The marching of the Kings californian grandkids

[Thedom]

Wish I could go back and find all those posters who predicted a Kardashian-esqe social media blitz at some point in H&M's future, wonder where are all the posters who we're so affronted by the very idea of that.

People magazine and all, the uber celeb magazine.

I guess needs must with the downfall of her business efforts, \oh look, here are my kids whose privacy we have decided to forego for the greater good of taking the heat off what a crap business woman I am'.

The Prince and Princess of Wales have children who will have a public role, and therefore need to be carefully exposed to some degree of publicity.
Their parents seem to be able to do this while keeping their family life private.

Seems to be a new attempt at a “gotcha” claiming that posters don’t really care about the children’s photos being shown because the are reposting them here. Doesn’t really work when the photo being objected to is an official Christmas card though 😆

I was assuming that the reason other people were complaining was that they objected to the children being visible in the media.

Honestly they are so transparent. Classic SS deflection attempts 🤦🏼‍♀️🤣

What do you thinks coming next? Get the bingo cards ready 🤭

Well they are visible, even if there's a weird heart emoji over their faces.

And it's the hypocrisy, rather than the 'visibility' of the children, that most people here are discussing.

FFS, when will you people understand? M&H can post all the pictures they want of their children. We are allowed to comment about this because it is illustrative of their hypocrisy. Their hypocrisy claiming their children's images would be captured and published constantly in the UK had they stayed (not true at all), and then H&M do just this. Their hypocrisy working with parents who have been bereaved as a result of their children's online activities and their work seeking to shut down sections of SM under the guise of protecting children, then exploiting their own children on SM. Their hypocrisy going after the Wales children in Spare and claiming that those kids are somehow in danger, when their images are carefully released on birthdays and on other very limited occasions that are in keeping with their parents' public roles - whereas H&H tease images of their children on a commercial instagram site in order to merch As Ever and With Love Meghan and whip up a demand for more and more.

That’s a valid argument about disapproving of anyone posting images of their dc on sm. And you can quite rightly make decisions in alignment with this belief when it comes to publishing images of your own dc on-line. Just as H & M are free to do.

But as I say, I don’t understand how posters can criticise H & M for doing this and then take it upon themselves to do the very thing they criticise H & M for, with photos of other people’s dc no less!

It’s like they are so focused on their negativity against H & M that they forget to behave in a way that aligns with their beliefs? If they believe that H & M want to exploit their dc, why would you exploit them further by publishing their photo here?

Also, if that particular image in which A and L’s faces can be seen clearly, is from a Christmas card sent to a friend; I don’t think it really qualifies as a money-making venture does it? I used to work with American clients and very many of them sent Christmas cards with photos of their family on the front at Thanksgiving or Christmas. It’s not at all unusual. And Meghan being American will have probably been brought up doing that and wants to do the same with her own family?

With respect, people with opposing views to you could say exactly the same sort of thing and argue that it’s a classic deflection attempt to keep mentioning the bingo card. We’ve heard it all before and many times over.

It is not from a Christmas card sent to a friend. It is from the 2021 Christmas card that was released by the Sussexes as their official Christmas card and was all over the media. That is theee times I have posted that now. Do you not bother to read replies to other posts?

Also, if that particular image in which A and L’s faces can be seen clearly, is from a Christmas card sent to a friend;

That "friend" is Gloria Steinham, who chose to place that photo in a prominent place in a photo shoot for Architectural Digest, a hugely read interiors magazine. If you don't think that was deliberate, you are very naive.

It’s not that card though

There are 2 photos. The officially released 2021 colour photo where Meghan is holding up Lily as a baby. And the black and white photo of the 4 of them lying down head to head, captured at Gloria Steinham's house, dated Christmas 2024. Both were widely published and seen all over social media and mainstream media. IT doesn't matter if one was officially published and the other not. They are both in the public sphere, and that is deliberate on the part of their parents.

Well to be fair, if I was interested in the monarchy, I would be much more able to pick out the Wales’s children in a line up than Meghan and Harry’s dc. So I think they have protected them better up to this point.

And none of us know for sure what will happen in future. What is written here by the anti H& M brigade is sheer speculation.

And how do you know they are being hypocritical about on-line safety? For all you know, H & M may not allow their dc access to any screens at all. I certainly hope they don’t given what is written here about their family!

Yes, but what is funny is that the posters are complaining about the 2021 card being reposted here. That was the official card, not the one sent to Gloria Steinman 😆

Have William and Catherine made a massive, public hooh hah about protecting their children's images, attacking the YK and the UK press? Have they joined up with big tech, think tanks and and a foreign government to censor SM? No they haven't. Herein lies the hypocrisy. Their children are seen just enough to fulfill the need that ensues from their children being the next in line to the throne and likely working royals. Their images are not used for commercial gain. And yes, you do know what they look like, so they are not being teased to the highest bidder as the Sussex children are.

Those Sussex children will get access to the internet one day, and they will see their parents in all their base glory. Their peers at school know all about their father's penis and their mother's idiocy. they may well suffer bullying as a result. And those details were provided to the Internet by H&M themselves, nobody else. They have no-one else to blame but themselves about what is out there. There isn't a tabloid in the world who has or could have published more about H&M than they themselves have published about themselves.

I do read other replies, I have just been busy answering posts in response to mine.

There’s a difference surely between private Christmas cards sent to family and friends and say close business contacts, which then get leaked to the press, and a general Christmas greeting posted on an official website. So which was this?

Either way, if you disapprove in principle of them posting images of their dc on-line then it’s still surprising that posters would choose to do the same thing here.

Well if that's the case, they are doubly stupid!

Can you read? Nobody cares about them posting images of their children. We are talking about their hypocrisy when they said they would not do this.

I think posting some Christmas card images of your dc, and some images with their faces erased, is not incompatible with campaigning for on-line safety for all dc. I don’t see the issue or any particular hypocrisy there tbh.

It’s pretty much where we all stand I would have thought. We send very occasional, partly obscured photos of our children to select family and friends and post fewer and fewer or none at all as the dc get older.

And at the same time we study guidelines on correct internet etiquette and safety and teach them to our dc and enforce the rules in our homes as much as we are able.

I think it’s a good cause for H & M to get involved in. Improvements to on-line safety will only come by involving the tech companies themselves.

And I hope by the time the friends of the Sussex children have access to the internet, they can react straightforwardly and sensibly to a story about frostbite and will have better manners than to call their friend’s mother an idiot.

Like I said earlier, most of us here have no skin in the game. We’re already busy protecting our own children’s and vulnerable relatives’ privacy on social media. That doesn’t mean we’re not allowed to discuss public figures, or point out double standards when we see them.

I personally posted images already released by H&M themselves because someone questioned whether the kids looked like Thomas Markle. I posted side-by-sides to show the resemblance. Then another user claimed they hadn’t seen clear face-on images of the children, and other posters helpfully shared ones already in the public domain.

At that point, it’s fair to say people reposting those images are:

1. Making the point that if it’s acceptable for Harry and Meghan to release images, then it’s acceptable for the public to comment on or share them.
2. Recognising context matters — posting a screenshot in a closed parenting forum is hardly the same as pushing those photos onto viral social media or tabloid covers. It’s actually a lot safer, considering how many fan pages on Instagram are gathering and idolising these kids in a way that’s honestly a bit creepy (see the one I linked further up).
3. Calling out hypocrisy — if H&M are sharing carefully chosen photos and even health info about their kids while publicly insisting on their “right to privacy”, then why should anyone feel guilty for simply pointing that out?

The irony is, I used to respect their stance. I thought it was great when they didn’t want to play the royal/media game and were clear about protecting their children’s privacy. But it didn’t last. Now they release curated images and anecdotes when it suits their narrative or brand, and it starts to look like PR, not protection.

There’s no need for them to post anything at all if they truly want privacy. Plenty of other celebs manage it. Harry himself proved you can keep things offline and private if you really want to. If they just want to share with close friends, they could do that privately, like a locked Facebook or even WhatsApp group would suffice. But when you go public, you invite public scrutiny. That’s the trade-off.

They are campaigning for online censorship, not safety. I don't know any decent parents who are not well versed in the measures one can take to limit their children's online usage. This is not what the Susssexes are interested in. They are interested in shutting anything down SM that is critical to them. Their use of bereaved parents is a Trojan horse. I suggest you familiarise yourself with the work of The Aspen Institute.

And I hope by the time the friends of the Sussex children have access to the internet, they can react straightforwardly and sensibly to a story about frostbite and will have better manners than to call their friend’s mother an idiot.

You are incredibly naive.

Sorry but I think it’s you who need to read more carefully! Lots of people on this very thread have said they care about it! And then went on to repeat post the same images!

Nope. Read again.

.

I agree with you about the trade off. All members of the RF are familiar with it. The Faustian pact. Where the privacy of children is sacrificed for the continuance of the institution. But that’s for a separate thread!

I’m afraid that I disagree fundamentally with your point one as previously discussed.

And I am not sure your point two counts as the tabloids steal stories and images from Mumsnet frequently.

And as I have said repeatedly, with regard to point three, there’s a difference between us as parents making an assessment and judging carefully what we are happy putting out there, versus some journalists deciding that for us. I don’t see that as hypocritical because parents should have more control and rights over images of their dc , than complete strangers, especially strangers publishing images of children who are not their own, for commercial reasons.

As for your last paras, I agree it’s always possible to go completely private if you want to. But Harry has only known life in the limelight. And Meghan’s career has always been in the public eye too. That is their background and where their experience lies and I think it’s a bit unreasonable expecting them to suddenly change to a completely different way of living. Especially when anything else they try, like Meghan’s country food and living brand website, gets totally pilloried and destroyed by the same people who think that they should try and make their money in a different way! Why should they turn their backs on every single thing that is familiar to them?