Hollywood Reporter - Meghan and Harry

[ThatAvidViewer]

Why Hollywood Keeps Quitting on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (hollywoodreporter.com)

Why’d they all leave? What explains the churn? “Everyone’s terrified of Meghan,” claims a source close to the couple. “She belittles people, she doesn’t take advice. They’re both poor decision-makers, they change their minds frequently. Harry is a very, very charming person — no airs at all — but he’s very much an enabler. And she’s just terrible.”

Yes, didn’t they bring their personal photographer….whats his name? Along to BP but they were told no by the queens staff. But….what he did get were internal photos of BP which they used in their docu. They didn’t have permission to take these photos etc. They also took film in kids Wendy house at Windsor, again bringing their fav photographer and using the images in their docu

I'm interested in the NDA situation. I know the law changed in the US to stop them being used to shield the perpetrators of sexual crime, but don't know how much further it went.

Yes it’s not good, they habe obviously tried to quickly put it to bed, a disgruntled employee truing to ruin Harry;s 40th (which is odd in Itself).

but of course now everyone knows it’s a dozen disgruntled employees inc a senior current one.and that’s not easy to bat away. I’m guessing they will now just ignore it. Because what can you say?

I'm told it's much the same in California, and that (like in the UK) if there isn't enough to keep both parties in a suitable manner an inheritance can still be up for grabs - but maybe someone with actual knowledge could advise?

That said, I expect the RF's lawyers have thought of this and that anything "owned" by Harry - and especially anything the family want to keep their hands on - has been arranged to keep it out of reach

Unlike their crazed fans, even they can’t defend the indefensible.

I've said the same all along, Mylovelygreendress, and that with a known loose cannon marrying an "outsider" it's unthinkable that their advisors wouldn't dig

This will include many things we've all mentioned and probably others not even thought of, but it's not for nothing that they say knowledge is power and the palace's very skilled PR people will no doubt use it as they see fit

What's the significance of this photo? I'm interested.
Sorry if I've missed another post already explaining!

Simply that the photo posted by the RF is of Harry on his own whereas the photo actually includes Meghan . Small detail but it struck me as deliberate . Pretty sure the King has a photo of Harry on his own that could have been used.,
But then I do like a conspiracy theory!

@Mylovelygreendress
Oh I see......thanks for explaining!
It might just be because it's a recent one that shows him happy and smiling. So many recent pictures of him show him looking solemn, so maybe they saw this and used it for his happy expression.
This is going off on a tangent a bit, but
looking at the entire picture, that you posted, there's something off about Meghan's expression, compared to how much Harry is laughing. They are both looking at the same person so you'd have thought they'd both be laughing to the same extent. Yes her mouth is smiling (acting IMO), but look at the expression in her eyes.

That's what the law is in California too. The money would have had to go into a mutual pot for it to be part of a financial settlement

Yes - with an NDA and a big dollop of cash for MM.

Can you imagine how much Meghan would go round shouting to anyone and everyone about how the RF are still trying to silence her if this happened?

Agree with this

I have experience of misrepresentation of scenarios caused by still and cropped images, both in work and public situations, which means I hesitate to jump to conclusions from them in any setting.

(First time ever posting on a H&M thread, so no axe to grind)

Depends how big that pot of cash was. Everyone has a price. King Charles is rich beyond measure - what's a few hundred million dollars to him?

A taste of their own medicine which they obviously don't like the taste of.

They have the bullying enq up their sleeve and maybe the ward thing re the DC - so I suggest its check mate / stale mate?

Money is very important to her.
So is power and fame though by the looks of it. She loves to play the victim too.
It’s certainly going to get interesting if things are going the way the rumours suggest.

Yeah it's a weird word isn't it? It reminds me of Hillary Clinton saying she "mis spoke"

I don't think it is the usual word salad and mangling of language - I think they're being careful legally not to describe what's being said about them as lies or untruths because that won't stand up if challenged. So instead they are insinuating they are being lied about by using the made up word "mistruths", but if pressed can then backtrack and argue that the person involved spoke "their own truth" or "misspoke" or some other obfuscating claptrap.

King Charles is rich beyond measure - what's a few hundred million dollars to him?

I very much doubt he has 'a few hundred million dollars' of personal wealth at his own disposal.

The Sussexes are certainly experts in the field of obfuscating clap trap 😆

He’s worth about 700 million personally. I doubt he’d give it to Megan of all people.

Yes, Of course I understand!!. Please don't misrepresent what I have been saying - which is precisely that we should not/not be looking at interpretations of photographs (confirmation bias and unfair/unrepresentative selection) because there is more important evidence.

It is a different poster who is suggesting we should give credence to it. I was responding to that, saying that it's not very reliable and there are more important sources.

As I said (previous post and several times earlier in the thread) I am very much of the opinion that we should be looking at their words and actions, and that Hollywood Reporter should be taken seriously.

Thanks @Theredfoxfliesatmidnight , interesting and would make sense.

We all form opinions through a variety of different sources. I actually believe that photos can be more telling and evidential and it’s not for others to tell me different. Non verbal communication is very powerful and so we can learn a lot from observing others.

Just because there are other sources, don’t discount photos that actually make it very clear that she’s difficult and volatile.

Mistruth isn't a made up word in British English

OED lists its first use in 1480, and it's a direct synonym for "lie" "falsehood"

I don't think the word salad is the important point here.

They're going for the "smear the other party" approach (again) and it will be interesting to see if that will work for them again. As HR is suggesting that Harry has smeared the Palace itself (accusing them of dirty tricks to cover up behaviour which he must have known was true), perhaps this approach will not have the effect she/they might be hoping for.