So, you think that the most Googled woman on earth from four years ago (literally number one), who is currently one of the most Googled people on earth, is not one of the famous women on earth.
Yes I do.
The failure of her podcast, her mere 2 million views on NF and her low Instagram follower account would support that.
Whatever you may claim, it debuted at number one in several countries.
But I've already told you I'm referring to her more recent podcast which got low audience figures.
And you consider this to be rational. I see. Unless you think only the English speaking world uses Google (I’m genuinely hoping no one is that ill informed) then you’re employing some impressive cognitive dissonance.
Ah some more snide insults! This thread is full of them!
Yes, I do think it's rational to suppose that relying on years old Google figures, rather than current social media followers or audiences for media projects, is not a great way to assess global fame.
What she owes her fame to has exactly nothing to do with anything I’ve said. You are free to ask it as many times as you like, though.
Well it does because it's blindingly obvious that her fame is due to her association with the British royal family, as she was pretty unknown before that. I don't believe the entire world is as intrigued by the royals as you seem to think however.