Vanity Fair podcast

[Atlasvue]

Carrying on.

Employee feels Harry is happy doing charity work and is happy for meghan to do all the work to make money so he doesn’t need to

Yup. I’m starting to gain a new found respect for William and Jason Knauf for actually sticking up for their staff when the staff members were powerless to stand up to a royal duchess.

I also seem to remember someone stating that Catherine and the Queen got involved when they saw her mistreating staff. Apparently the Queen told her “Meghan, in this family we don't speak to people like that" when she caught her arguing with the chef that she could taste egg in a vegan dish.

I was wondering what’s Doria up to these day? Does she look after the dcs or is she in LA? Meghan used to wheel her out regularly but now - nothing. You’d have thought she might have been in the cooking show.

Just my own musings, but I sometimes wonder if Harry is Snape and Catherine is Lily Potter.

Not completely Snape-like, as H has had other relationships. But just a seed in his mind at times.

Thats true, although they did say it was goodbye show rather than an attempt at a comeback, I don't know what the viewing numbers were like. I do remember reading it was panned by the critics

The sub-heading on that Times article ends with the question "So how do they recover?"

I think that begs a further question - what do they want to be? It's far from clear - there have been lots of sound-bitey phrases over the years about "doing good" but not so much on what "good" they are doing.

For example, what happened to the Parents Network? Where are the updates telling people what its been doing in the last few months (growth in number using it, increase in traffic etc) and reminding people that it exists and why it's worth going to. Who, if anyone, is doing the promotion work for it?

I was rewatching WeCrashed on Apple last week and there are just so many parallels between Meghan & Rebekah Neumann
Being married to a man more famous than her, claiming she was involved in launching WeWork when she didn’t.
Also in Vanity Fair about her at WeWork "she has been known to have people fired, such as a mechanic for WeWork’s Gulfstream jet, within minutes of meeting them because she didn’t like their energy."
The whole elevate the world’s consciousness stuff and the fact that she started a school with no experience whatsoever.
Not wanting to ‘promote’ she was related to Gwyneth Paltrow, but making sure that everyone was aware of it.
It is fascinating to see just how similar they are.

@Thedom Yes, comeback as in she was coming back with new material after a couple of years in the wilderness. NF don't very often publish figures but you can see why they might think a new show from Ellen the disgraced megastar was a better bet than Meghan's latest attempt at getting everyone to like her.

Goodness, even The Times is mocking them now! Hilarious.

Thanks for sharing.

So firefighters injured should expect no sympathy because it is obviously a dangerous job. NHS staff should be prepared for trauma as it's part of the job so they deserve no sympathy either. The police have signed up for a life of violence so if they get injured they get no sympathy either. And the soldiers who relieved Auschwitz should just get over themselves because that was what they signed up for?

The Vanity Fair article isn’t going away anytime soon. They look to have reissued the article, undated and under a new headline. ‘The Californians’. It’s the same article in its entirety with photos added. It popped up on my Apple News this morning for the first time and it’s the Editor’s pick!
So much for tomorrow’s chip paper that some posters were hoping for!

It's time to retreat and reflect but then I'm not sure if they two are capable of that

Instead of telling the world how to behave they should perhaps start with trying to men done relationships in their own families ... if they will have them

That's a great point.

Don't mention Catherine but mention others who have been targeted. It's hard to avoid the impression that they only care about themselves when everything they do focuses on their experience to the exclusion of others.

Yes, and I think W&C (and I think specially her is smarter than people give her credit for) saw through Meghan from day one.

To be fair, The Times (particularly Hilary Rose) has been mocking them for years! The tagline is prescient though about 'How do they come back from this?'. Yeah, how do they? I reckon NF will release the cooking show, because why would they not? They've spent the money producing and editing it, so anything they make back is good. But once the NF contract runs out in Sept what do they have left? I think they have a publishing contract for two more books (wasn't Spare a 3-book deal?), but apart from that, I think it's tumbleweed.

I doubt they know it themselves. I guess Meghan thought she was going to be a mix of Angelina Jolie and Diana. And Harry, God knows. The problem is that to quote Logan Roy, they are not serious people.

I seriously doubt they can recover from this. They will always have relevance in the tabloids, but their moment has passed.

In the end the bullying is not the problem in Hollywood. If they had delivered results, the bullying would have been tolerated, at least for a while. See Weinstein, Ellen, and the countless bullies and abusers that have go on for decades unaccounted.

The problem is that they have proven to be lazy, unreliable and uninteresting. They only value was to trash the BRF, but that cashcow has been milked to death now.

Just reading about Hugh Grant settling his media case because there was too big a risk he would lose and be liable for both sides costs; an estimated £10 million. Harry might have a good few million ($60 million is the figure currently quoted, £53 million). But if Hugh’s potential liability was near that mark, I can’t see Harry’s being less. Certainly a big bite out out his assets.

How Harry is just a title and cash cow for Meghan

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14308233/Harry-Meghan-useful-idiot-AMANDA-PLATELL.html

https://archive.ph/KpbOe

I genuinely don’t see how Harry has £53m, even with never spending his own money or paying rent, etc, up until Megxit.

The Diana inheritance reportedly £10m at the time x whatever it made in investments until he got it
Supposed Queen Mother inheritance, ditto (someone mathsier than me can probably make a rough guesstimate what both ended up being worth; the two inheritances might have been invested to total more than £50m)
Spare advance (-15% for his agent); it sold well but has it earned out, is he getting royalties?
BetterUp salary
Does he get a salary for Invictus or is he a patron?
Netflix, Spotify money went to Archewell to cover production costs, don’t know what salary they took and the figures were less than reported/not the full whack because they didn’t fulfil the contracts
Anything I’m forgetting?

But costs-wise… the Montecito mansion purchase, its property taxes and upkeep (it’s not got 3-bed semi maintenance costs), the lawyers for the non-stop court cases, the security, the first-class flights and private jets, Meghan doesn’t have low-key tastes in fashion and jewellery, the PR and managers. I can buy that the inheritances, invested wisely, totalled a hefty sum – but has Harry had to wisdom to use only the interest and not the capital? What’s left? And if it was more than £50m, why on earth did they need Spotify, Netflix and Spare in the first place?!

If Hugh Grant stood to cover £10m costs when he settled, how much could Harry stand to lose given his case has gone on longer?

I think you make really good points here. People in Hollywood are much happier turning a blind eye when palms are being greased and it’s beneficial for the business.

They are nowhere near as bankable now and the only thing I would add to your post is that there’s the hypocrisy in there too that makes it seem so much worse. Harry and Meghan want people to think they are these saintly people who are just so lovely to everyone, that they are anti-bullying and “show up and do good”. All the time they are making people’s lives hell, leaving people needing therapy to get over their experience of working with Meghan if not them both, the ‘Sussex Survivors Club’ seems to be getting bigger by the day.

It is tomorrow's chip paper if you go to BBC News, Guardian, Telegraph and even the Daily Mail the main headlines are either Trump, Musk and now Kiers statement on Southport. VF may have reprinted it but it doesn't mean it's still trending as a top new story elsewhere

Maybe there was an episode on barbeques. I can see how that may not go down well...

Or perhaps Meghan went on about "shining a light" on things "through her lens".
Certainly could start a wild fire, that

Like it or not, it’s still a headline. This isn’t a ‘picked for me’ article. It’s the Editor’s Pick so today it will be on the widgets of everyone’s news feed that has an Apple device.

I have to add that there are still articles being written and printed by other papers on the story. As posted upthread. It’s not going to go away anytime soon.

Prince Andrew hasn't been mentioned in BBC News, the Guardian, Telegraph or even the Daily Mail for a while as far as I'm aware.
So that's all forgotten and won't be mentioned again then?
No more "What about Andrew?"