A positive and non-bashing thread about Meghan and Harry

[MrsMaxDeWinter]

I have rejoined Mumsnet after leaving a few times. The first time I left was because I was concerned about the coverage and uncomfortable undertone of the commentary on Meghan Markle after the engagement was announced, before she had said a word, and before she had married into the Royal Family.

I came back around the time she and Harry left the UK, to be stunned by the pages and pages upon pages of virulent threads. At that time Mumsnet actually banned all threads about Meghan, it had become so toxic.

They have now made their lives in Montecito, but still the virulence continues. Yes, she speaks in a mix of therapy plus corporate gobbledegook, yes, she is occasionally vapid and irritating.

But who is she actually harming that she deserves all this virulence?

Yesterday, when the new UK Prime Minister was elected, the coverage in the Super Tory Daily Mail was all about a seven minute speech to a bunch of young people. Article after article after article. Body language experts. Counting the number of times she said "I" in a speech in which she sought to inspire young people by attempting to relate to them. Before that, 18 articles were devoted to the first podcast by the Daily Mail alone. 18!

Same with her podcasts. The series is about HER and HER take on labels, and she discusses HER take with HER guests.

It's all very anodyne, even vanilla. It does not deserve any of the vitriol sent her way.

SO:

As the next twelve weeks are going to be wall to wall Meghan, and the Meghan haters and detractors have several threads here that fill up rapidly with bile, scorn and mockery, I have started this thread, reminiscent of previous " positive" threads, to talk about what some of us like, enjoy, find amusing and even (gasp) admire, in the next few Meghan rich weeks.

If you don't have anything positive to say, that's okay, you can keep to the existing threads.

Looking forward to a bile-free discussion of everything Meghan!

Very funny. Not.

They travelled by commercial flights to UK, train and electric cars in UK and were widely criticised on the other thread for so say making a point and that was a shit thing to do.. Pathetic.
Because they obviously cannot do a thing right with ridiculous ppl who will criticize them for doing something better, I think they should travel how they want

I think we are saying the same thing right? I also think they should do what they like and not pander to their critics.

Sorry I thought you were being facetious

Absolutely they should stick to their own principals and allow others to do the same.
I really couldn't care less about any of them but when I read yet again of speeches telling what the world should do to save itself and see the preachers practising the exact opposite it makes my blood boil.

On a side note I find it really strange who people choose to admire. Harry and Meghan appear to be the same ilk of vacuous celebrity for some middle aged fan girls that the Kardansians are for starry eyed teens.
You'd want to have done something worthwhile in life to impress me what's amazing though is the ones who have are normal people with very few opportunities and public exposure. Imagine how much more they'd achieve if they'd the opportunities and money that's wasted on a so called royal family who every decade or so manage to wash their very dirty linen in public.

I admire all kinds of normal people. I also do not admire famous people.

One of the things I like about Meghans podcast is that she is having a conversation about the labels applied to women. That is a topic I think needs to be discussed more. I like that she seems to stand up for herself. But do I admire her because of it? Never thought of it that way.

No, I don't think I admire her, but I certainly do not hate her. At least, IMO, she is trying to raise awareness regarding women's issues. The Kardashians are just laughing all the way to the bank.

I should add that, in the case of the One Young World event. She used her, what? "Star power"? "Publicity"? I dont know exactly what to call it. To raise awareness for the amazing young people who are leading the way for the future.

Before this week, I had never heard of One Young World or had any idea of what their purpose is. So there is that.

What do you think their purpose is?

i was quite surprised to find out it’s basically a networking event that charges £3k for each attendee. But kudos to Meghan all the same for drawing attention to it. It’s not her fault if the charity itself pays extortionate salaries to its staff.

In the country I live in, I have volunteered for years with an organization that works with under 18s.

Every 3 years, they hold an event in a similar style to One Young World. Thousands of under 18s flock to it to hear keynote speakers and participate in events. Cost this year is about $2500 per attendee. Those who want to attend work very hard to earn and save to pay for it.

Cost and value are two different things.

Yes I did notice how much the Charity was rubbished on another thread, all as a way of getting at Meghan of course. Very predictable.

Harry and Meghan appear to be the same ilk of vacuous celebrity for some middle aged fan girls that the Kardansians are for starry eyed teens

Just working out the opposite name to a "middle aged fangirl" for those who have spent years slagging her off. Nah. ,Can't do it, I'd be more rude than your label!

I admire her for one thing.. riding above the bullying, hate and vicious insults lobbed her way on a daily basis for years and still managing to smile and give a good speech.
That's all. I'm not into vacuous celebrities. I do abhor bullying though

This is the thing, don't you haters already discuss these things on your hateful little threads. Why are you hell bent on spreading your nastiness over here. You already have your own space.

You have no value here, because you keep on repeating the same hate you have on other threads. Most of your questions have been addressed, so what is your point of repeating it on here.

The OP asked for a supportive thread. Please respect that. There are lurkers and tourists who sometimes peek at these threads and some are more sensitive, some fragile and really don't need wall to wall hate, when they are interested in H&M.

Some say they don't know what H&M do. Thats's because the press will not report anything positive about them. That is why I will post some of their work now and again - they are nothing like the Kardashians, no where near.

First of all this picture was taken is consent and approval. Secondly this is not the editor in chief, mm may not have even known who she is. Even if she did, how do you know she did not apologise. I believe the paper did apologise when MM won the case.

Did not look, but presumably you already discussed this in the hate threads, why are you bringing it here.

Another notable difference is that Andrew isn’t paying millions & millions of pounds each year for publicity & positive PR (including positive posts on social media & fora, Twitter bots et al). He’s keeping a low profile.

Andrew is paying millions and millions for his court case. He probably spends millions and millions of PR to the press to not talk about him. Just the same press dedicated pages and pages on H&M, they could spend all that time slagging off and picking up every little thing ever about Andrew. The press is keeping a low profile for him.

Yes, only 4 threads in as much months despite how big the scandal was. It was a slog to fill those threads. And yes, a lot of apologists for him.

I thought Meghan called herself a 'fangirl' on the Miriah podcast?

And thanks to the media attention I had no idea Charity CEOs were paid so highly. £400k a year, nice work if you can get it.

Andrew is paying millions and millions for his court case. He probably spends millions and millions of PR to the press to not talk about him

Not millions and millions. Up to a million is a realistic estimate. And there is no such thing as paying the press not to talk about you - unless you mean bribery. Is that what you are suggesting?

I think it’s more likely that doing nothing and going few places visibly means nothing for the press to write about. Whenever he does pop up he’s immediately in a story - generally of “The Queen is still seeing her disgraceful son” ilk.

The underbelly of the charity - even if murky (and I too was very surprised by the details - the £3k attendance fee is more than the average annual salary in many countries) - is not a reflection on Meghan because she is not expected to do due diligence on every good cause she supports. She is just trying to do charitable work for others for no personal gain. And we should all applaud her for that.

There's a lot of love for them in Germany

It may be a niche thing, like David Hasselhoff.

Not millions and millions. Up to a million is a realistic estimate

At the time, I understood his legal bill to be way more than that. He had a legal team in NY as well as here and they were the creme de la creme.
Of course this sort of info will be suppressed, we don't want the general public questioning how much and who paid!

The same papers you religiously believe in when they bash H&M, and basically do the RF's PR, you now think they inflated the amount?

H&M are rarely out and about, and have referred to their own experience a handful of times in years, we only see them when they do their charitable work, and yet papers are full of criticism.
Maybe they can use old pics of Andrew (like they do with H&M). Perhaps pap Andrew at his mums estates like they sometimes do or when he goes to church and keep on picking him apart. Apparently, they just send 'one discreet' photographer for the royals.

Bribery ? Was that the word you used when someone was saying H&M pay for their PR?
Since your gonna use such inflammatory language, maybe you can call it extortion by the press.

The BM are no longer the heavyweights they used to be . People get their info online from different sources. Even if the RF members have skeletons in the closet, they could free themselves by explaining them away. Free themselves from the media chokehold. If papers smear the RF, they will absolve themselves via other media outlets all over the world. PR their charities, and stop leaking and working against H&M.
We all have seen H's ugly side, they helped him by exposing him, he apologised and has mostly been forgiven, so they have nothing on him. Now BM have to create nonsense and faux rage, and the world can see right through it, making them look ridiculous (and the rest of the UK in the process, even though a lot of people don't hate H&M actually)

At the core, people prefer do gooders more than anything.
It does not matter if they are rich, are also profiting or gaining fame out of this, as long as those people are doing good for the community.

For that reason no one minds that Markus Rashford is a rich footballer, or Jamie is a celebrity chef, they are doing good for children. People love mega rich Martin Lewis who became rich via financial advise because he is doing what the government cannot do and is benefiting us as a community. Same with Gates Malaria drive - doesn't matter if he's rich, he is doing something worthwhile.
Yes, all have their own criticism, but it's not wall to wall hate.

That is why the BM refuse to highlight H&M charity work, so they can keep them as villains.

The underbelly of the charity - even if murky (and I too was very surprised by the details - the £3k attendance fee is more than the average annual salary in many countries) - is not a reflection on Meghan because she is not expected to do due diligence on every good cause she supports

This seems fair comment; if she was going for heavy involvement in a charity I'd expect that diligence, but not for an in-and-out speech at an event launch

Can't agree about "trying to do charitable work for others for no personal gain" though, unless you were being ironic? I'd have thought the gain was obvious, especially when Netflix seem to be tagging along to so much, though TBF (and with the possible exception of Anne) she's not the only RF member keen to broadcast the "massive amount" they do for charity

If it helps, I don’t pay any heed to what the papers report on topics l this. I rely on my own personal knowledge of what top legal services (particularly for white-collar crime) cost in London and New York - I have plenty of experience here.

And Harry & Meghan are out and about more than you say, but you are right we constantly see stories about them in the press - are they attending this function? Are they attending that function? Here’s two month’s notice that they are coming back to the UK for a couple of charity events! They are at the polo! They are in Jackson’s Hole! They have donated some money to a charity! They have written a letter to someone! Harry is driving Meghan to LA every day! They’ve had a zoom call with someone! They have praised a bill! Harry’s book is coming out! Harry’s book is being pushed back! (That’s the PR firm they r paying pushing out stories about them to keep them in the press).

Are you saying then...the 21 articles in the DM, passive aggressive negativity, is something they want and have paid to happen?
No
21 is the most in one edition. Other figures apply too

That’s the PR firm they're paying pushing out stories about them to keep them in the press

I believe many of us realise this, Serenster, but still it'll be insisted that the media only print the rubbish they're fed because they're obsessed with them (and probably racist)

I guess they could simply choose not to publish, but it's hard not to wonder what H&M would then do to ensure being back in the spotlight

Well, you sure are up to day for someone who neither reads the rags or follow H&M @Serenster .
Some of what you say, I never even heard about (H driving MM around?) and I do keep up to date on SM.

Ultimately though, it seems you do know about their charitable work even though the main British press never publicises it. Just what they can nitpick into negative.