As Ever #2 Whatever

[PrettyFlyforaMaiTai]

I noticed the old thread is almost full so thought we could start a new one to carry on the discussion about the rebrand and merching.

Are you an ‘As Ever’ or ‘Whatever’?

link to the old thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/5277002-as-ever

I thought you summede this up very well at 11.01, @FromThePrismOfJammyTodger, especially when you added the use of self-declared "humanitarianism" being used as a hustle

Even as someone notoriously hard to offend this manages it, and as we've seen so often Meghan's only real interest in this is as a vehicle for promoting herself - made even worse because she's not even good at pretending otherwise

Whatever we each perceive hustling to be it's the sheer fakery and hypocrisy which rankles, and a few "look at me being so sincere" videos aren't going to change that

To be fair, I think this happens all the time. Authors of pieces rarely write the headlines, which are designed by editorial to be clickbait, and not necessarily accurate descriptions of the content. Not saying that's the case with the piece you are discussing, but it does happen.

Even if you take the VF cover headline 'American hustlers' as a compliment (which I don't buy), the article in the magazine is an absolute takedown of M.

Yeh but we know from the VF article that the deal wasn’t 100million. We don’t know what it was but would be serious money, but not 9 figures. Plus they needed to produce to get it. Everything bar the love story docu was a failure. So what they’ve actually for in the end will be nowhere near that.

The hustle comes from the act. The act of pretending that they were serious producers when they were in no shape or form qualified. The VF article showed us with the Spotify contract, how that looked in practise. That’s where the title of the VF article came from.

It’s doesn’t matter about the money involved- what matters is that what they have gained is through the act of deception. Not fraudulent or illegal. But by acting as if they were serious people capable of running a production company.

But also yes, NF were using them just to get the gossip. But that doesn’t mean that they aren’t hustlers.

Another excellent post, but on the subject of using rented houses for filming I never quite understood that

Obviously we didn't expect a tour of their private home (well, I didn't anyway ...) but quite apart from adding to the fakery impression what's wrong with using strictly selected areas of their own anyway?

This was an accurate title to the story that they had on H&Ms business dealings, specifically the Spotify deal.

Everything bar the love story docu was a failure

If you mean the Netflix documentary that made no sense either, @Atlusvue

Among much else, remember we were told the proposal happened over roasting a chicken, only to later see Meghan shrieking "It's happening!!" while Harry set up candles outside?

Yet another example of "FGS get your story straight or just don't bother"

Yes, two completely different stories. Either you're in the kitchen cooking when it’s happening or you're out in the garden having a picnic! It can’t be bloody both! Why do they have to lie about everything! It is so odd.

I agree that titles are rewritten by the magazine for maximum clickbait revenue.

While “side hustle” is a term commonly used in the UK these days and isn’t derogatory, I agree that it used to suggest something dodgy/possibly illegal in the past eg Del Boy However the famous Oscar nominated movie American Hustle is about conmen helping the authorities with a sting operation so going for that title suggests a dodgy angle to the couple and VF will be full aware that hustle has different connotations overseas.

They’re always selling something. Selling a narrative: she’s a victim, he had an awful childhood.

The docu was selling their love story - through lies and betrayal of his family.

Hustlers, as ever.

Christ. Has anyone else gone blind from reading the word ‘hustle’ approximately 57 million times over the last few pages?

Meghan’s not ‘hustling’ anyway. That suggests a degree of ability and intelligence she doesn’t seem to possess, a hustler being one who is ahead of the game and playing those around them due to their superior skills and knowledge. I strongly suspect that she thinks she has this ability and thinks she is ahead of the game, but there’s no evidence at all that she is. Right back to her early days with Harry when she kept walking past the Daily Mail offices wearing pristine wellies (in Kensington!) trying to get her picture taken. She’s not a hustler, she’s just a desperate narcissist.

Edited for typo

The headline was American Hustle but they weren't calling them hustlers...?

OK then.

I think you are tying yourself into some illogical arguments to prove they are not hustlers.
Not sure why.

I often wonder if Oprah is annoyed about all the lies Megan told. Once the truths came out it made Oprah look naive and unprofessional as an interviewer. I know she must have made a fortune out of it. Ultimately though I think it did her professional reputation absolutely no good at all. The way she swallowed it all unquestioningly. Embarrassing

😎
Who said that?

It really doesn't.

There are plenty of failed hustlers.

And she may be failing now but she's had her successes.

I agree that the 'hustler' discussion has got very boring and repetitive.

I think Meghan is only somewhat promoting this 'lifestyle' show because, even with her lack of self awareness, she knows it's her last chance. The NF contract is up for renewal and apart from a 'documentary' about their time as royals, they haven't had a single success. I don't think this show will change that. It may get initial curiosity views, perhaps pushing it briefly into the Top Ten. But it's not going to persuade NF to extend the contract, unless for some unforeseen reason it's a huge success.

As for the 'brand' so far as I know there are no products. The copyright hasn't even been secured. So who knows when or even if it will launch? Either way, revamping The Tig is not where Meghan thought she'd be when writing that bizarre 'manifesto' 5 years ago.

I think Oprah has thrived in the era of victim status. Her M ^H interview was a classic but probably last gasp of this era.

Oprah has lost the cultural power she once held. This interview and her support for Kamala show that.

Of course she's going to be fine in her mansion with her billions but her star has waned not because of this interview but because of what it represents and how that is over.

I agree with all of that.

I agree. However, what we can take from it is that a person as experienced and worldly as Oprah was conned. No wonder millions of other people fell for it. It does show that to start with, Meghan did have control of her lying narrative. But she created the biggest stage anyone can have: the world. She might have managed to control the little worlds she had moved in earlier in her life. Now, she's created a monster, fuelled by untruths (her truths, ironically), that she doesn't have the wit or skill to manage.

Such good points. Plus, the lies have been revealed, so where do you go from there?

I have a question . Apparently Netflix are going to drop all 8 episodes of Love Meghan at once. I think they do this with some series but do they do it with all?

If , not all, do you think this is to try and help viewing figures. By which I mean I am sure the initial viewing figures will be enormous just because of the hype , from fans , to people who like that kind of escapist lifestyle stuff to people like me who will be watching it out of pure curiosity and shitz'n'giggles (& yes I will watch the first one hands up - I just know myself ) . But I suppose as long as the viewing figures are high Netflix don't care why you are watching just that you are.

But if the episodes were released weekly do you think it might be that viewing figures amongst the merely curious would be more likely to drop off if it meant having to remember the day etc. Whereas the "next episode coming in 15 seconds thing " might encourage a bit of binge watching which might carry people further through the series* and give NF a quick idea as to who's watched the whole lot - or indeed not

*Especially amongst those of us comfy on the sofa with the dog who don't want to disturb him when he's asleep on your tummy. 😊

I don't think Oprah was conned. I think she quite liked the big bad RF and UK narrative and went along with it. In fact I would argue she suspected M was bullsh&@ting because some of her stories were so obviously dubious. The one that stood out for me was about the story about having her keys and passport taken away, as if she was being locked up rather than having minions deal with them.

Probably nowhere. With every stumble and cock-up, her options become more limited. I don't think there are any As Ever products. It's another con. Pa is waiting in the wings and may be putting his hand in his pocket sooner than he expected.

Yes, I think they'll soon be reliant on the Bank of Pa. In all probability he's arranged Trust Funds for Archie and Lilibet, so I'm sure they'll be taken care of.
Nottingham Cottage probably doesn't look so modest now.

😂that was such nonsense, and Oprah probably knew that.
I did read that Oprah was hoping for an interview with Camilla.