Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

PR Disasters, chapter 13

720 replies

AtIusvue · 18/05/2026 15:57

Meg and Harry and all their PR shenanigans

Trigger Warning: this thread may contain talk about sleeves.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
48
Twisterr · Yesterday 21:13

LipglossAndLies · Yesterday 14:36

Well I think the privacy violation argument is pretty weak. The card shows first names, nicknames, initials, and casual sign-offs. I don't see any sensitive personal information, no surnames (that I can see clearly), no contact details, no staff IDs, no addresses, etc.

Realistically, nobody is identifying or tracking down BA staff from Tracey or Sam...how could they? It's fairly ambigious. It’s not comparable to exposing private data.

For the wedding pictures well the wedding was televised so people would of already been seen publicly anyway and they would of known this before they attended that there is a high chance they or their children would end up being shown on TV or in pictures. So whose consent has she violated?

She has violated the consent of these children (now teens) and their parents 8 years later. Of course AT THE TIME the wedding was televised and media photos published - but 8 years later - new, previously unseen photos, taken in a PRIVATE not public space at the wedding would require consent from those children or their parents. How does she know how this is going to land - does she consider how this will emotionally impact those now teens? We know that they have recently suffered a family breakdown and will have enough to endure privately and publicly around that - maybe they are just trying to keep their heads down when someone who iced out their mother and caused her deep pain now just carelessly throws these teens back into a global social media platform. Where is the sensitivity, the courtesy, the consent for these children. From a woman who 24hrs previously was lecturing the world (quite rightly) about the existential harms of social media - you really can’t be serious sticking your neck out to defend MM here - at best she’s careless and at worst she’s exploitative of other people’s children’s internet safety and privacy.

Lunde · Yesterday 21:14

corblimeygvnr · Yesterday 19:15

Charlotte Isn't in Meghan's dump is she?

No but Harry having words with nanny Maria is!

StrawberryWasp · Yesterday 21:20

I didn't realise Charlotte wasn't in Megs photo dump! Apologies for misleading anyone.
I thought I'd seen her.

Were the other children?

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 21:22

Indianrollerbird · Yesterday 21:00

Just watching Aston Villa in their Europa League final. Great footage of William going mad when they scored.

He's a proper footie fan.

StillSpartacus · Yesterday 21:25

I had suspected that too. Several of the signatures look like very similar handwriting, and I’m not sure BA first class have that many crew.

I suppose there is a possibility that a card was given (following a request) and a few additional signatures were added by someone with apparently impeccable handwriting.

Starryfifty · Yesterday 21:25

Twisterr · Yesterday 21:13

She has violated the consent of these children (now teens) and their parents 8 years later. Of course AT THE TIME the wedding was televised and media photos published - but 8 years later - new, previously unseen photos, taken in a PRIVATE not public space at the wedding would require consent from those children or their parents. How does she know how this is going to land - does she consider how this will emotionally impact those now teens? We know that they have recently suffered a family breakdown and will have enough to endure privately and publicly around that - maybe they are just trying to keep their heads down when someone who iced out their mother and caused her deep pain now just carelessly throws these teens back into a global social media platform. Where is the sensitivity, the courtesy, the consent for these children. From a woman who 24hrs previously was lecturing the world (quite rightly) about the existential harms of social media - you really can’t be serious sticking your neck out to defend MM here - at best she’s careless and at worst she’s exploitative of other people’s children’s internet safety and privacy.

Edited

There is no level Meg won't sink to. She certainly doesn't deserve the platform she was given in Geneva. This is shameful on behave of those who organised it and allowed her to be there

RecoIIectionsMayVary · Yesterday 21:26

Indianrollerbird · Yesterday 21:00

Just watching Aston Villa in their Europa League final. Great footage of William going mad when they scored.

I'm watching as well, I would love to be there (not a villa fan but love sport) Harry has given up so much. Even if we just look at the lack of access to sporting fixtures.

Irememberwhenitwasallfieldsroundhere · Yesterday 21:28

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 19:45

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/may/20/meghan-markle-anniversary-candle
Very funny from the Guardian - formerly cheerleaders of H&M.
Love the "don't say" one! 😂

Ha ha

bluegreygreen · Yesterday 21:29

Yes, had just seen that mentioned elsewhere, @Lunde.

One of the previously unseen photos is one taken as they are about to come out of the chapel after signing the register.
Meghan is foreground in the photo, Harry in the background talking to the Wales' (then Cambridges') nanny.

You will remember that George & Charlotte didn't come back down the aisle with the other attendants.

StartupRepair · Yesterday 21:30

Who could be bothered giving the cabin crew a pre-purchased card so it comes back as a 'surprise' on your tray? How desperate for attention would you have to be?

Indianrollerbird · Yesterday 21:32

bluegreygreen · Yesterday 21:29

Yes, had just seen that mentioned elsewhere, @Lunde.

One of the previously unseen photos is one taken as they are about to come out of the chapel after signing the register.
Meghan is foreground in the photo, Harry in the background talking to the Wales' (then Cambridges') nanny.

You will remember that George & Charlotte didn't come back down the aisle with the other attendants.

I think this picture is an attempted dig at the Wales clan: "Look at us all having to wait on our wedding day, because your nanny is causing a fuss over your children."

Lunde · Yesterday 21:33

bluegreygreen · Yesterday 21:29

Yes, had just seen that mentioned elsewhere, @Lunde.

One of the previously unseen photos is one taken as they are about to come out of the chapel after signing the register.
Meghan is foreground in the photo, Harry in the background talking to the Wales' (then Cambridges') nanny.

You will remember that George & Charlotte didn't come back down the aisle with the other attendants.

.... and George appeared to be crying and hid behind William

notimagain · Yesterday 21:34

StillSpartacus · Yesterday 21:25

I had suspected that too. Several of the signatures look like very similar handwriting, and I’m not sure BA first class have that many crew.

I suppose there is a possibility that a card was given (following a request) and a few additional signatures were added by someone with apparently impeccable handwriting.

That's certainly more than just the First class galley team, even on a 380, but that's not cause for suspicion.

The way this sometimes worked is the card would be taken around all the various galleys (and the flight deck ) for signing by those who wanted to do so before being handed over to the happy customer.

Starryfifty · Yesterday 21:34

I remember getting an Aer Lingus flight and I had just turned 30 ( looooong time ago) I happened to mention it to air hostess as I was probably sozzled. They made a huge fuss ☺️☺️

EmpressSisi · Yesterday 21:35

Do say: “Darling, let’s commemorate our anniversary traditionally this year.”
Don’t say: “By monetising our relationship with merch for the rich and gullible.”

🤣😂🫣

Tellmetomorrow57 · Yesterday 21:36

EmpressSisi · Yesterday 21:35

Do say: “Darling, let’s commemorate our anniversary traditionally this year.”
Don’t say: “By monetising our relationship with merch for the rich and gullible.”

🤣😂🫣

I miss the laughing emoji 😂

Indianrollerbird · Yesterday 21:38

RecoIIectionsMayVary · Yesterday 21:26

I'm watching as well, I would love to be there (not a villa fan but love sport) Harry has given up so much. Even if we just look at the lack of access to sporting fixtures.

Yes, I was thinking of the performative reactions we've seen from H&M watching American football and hockey versus William's genuine supporter reaction. I'm sure Haz would love to be able to go to a rugby match with his old mates.

Starryfifty · Yesterday 21:45

Indianrollerbird · Yesterday 21:38

Yes, I was thinking of the performative reactions we've seen from H&M watching American football and hockey versus William's genuine supporter reaction. I'm sure Haz would love to be able to go to a rugby match with his old mates.

Prepare for some tripe thrown together to match William at the AV match.

LipglossAndLies · Yesterday 21:59

Bigcat25 · Yesterday 17:17

Agree. Obviously she didn't ask the parents for consent as she's no contact with them. Yes it was a public event but now we have AI everywhere and generative AI can manipulate the images of kids/anyone and even create porn with them. Considering their reach of millions, and their online safety stance, it's ridiculous!

H and M actually have a very poor understanding of online safety and think they can pressure tech companies to both fully fix the issue and suddenly have a conscience.

Generative AI does not require a specific uploaded photograph of a child in order to create fake or harmful content. AI can already generate entirely fictional children, or estimate what children might look like from publicly available images of parents and relatives alone. So the existence of one additional public image does not fundamentally create the problem.

Taken to its logical conclusion, the argument would mean nobody could ever publicly share family photos, school pictures, wedding images, public event photography, or even ordinary photos of adults, because bad actors could theoretically misuse any visual material online. That standard is simply not realistic or workable in modern life.

There is also an important distinction between advocating for stronger online protections and believing that every possible online risk can be eliminated entirely. Public figures can support online safety initiatives while still sharing normal family or commemorative photographs without that becoming hypocrisy.

Ultimately, the responsibility for AI-generated abuse lies with the people creating and distributing harmful material, and with the platforms and technologies enabling it not automatically with every person who posts an ordinary public photograph.

Wasn't there AI images of them being posted on here I believe someone even shared one of their kids faces that had been generated by AI and rightfully deleted.

People can't wash their hands of personal responsibility either and blame the tools. Social media wouldn't be a cesspit or be harmful if people didn’t write hateful comments, trolling others etc.

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 22:14

EmpressSisi · Yesterday 21:35

Do say: “Darling, let’s commemorate our anniversary traditionally this year.”
Don’t say: “By monetising our relationship with merch for the rich and gullible.”

🤣😂🫣

😂

smilesy · Yesterday 22:19

LipglossAndLies · Yesterday 21:59

Generative AI does not require a specific uploaded photograph of a child in order to create fake or harmful content. AI can already generate entirely fictional children, or estimate what children might look like from publicly available images of parents and relatives alone. So the existence of one additional public image does not fundamentally create the problem.

Taken to its logical conclusion, the argument would mean nobody could ever publicly share family photos, school pictures, wedding images, public event photography, or even ordinary photos of adults, because bad actors could theoretically misuse any visual material online. That standard is simply not realistic or workable in modern life.

There is also an important distinction between advocating for stronger online protections and believing that every possible online risk can be eliminated entirely. Public figures can support online safety initiatives while still sharing normal family or commemorative photographs without that becoming hypocrisy.

Ultimately, the responsibility for AI-generated abuse lies with the people creating and distributing harmful material, and with the platforms and technologies enabling it not automatically with every person who posts an ordinary public photograph.

Wasn't there AI images of them being posted on here I believe someone even shared one of their kids faces that had been generated by AI and rightfully deleted.

People can't wash their hands of personal responsibility either and blame the tools. Social media wouldn't be a cesspit or be harmful if people didn’t write hateful comments, trolling others etc.

The use or otherwise of AI is not relevant to the fact that the photos of the children were posted without their or their parents’ consent though, is it?

Mylovelygreendress · Yesterday 22:21

bluegreygreen · Yesterday 21:29

Yes, had just seen that mentioned elsewhere, @Lunde.

One of the previously unseen photos is one taken as they are about to come out of the chapel after signing the register.
Meghan is foreground in the photo, Harry in the background talking to the Wales' (then Cambridges') nanny.

You will remember that George & Charlotte didn't come back down the aisle with the other attendants.

Did the other children walk back down the aisle ? I can’t remember and i can’t find the photos posted yesterday .

Mylovelygreendress · Yesterday 22:21

Sorry , just reread and they did walk back .

Lunde · Yesterday 22:29

Indianrollerbird · Yesterday 21:38

Yes, I was thinking of the performative reactions we've seen from H&M watching American football and hockey versus William's genuine supporter reaction. I'm sure Haz would love to be able to go to a rugby match with his old mates.

IIRC there was one sporting event they attended (can't remember whether it was basketball or baseball) where they had front seats with various other celebrities (who mostly ignored them). But it was clearly a just PR photo opportunity as they bailed on the game shortly after the photos ... one of the other celebrities was photographed later in the game and someone else was sitting in their seats.

HaddockDiem · Yesterday 22:31

Apologies if this has already been shared

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/may/20/meghan-markle-anniversary-candle

Swipe left for the next trending thread