PR Disasters….Part 8

[AtIusvue]

PR Disasters of the The Duke and Duchess of Sussex continued :

• So far we have Meg using charity events/sick children/vulnerable adults to merch her fashion, with the launch of her new fashion platform
• She will be appearing on MasterChef Australia
• Harry claiming to have had therapy when Archie was born, even though he never sought MH help for his ill wife a few short months earlier.

The Vintage Read did a good overview earlier today of the Sentabale debacle, as set out in Betrayal.

Ooh. Wine and sandwiches. We’ll all be living our best lives!

Julie Burchill has written a piece for Spiked:

“Edna summed up her television talk shows as ‘an intimate conversation between two friends, one of whom is a lot more interesting than the other’, and we can be fairly sure that Meghan thinks of her retreat with the broads from Her Best Life this way…..

And of course, Harry is Meghan’s Madge, the mute wind beneath the high-flyer’s wings. The original Madge Allsop had been Edna’s bridesmaid, and when we look at footage of the Sussexes’ nuptials, this seems very much the secondary role that the habitual spare played once more that day. Appearing on Desert Island Discs, the dame was allowed to choose Madge as her luxury item, on the grounds that she was ‘an inanimate object’. Whenever Meghan and Harry are seen in public, one cannot escape this image – indeed, some unkind Aussie commentators have dubbed the prince ‘Meghan’s spare handbag’.
But the spookiest coincidence is that in 2000, Edna’s show was called The Royal Tour – and now we are seeing the same from Meghan, a parody of a royal tour, as she traipses around Australia. The difference is that while the dame was mocking herself, Meghan has no idea that she is now viewed as a little light comic relief. The days when she was seen as a threat are long gone, so we can now enjoy the full glory of her self-adoring self-image – and the vast gap between that and the reality viewed by the rest of us.”

https://www.spiked-online.com/2026/04/17/meghan-markle-is-dame-edna-without-the-laughs/

Ouch. Go Julie. Fortunately for Meg and H, they are too witless to appreciate what Julie is actually saying

I’ve always loved Julie Birchill

Same and I haven't read anything by her in a long time

She has been very ill .

As have I! 🤣

Isn’t that a tad racist??? , the assumption not you!

Abso-bloody-lutely!

The Times BTL commenters tend to have a range of informed, intelligent opinions on the articles I read.

But, despite The Times having published extracts from Bower's book detailing H's appalling treatment of Sentebale and Dr S....

The BTL comments on the Sentebale situ remain stuck - she took a charity off H and is now bleeding it. Cos, you know, that's what Black Africans do when they get their hands on a thriving charity.

Boils my piss, it does.

It’s probably that kind of casual racism that emboldens people a certain type of person and that might be driving Sentebale on.

If H tries that attitude in the High Court, given the Claimant’s initial remarks thus far, it’ll get him the arse-end of nowhere.

I’m still wondering about Prince Seeiso’s position on all this. I don’t think he’s said anything since he resigned?

Seems they are very happy with how it went

”Those close to the Duke and Duchess are said to believe the visit has been a huge success and will form the blueprint of future tours.

One insider said: 'We've tested the playbook; it worked.' ‘

Will they ever learn ? Their idea of success doesn’t actually translate to actual real success.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15745159/public-verdict-Meghan-Harry-using-titles-commercial-gain.html

• That Meg n Harry are cashing in on titles and should be stopped (hard agree)
• the poll also thinks William should be transparent about his taxes (hard agree)
• KC shouldn’t make state visit to America (kinda agree)

It’s also top story on the DM online

News in Australia report her attendance at the event was actually 30 mins and not the two hours she was in the hotel for.

Yeh, I’ve seen that. Seems confusing.

I think maybe she took photos for half hour, and the chat was half hour. There really wasn’t much info that came from a Q&A if it was two hours. So think that must have been 30 mins. She took some photos for 30 mins. The rest of the time …hell knows.

Harry seemingly rushes out at the end, but it looks like Meg was late in arriving so if it ran over to make up for time…then they might have missed the start of the rugby and had to rush.

Any way it’s cut- she only gave a brief chat. There were hardly anyone there. There’s questions about fillers in seats. It was not a success.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyx014e2wqo

BBC:

‘But social media has also been useful to the pair - their "@sussexroyal" Instagram account has 8.7 million followers. Such a platform could prove increasingly useful with the couple now open about seeking new opportunities since their deals with Spotify and Netflix ended.’

I thought they weren’t allowed use sussexroyal?
Is this them testing the boundaries of the Sandringham summit again? I had seen online that it had been tagged multiple times during the trip but I really didn’t think much of it, but reading the bbc article it looks like it was part of a PR plan.

Bloody hell KC, rein them in! If the BBC are talking about them using it…it must be true that this is their new strategy.

The trouble is, their rumoured 120k of appearance fees are a trick that needs repeating many, many times to meet their annual costs. And how often can they realistically play the "playbook" a year? Maybe 3 max, if anyone wants them.

The positive review of the event had a strong whiff of paid for bullshit, but I would say that there's a type of woman I know who's had a hard life, and whose reaction is to overempathise with women they perceived as having similar challenges.

Problem is, they tend not to have loads of cash.

I suspect some of the "mother daughter" attendees tickets were paid by for the mums.

Why is it that the pair of them hugging people all the time is seen as such a positive? I don't WANT to be hugged by strangers and especially not by someone with the scary rictus smile plastered on their face that Meghan adopted for this whole trip. I would find it invasive and uncomfortable.

Interesting about the @sussexroyal but the BBC should research more and know that it wasn't to be used.

Interesting that it is still up.

Are they talking about this?

https://sussex.com/about/

This is their linked page on the Royal Family website. That needs to be removed!

You can still go to the “Sussex Royal” website, but it just takes you to the Sussex.com website for their current activities.

The BBC reporting has been plentiful, positive, and at times, sycophantic. There was a long section on the news about the "tour", related in glowing terms that they don't normally reserve for royal engagements, if they cover them at all. Not once did the reporter question their purpose or status.
The BBC haven't covered Sophie's visit to the victims of rape in Sudan, Camilla to Women's Refuges, nor William's visits to homelessness projects.
The BBC probably think they're being very modern or anti royal, instead of just having poor journalism.

Absolutely. No critical or remotely sceptical thought process applied to any of their coverage. With ITN also in the Sussex pocket, it’s a wonder their UK fans can’t move for all the “negative” coverage of this pair.

Exactly. The coverage has been plentiful and glowing, focusing on their philanthropy and charity.
When William spent a day in Sheffield, visiting homeless projects and talking to people about practical support and planning there was literally nothing on the news. Someone told me that on the local news there was film of him entering a building. I was disappointed that there was no coverage of Sophie's work, the sexual violence against women and girls is of a scale we can hardly imagine.
However, I think we can discern their editorial stance.