Demographic(s) which determinedly support H&M no matter what

[Ratherhaveacupofteaandabiscuit]

I am bewildered that anyone can support H&M in light of all their shenanigans.

There is no need to base an opinion on what others write about them, these two show who they are with their own words and actions.

Who are the determined supporters and why would anyone close their eyes to the (inconvenient) truth to continue to fit a preferred narrative?

It reminds me of other scenarios where fans of celebrity figures insist their idol is wonderful despite all evidence to the contrary.

Is it sex, age, race, location? Is it an inability to change their mind after an initially favourable judgement was made?

I wonder what it is that unites die hard H&M supporters?

Well yes, but for the sake of this discussion board, it seems to be referred to as an interview.

You can change the terminology but the broader point stands.

And yet ...

I do acknowledge it.

Now?

Well, unbiased support is odd, but the obsession of others, including negative, is weirder.

Did you read her article? Have anything to say about them drumming up their own coverage then lying about it?

Do you feel Oprah also knew what she was getting into with James Frey?

I’m still laughing at women in Britain accepting misogyny and sexism.

Do we fuck.

Although I read plenty of it in that post.

You can tell when it trickles up and falls out of a different hole.

And there is a difference between an actual interview and giving two people a golden opportunity to tell lies and go ‘what?

I don’t know why I expected anything different after TC bounced on her sofa.

It was certainly a sought after interview. The opportunity was wasted.

And the Hamlets ! How cute 🤭

I seriously think there is a misunderstanding of media markets.

They all want the interview of the moment and rarely come at it from a moral or ethical point of view, even though they try to merge the two.

It is always done with the audience numbers in mind - how many will watch, how much reach will it have, and will it make "good TV."

The moral resolve is that people get to tell their own story, people watching can make up their own minds blah blah blah.

Most times it works alright but sometimes it back fires hugely.

In Oprah's case - she is brilliant at what she does (even though I do not watch her as it is not really my cup of tea).

At times, she will highlight a plight, at others it is pure show business, most often it a mix of both.

Am I the only one who read the OP and several replies before realising that this thread wasn’t about the clothes shop H&M. I was wondering what on earth the clothing brand had done to offend anyone 🙈

She’s also still human and has a reputation to protect. If you think she doesn’t care when people try to make her look like a fool, you have another think coming.

No. I think I understand fine.

An interview is of course done with viewing figures in mind.

Whoever was chosen would have got the viewing figures that OW did.

I just doubt that anyone else would have let them off with so much varying recollections - because had they researched any of it, they would have known their recollections were a load of swill.

In my opinion it backfired hugely. It was a huge embarrassment.

Great for viewing figures and cashing in.

Also great for one’s reputation swirling down the pot.

When someone already has more money than most could spend, I feel it was an odd choice to make and not at all brilliant.

Each to their own though.

Mmmmm!

Mmmm!

Oh don’t get me started.

Oh yes Oprah ! , the professional, the humanitarian….who unfortunately seems to have been best friends with every single bad man in Hollywood….if there is controversy…there’s Oprah ….friends with …Weinstein….cosby …..diddy ….perry …..dr phill …..to name but a few ….somehow she’s escaped scrutiny 🧐

Now we’re talking.

Some of us actually read papers, watch the news and television without needing to be "fed" anything.
Same old, same old though.
No actual argument, just attack others for being aware of the very public actions and communications from H&M as if it was an offence in itself.

If that is what you took from my post then truly, we have no common ground.

No actual argument, just attack others for being aware of the very public actions and communications from H&M as if it was an offence in itself.

There was no attack?

I have not read any comms from HAM so I cannot comment on what you did or did not read.

I was speaking only about Oprah, the interview, and the conceit that Oprah Winfrey was duped, or fooled, by HAM.

This is claim is made even though the interview was prerecorded, edited, and vetted by legal teams of all parties before going to air.

Anyway - I have to go back to my shift.

In a way, yes. I just wish this was completely the case.

But they are a destabilising factor in the way that the Abdication Crisis was in the 30s. The monarchy has had several serious issues to deal with recently (death of QE2, Megxit, KC and PoW cancer diagnoses, AMW scandal) and the fuss over HAM is a further, minor irritation. If you’re a constitutional monarchist like me it’s more of a worry. I suspect that W in particular is near breaking point after the last few years and the threat of a split with his sentimental father over HAM might just be the last straw for him.

If you want to see the end of the monarchy this will be music to your ears but I see it as a dangerous situation. I feel that, after all the mess and suffering Harry has caused for his family, the very least he could do is to go and live a totally private life in the US and stop trying to make a comeback. That would be intolerable for W and C, and they are the people who matter going forward.

Yes - how does she get away with it? I suspect she’s “American Royalty “ and very well protected.

( Amid all the “cancellations “ of historical figures in this country I’m always amazed that nobody has attacked the statue of Oliver Cromwell outside Parliament…he was a genocidal brute in Ireland! But some people, past and present, seem to get a free pass.)

Er…just to be clear, I’m not accusing Oprah of genocidal brutality.

Very interesting that on the morning after QE2 death OW commissioned a one off interview on her mate Gayle King’s huge breakfast show to ‘re-position’ the H&M interview and her intentions. OW herself, realising that she was on the wrong side of history as the accolades for QE2 came in, more or less apologised and said that she had no idea it would be a ‘bombshell’ interview etc - it was painful to watch with the squirming.

I think OW is totally disingenuous in every manoeuvre - shes out for herself always. She groomed H&M for years to get the ‘bombshell’, then she distanced herself from it, but she will still be sniffing like a shark for the divorce interview.

Michele Obama spoke out the day after the OW interview and in her very own assertive and diplomatic words said that H&M had absolutely done the wrong thing - specifically on the racism claim.

Indeed, but historically Earl Spencer has a massive beef with KC over his sister’s marriage. Understandable in a normal context but extremely hypocritical in the light of both his own shocking marital record and the harsh treatment which he himself meted out to Diana before her death.

Plus - ES might use this as an opportunity to kick KC when he’s already down (personally and constitutionally) and I’d judge him for that because it will have implications for Diana’s other, far less troublesome son.

You personally attacked me and rightfully so your post was deleted.

I think you give them too much credit for being part of the debate over the future monarchy in the uk. Once William takes over I expect H&M will be out of the picture completely.