Maybe read the darn thing first?

[beguilingeyes]

All of these threads about a book that no-one has read yet?

Rumours you just made up?

there clearly was no affair for goodness sake

She did not make up the rumour. It has been all over twitter and foreign press.

Or you know there's no huge conspiracy and injunction because he never had an affair.

Let's be sensible for a minute I know it's hard to be logical when you're desperate to paint someone as a villain but isn't that much more likely than loads of people being sworn to secrecy and everyone knowing but not saying anything.

foreign press.

Supply some links then and prove it!

This. There is no such thing as bad publicity, it is a saying I have heard.

I asked for links to the foreign press articles once.

There weren't any.

Other countries wouldn't be bound by any superinjunction either.

Why buy the book when many different outlets are giving out the contents for free. The only bits left out will be the boring bits such as where he buys his shoes from and Megs yoga routines.

Exactly this. There is no superinjunction because if there were the foreign press would be completely free to report not just on an affair, but that William was trying to cover it up. And they would know that a superinjunction existed because every press outlet in the UK that will be bound by it will have to have been given a copy of it. They can’t publish that in the UK, but they can tell their foreign colleagues…. (this is how past ones have been revealed).

Also, the extracts of Spare that we’ve been reading have been from the Spanish language version of the book. That is, obviously, not being published in the UK. So PRH would be able to talk about the affair in that version (or an injunction, if there was one). Except they don’t - because there isn’t one.

This is a case of the dog that doesn’t bark. We know there’s no superinjunction because no-one, anywhere in the world is publishing what would be a huge story.

Think this is a media tactic. A lot of people watched the Netflix programme and changed their mind about H&M after it. If the media release exerts from the book with their twist on it, then people won't read the book and make up their own mind. Kinda clever and calculating. It controls the narrative.

No it hasn’t. Supply some links or I will conclude you are lying .

Re: superinjunction i read somebody on here mention that the daily mail removed their comment about the affair after being notified by a third party's legal team. There will be some type of injunction against it.

Could people just accept there was no affair ?

Apparently not. Honestly anyone who believes there was an affair must be quite hard of thinking. Applying even a modicum of logic to the situation would tell you that it wasn't something that happened.

What I don't get is if they can do superinjunction for the alleged affair, why not for all the other stuff? (Not legally minded here!) Makes me agree with never happened!

The UK has some of the strongest libel laws in the world, so it was probably that.

I think the fallout from the affair would perhaps have a greater impact given the Charles/Diana/camilla situation... in all honesty I'm not sure! I don't particularly understand the RF and think they're all rather dysfunctional 🤣 I don't believe all Harry has said but it's clear there's a lot more that goes on behind the scenes than we know.

Reading the leaks is good enough for me. No way would I waste my money buying the Tome of Whinge.

They far more likely will have been advised by William or the Marchioness’ legal team that they are publishing defamatory speculation without evidence and will have court proceedings issued issued against them unless they withdraw the story. And, having absolutely no evidence that any affair took place, they took the prudent course and took the story down.

This happens all the time, by the way. The press will play “chicken” with a story, and then pull it when threatened if they really can’t substantiate anything.

Read it? I’d rather pull out my teeth with rusty pliers.

Not going to buy it but I wonder if, just like the promo stuff for the Netflix series, the extracts out of context read a bit differently. I suspect they might. Maybe not such comedy gold?

The book is light years from getting onto my list of books to read.

Why would I pay money to read what is being widely distributed for free?

I had absolutely no desire to feather the nest of a multi-millionaire prior to these leaks and even less given how utterly cringeworthy the published extracts are.

I'm going to read it. I am no fan of harry but if i want to know what's in the book it's better to read it myself rather than filtered through the sun and the daily mail.

I do love how much damage he's doing to the royal family though. It's rather amazing to watch. I like to think this is the beginning of the end for our unelected overlords.

I think it's natural and inevitable that people will look for the excerpts/commentary in the press and react to them. Discussion is raging and very few people have access to the whole book, even those who do want and intend to read it.

I agree, though, that some of It isn't being presented very irresponsibly or contextually.

I saw a headline yesterday saying Harry claims the Queen was a main cause of the breakup of his relationship with Chelsy Davy. The article/excerpts didn't support this; it was basically Harry talking about how he'd been impressed/envious of how Chelsy always did what she wanted and didn't worry about either conforming or rebelling. He did say he knew his grandmother and the public did not/would not approve of Chelsy and would have tried to change her if the two of them had stayed together, and he hadn't wanted that to happen. But she left him because she knew she couldn't live with the constant press/public scrutiny, and he said he would have done the same in her place.

I suspect the book will provide a great deal more context, but that won't be the interesting part for many people. And some commenters "in the wild" clearly haven't even read the actual excerpts (as distinct from the headlines), so I don't expect much from them.

> Can we borrow it from the Library?
> Yes, but do realise that that way means that you are still putting some of our money into H&M's hands. They will get PLR money. Wait for the charity shop versions.

This is the most "when I hear the word culture, I reach for my revolver" thing I've seen in a while. If you want to own a book, it obviously has some intrinsic value to you - why shouldn't the author and publisher profit?

If you want to own a book, it obviously has some intrinsic value to you - why shouldn't the author and publisher profit?

If you buy it from a charity shop the author and publisher have already profited. Or do you think that charity shops shouldn't be able to sell books at all?