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

The divorce book – if it can be substantiated – really is the smoking gun, isn’t it? How can he stay? But then again, has he got the humility to admit he was wrong, and leave? And risk the divorce book!

It sounds like one or the other of them is setting up grounds for a divorce. Harry is portrayed as far more sympathetic: he's not interested in money; he prefers charity work; he doesn't want fame; he's uninterested when doing Spotify stuff but charming and polite otherwise; he misses his family; he hasn't made any friends in America yet; he's married to a demanding, fame-hungry, money-grubbing bully who already has one commercial eye on divorcing him.

It could almost read like Harry's people were doing some briefing.

I guess we will find out if they sue. And it will be telling if they don't.

If it’s not true- then they’ll sue right?

If they don’t sue…then it confirms it.

Thats the problem when you’re that litigious, inference is drawn when you don’t sue over an extremely scandalous story about your wife’s true intentions. And we all know how paranoid Harry is, this will eat away at him unless it can be proved that this isn’t true.

Brilliant point@EsmaCannonball

They won't sue. VF is not some internet gossip site. It's a major, respected publication and this article will have gone through all the legal checks.

It's also worth pointing out that VF, like The Hollywood Reporter, likes to keep good relations with celebrities and their agents. The fact that this article has gone to press indicates that nobody with any power in Hollywood could be bothered to try to stop it. Which does not bode well for their future in the industry.

I find the article to be a lot more sympathetic to both than the summary on this thread.

I've got the full article on two devices (mobile and laptop) without signing in (using link you provided @Atlasvue). Maybe it's based on location (I'm in the UK). You did a great job at capturing the detail given that you were posting as you listened!

The article does attempt to be even-handed but even that was half-hearted. The article starts with a list of their achievents:

• savvy homebuying (great price) BUT the fireplaces might be centuries old from France but 'stripped of any potentially uncomfortable context'
• Archewell BUT an 'approximation of...noblesse oblige'
• Invictus and Sentebale (the article doesn't say it BUT obviously developed during Harry's time as a royal)
• 40 x 40 BUT later described as 'ephermeral'
• ARO (article doesn't say BUT we all know how that went)
• Polo (again, not exactly a huge hit, I know, I'm being too generous); and finally
• their volunteering re the LA fires (a straightforward compliment that is not)

Most of the juciest quotes came from people who had worked with them - they are REALLY going to pay for not being nicer to their staff. Meghan comes in for most of the criticism but one person said they were being interviewed by the couple and 'I just felt like he kind of didn't want to be there.' Apparently the person was expecting charm '[and] it was clear he wasn't that person. At least that day.' A bit later: 'Harry's attitude was either "Well, why should I do this?" or 'Why are we doing this?" The interviewee says they wondered, "Didn't Spotify pay you a lot of money to do this?"

The love story reporting is very interesting. Almost everyone they spoke to fell all over themselves to emphasise how in love they were/are (depending on when the source knew them) - including, I believe, the people who obviously didn't like them. And then, a bit later, the 'post divorce' story. Mind-blowing.

There was an interesting comment about Meghan 'reparenting' Harry.

Agree @Atlasvue - the Mail will be delighted with this treasure trove!

If you’ve got the article please listen to the podcast!!!
The narration leaves you in no doubt this is a take down. It’s highly sarcastic at points.

Yes @Not2identifying

That divorce part smacked me round the chops, because of how so seemingly in love the sources for VF claimed they are.

Obviously I realise now that was done on purpose for the shock factor but also to make you realise, that’s she’s faking it.

They are loves young dream but she’s approaching about a divorce book?????. They even clearly state, not about her first husband, not about life post divorce generally….but states post divorce from Harry!

@ImJustFineTYVM I agree that there were nuggets of positive comments in there but, even then, my eyebrows rose at how tepid they were and there was usually a barb nearby or elsewhere in the article.

One journalist quoted fairly extensively was Elaine Lui of 'Lainey Gossip'. I haven't read her much recently but read her around 2019/2020 and she was very clearly pro H&M. She was quoted as saying '[ARO] to me is giving 2014. It's not giving 2024...Fame arrests you at the moment it arrives'. This is one of their cheerleaders!

Positive comments about Meghan include her being hard-working and determined. One source said of ARO 'There'll be no way that you can say it wasn't a success.' Another positive comment was the journalist's belief in the sincerity of their good intentions regarding changing the world for the better. But even then there was something about wanting to be seen to want that and how it was also about PR.

There was an interesting paragraph on Meghan's childhood trauma. Because she was homecoming queen, a lot of us have commented that she appeared to be lying when she said on her podcast that she wasn't popular but the article leans into that and uses lack of popularity to explain Meghan's character today.

It’s started. Page Six has picked it up on the bullying allegations:

https://pagesix.com/2025/01/17/royal-family/meghan-markle-was-cold-and-withholding-to-staffers-created-a-really-awful-workplace-source/?_gl=1105n533_gaMzMzMDg1NTM5LjE3MTA2MTU3MTI._ga_0DZ7LHF5PZ*MTczNzE0NDc5OC41ODYuMC4xNzM3MTQ0Nzk4LjYwLjAuMA..

I wonder if VF were approached to do a puff piece for the launch of With Love and given some sort press release / press points .... a bit like The Cut interview ... as it reads like a swinging pendulum some very positive bits then some back handed stuff etc?

Thanks @Atlasvue for your posts.
I haven't read the article or listened to the podcast yet but I will be giving the podcast a listen imminently. It sounds like chickens may be coming home to roost.

It might read like that, but it doesn’t come across like that on the podcast.

This is the VF cover.

They claim she’s a bully and approached about a divorce book.

Yes they do try and balance it a bit, but on the podcast, it comes across really sarcastically.

It strikes me as a complete hatchet job.

They seem to have got people actually or nearly breaching NDAs, and that is something which actually becomes something less risky to do once a certain momentum has been reached. Because there comes a point when it would be reputationally disastrous to try to enforce it.

I think the damage here mainly comes from further allegations that they are hell to work with. Because who is going to want to work with them (whether as collaborator or employee) now?

I'm wondering if this was always the intended publication date (planned before WLM was rescheduled). They must have been working on it for quite a while, and I assume it's been extensively legalled.

It's interesting that the article also talks about some of the accusations Harry made without suggesting they were incorrect. Particularly in terms of imperialism.

It does seem hostile towards Meghan in particular but also wants to be able to have a go at the British for the empire and the tabloids.

Am attempt to be more even handed maybe?

I suspect it is a mistake to include the divorce book snippet. They seems a little unlikely at the stage they are claiming it happened.

I predict a long weekend of anti Catherine threads popping up 😆

Honestly, I think most American journalists haven't got a clue about the monarchy beyond the basics. So they're happy to buy into anything which fits in with lazy stereotypes about 'racism' and 'imperialism'.

If the divorce book story didn’t happen….then they’ll sue. But I bet you they won’t.

Meghan comes across in the piece as cold, calculating every move, controlling, unable to carry through projects. She’s labelled a mean girl.

Now Harry will be questioning their ‘love’

https://pagesix.com/2024/09/25/royal-family/meghan-markle-prince-harrys-ex-staffers-share-differing-stories-about-working-with-royals/

Yes BP didnt publish the findings of their investigation into bullying by MM of palace staff ... I would imagine that MM demand they do if she was exonerated?

The above piece refs a further report from ex-colleages in The Daily Beast a few months back.

What are WME doing exactly for their money?

Hollywood seems determined to expose them and WME seem unable to stop them

I doubt WME are still repping her.

If they are, then clearly they can't be arsed to stand up for her, which tells you everything.

Well, quite. Just a reminder that it was in Vanity Fair that Meghan launched herself as a global figure, philanthropist and very serious girlfriend of Prince Harry way back in 2017, just before their engagement was announced. It’s no tabloid press. It’s declined now, as have all magazines, but in its heyday it was a very influential publication.

archive.vanityfair.com/article/2017/10/wild-about-harry

Further to one of my earlier posts, in the list of achievents at the start of the article, I forgot to mention Spare!

he's not interested in money; he prefers charity work; he doesn't want fame; he's uninterested when doing Spotify stuff

It doesn’t come across as not interested in the benefits of having money, but rather as in not wanting to have to earn a living.