PR disasters thread 33

[BigWillyLittleTodger]

A shiny new thread for September Sussex shenanigans!

The last PM I had (and deleted) simply said: 'Do you live in London?'

Charming and fragrant though this approach was, I chose to turn off the message function in my settings as I have pearls to choose and a wealthy husband to find divorce.

I now suspect it was a rock dove called Stan, who wanted to take me up the Belsize Park.

Sorry I'm catching up bit by bit on the thread. Thank you for reminding me of this @jeffgoldblum . That is some really top quality Princesplaining . I can just see "You do know that the Monarchy is a hierarchy , right? " with his hand out with the finger and thumbs downwards like a grabber in a quarry or an amusement arcade. Yes we did know dear boy & this is why you are Prince Harry , Duke of Sussex and not plain ol' Mr / Captain Mountbatten-Windsor. When reminded I just can't get over the effrontery of whinging about only being the Monarch's second son and your whole rather luxurious life being organised and paid for. He's clueless , clueless I say. 😊

OK back to the thread. Basilisk. (in her 60s , retired , wears pearls on occasion , reserves the right to clutch them at will )

I'm not sure if this has already been posted, but according to Andrew Lownie in the DM, HAM and Ferguson are in cahoots.

https://archive.is/VwauD

The names they chose plus the titles refusal / insistence has always fascinated me.

i think the difference in naming style between the UK and US played a big part with Archie.
Plus them trying to be ‘cool’ and less Royal we’re not naming him Archibald only to use Archie.

I also suspect that Earl Dumbarton was refused because of again the U.K. US differences.
Meghan would have perceived that the way we’d perceive Earl Prattshire.

Lilibet is just absurd as a name but most likely works better in the US and was by that point a land grab against the RF / Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.
(Princess) Lilly Diana Doria would have been sweet.

I have long thought the unusually tight-lipped on the disgraceful Yorks Harolds have some beneficial connection with said Yorks.

It's the only conclusion to be drawn.

Agreed.

I know someone whose parents gave her a name better suited to a puppy living in the deep south US.

She wanted a serious career so changed her name, having ditched her incurably nutty mother years before.

What seems “cutesie” for a baby to intellectually challenged parents just sounds deranged on a middle aged professional.

There is no thought for the child as a person, only as an accessory.

Princess Lillibet makes me think Katie Price not RF.

Page Six - School parents warned not to photograph other children

https://archive.is/cTPpC

A relative of mine called their child a common first name then a totally way out and wacky name as the middle. It became clear when he told us that we were meant slap our thigh and crow with laughter saying something along the lines of "oh, Steve's such a wag. He's hilarious. Can't even be sensible when naming his kid. How like him!"
He was very put out when the response varied from ignoring it to a few blunter people pointing out it wasn't funny on the poor child who had to live with it.

I suspect it was something similar in using "Harrison". We were meant to think how funny he was.

Not a surprise and imo a good rule generally for schools.

I'm sure they put out a statement after Archie's birth that Harrison was given as second name because he was 'Harry's son'.

I still think David Hedison made a better fly.

Sorry. Jeff Goldblum is the only fly for me.

I still fondly recall going into the pub next door after a group viewing with a few turning pale when some more robust souls pretended to honk in their beer (you might have to have seen it to get the reference) then suck the brew dry.

Happy days 🍺

Pmd you x

I saw this and I well believe A lowrie. Like attracts like. Best of luck to them all. All prepared to f** each over in a heartbeat. What a hideous bunch

My blunt opinion: Archie was a terrible choice of name because 'Prince Archie' (likewise Lord Archie or other options) really doesn't go well. Apologies to anyone who has a loved one with the name: I know one and it's fine in context for them, but as HAM's choice it looks like a massive finger stuck up at traditional royalling. Which is a choice they can make for themselves, but it's also a little boy's name. I wish they'd come up with something better and used Archie as a nickname if they really liked it. They didn't say anything, as I remember, about why they'd picked it or what the inspiration was. Another area in which Lili at least gets a better origin story.

Unfortunately, I don’t think their sense of humour even works like that. They are far too earnest. I think it’s literally because he is Harry’s son. They genuinely think it’s an amazing thing to have made it clear who Archie’s father is. They also think everyone else is too dense to work it out. What a shame that they aren’t actually Icelandic 🙄😆😆

Frankly if I had a child at the school A&L are going to I would not be impressed if the school wrote to me to remind me of being careful about how you photograph your child and others because the Hamlets are going to be there. All of those parents will be aware of the general consensus of not wanting your child shared on SM by others. Many years ago (quarter of a century years for context ) when we lived in London , DS went to a prep school , and there were a small number of children there of properly famous household name parents. This was before SM really took off , but even then there was policy regarding sharing photographs of any child. No parents gave two hoots about photographing other children , they were more concerned their child might end up in a photograph with the "famous" children. If it is the case H&M have written to the school about their children , well , a personal opinion , they may not have got off on to the right foot. Faces blanked out or not , who's the one who has put her DCs on social media with the widest reach ? If it is just a new term general reminder then fair play.

ETA prompted by @bluegreygreen 's link - for which thanks. In case anyone thought it was a rant out of left field ( but I am in my 60s and retired and wear pearls occasionally so do forgive 😊 )

Feels a bit like people in US who wear kilts at their wedding but aren’t actually Scottish.

Am we allowed to say Kilt?

Exactly, the parents didn't get similar warnings at any school other royal children attended.
Sounds like wishful thinking PR from the Sussexes.

I hope they also apply those rules to HAM. Super keen to post photos of other people’s children.

Sad for Archie and Lili who may not be invited to play dates and birthday parties because of this edict.

It’s more than a consensus of not taking photos, it’s a safeguarding matter of which all parents will be well aware. You have to consent to the school using photos of your child, and at any school events, you are always reminded that any photos taken are for personal viewing only and on no account to be shared. So the Sussexes request is totally unnecessary and completely attention seeking

There's a 3rd option @BasiliskStare :

1. Sussexes ask school

2. School annually put out that notice; and

3. School pro-actively puts out the notice because of the Sussexes.

Harry is at a level of fame that few people in the world have.

The policy is in the school's and all the children's interests, and the school. I wouldn't want my young children turning up in a photo with the Sussexes child on another parent's FB page for several reasons, including that I wouldn't want the intrusion or the risk of my child's photo circulated around the world.

And it works both ways - the famous family can't photograph other children without consent.

My teenage DC turned up in the background of a famous pop star mother's instagram video as my DC was best friends with one of their children, but my DC was old enough to give consent. I would not have been happy if my DC was young.

I see on the BBC website the Met Office have released a list of new storm names for 2026/27

I could have suggested names beginning with H, M & S . . . .

You echo my thoughts when I saw the story, @BasiliskStare.

A letter with a standard reminder of the social media and safeguarding policy? No problem.

A letter about 'some families joining the school may attract a greater level of public or media interest'? Less good.

That's not how schools work. Even state schools.
Your child cannot be photographed without express parental permission.
Children are protected going to and from school - they're not allowed to be photographed.
Think of how many children were in the same classes as the Wales' children!
I call BS.

It’s how it works afterschool though at public places and peoples homes.

And just because you shouldn’t don’t mean people don’t. Ask any adoptive parent how hard it can be to get other parents to not take photos of nativity plays etc, even if the school had said now, people still do it,