ARO update

[Sunblessed]

At the end of August, there was a partial rejection of the ARO trademark because of the name and descriptions. Also issues with the logo.
They had 3 months to rectify, which you would think would be ample time.

But just a few days before the deadline, an extension has been applied for. Which would be another 3 months

So it’s obviously not an easy fix, I’m sure there have been countless people working to get this done and they have months! Yet they’ve not been able to sort it.

Seemingly, you are only allowed one extension. This would take her to the end of February. So pretty much a year since she’s launched and it’s no further forward, if anything she’s in a worse position. What a disaster.

😬

I'm probably being over cynical here, but I think that if the investigation had exonerated the Sussexes, it would have leaked by now (we have Harry's own words for how unpleasant their office was).

Stella McCartney is an interesting label because they have discussed "stars" and their impact on the brand. MM wore something of theirs (quite some time ago now). The brand calculated that one outing was worth somewhere near 10 million, multiplying by a factor of 10 any influence Obama, Beyonce and PoW have.

I think maybe you are referring to internet search rather than sales.?

The most famous Stella McCartney dress worn by Meghan was the wedding evening dress, and for that year, 2018, Stella McCartney reported loses which they ascribed to a slowdown in sales and other administrative costs.

What about the recent expose of her bullying behaviour past and present in The Hollywood Reporter of 12 separate members of her staff?

Are all of the allegations from these victims to be dismissed?

This has huge reputational impact for MM - but she hasnt sued? Why not?

THR is a credible long standing business publication - not a gossip mag. This article would be bullet-proof legally.

I 100% agree.

And all we have since is a repetition of the same bully behaviour allegations by multiple staff in another workplace and country.

The bullying report was not released to protect those members of staff who felt they had been bullied. It may well not have been released to protect Meghan as well. The Sussexes have never asked for the report to be released, have they? Maybe because it will show them in a bad light. Harry told us in Spare that people were crying at their desks I the Sussexes office. Doesn’t sound like a very happy workplace to me 🤷‍♀️

The idea of people crying at their desks is just fucking awful.

No, that is not what I am referring to.

I'm not sure why people expect an internal HR report to be made public.

Would that even be legal? Wouldn't it be an infringement of the confidentiality of those involved? Even if names were redacted, they'd probably be fairly easy to identify.

Oh come on. Refused luxury brands such as Chanel. 😂

There are ‘fans’ that would still deny it despite it coming from the horse’s mouth (H).

What about that killer look she gave her own mother when she dared interrupt her? I wouldn’t give my mum that look and certainly not on public record. Talk about mask slip.

So you are a ‘super fan’. Crikey there must be better people to fan over than Meghan Markle.

I was a witness in an HR investigation. Reading between the lines it was bullying and constructive dismissal.

I was never told that - I was asked for what I had seen of the relationship between person X and person B. I didn't get feedback about the end result of the investigation.

Quite rightly, to.protect the people involved (personally I think there was bullying).

So no, of course the investigation into Meghan potentially bullying staff would not be released - not because it's a cover up but to protect those involved.

But Harry put in Spare that staff were crying at their desks and William blamed Meghan. Which suggested the staff weren't crying at their desks pre-Meghan, because otherwise that would be the obvious reply. No need for broken necklaces or dog bowls 😂

So they went from 'not crying at work' to 'crying at work', and this happened when they started working for Meghan.

The thing is, once bullying allegations come out people line up to tell their stories, which are usually easy to verify. This is because all bullies have their own mo. So, in spite of the fact that people want it to be true in the case of MM, there has never been any credible evidence that points in to anything other than smear.

So your suggestion is that the 12 victims The Hollywood Reporter spoke to in their investigation, made it all up and there is no evidence - its just a smear?

Can you explain why MM would stand back and let that stand to damage her reputation?

Can you explain why THR would risk a law suit with unsubstantiated claims?

Exactly, if it wasn’t true, she would sue. Both of them are very litigious and she would likely have a case because she could prove that an industry magazine materially affected her production company and damaged her reputation.

But she hasn’t, thus proving the allegations are likely to be true.

Look at the lengths Harry is going to because the papers listened to boring voicemails from 20years ago.

Yet an incredibly damning article is released and they’ve done nothing. Says it all.

@andIsaid what is you explanation for Harry saying staff were crying at their desks? Why were they crying?

She made her claims against them, out in the open so they get a right to reply.
They imply against her, so she has not able to reply.
She cannot answer to shadows

This is quite hilarious as a defence of someone who has accused someone in the Royal family of being directly racist. Who? Oh, we won’t tell you that…

The moment there was a press report that her PA Melissa Toubati left unhappily, Omid Scobie and Meghan’s friend Janina Gavankar went out on global interviews stating that she had been dismissed for gross misconduct. Meanwhile the former staff member is subject to a non-disclosure agreement as part of her employment contract and cannot defend herself at all.

Indeed. Of course they would sue. The problem with being as litigious as H&M is that when they don’t sue people wonder why. The RF are ‘never complain, never explain’ except most possibly in some circumstances. Much better imo.

Prior to that she wasn't in that position of power, and had more need to keep people on side, so it is possible her behaviour changed when her circumstances changed

Meghan was in a position of some power before marrying into the RF though. As an actor on suits she would have had some power over many of the crew. Yet no one from the crew of that show has come forward with anything negative about her. They’ve always sung her praises actually. Something something employee of Reitmans department store is just one person, in the first 36 years of her life. I’m an unassertive and usually good-natured person known for being thoughtful and polite, and in the first 36 years of my life I’m sure I pissed more than one person off. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t. Lucky for me I’ve never been famous. It’s a fact that for anyone that becomes famous there will be supporters and detractors. Especially when it’s a woman. We see it publicly all the time.

I think what bothers me most about theses charges of bullying is that the palace leaked this a day or two before the OW interview. The timing is suspicious. And since then nothing substantial, other than what is ‘he said, she said’ via royal biographers and tabloid style journalism. The palace have stated they will not be releasing their findings which is fair enough as it’s an internal staff issue. But really the palace should not have spoken at all about this in the first place as it is an internal staff issue. (The palaces, aka the Royal Family, really do pick and choose what they will speak to).

One royal biographer said that Meghan bullied some office staff intensely. Another royal biographer said that it was a clash of cultures and over-reactions on the part of the office staff. Two different royal biographers and two different views.

If it became known that Meghan was going to claim to be a victim on OW then it makes sense that her victims would go public.

'Clash of cultures'. I have worked in a couple of different cultures other than the UK. I never felt bullied, or reduced to tears. I have had respectful conversations about differing cultures and expectations. But not reduced to tears.

And she wasn't integral to Suits. It wouldn't have folded if her character was written out. So no, not hugely powerful

I think what bothers me most about theses charges of bullying is that the palace leaked this a day or two before the OW interview. The timing is suspicious.

The Palace didn’t “leak” the charges of bullying. Former employees of the Sussexes approached journalist Valentine Low of The Times, which gave them protection as whistleblowers (otherwise they were in breach of the NDAs). The Palace came out looking very bad themselves from the story - a serious complaint is made and they do nothing and leave their staff to just suffer the consequences of bullying. Then they have to pay several hundred thousand pounds to a law firm for an independent investigation!

The timing of the story was something Valentine Low was very clear about that at the time - their former staff were deeply unhappy that Meghan was going to go ahead on Oprah and paint such a skewed picture of her time in the Royal family, and wanted their stories heard too, so at least there was some balance. So it wasn’t “suspicious” timing - it was deliberate.

Whats your take on the 12 separate victims of bullying reported in The Hollywood Reporter following their investigation into MM published this year?

Why would a highly credible business publication put themselves at risk without watertight evidence?

And why would MM not sue for defamation if this were lies?

@wonderingconcerned

Is this the ‘report’? It’s my first time reading it fully. I really didn’t want to get into all this and I’ll answer your post but then I’m leaving it there. It’s not a settled matter. We aren’t talking about something that we know definitively happened.

Why Hollywood Keeps Quitting on Harry and Meghan
Plus, how an Echo glitch turned Alexa into a “commie operative” and Dimitri, the million-dollar maitre ‘d, rides off into the Sunset (Tower).

Would you work for Harry and Meghan? Ex-employees say run away. Adobe Stock (2); Samir Hussein/WireImage; Karwai Tang/WireImage
Plus, how an Echo glitch turned Alexa into a “commie operative” and Dimitri, the million-dollar maitre ‘d, rides off into the Sunset (Tower).

(The column covers 3 separate topics. 1. Meghan and Harry’s ex employees, 2. Alexa is a ‘commie operative’ due to a technical glitch, and 3. a story about Dimitri the maitre ‘d)

“Looks like Harry and Meghan have done it again — they’ve chewed up yet another American adviser.

Josh Kettler, the Santa Barbara-based consultant who’d been serving as chief of staff to the Duke and Duchess, reportedly resigned in August — after just three months on the job — becoming the latest member of the ever-expanding “Sussex Survivors Club,” as some former employees have taken to calling themselves. Before Kettler, there was Toya Holness, who was their global press secretary until 2022, and Christine Weil Schirmer, the onetime Pinterest communications director who quit as Harry and Meghan’s PR head in 2021. Samantha Cohen, Markle’s top aide and private secretary, departed the same year.

Earlier, there was Keleigh Thomas Morgan, a Sunshine Sachs partner who started repping Meghan when she was still a commoner (well, a TV star on Suits), adding Harry to her client roster when they became engaged and then helping them set up their own internal comms operation when the couple moved to California.
(Sources tell Rambling Reporter that Morgan stopped repping them around 2020, because the Sussexes stopped paying Sunshine Sachs for its services, though the PR firm denies that was the case.)

Other members of the Survivors Club include Catherine St-Laurent, who lasted a year as head of the Sussexes’ charity Archewell; Archewell COO Mandana Dayani; content chief Ben Browning (who got Harry and Meghan’s documentary on Netflix before bolting for FilmNation); and marketing chief Fara Taylor.
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.”

In 2018 Markle’s treatment of two royal aides prompted Buckingham Palace to investigate the then-princess for “bullying behavior.” Though the results of the inquiry were never released, Markle denounced the effort as a “calculated smear campaign.” But some of the couple’s stateside staff-members also reserve special bile for Markle, whose reported penchant for noisy tantrums and angry 5 a.m. emails has earned her the in-house moniker ‘Duchess Difficult.’ “She’s absolutely relentless,” says one source. “She marches around like a dictator in high heels, fuming and barking orders. I’ve watched her reduce grown men to tears.”

Their unsparing portrait of her is in marked contrast with the kinder, gentler image Markle has been painting of herself. In recent years the former princess has become an ardent admirer of best-selling Texas self-help author Brené Brown, who urges readers to cultivate gratitude and joy in their lives. While touring Colombia with her husband last month, Markle said her new attitude of gratitude had lead her to a “chapter of joy.” “If you’re going to be grateful for your life, you have to be grateful for all aspects of it,” she said.

And in a recent episode of her Archetypespodcast, Meghan spoke about the challenges she has faced asserting herself and overcoming her natural reticence in professional situations. “I find myself cowering and tiptoeing into a room and – the thing I find most embarrassing – when you’re saying a sentence and the intonation goes up, like it’s a question. And you’re like, ‘Oh my God, stop stop like whispering and tiptoeing around it. Just say what it is that you need. You’re allowed to set a boundary. You’re allowed to be clear, it doesn’t make you demanding. It doesn’t make you difficult, it makes you clear.'”

Harry and Meghan’s current spokesperson declined to comment.”

The column throws a lot of shade on Meghan but again, no one willing to come forward. No one who says they actually belong to the ‘Sussex survivors club’ - actually it doesn’t tell us if any of the people actually belong to this ‘club.’ 3 of the people are from their original KP office. 2 of those 3 were the original 2 that apparently prompted Jason Knauf to officially complain. One, Samantha Cohen left their employ in 2021 according to this article. Isn’t this incorrect? Harry and Meghan left the UK early 2020.

they quoted a ‘source’ as saying this, “She marches around like a dictator in high heels, fuming and barking orders. I’ve watched her reduce grown men to tears.” This reeks of misogyny, and I was left wondering if this is a remotely serious piece of journalism. Of course, a man could be reduced to tears by a woman but how many ‘ grown men’ in her employ did Meghan reduce to tears exactly? Then I realized this is in the equivalent of the gossip column of a newspaper.

I counted there were 11 people (not 12) referred to. I just couldn’t be disciplined enough to read it again to check. But some of these people were just noted as having left Meghan and Harry’s employ. No reasons given. The column didn’t tie anyone to actually being a bullying victim. In my opinion they’ve implied all 11 were victims with a lot of twisty writing as far as I can tell. Truly, I’m sick of this sort of writing.

(I tried to link the actual Hollywood Reporter article but it wouldn’t link) so I’ll reference it the old way;

The Hollywood Reporter September 12, 2024 authors Benjamin Svrkey editor, and Julian Sancton, Editor.

Meghan and Harry don’t sue the media willy nilly although it feels like it because churnalists are always referring to their ‘habit of suing.’ Meghan has only sued once as far as I know. Harry 3 times - 2 of which are ongoing.

Not suing someone is not an admission that the story is true, nor is it an admission of guilt in any way.

With all the bad things Meghan is accused of doing by the media and on sm, she’d have to be 50 people just to get it all done.

Meghan and Harry don’t sue the media willy nilly although it feels like it because churnalists are always referring to their ‘habit of suing.’ Meghan has only sued once as far as I know. Harry 3 times - 2 of which are ongoing.
Not suing someone is not an admission that the story is true, nor is it an admission of guilt in any way.

Ah but you forgot that they also threatened to sue the BBC when they claimed that Harry didn’t in fact ask the Queen for her explicit permission to use the name Lilibet. They threatened but the BBC stood by the story and their JOURNALIST (caps because you seem unaware of that word) and guess what happened?……..
They didn’t sue after all because they knew they didn’t have a case.

Whether you choose to sue or not, is not based upon the perception of journalists. What a ludicrous suggestion.

You sue because of reputational damage which has had a material affect, because of written untruths.

HR is an industry magazine. Meghan has a production company and it is highly likely because of the nature of the publication, that the sources themselves are from that world. This article has damaged her reputation in Hollywood and classed her as a bully. This is serious. This was a well sourced story backed by the HR editor in interviews. This would almost certainly have had an impact on not only meghan but her company too.

So yes, you take inference from the lack of action when the damage is so great. They are a litigious couple that have chosen not to sue. That’s highly unusual given the gravity of the article…but that’s because they knows it’s true.

Harry is suing the Sun knowing that even if he wins, he pays the costs for both parties because he previously rejected a settlement. So it ms very much about perception for them and seen to be doing the right thing. Harry even said he is doing so out of principle. The outcome is guaranteed to cost him a huge amount of money but he is hoping for vindication.

So why not the same approach? Why aren’t they taking the principled approach of taking the publication, that called his wife a bully to court? He stated in NY the other day about how his wife has been targeted, then why not stand up to the magazine? Why is he happy for a biracial women to be targeted in such a way?

Why? We all know why.

The best bit is, is actually easier to sue in the US than it is in the UK. In the US, all she would have to do is provide evidence that she’s not a bully. The onus in the UK would be for HR to prove that what they’ve written is true, so it a higher barrier. All Megs would have to do is get some staff to say how wonderful she is and how she gives out great hugs and gift baskets. But the truth is she can’t risk HR coming forward with their evidence, eg ex staff coming to court. But that’s even if it got that far, usually these things are settled beforehand, just the mere threat of suing is enough. Just like they tried with the BBC. But as far as we aware, they haven’t even done that this time.

So yes, we can take inference from the lack of action that Meghan is indeed….a bully