The PR Whodunnit?

[StormzyinaTCup]

So what is this all about then?
Who did it and why?
And whoever's PR team is responsible needs tearing off a strip, it's going to backfire.
I know there was a thread about this earlier today but it was deleted due to questions over how genuine the OP was. As this story is everywhere at the moment I thought I would have a try myself and see how we go. Just a couple of preemptive points:

1. My MN credentials are rock solid so don't anyone even go there😁
2. Lets also keep some perspective, at the end of the day we are talking about a bunch of privileged and entitled millionaires who likely wouldn't even pee on us if we were on fire and that goes for both 'sides'.

https://news.sky.com/story/meghan-wrote-to-king-charles-expressing-concern-about-unconscious-bias-in-the-royal-family-reports-12863044

🤞🤞🤞🤞

What's wrong with being D List? It is a classification based on quantifiable comparatives?

@MrsMaxDeWinter but Donna was best. rachel was irritating lol

Not knocking at all. To get that part in Suits was Big when you consider that 99%,of actors are unemployed. Just saying that she was not the globally-renowned superstar that some posters are saying she was pre-Harry.

I think it is vitally important for her fans to push a false narrative about her being an asset to the royals by lowering herself to join their family 😂

I agree. I watched the first couple of series and enjoyed it. I don't think it was really that widely known/watched in the UK, but not because it wasn't good though.

people do like to pretend Suits wasn't popular

I think it was easy to miss in UK - not on one of the main channels (old terrestrial ones) and aired late at night or that's' what I remember.

I watched the first series and really liked Meghan in it but I didn't watch past the first series as it was okay TV but not great.

It didn't generated such a huge buzz in UK that I was aware of people talking about it - it wasn't Dr Who, Friends, Succession, Game of thrones level of fame.

Only later I on a re-watch Fringe that I remember she was in it - and it did seem odd she wasn't in more as it felt like it was setting up for that and she did have a screen presence.

However large swaths of the UK population didn't know who she was - heard many conversation where people were asking what she'd been in and no having a clue what suits was.

She has a good career - a solid one but Suits was yet another US import on a minor channel at a quiet hour - successful in it's own terms but not huge by any means.

No, I have never watched Suits so can’t comment on whether the acting, storylines or anything else were good bad or indifferent. On paper it sounds like something I might like but that is different from me actually watching it. Although, if my brother was dating an actress from a soap I might be inclined to say I have watched it to be polite and then do some frantic binge watching😆

I do like ‘Friends’ though and have rewatched more times than I’d care to admit😁.

An image she cultivated with her comment about hitting the ground running. Running off to California via Canada as soon as she'd had her expensive wedding part funded by us the British taxpayers. She had to have that as a stepping stone to stardom. What better way to enter the media stage she'd always craved.

The only person who said William and Kate liked suits was Harry. And we all know the weed skews his truth telling abilities. As if 2 busy people with 3 kids tune in to a cable tv show from America. This was a Harry and Meghan spin if ever I heard it.

Success has clearly has a different meaning here when it comes to Meghan than it does for everyone else clearly!

Saw the attached earlier on Twitter and laughed.

That a "D list actress has such power that even in her absence, she is THE story of this historic, once in a life time Coronation surely says something about Charles and Camilla.

I am willing to bet that if I have a drink for every time her name is mentioned during the commentary on 6 May, I will be very drunk at the end of it.

One paper even shoehorned her into Louis's birthday with the headline: "Louis's life in pictures, including his antics with Meghan Markle."😂

I fully expect the main Coronation story to be:

CHARLES CROWNED DESPITE MEGHAN'S ABSENCE.

"King Charles III was crowned today at Westminster Abbey while Meghan Markle stayed away from the ceremony, choosing to spend time in her 16-bedroomed house in Montecito with her children, Archie and Lilibet. The glittering ceremony, which Meghan snubbed, is the first coronation in 70 years. It was confirmed today that Meghan was not among the 2000 guests that thronged the Abbey. Presiding over the ceremony was the Archbishop of Canterbury who also performed the wedding ceremony of Prince Harry to Meghan in 2018."

I am willing to bet that if I have a drink for every time her name is mentioned during the commentary on 6 May, I will be very drunk at the end of it.

Can we please do this... it might be the only way I get through the Coronation 😂

I would be very surprised if they mentioned Meghan's name during the Coronation commentary. At all.
It will be all about the ceremony.

Roussette, if you're not at work, just go out for the day. Or come and do my garden. I'll give you some quiche.

Oh yes please! I'll be in London that weekend, so I will watch it in real time!! We can do a live watching thread.

Please let's!

I'll bring the vodka. You bring the cranberry juice!

I wonder if it will be Nicholas Witchell. I will really need a drink if I watch any of it, and it's him

@MrsMaxDeWinter I had heard/read Meghan’s name but wouldn’t have said I would recognise her, mainly because l wasn’t the intended audience for The Tig etc. I’ve watched suits since she married and liked her in the role.

No one can tell what her career would have been, depending on what route she took there was the potential for a higher profile and/or $ but also there was potential to fade away.

Personally, I think she was unprepared by her husband for what the royal role entailed and being in her 30s having achieved a career must have found a lot of the limitations due to being part of the institution difficult. There was also a UK/US culture clash which resulted in some misunderstandings like the wedding confusion, the titles etc.

I am in the camp of no one’s perfect and they have all made mistakes, but for god sake why did PH not go and meet Thomas Markle (and the rest of the family) when their relationship first became public and say “ the press are absolute shits, they will try every trick in the book to get an interview please do not engage with them. Look here is how they treated my Mum, Fergie, Camilla, Kate etc.

Witchell isn't important enough to do the commentary. It's usually someone with a bit of gravitas like Huw Edwards. Then they get Alastair Bruce to explain the more arcane stuff. That man is a fount of knowledge.
I watched coverage of the Jubilee and the late Queen's funeral, and the commentators did not mention Meghan at all, apart from to note that they were taking their seats.
Believe me, it ain't gonna be about her

Let's hope so @Maireas 👍

Hi, @jeffgoldblum - I've watched coverage of these things and they never descend into gossip and sniping. At the Jubilee they noted the arrival of W and H and made no judgement whatsoever.
I think some people are guilty of wishful thinking....

Nice of you to acknowledge that you were probably not the intended audience for The Tig.

I don't disagree with the rest of your post, there were many mistakes right from the off. Reading between the lines, and watching some of the footage from her childhood, I think that Meghan's relationship with Thomas was always tricky, and that the mistake she made when she became better known was to curate herself a stable, happy childhood when it probably was quite chaotic.

It's something people in the public eye sometimes do, particularly when they have dysfunctional families, most recently Brooke Shields admitted that the picture of her mother she had curated was very different from the reality.

The quickness with which Thomas Markle betrayed her and all his subsequent actions, his blackmail, "time to take care of daddy", etc, seeking common cause with her main bashers and those spreading conspiracy theories about her children suggest to me that all was never really well.

Good god no. I hope they don't mention her name once.

Not wishful thinking at all.

Just bemused that the lead up to the Coronation has been all about Meghan, particularly here on Mumsnet.

But of course I hope you are right.

If only because I don't wish to consume a quart of vodka in a very short space of time!

I hope the same happens again for the coronation, I wasn't alive for the first one and whatever your views it's a piece of history and I'm interested to see it happen live instead of black and white recordings , I hope nothing takes away from this advent !

It's what I'd expect.

Lots of facts being dropped lots of filling in talk but having watched previous events having grown and lived for decades in UK TV and radio coverage tend to steer well clear of gossip and sniping.

At most if she mentioned at all it will be to quickly state that she stayed in the USA with her children when/if they point out Harry - with a swift moving on to next topic.

The tabloids and magazines wouldn't surprise me if they were fill of Meghan stories but actual coverage will be loads of little facts and historical info at least that's the tried and tested format in the UK.

Yes, I'm interested from the historical point of view, and the BBC and ITV commentaries are usually very informative. They have military and royal experts on. I've never known anything unpleasant or personal, I think that's what makes it quite enjoyable for me. At the late Queen's funeral, one of the commentators explained all the military traditions, which (I thought) was very interesting. Not many of us were around in 1953, so this Coronation, whatever your views, be quite an event.