - and put in back in the context it was written - so you can see it refers to all royals feeding like parasites off the public for centuries globally.

Maybe it's her relentless narcissism?

They really should never have let us have unfettered access to the language of psychology.

Quite missing the point here.

If you are used to using words like 'that is so lame' to your friends, you must never have this word, like ever in anything at all near this when you are referring to or speaking about someone with special needs.

Hence I am happy the youth are being taught to resist these useless, degrading words and are shown the history of how these were used to belittle certain groups.

But, ok, whatever.

I really do believe there are some people who are ardently praying, even daily manifesting that M and H divorce. They would skip their children's graduation or visiting their newborn grandchildren if it meant a day staking out the internet hoping to zoom in on an image which might look like Harry is frowning or Meghan isn't smiling all to deduce divorce is afoot. It's actually very bizarre. And no, criticism of Meghan cannot be divorced from her race. It doesn't work like that. There are reasons. Think, if you will, why it is that of the entire shit show of all politicians of all stripes it just so miraculously happens that a certain Ms Abbott alone receives nearly half of all online abuse.

@notanotheroneagain : "And can posters stop rewriting history."

Says the poster who also alleged this, erroneously, about the topless photos pf Kate in France: "Kate did not say anything, because she did not have to. She was protected and that press was dealt with by the palace."
"They charged them and got it taken down !"

@VladmirsPoutine what's different about meghan is not her skin. I think it's that she rejected the monarchy. She stood down. She left.

This is hardly going to make her popular.

In her last podcast she talked about forgiveness, as though it was something she had to work through. Fair enough, her father is still "dumped".

Jenny Bond was quite scathing on the radio this morning , citing that meghan is turning into her Dad ,

"They surely have all they ever wanted and yet they keep on whinging and I think a lot of people in Britain feel maybe she should shut up."

One of Jennie Bonds quotes this morning !

Nothing to do with DAs performance and behaviour then? Nothing at all? Just her race…

I was wondering what Doria thought as she sat there watching the wedding. She seems a free thinking , independent woman. I wonder if she had her doubts?

Maybe she did in earnest think that she and Harry could truly update the monarchy (however misguided that was). So perhaps she had good intentions, I tend to think she did, however the constraints and protocols may have been too stifling, which is understandable for someone used to having more freedom and a say in how she deals with things. I would also find it suffocating.

I think if they had gone away quietly, as they claimed to have wanted, and just said 'mea culpa - it didn't work, but we tried our best, it wasn't the right environment for us' people could relate to that.
But the petty mud slinging and accusations, and absolute refusal to take any responsibility is hard to sympathise with. And the blatant selling of their story and coming out with 'truth bombs' to keep the media interested is just a bit of a low blow.
When asked whether they had any regrets about their behaviour by Oprah they said none. That's a bit strange, given in any family or relationship dynamics there is always some blame to be had on both sides. Their refusal to accept anything other than victimhood will not win them many more supporters. Nobody likes a whiner.