Further pr discussions with the lone gunman now in charge!

[jeffgoldblum]

im hoping that @Atlusvuewill not mind me continuing her work, I have a feeling that there is more to discuss and come!

I think it is serious. It's Roya Nikkah, she tends to take things at face value and put the best possible interpretation on anything royal

Either the articles are true and therefore the criricms are fair or the articles are just bs made up stuff which makes any criticisms made about her also a load of bs

It's reasonably easy to distinguish.

Articles that are based on publicly available figures (like Archewell accounts showing higher expenses than income - not donations) can be critiqued, and either accepted or errors shown.

Articles based on huge volumes of stock, based on no publicly available figures and when we know from the As Ever website that it uses a fulfilment company, are clearly imaginary.

The byline said Shane Watson. Not sure what her writing is normally like.

I misread the name in that case!

And the news coverage afterwards that MM had an absolute meltdown of a tantrum afterwards because JP asked her directly about her own personal experience of suicid@L ideation. Hope this didn’t happen in earshot of the suffering grieving parents of teenagers who they had lost that way. Seems MM dumped those parents and that charity within months. So much for community, commitment and compassion.

The media isn't lapping up the lies, they know as well as we do it's all nonsense. Ever since the DM published the howlingly funny Google-translation of the Spanish edition of Spare, it's all been about making H&M appear as ridiculous as they are. The beauty is, zero effort is required, they just publish the idiotic press releases put out by the Sussexes inept PR rep.

How long until Liam toddles off ?

I agree. The tabloids don’t give a shiny shit about the content. They have only one agenda which is to monetise with clicks and H&M hand that to them on a plate day in day out. They don’t have any agenda to support or undermine H&M (or anyone) - just to create a click bait headline from H&M’s daily PR nonsense to attract and engage and enrage readers to click and comment which ups the media’s ad revenue.

Most of it works by being just entertaining and ridiculing enough to draw readers in - and saving enough nonsense for the next day which H&M and their grandiose and delusional communications team serve up directly to the tabloids with their SM posts, journalists briefings, ‘source’ leaks, PR initiatives etc. They are just swirling around in a big pile of pantomime shit that they themselves created whilst the world draws up a seat, pulls out the popcorn and laughs on. They really are something else.

The press may know it’s all nonsense, unfortunately there are people who lap it up and believe all the fairytales.

More nonsense
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15456131/King-Charles-offer-Harry-Meghan-chance-stay-Highgrove-visit-Invictus.html

As if Charles would give them free run of Highgrove with their camera phones and PeopleMagazine on speed dial 🙄

So what idiotic press release have they put out that led to the daily.ma writing that article that Charles could let them stay at highgrove?

And if you think oh haha isnt this so funny that we have fun our media making up nonsense articles to ridicule people what does that say about you as a person. I think its pretty shocking thing to do really, there really should be better press standards than creating nonsense to mock people.

It is the new meg-mathics.

M is modernising accounting by ignoring old-fashioned formulas such as revenue minus expenses equals profit.

Meg-mathics 😂

Because the editor says at the morning meeting “yesterday’s story about Harry and Charles potential reconciliation got x million clicks - great stuff, let’s keep it going today - ideas?”

And our hack put their hand up and says “I could do a piece speculating where Harry might stay when he come over for Invictus - I can fill it up with lots of lovely photos of Highgrove etc. I’ve got a friend of a friend who once worked as a maid there - I’ll get a ‘Royal insider’ quote from her.

Editor: “Great stuff - get the phrase olive branch in there somewhere”

I have a friend who works at Highgrove. Harry took Meghan there way back in time, not sure if it was before or soon after engagement. He demanded the planned, pre-booked garden tours for the day be cancelled so they could have the place to themselves. Manager said NO. Harry had a tantrum. Whether a case of What Meghan wants Meghan doesn't get, or What Harry wants Harry doesn't get I couldn't say. Pretty sure neither of them will be welcome there any time soon.

That's horrible, @ShamedBySiri, but hardly any worse than his late grandmother, who chartered the Hebridean Princess for her Scottish cruise back in July 2010 (and a few other summers I believe)

This meant that those already booked lost the holidays they'd planned, but presumably they didn't want to say no to the Queen

Maybe she was hoping for another yacht?

Computer says no.

Some similarities @Puzzledandpissedoff - but the cruise passengers did have 6 months' notice and were offered 'upgrades to more expensive cruises, other dates, discounts off future trips or refunds'.
(No cancellations would obviously have been better. I wonder if someone - perhaps the Queen herself - slipped up somewhere.)

https://archive.is/QDTMV

6 months notice with preferential rebooking isn't quite the same as an on the day cancellation! A day at Highgrove isn't particularly expensive, but people from all over the world plan a trip, travelling especially for the day so it would be disgraceful to turn them away on arrival on the day.

It is 2026 darling...you've got to keep up with the "learns"

M sang with seals so by the transitive properties of meg-mathics you've got to factor in the implied value of the associated unicorn horns and mermaid fins.

Very true, @ShamedBySiri and @bluegreygreen
, though TBF the concept of a single day out being cancelled isn't quite the same as a whole holiday either

What I was really getting at though is that, if the RF want something, whoever else it "belongs" to is expected to give way

Except that in Harry's case the request - or demand - was denied.

Also, as regards the cruise booking, the cruise was probably not yet fully booked six months in advance and it would make commercial sense to accept a booking for the whole boat. I imagine they'd do the same for any other regular wealthy person who came along with their open cheque book.

Which shouldn't happen, and I can't see anywhere that it happened in 2006 (the previous time the Queen took that cruise), hence wondering if someone slipped up somewhere.