PR Disasters chapter 12

[AtIusvue]

Meg n Harry giving us plenty to talk about as usual…..

Yes, the result of a judicial review is in the public domain. The RAVEC decisions are not.

Harry blabbed. His choice, but not usual.

ETA: usual for Harry, but not usual for sensible people with security arrangements iykwim.

He lost his legal fight, but then he personally lobbied the UK Home Secretary, to request RAVEC re-evaluate his security arrangements in the UK, which she duly did 🙄, despite the outcome of the court case. A few months ago Harry leaked he had his security reinstated, just waiting for the RF to rubber stamp it 🤯. No other leaks since though.

It's also been leaked that nothing's actually changed with his RAVEC arrangements!

I agree that the early years agenda feels a bit vague. But saying that she does appear to genuinely have an affinity for young children, so it doesn't feel manufactured, and I think if she continues to stick with it people will come to feel it's very genuine and admire her commitment.

I think long term commitment for low key causes and consistent duty to that cause is what people most respect royals for over time.

I think the princes trust and camillas domestic violence agendas have built respect for them over decades.

Harry thinks Invictus is his thing to achieve this. But unfortunately it's become too showy and focused on his and Megs needs so it's lost that quiet commitment royals get respect for.

Most of the royal news is fashion and gossip and transitory. It's a long game of quiet duty that wins the day.

Also Meghan never even got near establishing her genuine personal commitment to any cause.

It was all: I'm just a compassionate philanthropist feminist who loves the oppressed all over the world.

Words, words, empty self aggrandising words. People see how hollow it is.

Years of quietly turning up is what people come to admire.

I honestly don't see how his arrangements could change.

He lives 8 time zones away from Britain. He holds no public office. He is not in direct line to the throne. There's just no way that he can have the type of security he thinks he's entitled to. And of course, he DOES have security. He just has to give notice and cooperate with RAVEC. But that, apparently, is too much of an imposition on him. Hence the hissy fit.

That’s bloody hilarious! 🤣

I work in education and I know some of the things Catherine has said are a bit obvious but I think it’s really important that someone in the public eye is banging on about the links between good quality early years education and outcomes as adults, not just academically but socially and emotionally. Also, I saw a video on Instagram of her visit to a school that devotes time and resources to creativity. We have completely lost that in our school curriculum in England. I work in year one and we rarely do art, let alone have time when children can just explore. Music isn’t even on the timetable. I like seeing someone with a platform highlighting these things.

An ok. I did see a leak that it was re-instated. It could be and we would never know. I do think if it wasn't reinstated, we would hear all about it via a furious hissy fit etc

But how can his security be 'reinstated' when his circumstances have completely changed?

“I’ve spent my life investing in women. Can I finally invest in me?” 😂🤪😂

Exactly but that's what he was campaigning for 🙄

Has she ever presented how she invested in other women ?

Agree. Camilla has been doing work with DA victims for years , most of it under the radar like Sophie with her work .
There’s no “ look at me” because they realise that it’s the subject that’s most important not them . Something Meghan never accepted .

Yes, she’s shining a light on what works, not writing a PhD! It’s national and international, not personal. And good on her for that.

I think the message needs to be out there, loud and clear: this matters; this works.

Yes @noonames That another classic example of her narcissism. She caertainly hasn't spent her whole life doing that, maybe since getting married she's made some small investments, but she has an ownership stake so that could also be considered investing in herself. She makes herself sound deprieved and selfless, and as if she hasn't been living to a very high standard since she got the job on suits.

Reminds me years ago about her purchase of a piece of jewellery she bought and had engraved "from Me to Me," or maybe it was "From Meghan to Meghan."

Had never heard that story @Bigcat25but somehow I am not surprised!

I think the Australia trip was evidence he doesn’t haven’t the security he was demanding.

Apparantly she invested in a woman owned coffee company, (promoted to Oprah) and a purse company that sold expensive purses partly made by women in Africa. She used one of their bags once which got them some publicity.

I read that the female workers get a few bob a day in wages, but the owners and investors are coining it in. Very exploitative, allegedly.

I agree. I volunteer with children a bit older than your charges, and there's so much focus on them being the next Greta Thunberg or else they are wasting their time.

It's not always obvious either. One of Catherine's awareness raising initiatives relates to mums in prison and babies that spend their early years in the prison system. If the work is done that allows these women to bond with their children, and in turn breaks a reoffending/generational offender cycle, that's worthwhile I'd say.

Besides which, most good causes are "obvious". It doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile promoting them and demanding them, when what's obvious so often gets lost in what's expedient and cheap in the minds of our legislators.

@WhatTheActualFeckityFeck I read the same.

Wasn't there a scandal related to the handbags as well? They were being sold for approx £500-1,000 each but it was revealed that the women in Rwanda who made them were literally being paid 10p an hour!

I don’t believe so, no, it’s utter fantasy, like her supposed humanitarianism that didn’t withstand the slightest scrutiny. I’m not sure the women who worked for her and ended up needing mental health support as a result would call it investment. In any case the idea she would put anyone ahead of herself is risible, given this is the woman who used children with cancer and survivors of a terrorist atrocity to advertise her outfits. This is not the behaviour of a natural altruist.

I also suspect that for a large number of people what seems obvious to some isn't.

I think her Early Years work has the capacity to be a bit like Charles banging on about the environment for decades. Something that needs a lot of time and momentum behind it to bring actual change rather than just politicians saying it's a good thing.