Harry, Meghan and Netflix are go

[CathyorClaire]

The long awaited documentray is hitting the screen on December 8th:

www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/breaking-prince-harry-meghan-markles-28607547

What with the award in a few days and the book in January they're ramping up the game.

I'm becoming more and more alarmed by this on all sorts of levels.

One commentator has referred to them as constitutional terrorists, and I'm afraid I'm starting to see things that way too.

The issue in Britain is that the Head of State is a hereditary role: as such, there's little to no division between the person and the role. Now this has benefits the role is largely unpoliticised, for example but it also has costs: the family are over-identified with the institution.

Because of this, you cannot level attacks against the Monarch or the heir without damaging the institution. And that has serious consequences because you cannot attack the institution without attacking the entire premise of the state structure in the UK.

In short, constitutionally, the Monarch is the conduit for all forms of state power in this country; the basis of all power resides within the Monarch.

Without the Monarch, there is no power by which the government can do anything, there is no law, there is no authority to imprison, arrest or tax -- that is how our state is structured.

Everything the government does rests, constitutionally, on the Monarch's existence. That is why our prisons are now HM The King's prisons, it's His Majesty's Customs and Revenue Office, His Majesty's Police Force etc.

The House of Commons can only operate because it utilises monarchical powers that have been delegated to it by the Monarch, which is why the Monarch must review and sign all laws, must appoint a Prime Minister, must open Parliament etc.

So, theoretically, if the entire British Royal Family was wiped out in a freak asteroid event, and there was no-one to succeed to the throne, the British government would have no power to do anything. The whole thing collapses, which is why after the execution of Charles I, Cromwell had to become the "surrogate" king (he just named it differently), and why they had to ask Charles II to return after Cromwell's death -- which is probably why there's never been another revolution since, because it was a lot of death, destruction, and disaster for, essentially, things to go back to the way they were.

Harry seems to have missed this memo (although he was probably never sent it, which is a massive failure on the part of the Royal Family). He talks about the RF as though it is a powerful family, like maybe the Gates or the Musks (who can add or remove themselves from incorporated institutions, because those institutions are separate legal entities to them as people), and doesn't seem to understand that his family is powerful because they are in this unique "devil's bargain" situation -- and that you cannot separate the two because his father is the embodiment of the legal entity as Monarch.

For non-constitutional bods, a more US-based equivalent would maybe be something like Donald Trump not just attacking Joe and Hunter Biden, but attacking the whole concept of the American Presidency itself.

The difference in the US is that the concept of the presidency exists outside of a specific person. To some extent, it's a role that a person undertakes, the "chair" they sit in. In Britain, because we are a Monarchy, it's the other way around -- it's the person.

i completely agree Harry missed the memo with the instructions on what monarchy is or maybe it was not sent to him as he didn't need to know it. Hopefully William will not make this mistake with his own children
And if Harry did understand what monarchy is and how it works then he completely forgot to mention it to Meghan before he married her.
His revelation that Monarchy is a hierarchy suggests this is a surprise to him - I do think he considered his status in the monarchy as equal to William and by extension Meghan was equal to Kate when this was never going to the case.
But as PP have said he didn't seem to mind the hierarchical system when it benefitted him. Perhaps he never noticed how he was more important than his cousins and how Philip and Zara were the least important cousins of all as their mother was female despite being 2nd born.
(of course within the family itself everyone is important and equally loved)

This is fascinating and all I can say is thank goodness Harry wasn’t the heir because he and his temperament and apparent lack of intellect would be a huge risk for the U.K.

Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailers criticised over 'misleading' clips www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63837131

oh dear…

Yes I agree that would a valuable lesson for Harry to learn.

The hypocrisy with this latest trailer is mind blowing. They talk almost endlessly about 'fake news' and the media publishing untruths or deliberately misleading information about the pair of them - then they produce a trailer which does exactly that. How can they justify the use of deliberately misleading images - images that had nothing to do with them.

Can you imagine if another media outlet did the same to them? Published deliberately misleading photographs. We would be back in the high court before Christmas.

I completely agree with this. If, as they say they have been fighting a constant battle against media intrusion and paparazzi there must be ample real legitimate evidence they could have used. They have had a photographer following them for best part of two years - where are the real photos?

It is either editorial laziness - which is hard to believe with an outfit like Netflix and the director they have or they don't have this evidence and so had no choice but to use stock photos.

Their credibility is in the toilet at this stage.

So far we have a short-list of explanations for the bewildering choice of photographs being either

1 Editorial laziness
2 No such photographs exist of them being hounded by paparazzi
3 Netflix are trolling them now

Maybe it's a glorious combination, like a festive selection box of no-one-gives-a-shit-any-more-about-this-nonsense crapness, because there's no real content and all that's left is click-chasing.

When previous royal shitshows have happened directly involving the media (the Diana interview; the Andrew interview) the royals concerned have to some extent been duped (Diana) or placed off-guard (Andrew).

I think Harry is certainly capable of being duped, and Meghan placed off-guard (see The Cut interview).

Interesting times.

I'm actually shocked that they would use footage of paparazzi at events totally unrelated to them.And manipulation of the balcony photo from 2019 to make them look marginalised when in fact they stood close to the queen looking happy and relaxed.
I agree - all credibility blown.And sinking to the same levels of the press they hate so much.A dangerous game indeed .

5 manipulations on one very short trailer. What will we see in six hour-long episodes I wonder? I expect the BBC are standing by to fact check. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot, do they really think we are all that stupid??

It's not just the Monarchy they are attacking. First it was the Press, then Press and Monarchy now it seems to be the British public as well. H reported said the British need to learn a lesson.

The Sussexes seem to just keep ramping it up. I don't understand why it makes them seem like toddlers throwing a tantrum.

If they believe there is structural racism within the famthey how come they wanted a half in half out tried to merch SussexRoyal. Surely if you'd suffered such awful racism from the family you'd want nothing to do with them? It can't just be money H was worth well in excess of 30 mill and M was worth several and Charles has been shown to have paid for their expenses for several years even after they left.

Revenge for slights, real or imagined never ends well and the Sussexes seem to have the reverse Midas touch.

It defies belief. They are coming after the press and the media, they make no bones about that. Then they release a trailer fully of distorted/misleading images and expect the press/media to sit back and take it face value.

No doubt there will be some fudge like there has been in the past - the images were never meant to be taken literally, they are are examples/imaginative imagery of the behaviour they are talking about.

Is this a documentary or a dramatisation? Do we need a crown style disclaimer to say it is 'inspired by real life events' but largely a fictional account of what happened.

I don’t understand why they’re attacking the general public? The day of their wedding there was a real buzz around this country! I don’t know ANYONE who wasn’t supportive…
the whole thing is just so strange- and now the lies will start to come out. The whole thing is desperately sad. She obviously has issues which I hope she heals after this series, privately, and lets this all go for her own sake.

This waving of the family laundry can't go well - except for netflix perhaps who will get views.

How does this fit in with not wanting the stress of being in the public eye?

Where do the two go from this?

It is hard to see how they can get another series. After a first shock - unwashed laundry is pretty dull.

At this point it is screaming A-level media project not slick Netflix documentary. I wonder what is being said at Netflix at the moment. I get they will be loving the amount of attention this is getting - but this surely affects their documentary making credibility as well. What else have they put out that is factually inaccurate?

This is a good point.

For a deal that apparently cost $100m, you’d expect slicker than some stock photos?

Yes, it goes to the heart of Netflix's credibility if it doesn't make it clear this is actually a drama-docu-series.

Using the first image you find when you Google “ paparazzi” is so bizarre it can only be Netflix having a joke. It’s not a mistake , it’s deliberate imo.
I agree with autumncrow, they are going for the clicks, don’t care anymore angle.

I'm surprised you are shocked.

It's not like there isn't a precedent for this. Remember the screen shots of awful headlines in the "British" press shown in the OW interview that turned out to be from international publications?

the very obvious story Meghan planted (with a Toronto gossip columnist that Meghan already knew) about snooty Kate not offering her a lift to go shopping when she was a royal girlfriend

The kind explanation for this is that Meghan was new to it all, and did not understand much about close protection teams. Kate would have done, from living with it for years.

The principle, in this case Kate, was slipping out alone for a quick shopping trip down the Kings Road. Her CP team would have known of and approved the plan. It's quite hard to target someone on a trip like that - no Bad Hat is going to spend all their time hanging round Peter Jones on the off chance a target is going to wander in, and even if watching the gates, they won't know where she's going in time to ger into position (contrast the school run, which is always guarded, as destination and window of arrival times is known)

BUT - the approval would have been for the trip as she described it. A trip with two is not the same thing (more attention from bystanders at least) and Kate would have known that they'd need to go back, run it past the team again, and perhaps have different arrangements. Which all would have taken time and effort, and (depending on whether there were plans for the rest of the day - even if only simple ones like be back before DC come home from school) might have left not enough time.

So I can see why she'd just crack on. And why Meghan might not understand the security background at that point

Maybe they are going full Tiger King on the Dook and Dookess?

The documentary and book are all for the foreign/US punters who will believe it all.. They dont care about the British public because we are much more sceptical

Have you seen the comments and down votes on the YouTube trailers?

I very much doubt all those people are British.

There's still a lot of trust internationally for the BBC and their article today lays out the issues with the trailers very clearly. Some say that there are enough misrepresentations to make the whole thing an untruth, planted deliberately.

The reaction here does matter for and people or institutions based in the UK if they are discussed in the documentary - particularly if anyone's privacy is invaded

M&H were booed by the Loose Women audience today. Despite three of the panel sticking up for them. Knock me down with a feather.