Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

As Ever Part 7 - Whatever, however, whenever with edible flowers on top

1000 replies

TheWayTheLightFalls · 07/03/2025 13:14

New thread as the previous one is full!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
33
LovelyJubly12 · 08/03/2025 14:02

BigWillyLittleTodger · 08/03/2025 13:53

Investigative journalism doesn’t seem to exist in the modern age anymore, years ago we would have actual programs with famous journalists such as Donal MacIntyre Investigates, now things are only as deep as Drew Barrymore interviews in the mainstream media, no wonder people are turning away from it and go to YouTube podcasters instead.

That’s very true. Everything in life is becoming so dumbed down.

MayaKovskaya · 08/03/2025 14:07

Robert Rinder was fairly robust with Captain Tom's daughter. Either him or Laura Kuenssberg would be good to get something out of the Sussexes, apart from the usual lies.

Mylovelygreendress · 08/03/2025 14:16

MayaKovskaya · 08/03/2025 14:07

Robert Rinder was fairly robust with Captain Tom's daughter. Either him or Laura Kuenssberg would be good to get something out of the Sussexes, apart from the usual lies.

I cannot see H and M letting themselves be interviewed by anyone who is likely to ask tricky questions !!
Piers Morgan ? Andrew Neil ?

MonteShitshow · 08/03/2025 14:17

On the surface of it, at the time, I feel that those actions were out of genuine care for young fans. Those girls probably didn’t have parents like the mums on here, and were therefore able to access social media at inappropriately young ages.

It might have been beneficial for them to have a strong female figure to look up to and interact with?

It could have been hurtful to sidestep a young fan’s comments if they were feeling desperate?

Maybe I’m totally gullible however I don’t believe she started out with the intention to do harm.

JADS · 08/03/2025 14:19

MayaKovskaya · 08/03/2025 14:07

Robert Rinder was fairly robust with Captain Tom's daughter. Either him or Laura Kuenssberg would be good to get something out of the Sussexes, apart from the usual lies.

Rob Rinder did that Princes in the Tower program and he was less than robust in that. I was quite disappointed as the programs he did about his family and the Holocaust were very moving.

MayaKovskaya · 08/03/2025 14:36

JADS · 08/03/2025 14:19

Rob Rinder did that Princes in the Tower program and he was less than robust in that. I was quite disappointed as the programs he did about his family and the Holocaust were very moving.

Edited

Yes, he was not robust in that at all, and I'm surprised he took that letter as evidence.
Anyway, you may disagree, but I think he's a good interviewer and put Captain Tom's daughter on the spot.
Whoever does it, I'd just like to see a proper interview which isn't just fawning nonsense.

MayaKovskaya · 08/03/2025 14:38

MonteShitshow · 08/03/2025 14:17

On the surface of it, at the time, I feel that those actions were out of genuine care for young fans. Those girls probably didn’t have parents like the mums on here, and were therefore able to access social media at inappropriately young ages.

It might have been beneficial for them to have a strong female figure to look up to and interact with?

It could have been hurtful to sidestep a young fan’s comments if they were feeling desperate?

Maybe I’m totally gullible however I don’t believe she started out with the intention to do harm.

She wasn't, and isn't, a strong female figure. She's not exactly a role model.
Perhaps a woman with success because of personal achievement would be better for vulnerable girls.

MayaKovskaya · 08/03/2025 14:39

Mylovelygreendress · 08/03/2025 14:16

I cannot see H and M letting themselves be interviewed by anyone who is likely to ask tricky questions !!
Piers Morgan ? Andrew Neil ?

Bloody hell, she could hardly cope with Drew Barrymore, which was the equivalent of drowning in syrup!

IdaGlossop · 08/03/2025 14:42

Thedom · 08/03/2025 07:02

Interesting they didn't do a full release at one time, there will probably be a lot less interest in part 2. I wonder if the next bunch of episodes will include their fire disaster tour.

I think the two-phase release is to do with As Ever's seasonal products, and with Netflix wanting to wind up their relationship with Harry and Meghan.

AtIusvue · 08/03/2025 15:17

IdaGlossop · 08/03/2025 14:42

I think the two-phase release is to do with As Ever's seasonal products, and with Netflix wanting to wind up their relationship with Harry and Meghan.

Yeh the contract was the end in Sept- so the autumn release could tie in neatly.

jeffgoldblum · 08/03/2025 15:20

Ive noticed that Netflix has started doing this recently!
Watched the new series of squid game and the last couple of episodes are not being released till later!!!! So annoying it's already filmed why??? To keep us viewing? 😡

Same with stranger things too!
Either release the whole thing together or not at all !!!
Sorry I find it grossly irritating!😠

elessar · 08/03/2025 15:31

I agree it will be because of the seasonal nature of the products - mind you I bet Netflix are pissed off that despite a two month delay she still hasn't been able to line up products to sell in line with the first season launch must have been the intention. It would have been far more likely to generate sales than dropping them a month or so later when the programme will have sunk without trace - I certainly can't see it remaining popular for long.

IcedPurple · 08/03/2025 15:32

jeffgoldblum · 08/03/2025 15:20

Ive noticed that Netflix has started doing this recently!
Watched the new series of squid game and the last couple of episodes are not being released till later!!!! So annoying it's already filmed why??? To keep us viewing? 😡

Same with stranger things too!
Either release the whole thing together or not at all !!!
Sorry I find it grossly irritating!😠

Basically yes, it's to keep us viewing. Or rather, keep us subscribing.

NF are on to the people who sign up for a month just to binge watch a popular show and then end their subscription, so this is their way to keep people signed up.

Obviously that's not the case with a minor show like WLM, so I wonder why they've split it into two parts? Mind you, 8 episodes seemed more than enough to begin with! Personally, I'm not convinced by the theory that NF has a major financial interest in 'As Ever' products. I think the roll out would have been much more professional had that been the case. I guess this type of programming is cheap to make so adding a few extra episodes won't have added that much to the budget. I wonder if it will be all about 'friends' again or if she'll start featuring the kids more obviously?

NotaRealHousewife · 08/03/2025 15:34

If anyone wants a giggle then look at Kai Cameron on insta, he had made a couple of With love, Meghan spoofs

jeffgoldblum · 08/03/2025 15:45

I only keep it for my kids @IcedPurple , I watched those two programs ( very late to the party as always!) because my dh recommended it!
Considering cancelling because they are doing this!!!
I much preferred it when it was sending dvds!!

AlternativeView · 08/03/2025 15:48

I was a little sceptical first watching it but I'm really enjoying it.
Short sweet episodes, sunny bright... And I'm really warming to her.

Thedom · 08/03/2025 15:49

It is nowhere on the global top 10 on Netflix anymore. Has dropped to no. 9 on the US top 10 and dropped to 8 on the UK charts, so it didn't have much longevity beyond the initial flurry of interest and it never made the top 3 anywhere, .

As Ever Part 7 - Whatever, however, whenever with edible flowers on top
As Ever Part 7 - Whatever, however, whenever with edible flowers on top
As Ever Part 7 - Whatever, however, whenever with edible flowers on top
IcedPurple · 08/03/2025 15:56

Thedom · 08/03/2025 15:49

It is nowhere on the global top 10 on Netflix anymore. Has dropped to no. 9 on the US top 10 and dropped to 8 on the UK charts, so it didn't have much longevity beyond the initial flurry of interest and it never made the top 3 anywhere, .

Edited

Yes, that's pretty much as I and others had predicted. A brief spot in the top ten before quickly dropping out. It's a different format but her podcast had a similar pattern. It was heavily promoted resulting in high audience figures for the first episodes, but as soon as people realised how dull it was they didn't bother tuning in for later ones.

Getting into the Top Ten will allow her and her fanz to describe it as a 'success', but NF will be interested in overall viewing hours, not Top Ten rankings. The streaming market is brutal and if people don't like something, they have lots of other options.

MrsLeonFarrell · 08/03/2025 15:58

MonteShitshow · 08/03/2025 14:17

On the surface of it, at the time, I feel that those actions were out of genuine care for young fans. Those girls probably didn’t have parents like the mums on here, and were therefore able to access social media at inappropriately young ages.

It might have been beneficial for them to have a strong female figure to look up to and interact with?

It could have been hurtful to sidestep a young fan’s comments if they were feeling desperate?

Maybe I’m totally gullible however I don’t believe she started out with the intention to do harm.

I agree. If you follow any teen or young adult writers, or actors who have been in things that appeal to teen/young adults, this sort of fan/ celebrity activity is really common. The letters, exaggerated emotional social media posts, meet and greets, even tattoos based on their fandom etc it is all really really normal in that context.

I don't see evidence that Meghan has done anything harmful. I don't think she should be attacked for this without evidence.

As an aside, this sort of intense fandom is why social media can be so harmful. It's so often young people with mental health struggles who get really attached and no one can fulfil the dreams fans project onto them. It isn't just teens and young adults either. Lots of lonely, struggling adults attach themselves to celebrities in a way that may help but may also harm.

Thedom · 08/03/2025 15:59

Yes, the viewing hours will be interesting when Netflix release it on Tuesday.

FromTheOfficeOfJammyTodger · 08/03/2025 16:21

MrsLeonFarrell · 08/03/2025 15:58

I agree. If you follow any teen or young adult writers, or actors who have been in things that appeal to teen/young adults, this sort of fan/ celebrity activity is really common. The letters, exaggerated emotional social media posts, meet and greets, even tattoos based on their fandom etc it is all really really normal in that context.

I don't see evidence that Meghan has done anything harmful. I don't think she should be attacked for this without evidence.

As an aside, this sort of intense fandom is why social media can be so harmful. It's so often young people with mental health struggles who get really attached and no one can fulfil the dreams fans project onto them. It isn't just teens and young adults either. Lots of lonely, struggling adults attach themselves to celebrities in a way that may help but may also harm.

I completely disagree. MM has set HERSELF up as an expert in online harm.

She may not have meant any harm 10 years ago as a minor actress, and may naively have believed including her friend, who runs the dubious club, to collate the names of 13 and 14 year olds, was a kindness. She would have no doubt been aware that they were vulnerable by the way they were posting details about their emotional state and showing her this in person too.

Basic safeguarding training tells you that you are not the friend of vulnerable young people who are strangers to you. You are not there to keep their secrets, join them in a secret club, write their name on some list compiled by some strange bloke, arrange meet ups with them, be their shoulder to cry on when you don't know them and have no expertise in their issues, be their object of worship and encourage them in this worship when they need proper, professional help. Granted, MM may not have known that at that time.

Her meeting the other night with these - still young, still vulnerable by the sounds of it - women is 10 years later, and in circumstances where she should know better. After she should have made herself aware of basic safeguarding issues, having held herself out to be an expert in this field on platform after platform. Meeting with women who may well still have the vulnerable mindsets planted in them as children by being online groupies is hugely irresponsible, given the position she has set herself up to occupy. Kids who are groomed in youth do not simply stop being vulnerable when they become young adults. I assume the Parent Network is all about teaching kids healthy use of the internet so they become healthy adult users of the internet. These young women appear to be neither. Meeting them - simply to feed MM's own massive ego and need to be fawned over - was a mistake. But luckily, she always has her apologists, and the press who just ignore it.

Ohpleeeease · 08/03/2025 16:24

MonteShitshow · 08/03/2025 14:17

On the surface of it, at the time, I feel that those actions were out of genuine care for young fans. Those girls probably didn’t have parents like the mums on here, and were therefore able to access social media at inappropriately young ages.

It might have been beneficial for them to have a strong female figure to look up to and interact with?

It could have been hurtful to sidestep a young fan’s comments if they were feeling desperate?

Maybe I’m totally gullible however I don’t believe she started out with the intention to do harm.

Neither do I, but reconnecting later is something else.

jeffgoldblum · 08/03/2025 16:27

I can't agree more ! @FromTheOfficeOfJammyTodger , I'd like to subscribe innocent reasons to Meghan but involving Markus Anderson is ann enormous red flag!!
And let's be honest just like paid bots , these girls were picked up and groomed for one reason only , to boost Meghans image and spread fan engagement, they were dropped immediately as she met snd married Harry as they were not needed, they have been picked up again because she needs them now.

MrsLeonFarrell · 08/03/2025 16:37

FromTheOfficeOfJammyTodger · 08/03/2025 16:21

I completely disagree. MM has set HERSELF up as an expert in online harm.

She may not have meant any harm 10 years ago as a minor actress, and may naively have believed including her friend, who runs the dubious club, to collate the names of 13 and 14 year olds, was a kindness. She would have no doubt been aware that they were vulnerable by the way they were posting details about their emotional state and showing her this in person too.

Basic safeguarding training tells you that you are not the friend of vulnerable young people who are strangers to you. You are not there to keep their secrets, join them in a secret club, write their name on some list compiled by some strange bloke, arrange meet ups with them, be their shoulder to cry on when you don't know them and have no expertise in their issues, be their object of worship and encourage them in this worship when they need proper, professional help. Granted, MM may not have known that at that time.

Her meeting the other night with these - still young, still vulnerable by the sounds of it - women is 10 years later, and in circumstances where she should know better. After she should have made herself aware of basic safeguarding issues, having held herself out to be an expert in this field on platform after platform. Meeting with women who may well still have the vulnerable mindsets planted in them as children by being online groupies is hugely irresponsible, given the position she has set herself up to occupy. Kids who are groomed in youth do not simply stop being vulnerable when they become young adults. I assume the Parent Network is all about teaching kids healthy use of the internet so they become healthy adult users of the internet. These young women appear to be neither. Meeting them - simply to feed MM's own massive ego and need to be fawned over - was a mistake. But luckily, she always has her apologists, and the press who just ignore it.

I don't think the word 'groomed' is appropriate for Meghan doing what many writers and actors do. She is interacting with them in exactly the same way as others. I would need far more evidence to make such a serious accustion against her.

I would make an argument that some online and real life interaction between the famous and fans is unhealthy, used vulnerable people for publicity and should probably be looked into but that is separate from singling Meghan out.

I don't think safeguarding in general has reached this social media arena yet and it probably should.

Thedom · 08/03/2025 16:44

At the time she was communicating with this 13 year old girl, Suits had an age rating of Mature Audience only, there was no way she should have been encouraging and exploiting a few young teen superfans to promote her on SM.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread