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.

Is that your gotcha moment ?

Sure, I believe that the rf do things as approved by the firm. HMQ, PC and W are very important for the RF and firm to survive. Hence they can sometimes firmly put their foot down like when HMQ wanted to marry PP and when PC eventually wanted to marry CPB. They have way more power and influence than others, naturally. This is why I"m disappointed by their lack of support for H&M. Anything comes from them/their office holds more gravitas.

While H from the start, 'we were so welcoming of MM' he had to put out a statement asking the press to back off, it was ignored - he was never as important as the heirs (I believe that is why everyone else is protected by BP, because they would not be effective in putting out anything - hence I feel some have been bullied into submission). Even other groups had to band together to write open letters as this was just too much.
I expected better from the line of succession. If we go with this King/Queen concept, we have to see that the King/Queen 'protect their own', and will therefore 'protect us'. We have to see them putting their foot down against racism and other issues.

@SilverLiningPlaybook I don't think I've ever seen a post missing the point so spectacularly as yours.

I did not conflate anything. I did not mention New Yorker, I simply talked about NYP in regards with WP as saying I side eye anything with 'Post' in it because I know very well that NYP is right wing, so I stay away from WP or anything that has 'Post' in the title. I also said, this is on me, my own thing, not to say that a random paper with 'Post' in it is definitely from the same stable.

Individuals from all over the world from each end of the political, economic, republican/royal, social, racial, gender spectrum - everything in between - are able to see, hear and sense H&M repeated words, sentiments, actions and behaviours DIRECTLY from the content and activities they produce / engage in direct to the public - and the public are making their own minds up.

Its hard for the defenders to acknowledge that over time and increasingly with more direct exposure - uncensored - they are revealing themselves as tone deaf, vexatious, grandiose and deluded…..they don’t need a racist right wing press to spin them into a bad light.

Nobody likes a whiner.

Pretty much sums up the whole situation. No more threads needed!

I’ve said this before , the Press never said one bad thing about Doria , They will only mention her charitable work or wether she’s in charge of childcare duty etc, that’s all.
and from what I’ve seen , she seems like a gentle person , very calm and elegant .
I’ve read some quite horrible things about her on MN though , someone repeated something mentioned on an US gossip site, never has the press picked it up.
Her Fathers family on the other side were the gift that keeps giving , loud , crass . complete opposite of Meghan, who is very smart , eloquent and savvy.

the press had it so easy , all they had to do is call Samantha and let her do the talking ! Horrible , horrible person.

They didn’t want a demotion ! They wanted the 24/7 security and Archie to be a Prince !

@notanotheroneagain

The Washington post is an American institution - whose reporters broke the watergate scandal.

it would follow a largely democratic agenda and I would argue one of the most important newspapers in the country

www.forbes.com/sites/stephaniedenning/2018/09/19/why-jeff-bezos-bought-the-washington-post/?sh=41c1e94b3aab it was bought by Jeff Bezos but he has been hands off editorially.

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.

I agree. I don’t think they would have been getting this backlash if they’d just said, we are stepping down as working royals and going to start afresh in the US and then had built up their various initiatives without all the RF badmouthing. It’s the hypocrisy of earning a living mainly off slagging off the institution you couldn’t get away from fast enough while benefiting from the titles bestowed upon them that sticks in peoples throats.

You mean like the Princesses E and B? Who are not senior working royals ?
And H being well known and linked all his life to rf, so does need security no matter what.

But E and B are grandchildren of the monarch. Archie is a great grandson. When Charles is the monarch, Archie will be entitled to be a prince.

Beatrice and Eugenie are grandchildren of HM so Letters Patent ( 1917 I think) applied .
Archie and Lilibet are great grandchildren so not Prince / Princess .
When PC becomes King , A and L become Prince and Princess but why on earth would H and M want that for their DC ?
This has been discussed before .

x post with @sammylady37

Ehhh???

The Bristol Evening Post. The Yorkshire Post
The Edinburgh Evening Post

What did any of these do to you - what are you on about??

Why are you derailing about personally not reading any publications with the word “Post” in their title? What do you think it indicates?

Best to try to conserve any integrity and be dignified enough to just concede that you that you are not informed enough to comment on the political stance of US media outlets.

Honestly it won’t hurt - we all get things wrong sometimes. Better to take these opportunities to learn rather than double down on our short-comings / lack of knowledge.

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.

What utter idiocy.

The French police commenced a criminal investigation immediately after the fatal car crash which meant they immediately sized all available evidence - CCTV and other evidence from both the Ritz and the jeweller’s shop where the Ritz staff had picked up the diamond ring Dodi intended to give to Diana, film from the paparazzi and tourists in the Place Vendome, testimony evidence from everyone who had contact with the couple that day. THAT is the kind of information that is archived, and which is exempt from data protection legislation.

And because Mohammed al Fayed had been briefing the press for all he was worth about his son and Diana’s movements in the weeks leading up to their trip to Paris they had been followed by the press and the paparazzi literally everywhere they went that summer, all of which information was immediately available to the press to publish/broadcast, and for future documentary makers to comb through. Again, news footage and copies of past newspapers are exempt.

There you go @notanotheroneagain - posters here to help educate you - see also @Ohnonevermind

I actually felt very sorry for her in the Bradbury interview, there was something real there, in the midst of her mental health struggles and presumably the breastfeeding hormones and sleepless nights. But as time has gone on, each interview and appearance feels more performative, and 2 years later sitting in a marshmallowy mansion wearing haute couture, still moaning about it when the rest of the world has moved on, and she really should have too.

It feels like, if we can be manipulated into seeing them both as victims, we will overlook their privilege, hypocrisy and sometimes bizarre pronouncements. Similarly reopening the complex and thorny Diana years through the lens of Netflix, and putting themselves in her camp, seems to be the new strategy to keep them relevant and paint the RF as the bad guys.

It's a shame as I really hoped to see them prove everyone wrong, do something really positive and original and based on their own hard work without dishing up dirt or access to the royals.

The hell are you on about.

You just quoted British press, different from US. I don't think the UK 'Times' is the same as NYT for example, don't even think they have the same affiliations. This should be clear to anyone that when someone says 'I don't trust anything with 'mail' on it here in the UK, they think it's under the Fail stable.

I did in fact say, I don't read these American publication and have my own opinions on them - clearly a clause for me to say, I could be wrong but that is what my personal view is (something I have not seen much of on this thread, as opinions are stated as facts).

Nice try, to try and discredit me thought .

No-one needs to try and discredit you

Remind you of anyone else - unfiltered? Enough rope…..

🤣🤣

I actually felt very sorry for her in the Bradbury interview, there was something real there, in the midst of her mental health struggles and presumably the breastfeeding hormones and sleepless nights. But as time has gone on, each interview and appearance feels more performative, and 2 years later sitting in a marshmallowy mansion wearing haute couture, still moaning about it when the rest of the world has moved on, and she really should have too.

I think you're on to something there. As though as as started feeling better, she saw the usefulness of that narrative. Support was quite high for them when they first went - escape from that stifling, controlling institution. I do think that if they had walked away entirely, kept their own council and not done the dreadful OW interview things would look very different for them. Possibly the pandemic contributed as they couldn't do everything they'd planned, with perhaps a more careful move to good works within their new civilian life. Plus they had to make that money and the pandemic but the kibosh on that!

Don't think anyone needs to victimise them. As I said, Bradby would have probably seen them crying during the fire incident and did what he usually does and ask if they are ok. Was she supposed to lie?
I don't think Bradby is anti royals I must quickly add, just an emphatic human.

There seems to be a concerted effort to paint them in a certain light - narcissist/tone deaf/ whatever label /take your pick. Funny how people say, they are rich and privileged, living in mansions, do not ask the press why they are hell bent on putting them on the front pages, with the press moaning and winging, when we are all going through hardships.

The 'sources' should have stopped briefing ages ago and the press should have just let it go. H&M backed off, and ran across the pond. Press chase them, they can do a comeback I expect. They have work to do, their reputation does not need to be unnecessarily tarnished, as I said, get the h*ll out of the way.

Oh yeah, the tired old personal attacks and pops when you have no argument.

As I said, you are not hounding me and other positive posters out.

So stop this playground nonsense, it does not make you sound any more insightful or clever.