Page 29 | PR Disasters, chapter 13

AtIusvue · 2026-05-18T14:57:45+00:00

Meg and Harry and all their PR shenanigans Trigger Warning: this thread may contain talk about sleeves.

PoppysAunt · Yesterday 22:33

HaddockDiem · Yesterday 22:31

Apologies if this has already been shared

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

Yes, we're all laughing about it - we particularly liked the last sentence!
Good snark though, and unusual for the Guardian!

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:25

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

Show quote history

Don’t bother you are arguing with an incognito sweetie.

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:29

Starryfifty · Yesterday 21:45

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

Show quote history

No doubt there will be criticism about which child he took , didn’t take , whatever! 🙄

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:31

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.

Show quote history

Are you happy with this long winded explanation that is both wrong and pointless?
nobody really cares at this point! 🤷‍♀️

MrsFinkelstein · Yesterday 23:47

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:29

No doubt there will be criticism about which child he took , didn’t take , whatever! 🙄

Show quote history

Oh the new script is that William is a thug and probably violent - look at how aggressive he is celebrating. It's apparently not normal. 🙄

BigWillyLittleTodger · Yesterday 23:56

Can’t remember if this has been picked up earlier in the thread but looks like Meghan may have set the card up herself, if you don’t want to watch the whole video the part regarding the card is about 4 minutes in.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/K5XdKNk3HAY?si=uO25F6D2UGpdfIeN

BigWillyLittleTodger · Yesterday 23:57

Rumbled indeed.

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:59

MrsFinkelstein · Yesterday 23:47

Oh the new script is that William is a thug and probably violent - look at how aggressive he is celebrating. It's apparently not normal. 🙄

Show quote history

I’d like to say I’m surprised and shocked but I’m not!!! The only royal who has actually been caught on camera being violent, angry and aggressive is…..and our survey said ?…. Harry ! 🙄🤣

BigWillyLittleTodger · Today 00:01

MrsFinkelstein · Yesterday 23:47

Oh the new script is that William is a thug and probably violent - look at how aggressive he is celebrating. It's apparently not normal. 🙄

Show quote history

Is this on X I presume?

Lunde · Today 00:08

The Guardian article about the candle's is hilarious - especially the snark at the end but also the idea that Moroccan mint, white tea and cardamom apparently evokes the "freshness of a day in the English countryside" 😂😂😂 She really didn't spend much time in the country - did she?

I also think the ceramic candle pots look very basic, impersonal and naff - like something you'd pick up at an airport/hotel gift shop in the Middle East if you forgot to buy a present for a distant relative! 🙄

Lunde · Today 00:12

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:59

I’d like to say I’m surprised and shocked but I’m not!!! The only royal who has actually been caught on camera being violent, angry and aggressive is…..and our survey said ?…. Harry ! 🙄🤣

Show quote history

He had to be restrained from attacking people outside clubs by his own security team - in fact he even had an angry/violent way of throwing confetti!

jeffgoldblum · Today 00:17

🎶it seems to me like she lived her life , like a candle in the shed 🎶
🎶 never knowing what to cling to when the camera clicked 🎶
🎶 her fame will burn out long before her candle ever lit ! 🎶

jeffgoldblum · Today 00:21

And I would have liked to know her but she was just a twig…..

Justdancevance · Today 00:21

The roundabout video on Meghan’s IG

i thought she couldn’t top Queen of Hertz 😀

jeffgoldblum · Today 00:22

Justdancevance · Today 00:21

The roundabout video on Meghan’s IG

i thought she couldn’t top Queen of Hertz 😀

Never play Meghan short ! Her ridiculousness has no bounds!!!

jeffgoldblum · Today 00:24

….. her legend was a crock of shit ..that’s why she had some kids…..

jeffgoldblum · Today 00:27

Honestly, I actually thought it was really disrespectful of Elton to rewrite candle in the wind! , it was for m monroe , he should have wrote a song actually for Diana.

jeffgoldblum · Today 00:29

Excuse my pondering! I’m a night owl , every one is asleep and I’ve got a good pinot Grigio !

MyAutumnCrow · Today 01:16

jeffgoldblum · Yesterday 23:31

Are you happy with this long winded explanation that is both wrong and pointless?
nobody really cares at this point! 🤷‍♀️

Show quote history

To be honest, I didn’t read past the first feeble and gratuitous excuse.

jeffgoldblum · Today 01:46

MyAutumnCrow · Today 01:16

To be honest, I didn’t read past the first feeble and gratuitous excuse.

Show quote history

Me neither! 😉🤣

Twisterr · Today 04:46

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.

Show quote history

You are wrong and totally disingenuous. MM herself wouldn’t agree with you.

It’s already unacceptable for any school, sports club, organisation etc to use photos of children publicly without parental consent has been for many years. Consent is always required so much so that often schools ban parents from videoing their own children at plays / events because other people’s children will be identified. Beyond organisations it’s even socially unacceptable for friends and family to upload photos of other peoples children on to social media.

Can you imagine if Jessica Mulroney or PW shared private unseen full facial photos of A & L taken in a private space on to a global social media platform without H&M consent? All hell would break loose…….and I would support H&M.

MonteShitshow · Today 05:21

MyAutumnCrow · 18/05/2026 16:43

I wonder who organised this shitshow?

I’m also hoping more about the plagiarism(s) comes up online.

Edited

I have only just finished thread 12! So I haven’t read this one fully, but very interested in this particular bit regarding the speech.

With regards to the poor turnout, it could be spun to highlight the lack of interest in protecting children against the harms of social media, thereby giving more credence to her (and her love’s) concerns, And applauding the ongoing hard work of the Duchess in this area. 😬

PinkMagpie · Today 06:02

Apologies if this has been posted, but I think I figured out why Meghan needed such a fuss for her 8th wedding anniversary

https://people.com/royals/kate-middleton-just-received-a-special-honor-from-queen-elizabeth-on-her-wedding-anniversary/

MyAutumnCrow · Today 06:08

Part of me does wonder about Meg’s big drive to bang on about the 8th wedding anniversary, and her determination to create an illusion of blissful matrimony despite all evidence to the contrary.

Is it to make people more interested and invested in any forthcoming fracture narrative - the ‘I was blindsided by him’ gambit? Please make your opening bids, ladies and gentlemen.

sickofsixseven · Today 06:28

She seems to think that she is a draw without harry. She isnt. Even harry is barely hanging on at this stage. She saw the success of Catherine's Italy tour so thought Switzerland would be a "clap back". It wasn't and backfired spectacularly, like everything they try, and so she crashed out posting old pics of their wedding hoping to grab a few headlines. I dont really think it worked?

Its so embarrassing for them at this stage (and for a long time) but for some reason they just can't keep quiet. I can only imagine things will spiral even further because of their weird pathological need to always have the last word. I mean they are on the level of tawdry celeb gossip but its actually fascinating considering that this will literally be part of the history books one day. Or maybe it will all be glossed over? That will kill them lol