Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

PR Disasters Chapter 15

743 replies

FenellaFeldman · 31/05/2026 22:26

The saga continues

OP posts:
Thread gallery
54
Lunde · 04/06/2026 17:10

FenellaFeldman · 04/06/2026 15:05

There was a lot of criticism of Diana that summer. She spent a lot of time on a yacht with her boyfriend and not much time with her sons, who were both on holiday from boarding school.

Also it was clear that the paps had been tipped off and William was really stressed and not enjoying it at all. I remember them being papped out for a boat trip while William just sat with his head in his hands.

FenellaFeldman · 04/06/2026 17:13

Lunde · 04/06/2026 17:10

Also it was clear that the paps had been tipped off and William was really stressed and not enjoying it at all. I remember them being papped out for a boat trip while William just sat with his head in his hands.

Awful. She got a bit addicted to it all, I think.

OP posts:
Miranda65 · 04/06/2026 17:16

Whilst Charles Spencer may have his own personal views on a documentary about his sister, I think he's also very conscious that he is uncle to the next Sovereign. He is not going to mess up his relationship with William, even if that means upsetting Harry.
If all of the Spencer siblings refuse to cooperate (as, of course, will William and Charles), then there will be no material for a doc, and H & M will get nowhere.

FenellaFeldman · 04/06/2026 17:16

Miranda65 · 04/06/2026 17:16

Whilst Charles Spencer may have his own personal views on a documentary about his sister, I think he's also very conscious that he is uncle to the next Sovereign. He is not going to mess up his relationship with William, even if that means upsetting Harry.
If all of the Spencer siblings refuse to cooperate (as, of course, will William and Charles), then there will be no material for a doc, and H & M will get nowhere.

Very good points.

OP posts:
Papercompany · 04/06/2026 17:19

StrawberryWasp · 04/06/2026 12:53

I've said it before but I'll say it again:

Not showing children's faces does not negate the potential damage of exposing your child on social media, or of using them to build your brand.

You are still using them and their image, their childhood, their personal experiences to promote yourself, and exposing them to the scrutiny of the world.
All without their consent and all out there forever.

It's bloody ridiculous to pretend the only potential damage is from being recognised in RL. It's not. It's from your life being mined and exposed for content.

It's such a faux nod to safeguarding which allows parents to continue to exploit their children.
It actually makes me angry.

I agree with this 100%....I couldn't say it any more clearly. How on earth do H & M not realise or appreciate this?!

FenellaFeldman · 04/06/2026 17:23

Papercompany · 04/06/2026 17:19

I agree with this 100%....I couldn't say it any more clearly. How on earth do H & M not realise or appreciate this?!

Because they're hypocrites.

OP posts:
ShamedBySiri · 04/06/2026 17:24

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 15:22

I saw something recently that the Sussexes want their proposed Diana documentary to frame Meghan's illustrious life of jam and faux feminism as the continuation of her legacy. I really hope they do this, as the fall out will be hilarious.

In any event, Andrew Morton and a co conspirator are doing their own documentary based around some tapes they possess of unheard interviews with Diana, which sounds much more interesting than the hackneyed narrative we've heard from Harry time and time again.

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/documentaries/princess-diana-unheard-tapes-documentary-newsupdate/

Poor William. It must drive him mad with all these people making wild claims about his mother and earning a living off her. I hope he just takes a deep breath, moment of calm and lets it wash over him.
Save the rage for his brother and his wife if they do attempt to produce a documentary. There’s reasons why he split from the usual royal solicitors and engaged his own. Not necessarily this reason but it does mean he can probably just ring them up and tell them to do whatever is necessary to put a spanner in Harry’s works and then leave them legal to it while he gets on with living his best life.

Lunde · 04/06/2026 17:24

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 15:22

I saw something recently that the Sussexes want their proposed Diana documentary to frame Meghan's illustrious life of jam and faux feminism as the continuation of her legacy. I really hope they do this, as the fall out will be hilarious.

In any event, Andrew Morton and a co conspirator are doing their own documentary based around some tapes they possess of unheard interviews with Diana, which sounds much more interesting than the hackneyed narrative we've heard from Harry time and time again.

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/documentaries/princess-diana-unheard-tapes-documentary-newsupdate/

Weren't these tapes recorded around the time that she was being manipulated by Martin Bashir and the documents he faked that made her refuse security.

Ferryl · 04/06/2026 17:28

ShamedBySiri · 04/06/2026 14:46

Same! I was in the shower and DH burst in to say Damian and that bloke are dead. I couldn’t believe it.

Me too - pregnant with my 3rd dc. Dh and I had had an argument the previous evening - when I heard him calling me downstairs on the morning of Diana’s death, I thought it was because he wanted to apologise for our disagreement!

bluegreygreen · 04/06/2026 17:29

I still find it hard to understand how Martin Bashir (and/or the BBC) could not have been prosecuted for a crime.

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 17:30

Lunde · 04/06/2026 17:24

Weren't these tapes recorded around the time that she was being manipulated by Martin Bashir and the documents he faked that made her refuse security.

Morton’s book was published in Summer 1992, so I assume his tapes date back to 1991/2. Bashir’s interview was broadcast during November 1995.

FenellaFeldman · 04/06/2026 17:31

bluegreygreen · 04/06/2026 17:29

I still find it hard to understand how Martin Bashir (and/or the BBC) could not have been prosecuted for a crime.

Absolutely. He fed her paranoia so that she rejected the experienced Palace security.

OP posts:
ShamedBySiri · 04/06/2026 17:34

Miranda65 · 04/06/2026 17:16

Whilst Charles Spencer may have his own personal views on a documentary about his sister, I think he's also very conscious that he is uncle to the next Sovereign. He is not going to mess up his relationship with William, even if that means upsetting Harry.
If all of the Spencer siblings refuse to cooperate (as, of course, will William and Charles), then there will be no material for a doc, and H & M will get nowhere.

I don’t think Spencer is the type to interrupt his honeymoon (he didn’t invite his nephew to the wedding) to fly halfway across the USA on a social visit.
IF it’s true he did visit I am inclined to believe it was to deliver a message from the Spencer family regarding any Diana documentary. The Spencers seem to have tried to stay out of the whole H&M drama whilst quietly supporting both H & W (the aunts anyway) but I can imagine the whole family being united on this. So no access to Althorp, the grave, any family photos and archives.

As a pp said, had it been a happy family visit I think we can be sure it would have been announced. A not so happy visit? They will be licking their wounds and wondering where they will get content for the documentary. I suppose they could try ringing up Julia Carling and Oliver Hoare’s wife for a comment?

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 17:37

bluegreygreen · 04/06/2026 17:29

I still find it hard to understand how Martin Bashir (and/or the BBC) could not have been prosecuted for a crime.

The police did look into Bashir’s actions and decided they didn’t constitute criminal activity.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 04/06/2026 17:46

MrsLeonFarrell · 04/06/2026 16:32

After Spare anyone with an ounce of intelligence would steer clear of any involvement with a documentary about Harry's Diana memories. Spare made it clear that Harry isn't interested in truth or facts but only in promoting his own grievances. Who would want to be involved in that?

Correct once again, MrsLF, and as a PP said it'll be for the same reason that Meghan can no longer attract A listers to take part in her ridiculous "shows"

It's hard to imagine anyone possessed of integrity would involve themselves with her now, and so it's proving

tengreencats · 04/06/2026 18:28

SlayTheJAway · 04/06/2026 14:15

Or she could just schedule it like loads of people do

But why is she posting as if she lives in another time zone? 🤷‍♀️

tengreencats · 04/06/2026 18:35

StrawberryWasp · 04/06/2026 13:05

It's getting hard to avoid the speculation that there is a reason Archie does not appear as much as Lili.

Which is absolutely shit for the child. And entirely his parents fault.

This type of speculation and narrative will grow and future photo releases used to build narratives about the children.

All because their parents want to be in the public eye.

It's shit parenting.

What have we had of Archie recently? His mother laughing at him when he was hiding behind a pillar at Disney 🤷‍♀️

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 18:35

tengreencats · 04/06/2026 18:28

But why is she posting as if she lives in another time zone? 🤷‍♀️

To catch the UK press early morning our time, so that poor Willie and Katy Keen can laugh uproariously get into a froth of jealousy over their Highgrove jam crumpets.

bluegreygreen · 04/06/2026 18:46

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 17:37

The police did look into Bashir’s actions and decided they didn’t constitute criminal activity.

I know. I probably should have worded that differently - I find it frustrating. They apparently looked at the case with the CPS following the Dyson report.

He asked a BBC artist to produce false bank statements showing that Charles' Spencer's head of security was being paid by the tabloids. He used these to push Charles to persuade Diana to talk to him. He then made false allegations against senior members of the RF.

The BBC artist was a freelance graphic designer called Wiessler. Bashir had told him the statements were for use as filming props. When he realised they were used otherwise he spoke to the reporters who broke the story of the fake documents.

The BBC held an internal investigation, didn't speak to either Charles Spencer or Wiessler, cleared Bashir of wrongdoing and didn't employ Wiessler again. He struggled for work for years afterwards.

Presumably nothing met the standard for prosecution, but so many people's lives were affected.

FenellaFeldman · 04/06/2026 18:50

tengreencats · 04/06/2026 18:35

What have we had of Archie recently? His mother laughing at him when he was hiding behind a pillar at Disney 🤷‍♀️

😢

OP posts:
YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 19:14

bluegreygreen · 04/06/2026 18:46

I know. I probably should have worded that differently - I find it frustrating. They apparently looked at the case with the CPS following the Dyson report.

He asked a BBC artist to produce false bank statements showing that Charles' Spencer's head of security was being paid by the tabloids. He used these to push Charles to persuade Diana to talk to him. He then made false allegations against senior members of the RF.

The BBC artist was a freelance graphic designer called Wiessler. Bashir had told him the statements were for use as filming props. When he realised they were used otherwise he spoke to the reporters who broke the story of the fake documents.

The BBC held an internal investigation, didn't speak to either Charles Spencer or Wiessler, cleared Bashir of wrongdoing and didn't employ Wiessler again. He struggled for work for years afterwards.

Presumably nothing met the standard for prosecution, but so many people's lives were affected.

Andy Webb’s Dianorama has blown a hole through the BBC’s so called investigation. The BBC were disgraceful both then and now, as they continue to obstruct the truth of what happened. But unfortunately, conning someone in the manner they did to get an interview doesn’t fall into any criminal law I am aware of, certainly not one that existed in 1995.

Not2identifying · 04/06/2026 19:26

I cringed when I saw the birthday photos. Because they were published in the first place when H&M could be protecting their daughter from having a public profile and because their favouritism is so obvious.

The clap back was ridiculously unconvincing. They believe it because they want to believe it and I suspect Meghan believes it more than Harry. We are only 11 years from Archie being able to talk freely about this as an adult. The time will pass quickly.

Lunde · 04/06/2026 19:34

YouputthetwatinKathleen · 04/06/2026 17:37

The police did look into Bashir’s actions and decided they didn’t constitute criminal activity.

I'm not sure that they concluded it wasn't a crime but it was more the issue of attempting to successfully prosecute in 2021 (after the Dyson report branded Bashir deceitful, dishonest, unreliable and devious) when the victim, Diana, was dead and unable to testify. The original BBC internal inquiry (1996??) cleared Bashir and called him "honest" and "remorseful".

It may also have been difficult from a statute of limitations point of view to prosecute 25 years later.

The BBC did have to pay damages to William and Harry's nanny, Tiggy Legge Bourke (believed to be IRO £200K) for the falsified documents that purported to show that she was having an affair with Charles, which were used to manipulate Diana into giving the interview,

I don't know whether Bashir's medical issues played a part as he was reported to be very unwell with Covid and heart issues when this blew up in 2020-1.

NormalAuntFanny · 04/06/2026 19:50

bluegreygreen · 04/06/2026 14:44

Agree, @MrsLeonFarrell.

I have read from at least one PR person on here, and have heard elsewhere, that the early Sunday papers were withdrawn in a hurry that morning, as they were very critical of Diana.

(As an aside - imagine that being able to happen these days, in the era of social media news!)

I was working that night and we got the papers all night long. The press had been all about Dodi etc for some weeks and very disapproving. I don't remember the early editions specifically but might well be correct

The late editions were genuinely shocking but not because of any people's princess stuff but just because it was sudden major news story. I regarded her really as a celeb by that point not really a 'royal'.

CathyorClaire · 04/06/2026 20:00

AtIusvue · 04/06/2026 16:17

And yet the BBC didn’t report on Archie’s birthday last month. Why? Because there wasn’t an official type photos taken. It was an old baby pic and a phone pic.

Yet they’ve reported on Lilis, because hers is a professional photoshoot and Meg n Harry are in the photos with her, unlike Archie

Harry n Meg know exactly how to get their daughter in the press. The right photos posing with parents, posted early in the day. With Archie, old photos and they were posted late.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx21rr51z1eo

Edited

Gosh.

Harold's not a poster boy for the health benefits of hallucinogenics, is he?

And. Can someone please buy that poor kid a pair of shoes?

Soles of her feet must be verging on leather by now.

Swipe left for the next trending thread