Harry and Megan dubbed "fucking grifters" by Spotify exec and podcaster

[Qbish]

No great surprise there... Would love to hear his story about Zooming Prince Harry, I can only imagine his frustration with the whining ninny!

Leading Spotify figure lashes out at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after end of podcast deal | The Independent

Hmm. Makes sense.

Yes that makes sense.

Meghan backed him for a long time. To be honest I think she should cut her losses and get out now.

He's too damaged for anyone but his blood family to deal with.

If the deal goes through, she's just selling Dior - hardly philanthropic. But it doesn't take much work to get dressed, I guess, so she should be able to cope with that.

But if it doesn't go ahead, isn't that just something else she was considered no good for? Another company that rejected her.

Aw, though, I don't want to say bad things about her because at least she trying, unlike her no mark husband. She's got herself a new mgt company; she's gone on the set-up meal with Gwyneth and Cameron; she did her pap photos yesterday.... She's putting in the effort. So good for her.

Strangely, the more peoole laugh at her, the more I grow to like her. I'm so contrary. 😄

And the other issues with this are
a) there never was a Madeleine topic, and
b) the Royal family topic was in existence before H&M even met

Perhaps what she meant is that in both cases threads are corralled within a specific area, for example 'In the news' for Madeleine McCann and Royal Family for H&M, rather than letting the conversations spread through AIBU, chat etc. They do tend to pop up on the general boards during a big event, eg the coronation.

The parallel with the McCanns is interesting. People have mentioned Meghan's inauthenticity and I think that's part of the phenomenon. There's a sort of cognitive dissonance - something false and smug about her and Harry that a lot of people are picking up on - they really seem to irritate people on a grand scale.

The McCanns were similarly divisive - despite their tragedy, a lot of people felt confused by them. My private theory was that they lied at the start about the frequency of their checks on the children, to avoid being charged with neglect. This meant the police were working with a narrower window for the kidnapping/escape to happen. I think the Mccanns' guilt around this made them behave in a 'guilty' way, which a lot of people picked up on & mistakenly attributed to them being somehow involved in MM's disappearance.

But then there are cases like Lindy Chamberlain's in Aus where people's spidey senses are triggered en masse- yet they are just completely wrong and she was innocent all along.

The purpose is to take attention away from the Trooping of the Colour and unfavourable comments about Spotify. Also to make her look like she’s hard at work taking calls. Harry doesn’t seem to feature much these days.

If the deal goes through, she's just selling Dior - hardly philanthropic. But it doesn't take much work to get dressed, I guess, so she should be able to cope with that.

There's a lot of criticism on-line about how she dresses so if she did get the Dior contract I do think that would be a huge win for her.

How wonderful!

@TrashyPanda

what a great story. Glad you hear you’re a medical miracle

There's a lot of criticism on-line about how she dresses so if she did get the Dior contract I do think that would be a huge win for her.

Because they'll help her to get dressed? I don't see the criticism. These threads are full of people saying she dresses nicely and they love her style - which isn't Dior. Although won't she rather just end up doing perfume ads?

However, I admire her for supporting herself and not sponging off others or selling out her 18mthscon the Rf. I'd always thought they'd end up doing brand advertising in some form or other so this shouldn't come as a surprise. How else can they support themselves? But when they didn't go that way and emphasised their philanthropic work, I thought they might have something classier in mind. But I guess, these days, thete isn't much else out there for people who aren't really qualified to earn huge amounts through their own skills so have to become influencers. Archewell sponsored by Dior.

And I'm not casting shade here. Because if someone paid me millions for wearing nice clothes, shoes, bags, perfume, makeup etc, I'd bite their hand off! So I don't blame her at all Haha. I just didn't expect that would be the route they'd take. But it explains why the Queen said it wouldn't work being half in and half out.

There's a big difference between bullies and people challenging their 'truth' lies and manipulation.
Pisses me off when others are yelling 'bully' at people who aren't bullies, it's just you don't like others challenging or having different opinions

All I want is to be a fly on the wall watching her go off on one, wailing about how everyone is horrible and she is perfect and Harry is nervously following her around, bowing and stooping to pick up her hair extensions that she's ripped out in a fury and consoling her with "Yes dear, no dear, whatever you say dear...!"

She strikes me as the kind of person who would make a fuss of a cat when the cameras are on her, all smiles and fussing over the cat and then when the camera has stopped rolling and the door is shut, the smile turns into a scowl and the cat gets booted up the arse.

Replace the word cat with Harry and that's about right.

I'd be pretty shocked if Dior chose her, she's a Z list actress, married a prince, failing in business and has come across as an Entitled lying winge-bag, along with her husband - what a figurehead she would be 🤨 ... I don't think!

As an aside, a year ago a thread like this would have been full of people telling us we were RaCiStS for daring to criticise Meghan. That seems to have changed...

I don't believe there is a Dior contract or a possibility of one. I think this is made up PR. I'm sure its true she's in negotiations for these sort of deals but not with Dior- I can't see why they would want her. She's more likely to be brand damaging now for them as they are so ultra- premium.

It's the sort of thing that anyone can say because it's not defamatory, it is presented as 'a rumour' rather than fact and Dior is very unlikely to release a statement saying its untrue because if it's expressed as a rumour it isn't really damaging to them and the reference to their name everywhere is free publicity.

Just look at the quotes in the Mail article and read it with an eye of 'how likely is this to be true' versus 'how likely is this lacking in substance and more likely to be PR to distract from the grifters comment'.

"Meghan is all anyone is talking about,' a prominent Beverly Hills socialite said last night.

There have been rumours for weeks that she's about to sign a deal with Dior which has put the gossip mill into overdrive. If she pulls that off, then no one will remember that her silly little podcast got cancelled after one season.' "

Note it says 'rumours for weeks' (doubtful whether true but if it is who started them), rather than 'a source close to the company said [as a fact] she about to sign a deal. All it says is rumour not a sourced fact.

"We knew the Spotify announcement was coming,' a source at WME told me.
'It might be a shock to everyone else but we've been working on the rebranding of Meghan for weeks.
'Ari is the best in the business when it comes to corporate deals and making money. He's excited to be representing Meghan and has thrown all his energy into it. The offers have been pouring in, including from other podcast platforms.'"

I'm sure it's true she has got offers but I doubt they have been 'pouring in' - because it's a long time since Megexit and if they'd been pouring in more would have poured out by now.

It all has the feel of exaggerated PR - good and sly and well timed PR -but smoke and mirrors PR all the same.

Thing is, I think she's stunning. But a brand ambassador needs to be aspirational, and she needs to pretend she's still doing everything for philanthropy. Not sure how Dior will marry that up.

But a brand ambassador needs to be aspirational

Not necessarily - depends on the brand - but for Dior which is a supreme premium brand I agree absolutely needs to be aspirational. which is what I was saying upthread. I think she's missed her window for ultra premium brands. Because she's gone from being an actress/philanthropist who fell in love with a Prince to being a career-less part of a pair of complaining liars who are now desperate to make money to fund their lavish lifestyle. It's Wallace Simpson all over again. Who is going to pay for the French Chateau and the LA palace.

I suppose there is a fan sector who will find her aspirational who identify with her as a mixed race/black woman from a working class background who has achieved international fame but I don't think that is a sector that Dior is marketing to.

Gurning not gunning ^

I've always found Meghan's eyes very arresting.

There is a lot more diversity on the catwalk than ever before. Even before, there was always some diversity but the girls would be identified as exotic and cosmetic contracts were off limits for darker skin due to the limitations in high-end ranges.

I completely agree, it’s utterly disrespectful and they seem oblivious to the damage and hurt they’ve caused.
Quite honestly I’m delighted that someone has stood up and told it as it is rather than the syncopated, insincere fawning of so many others.

She never was and she never will be fashion model material and that is not a specific criticism of her at all. It remains extremely cut throat and even a taller, well proportioned, younger version of Meghan would unlikely get a look in at the major agencies. Dior in particular take the cream of the crop and they have always been pretty unapologetic about it.

That is why she will either be special guest walking for Dior alongside the models or used for a bag range or a perfume and even then I doubt it. I think Lily Rose Depp performs that role at Chanel and she is visually arresting and picture perfect and very young in comparison with famous parents. It is that sense of promise and aspiration which a brand can only tap into if you possess it already, they cannot randomly generate it.

I don't think she's stunning either, but she's certainly attractive enough to be a 'brand ambassador'. You don't have to be Naomi Campbell for that.

It's not her looks that are the problem. It's the fact that she has no obvious role which would see her posing on red carpets, no social media, no target market. The only really interesting thing about her was her royal connection, and she no longer has that. She's also divisive and has earned a reputation for being difficult to work with and not listening to advice. And would Dior want to be associated with the kind of drama we saw with the 'car chase' in NY? How does an association with Meghan benefit Dior?