Sentebale #2

[Words]

Second thread .

I don't know - there was loads of media attention on the mess at the Captain Tom Foundation but the Charity Commission investigation still took about 2 years.

His todger led him astray. It happens to so many men and royals are not immune. Even Elizabeth Arden couldn't save him.

👏

You are probably right. They have already asked the former trustees for statements so a promising start.

Indeed but from her interviews these relate to a failure of governance due to claims of bullying and racism. I’m not entirely sure how this link will be established. In turn the trustees may report on the circumstances behind spending on consultancy fees and the collapse of donations and this may be seen as a failure in governance. If the charity is on the brink of collapse then the decisions made in the run up to that will be scrutinised and action taken.

It won’t be quick, they never are.

I suspect there are faults on both sides in this story, and charity governance is notoriously tricky, so we need to await any report from the Charity Commission.

But.
Harry's behaviour over the past 5 years has now had such an impact on how people view him, that some of the mud will inevitably stick and his reputation will be damaged. He is going to struggle to cope with the fallout. One can only hope, for his sake, that his wife stands by him.

And it will be very sad - mainly for the beneficiaries - if Sentebale ultimately fails, because nobody in their right mind would donate now.

Harry's loving Pa must be very anxious about him, but it may not be enough to bring them back together.

I guess my final thought on this whole sorry mess is that I sincerely hope that it wasn’t entirely triggered by the polo push incident. Imagine the loss of a whole charity and 20 years of work for the people it supports because of this altercation. Harry loses a big piece of his life’s work because of the interactions the polo. I hope there really is a way it can be investigated and resolved.

Exactly @Cynic17

I'd imagine that was a symptom, not a cause.

So did the Mermaids investigation. A lot of publicity there, too.

I have a friend who works in PR. I’m quite interested in her job as it’s so different to what I do so we often chat about it.

One thing she said has always stuck with me and that is how much effort she and her team put into making people “seem” likeable and credible.

She said the rationale is that when the shit hits the fan (and it usually does at some point with high profile egos individuals) the public are a lot more forgiving of big issue re: a “nice” person who is perceived to be truthful who did something stupid and apologises than a minor social infringement by person who lacks “social integrity”.

I think this is where H&M are getting hoisted by their own petard.

There are now so many receipts of them lying/pivoting/misleading and behaving poorly to other people that even in the event that allegations made against them are untrue, the mud is starting to stick regardless, because based on past behaviours such actions are no longer perceived as one off’s or out of character.

I’m not clear on what’s happened with Sentable given all the counter allegations but even if H has done nothing wrong his and M’s past actions have left them both very exposed to bad press coverage and the general presumption that “their truth” is not to be taken at face value.

Could a call from the Palace make a difference? A protracted period of mud-slinging isn't what the monarchy needs...

Just a point on the invictus games (which does seem to have lost its point if, as I understand a point of the previous thread, it no longer just involves veterans): it is not just the IG that are struggling at the moment. The Commonwealth Games couldn’t find anyone to host them until Glasgow were persuaded to step up again barely ten years after they last held them. And the Olympic Games are struggling to find hosts too.

I guess the cost of holding such events no longer seems worthwhile.

As if!
Look at Dr C's CV. As a woman (of colour) working at the levels she achieved she'll have endured much worse and weathered it.
The issue is the Sussex rot and her refusal to compromise professional standards.

I don’t think we call rule out her wanting to pursue a strategy/approach at odds with that preferred by the other trustees. A disagreement over direction does not mean either side is wrong.

One thing is for sure, the optics are going to be really difficult for H&M, even if PH has done nothing wrong. You could not script a worse scenario for them, given everything they have ever said in public about supporting women, minorities, etc. Even defending himself is going to make PH look bad as it’s pitting extreme privilege against someone who ostensibly has none or at least not of the same magnitude.

And that toe curlingly uncomfortable-to-watch footage of the polo presentation is going to be rolled out again and again now, and the camera does not lie.

The DM’s Palace Confidential YouTube programme raised an interesting point about sponsorship that I haven’t seen mentioned here. It seems that Meghan had some input in raising expectations about funding that ultimately led to the withdrawal of a major sponsor. I don’t want to make this about her, obviously the issues within the charity go far beyond that, but it does demonstrate what a negative impact she has whenever she gets involved.

For those who don’t want to watch the whole show for a two minute clip, the Mail on Sunday’s Editor at Large Charlotte Griffiths discusses this about 35 mins in.

I mean, let's face it, SC's preferred strategy of wanting the charity to seek long-term, major donors for a sustainable future is pretty standard in the third sector. Anyone being interviewed for a senior role at a charity would be expected to understand the 'invest to thrive' model.

It's not enough to just survive, right?

I'm interested though in what put the potential major donors off, and the Charity Commission might have a view having looked at the evidence.

Edited to Add: crossed with you, @Ohpleeeease - thanks for the link.

This much is true.

At the moment I’m not sure what to make of this latest debacle and obviously it has some way to roll before things may become clearer.

But this footage is certainly going to feature time and time again.

As another person upthread has already stated, in the world of PR past events also accumulate into the overall picture whether they are actually relevant or not to the issue in question.

Thank you, I didn’t think I posted anything untoward either!

I’d feel sympathy for Harry if he’d hadn’t spent the last few years spouting lies ( disguised as his truth ) and slagging off anyone who disagreed with him! , his own book shows he’s , a very unpleasant bully who likes to physically attack those who can’t fight back ( his bodyguards) and took delight in slagging off his old teacher because she was not hot enough and had a disability, then he delighted in revealing his tryst with an older woman ( by one year!) in a field behind a pub , with no thought to her privacy, he’s dispicable, untrustworthy and repulsive.

And for those more spiritual and temperate than me , there is only so much negativity that you can put out into the universe before it comes back to you.

What I thought was interesting was that the plan was to do lots of fundraising on the West Coast in the US, but that fell through. Why?