Well done Harry

[Howmanychocolatebrowniestoday]

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/833354/prince-harry-leaves-charity-gobsmacked-significant-donation/?viewas=amp

Great to see that he is still supporting grass roots charities like this. And that he and Meghan haven’t forgotten the connections they made on their official visit to Nottingham.

I know someone connected to this charity and they are truly ecstatic about the financial gift itself and the publicity and recognition that it has brought to their work.

Strange that there don’t seem to be any threads about it as it happened a fortnight or so ago and I think it’s great news!

Yes it is. The Hello artcle is dated 21st May - so must be a slow news day for the H&M PR team or there is something neeeding hiding if this is brought back to life nearly a month on.....

Actually I heard about this through a friend and then looked up to see if there were press stories about it. Hence the delay.

Funnily enough there were but it hadn’t been widely reported or mentioned on this board as far as I have seen and I find that rather telling in itself.

And having finally read about it, some people can’t even bring themselves to even grudgingly admit that it was a good thing. It doesn’t matter though because, happily, the charity themselves were really thrilled about it and appreciated it.

But it hasn’t been particularly newsworthy as we have seen! It hasn’t been mentioned here which is why I started a thread.

Thanks for this correction. I have just looked it up. It was profits from the Grenfell cook book redirected through the RF apparent. They must have still been in the UK at that point.

I.e. not their money.

Like many people I started contributing to food bank collections during lockdown. I would say about £5 a week on average ever since, I am lucky that I can afford it and want to help those who need it. So about £1,250 over the past 5 years, and i am far from affording a $? how many millions house. I won't pay off the mortgage on my suburban semi until I am.in my 70s...

I also volunteered on the stalls outside the supermarket in 2020/2021.

£5,000 or so for people of their wealth is peanuts. Better than nothing of course, but hardly worth publicising.

I'm sorry but most generous people do not publicize their donations - this is cheap advertising / brand building for them.

I think the gesture is much more than just about money though. The charity tackles poverty, social exclusion and racism. I think the latter is very significant.

You can’t have it both ways! If it’s not widely reported and goes under the radar for two weeks on here then it’s unlikely it’s been done solely for PR purposes?

Also, there is a thread on the RF board which seems mostly to be about Katherine wearing a navy suit! She’s visiting a V & A project and looks beautiful of course, and most importantly she appears to be in good health, but I don’t see why Harry’s donation isn’t equally newsworthy?

I had rather taken them at their word up til now that they were philanthropists I.e committed to giving away a significant chunk of their personal wealth to make a difference in the world.

The publicity around this comparatively measly amount makes me think that if they'd previously donated £5k then we'd have heard about it.

Obviously not as generous or as charitable as they previously made out!

Yes, if this small amount is newsworthy it does highlight how little they give in general

It is tiring when H&M super supporters resort to whataboutism as they cannot defend their favorites.

The post about Catherine with a "C" is about her visit to a museum. It is factual and does not feature the over-the-top gushing typical of H&M paid for puff pieces.

H's donation is hardly the stuff of legend and pretending it is, simply will not make it so.

I’m afraid that it’s equally tiring to be labelled a super supporter for highlighting a good deed. Giving credit where credit is due can hardly be characterised as fawning.

Please point to me where I said that the donations was “the stuff of legend”? You have introduced that phrase in order to justify your criticism, which is rather silly, and again, far from objective.

I am becoming increasingly aware though of how biaised the English-speaking press has become in their reporting. Very few journalists have remained objective but have recognised that slating H and M is a very good little earner.

I’m afraid I can’t take any of these criticisms seriously because they are not objective.

We all know that if it were William, Catherine, Sophie or Edward making a personal donation there would be endless praise for it!

I was trying to keep all of the usual joyless anti-Harry and Meghan v RF rhetoric out of this thread but it’s all-pervading and relentless I’m afraid.

Therefore what I will say in return is I find it amusing that no one addresses the elephant in the room that the RF have massive personal wealth and even a relatively minor royal like Edward lives in a £30 million pound mansion. But what does he donate personally?

The RF give their time to charity patronages but they are funded by the tax payer to do this? So why is their contribution seen as superior?

This article says there is little evidence that Royal patronages increase funding to charities anyway! In fact this article is quite an eye opener!

https://www.charitytimes.com/ct/Royal-patronage-fails-to-boost-charities-income-report-finds.php

I was always taught that when it comes to charity not even your right hand should know what your left hand is doing.

But what does he donate personally?

Personally? But surely that’s the point. It’s personal and no business of anyone else.

There’s an old saying that I think goes back to the Bible and it’s something along the lines of when it comes to charity ‘that not even one hand should know what your other hand is doing’. The meaning is obvious but it’s along these lines which were the first explanation to come up on Google.

Elaboration:
Context of the Saying:
The phrase originates in the Bible, specifically in Jesus' teaching about giving to the needy.

Purpose:
The primary purpose of this saying is to encourage giving without the motivation of worldly acclaim. It emphasizes the importance of internal motivation and the reward of giving from a place of compassion rather than a desire for public praise.

Meaning:
The saying implies that giving should be a private act, done for the benefit of the recipient, not for the benefit of the giver.

Modern Usage:
The phrase is still used today in various contexts, often to emphasize the importance of doing good deeds without seeking recognition or publicity.

So in a nutshell - not knowing what Edward or anyone else (and I even include our close family members in this) donated to charity in private is a good thing

It could be good or bad surely depending on whether Edward makes private donations or not? What makes you so certain that he does?

What makes you so certain that he does?

Im not certain and I certainly didn’t say I was, but you certainly seem to be determined that he doesn’t.

Whether he gives privately or not is no one’s business and if it’s important to you to believe he doesn’t, for any reason, let alone so you can use it against him in your defence/praise of Harry and Meghan then that’s fine. But the fact is that those who live by the practice of their left hand not knowing what their right hand is doing when it comes to charity won’t bother their backside about what others think of them. It’s as simple as that. People think they don’t donate? Then let them. People think they’re the most miserly people on the planet? Then let them. And all the while they’ll quietly continue to donate without needing anything in return.

And if you can’t understand that? Well, there’s really no point in trying to explain it to you anymore because nothing could really be simpler to understand.

Yes It is a nice thing to do, but don’t be surprised when people are cynical as to their motives.

Really? He’s a private citizen living in the US. Any donation he gives is up to him and ought to remain private unless he wants the publicity and kudos? Catherine is fulfilling a public role in service to the country . Two completely different things.

Going back to your last paragraph.

I agree with what you’ve said, and it’s so easy to do. No one need ever know if the donation comes with the words - the donor wishes to remain anonymous/donating anonymously. It can even be set up that the charity first of all has to say the donation will remain anonymous before the donation is made.

And I would have thought most people/philanthropists knew that.

I'm confused, you have a friend at the charity, who is estatic with the donation, but they've only just mentioned it?

That was my first thought. Aggressive PR onslaught but no new content to work with.

It wasn’t under the radar, it has been posted and discussed previously. It’s recycled news because they have nothing new.

I have a friend who works for another charity which is aligned to this one. They had received three really excited emails from people in this charity saying how thrilled they were about the donation.