Are Netflix secretly playing Harry and Meghan?

[username8888]

H&M think they are dictating the Netflix narrative, but I wonder if Netflix are actually playing a longer game? This was billed as their story, but they are so tone deaf and are exposing themselves to ridicule with their ham fisted attempts to justify their behaviour. It's so full of ridiculous unsubstantiated statements and generalisations with no evidence to back it up. It's using stock photographs of photographers that have nothing to do with them. Why not show real photographers? A ridiculous car chase with a lone photographer on a moped provoking panic and faux fear in the couple is laughable. And as for Harry's face as Meghan takes the piss out of the queen? This was definitely seen by the editors who chose to leave it in.

Will Netflix get a double helping from this series with the candy-floss fluff that's the first airing, with a second being the dissection of this sad and deluded pair?

They are doing this to be heard....but much of what they say is proving to be untrue, so they are losing credibility, and coming off as privileged toddlers stamping their feet.

If only they just kept quiet after they left, they would've remained much loved. This incessant need be heard and to have the last word (which we all can understand and relate to) is losing them popularity.

But that’s not how humans work. There’s too much emotion riding behind it all, so it’s bound to burst at the seams.

Sounds like this has got to the point of airing dirty laundry in public because the public have been misled to believe that the royal family’s laundry is never dirty… and the public want to believe that the royal family are not capable of having dirty laundry.

The whole thing is a farce.

I wonder what comes next. After this docuseries, after the book - then what? Their 'story' has been done to death at this stage. I don't really see any new revelations just repetition of previous complaints with added photos and videos.

I get the charity work but they can't monetise that. So how do they earn money? I am assuming the series about themselves will be one off, otherwise it does just become 'Keeping up with the Sussexes'

The Commonwealth/The Empire = structural racism, bias and unearned wealth & privilege.

The Commonwealth and Empire are two different things.
You will have read what Gabon's high commissioner said about the Commonwealth so you know that he considers that the criticism of belonging to the commonwealth as ignorant and racist.

The commonwealth came out of the Empire. The Windrush generation, born in the Commonwealth, might disagree with you on the structural racism part. But what do they know... As for the unearned wealth and privileges, it's pretty hard to deny.

That's exactly how humans work and it's not 'bound to' at all - unless H&M step across a legal line. In the meantime the RF will leave H&M to it and just get on with their lives.

That’s how humans would like it to work, but I say it’s not how humans work because there is too much emotion behind it all. It’s a family matter with too much history. The royal family are good at their or image, but it’s also robotic and requires repression of emotions.

It’s bound to rip at the seams because of the emotions… and it will inevitably begin behind closed doors. We don’t know where or how it will end, because emotions can be unpredictable.

*pr

Not publicly it won't - they don't do the H&M Insta emotional approach.

You're wrong. Read what the Gabon High Commissioner had to say if you want to know what countries in the Commonwealth today think of it. If it was colonialist and rasist why would countries like Barbados do away with the monarch as head of state to get rid of the vestiges of colonialism but stay in a structurally racist organisation?

No they don’t. They do the Insta unemotional approach of smiling excessively and claiming everything is wonderful… even if it isn’t.

Like I said, the emotional spillover will have unforeseen consequences.

That’s right, they don’t air their dirty laundry in public or pander to the Twitterati.

Like I said, no it won’t.

I just don't care any more about either them or the royal family, you have King Charles and Diana who made an absolute hash of their marriage all played out in public in absurd tv interviews by both of them and public fall outs and books, affairs on both sides, ten times worse than the Meghan and Harry saga, the death of Diana leaving two traumatised little boys.
Then the Andrew saga and trafficked girls, then Fergie and Andrew toe sucking and the like, then William and his affair and all that business about plugging, it just makes me sick.
None of them sound normal or behave normally. I'd be glad to see the back of the lot of them.
I can't even look at any of them without feeling repulsed.

I do think the 'no comment' policy of the RF is the best approach here. There are real reasons most lawyers advise their clients to make 'no comment' interviews. If you don't provide explanations they can't be picked part or proven to be incorrect.

When you only ever have one side of the story the interest will inevitable wane. Answering back will only prolong the drama here.

The Sussexes are not helping themselves with repetition, contradiction and easily proved inaccuracies. The more they talk the less cogent their argument becomes and the less credible and rational they seem.

@ArabianLeopardCub ”I do think the 'no comment' policy of the RF is the best approach here. There are real reasons most lawyers advise their clients to make 'no comment' interviews. If you don't provide explanations they can't be picked part or proven to be incorrect.”

And a good judge can see through that “no comment” strategy as not being the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

“No comment” looks like there’s something to hide and that makes people suspicious. And the drama is prolonged through the suspense of a deafening silence.

@HardRock I tend to disagree. I think 'no comment' infuriates people because they don't get what they want. If you use it as a consistent policy, however, then it neither indicates innocence or guilt - it is just your modus operandi.

I can't see what the RF have to gain by responding. Whatever they say will be picked apart by the press and give opportunity to Harry and Meghan to do another interview to address and respond and so the carnival continues.

Don't get me wrong, from a purely human interest angle I would love to know the RF side of the story. I think it would be disastrous for them to provide it though. No matter what they said it would be analysed and picked apart and ascribed all manner of different meanings.

A good judge can also see the glaring inconsistencies in the Sussexes stories and their need for further interactions from the RF to give these stories oxygen. Cutting off that oxygen supply with a ‘no comment’ is the best response.

“I think 'no comment' infuriates people because they don't get what they want.”

A good judge wants the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Inevitably they will get infuriated with someone who sidesteps that reasonable need for the judiciary to function properly with a list of “no comment” responses.

If you use it as a consistent policy, however, then it neither indicates innocence or guilt - it is just your modus operandi.

I’m sure there are also criminal organisations that use ‘no comment’ as a consistent policy as their modus operandi too. Doesn’t make it right or graceful or honest.

What will become of the justice system if the modus operandi was “no comment”?!

Truth isn’t merely a want. Truth is a need. There’s a hunger for truth from the royal
family.

I can't see what the RF have to gain by responding.

They are damned if they do. Damned if they don’t.

And I actually think the response to the Oprah interview was quite good. “Recollections may vary”. So they can respond diplomatically.

Anyone else wondering what will be in the Spare book?
After all they have said so much drivel already, what is left, for Harry to tell us the sizes of the crown jewels?

Tbh I’m not up to speed with it all. Remind me about the glaring inconsistencies?

I remember that Meghan said something about how they got married in a secret and private ceremony in their backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury 3 days before the big showy one. Archbishop contradicted that assertion because the legal wedding was the big showy one 3 days later. But it does sound like there was a significant exchange of vows between Harry and Meghan in the presence of the Archbishop that was meaningful to the couple; it sounded like, to them, that was the real personal and intimate marriage, albeit not the legal showy one.

Sounds more like a difference in interpretation of events rather than inconsistencies that mean they’re out to deceive.

amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/30/archbishop-of-canterbury-harry-and-meghans-legal-wedding-was-on-saturday

Cutting off that oxygen supply with a ‘no comment’ is the best response.

Yes, what’s the point of oxygen when no one is allowed to say anything other than ‘no comment’ anyway? Might as well just become mutes who just say “no comment” to everything that matters.

I’m guessing nothing new given that the stockists have already slashed the price of it before it’s even been released.

Meghan Markle and the Half Price Prince.

If you Google H&am inconsistencies you’ll be able to read them.

When something is said that really matters they may decide to comment - in the meantime, they’re right to say nothing.

From that comment I’m going to assume you don’t buy new books often. I’ve noticed it’s a common marketing and sales strategy, especially for new hardbacks, where the listed price is something like “£25.00” and the bookstores or Amazon are selling it for half price to make buyers think they’re getting a bargain. But really the customers are just buying the book for its actual value.

People like to think they’re getting a bargain. Sales and marketing know this.

Meghan Markle and the Half Price Prince.

That’s actually a good title. 😂

What is the phrase? "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt"

Wise words. The people in public life who I admire the most tend to be to be the ones that keep their own counsel.