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

Rebrand, Restructure, Harry and Meghan 2025 version

1000 replies

Thedom · 25/05/2025 08:15

The Era of Joy didn't last long.

This is going to be interesting, it's going to be a full on PR onslaught for the next few months, and then we will have Harry launching his very own 'commercial project'.

Clearly an article straight from the Office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, giving an exclusive to the DM.

archive.is/ufM7K

OP posts:
Thread gallery
28
Barbiewhirl · 26/05/2025 10:23

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:14

I know nothing about beekeeping and whether a hat is on correctly, it all looked good to me!

She looks sweet. From what I see of her of course.

It wasn't on properly, however someone else pointed out David Beckham posted his new beekeeping equipment on Instagram 9 hours before Meghan did so it makes sense now why she posted it.

Serenster · 26/05/2025 10:25

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:14

I know nothing about beekeeping and whether a hat is on correctly, it all looked good to me!

She looks sweet. From what I see of her of course.

Saying “it’s all looked good” is ignoring the issue.

Child exploitation on social media is enough of an issue that in California a new bill has just been passed that means from next years parents who feature their children’s images in at least 30% of their monetised social media content have to set aside a percentage of their earnings in a trust account for the child once they reach adulthood. All those “sweet” images of Meghan’s children baking with her jam, and collecting honey from her bees would count toward that…

https://sd18.senate.ca.gov/news/california-governor-signs-senator-padilla-bill-updating-financial-protections-youth-content#:~:text=Senate%20Bill%20764%20requires%20content,access%20when%20they%20reach%20adulthood.

California Governor Signs Senator Padilla Bill Updating Financial Protections for Youth Content Creators

Official website of Senator Steve Padilla , representing California Senate District 18.

https://sd18.senate.ca.gov/news/california-governor-signs-senator-padilla-bill-updating-financial-protections-youth-content#:~:text=Senate%20Bill%20764%20requires%20content,access%20when%20they%20reach%20adulthood.

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:28

Oh deary me 😂🤣

This thread is very strange. Sweet pic of a mum and daughter in beekeeping outfits is child exploitation!

Personally, and just my opinion, I don't think of it as 'an issue'. But we're all different with varying opinions aren't we?

I liked the footage and thought it was sweet. Just my opinion

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:30

Other opinions are also valid.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:31

It's very hypocritical because Harry and Meghan have claimed to be a voice about the dangers of children and social media, and claim this issue as part of their well promoted philanthropy.
Either children are protected from social media, or you post pictures of your children regularly in order to promote your own media presence and so that people can say "sweet".
Click.

TheAutumnCrow · 26/05/2025 10:32

Serenster · 26/05/2025 10:25

Saying “it’s all looked good” is ignoring the issue.

Child exploitation on social media is enough of an issue that in California a new bill has just been passed that means from next years parents who feature their children’s images in at least 30% of their monetised social media content have to set aside a percentage of their earnings in a trust account for the child once they reach adulthood. All those “sweet” images of Meghan’s children baking with her jam, and collecting honey from her bees would count toward that…

https://sd18.senate.ca.gov/news/california-governor-signs-senator-padilla-bill-updating-financial-protections-youth-content#:~:text=Senate%20Bill%20764%20requires%20content,access%20when%20they%20reach%20adulthood.

Signed by none other than Gavin Newsom.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:32

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:30

Other opinions are also valid.

Quite. Especially when substantied with evidence about this couple's hypocrisy about the whole issue.

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:33

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:30

Other opinions are also valid.

Absolutely. Which is why I have said 'let's agree to disagree' and 'just my opinion' repeatedly!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Vespanest · 26/05/2025 10:35

Meghan can somehow manage to have both opinions. To see the harm it causes you only have to open other social media platforms as the topic seems to be comparing this photo and the Mother's Day photo. and why Meghan has to keep her comments off.

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:38

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:32

Quite. Especially when substantied with evidence about this couple's hypocrisy about the whole issue.

Yes , in the rush to forward their own opinions ( that often seem to be the complete opposite ) , people seem to overlook that others are also entitled to an opinion!

posters opinions are like their children, only superior or important to themselves.

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:40

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:31

It's very hypocritical because Harry and Meghan have claimed to be a voice about the dangers of children and social media, and claim this issue as part of their well promoted philanthropy.
Either children are protected from social media, or you post pictures of your children regularly in order to promote your own media presence and so that people can say "sweet".
Click.

As I said, you could put those children in a lineup and I wouldn't have a clue what they looked like.. We don't see their faces.

Yes, it was sweet to see the back of a mum and her little daughter in beekeeper outfits, in my opinion!

Click (do we have to say click at the end of our posts?!)

IcedPurple · 26/05/2025 10:42

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:31

It's very hypocritical because Harry and Meghan have claimed to be a voice about the dangers of children and social media, and claim this issue as part of their well promoted philanthropy.
Either children are protected from social media, or you post pictures of your children regularly in order to promote your own media presence and so that people can say "sweet".
Click.

Yes, there is absolutely no reason for the public to see these children at all. Their parents aren't working royals so there is no reason to see the back of their heads or random limbs.

There are so many celebrities where I've been surprised to hear they have children at all, and I couldn't even tell you their age, gender and certainly not how 'sweet' the back of their head looks in a beekeeper suit. Does anyone know the name or gender of Elisabeth Moss' baby? Has anyone seen Margot Robbie's little boy? It's perfectly possible for people much more famous than Meghan to keep their children entirely private.

This whole 'but we don't show their faces' thing is transparent game playing, and people are wise to it.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:45

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:33

Absolutely. Which is why I have said 'let's agree to disagree' and 'just my opinion' repeatedly!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Did anyone on her say they weren't?

Barbiewhirl · 26/05/2025 10:46

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, which is part of why she posts photos of the children if she has nothing to gain by doing so weird. She knows it invites comments on her children on social media- discussions, opinion pieces etc. Usually I say people should do as they please without worrying about the noise, but social media is a different beast imo and rightly or wrongly if you choose to share something then you are choosing to let people comment.

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:47

That's strange because Royals do it too. If I remember correctly, both Beatrice and Eugenie announced baby births with pics of hands/feet or something, and we've seen the backs of heads of their little ones on IG and in articles.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:49

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:40

As I said, you could put those children in a lineup and I wouldn't have a clue what they looked like.. We don't see their faces.

Yes, it was sweet to see the back of a mum and her little daughter in beekeeper outfits, in my opinion!

Click (do we have to say click at the end of our posts?!)

Why on earth would we have to say "click" at the end of our posts? There is no thread police. People are making points. That Meghan and Harry are visibly involved in a charity supporting those whose children have suffered because of social media. Meghan chooses to use her children, frequently, to promote her profile social media. If you think that's ok, that's fine, but I think it's hypocritical.

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:49

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:33

Absolutely. Which is why I have said 'let's agree to disagree' and 'just my opinion' repeatedly!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Why then did you immediately arrive and start berating posters for criticism for criticisms sake?

my personal opinion on social media is that I don’t like it , I’m not on it and my children are certainly kept well away from it!
I don’t think any child should be on it until they are old enough to consent with clear understanding.

I don’t normally mention this as I’m well aware that other’s opinions are different, but because they are different it doesn’t make them wrong, just different.

IcedPurple · 26/05/2025 10:50

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:47

That's strange because Royals do it too. If I remember correctly, both Beatrice and Eugenie announced baby births with pics of hands/feet or something, and we've seen the backs of heads of their little ones on IG and in articles.

What's 'strange'? Eugenie is similar to Meghan in that she's 'royal' but holds no official role so there is no public interest in the children seeing her children. She and Beatrice choose to post photos of random limbs or backs of heads, and it's annoying when they do it too. Neither of them has made a big deal out of the safety of children online however.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:51

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:47

That's strange because Royals do it too. If I remember correctly, both Beatrice and Eugenie announced baby births with pics of hands/feet or something, and we've seen the backs of heads of their little ones on IG and in articles.

Yes they do. I think the Yorks are quite similar to the Sussexes in their quest for self promotion and money making opportunities. It's not surprising that these two families are good friends.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:52

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:49

Why then did you immediately arrive and start berating posters for criticism for criticisms sake?

my personal opinion on social media is that I don’t like it , I’m not on it and my children are certainly kept well away from it!
I don’t think any child should be on it until they are old enough to consent with clear understanding.

I don’t normally mention this as I’m well aware that other’s opinions are different, but because they are different it doesn’t make them wrong, just different.

Exactly! This is a discussion, no doubt people will have different opinions. As ever.

AliasGraced · 26/05/2025 10:53

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:51

Yes they do. I think the Yorks are quite similar to the Sussexes in their quest for self promotion and money making opportunities. It's not surprising that these two families are good friends.

I know someone who has done work for them . That’s certainly the case. Greedy and grasping.

IcedPurple · 26/05/2025 10:53

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:52

Exactly! This is a discussion, no doubt people will have different opinions. As ever.

I also never understand why people add 'just my opinion' to a post.

What else did anyone think it was, other than a random person's opinion on a discussion forum?

Extiainoiapeial · 26/05/2025 10:53

jeffgoldblum · 26/05/2025 10:49

Why then did you immediately arrive and start berating posters for criticism for criticisms sake?

my personal opinion on social media is that I don’t like it , I’m not on it and my children are certainly kept well away from it!
I don’t think any child should be on it until they are old enough to consent with clear understanding.

I don’t normally mention this as I’m well aware that other’s opinions are different, but because they are different it doesn’t make them wrong, just different.

I didn't berate. Sorry you saw it like that. I only said I felt it was criticism for criticisms sake. That again is an opinion and not berating anyone.

I respect your opinion about social media and children. But Royals do it too. Continually. So I have no idea why meghan and harry should carry all the flak about this.

I do have to say that you are on social media, that's exactly what Mumsnet is!

Yes, different opinions, and I certainly agree with you on that.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:54

AliasGraced · 26/05/2025 10:53

I know someone who has done work for them . That’s certainly the case. Greedy and grasping.

Interesting. My opinion exactly.

MayaKovskaya · 26/05/2025 10:55

IcedPurple · 26/05/2025 10:53

I also never understand why people add 'just my opinion' to a post.

What else did anyone think it was, other than a random person's opinion on a discussion forum?

I have no idea! As if the rest of us somehow wouldn't allow it 😂!

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.