H and m pr disasters 34!

[jeffgoldblum]

A continuation of the exiting and entertaining shenanigans of ham….

Yes, I remember him being critical of her just after the Bashir interview. Like you, I don't remember anything like that after she died.

Can you imagine the tantrum for the HAMs if that happened though? They would just cry victim again, nasty Catherine made sure they weren’t in the final edit, she made us sit behind a pillar, she ignored Meghan and on and on it goes. You cannot win with narcissists, best to grey rock permanently.

Nah, I'm sure she has a back up drive or thumb drives (or an assistant who does) with all 'important people' photos on it. All she had to do was plug the drive into the nearest laptop and print the photo, find a reasonably same size frame and 'Voilá', instant BFFS!

I'm sure her motto is "Be Prepared to exploit any occasion for publicity".

Smart Works is not a royal patronage. Both Meghan and Harry lost all their royal patronages when they found freedom, but if individual charities want to maintain a relationship with either of them, that's up to the charity. It has nothing to do with Charles, and certainly does not indicate 'half in half out'.

Thank you for clearing that up 👍🏼

Once again you're making perfect sense about their MO, bluegreygreen; I'd only add that, since all other opportunities have gone, it's just remotely possible Harry's realised he'll need a different one if he hopes to worm his way back in

This could also explain the silence so far (I don't count "sources" and "it's understood that" as they're too easily made up) and the absence of "Look at us making another new life" on SM

As said before though, it won't last. Unless his father really is stupid enough to grant his every wish, sooner or later Harry will be disappointed and the tantrums will start again

Meghan’s patronage of Smart Works is literally on the Royal Family website. Most people couldn’t tell the difference between a royal patronage versus a patronage by a royal person (and by being listed as a member of the royal family by the royal family, Meghan is royal). I think that in the public’s and media’s eyes, that’s good enough. It would be half-in, half-out.

I can't see why any charity would associate with either of them tbh

I’m still waiting for Invictus to see that particular light.

Honestly, most people really don't care one way or the other.

Harry and Meghan have both maintained relationships with their private patronages since leaving, even if they've not done very much for them. Harry still occasionally appears at events for 'Well Child' for example. So this is nothing new, and in no way is it 'half in half out'. Anyone can be a patron of a charity, and 'Smartworks' has several.

I always find M’s connection with Smartworks slightly amusing given the state of some of the clothes she wears .
( But it is a worthwhile cause)

It wouldn't technically be half in half out because neither Harry nor Meghan undertake official royal duties on behalf of the monarchy.

But, and it's a big but, now they are back in the UK I really think the palace need to remove them from the official Royal family website. Zara isn't on it or the York sisters. Harry being there is a hang over from when he was a working royal and it risks causing needless confusion to keep him there now he isn't.

I agree, they don't exactly promote a great image. Meghan's last iteration was a Trad Wife, the kitchen, the flower sprinkles, fashion, clutching on to her man. Isn't Smartworks a charity to support women progressing in the world of work? Actual competitive work?
Counter intuitive connection , I'd have thought.

Thinking about the Christmas events. Surely the most sensible thing would be to keep everything the same this year. By next year there will be ample evidence of how the Sussexes are going to go about things in the UK and clear decisions can be made.

As an aside, how unkind would it be for Archie and Lily to join in the Christmas walk to church. They have been raised far away from any public spotlight and the large crowds would be the worst way to start introducing them to a public life (which is pointless anyway as they will never have a public role in the way the Wales children will).

Apologies, I’m not ignoring requests for examples of Charles’ vilification (wish I hadn’t used that word in retrospect but ‘tis done now) of Diana. I’m on holiday and also hosting so catching a moment.

My timing may have been off, I’m thinking about how negative stories about Diana conveniently appeared, whether before or after her death. There’s no doubt in my mind that C was content to let her be criticised by close friends. But I won’t pursue this line, I appreciate others disagree.

Back to lurking …

I’m only coming back to you because of the interesting points you make, this isn’t a personal attack!

Neither Harry nor Meghan are “anyone”, and not “anyone” is listed by the Royal family as being a member of their family. That puts Well Child and Smart Works into a different category than the one you or I might occupy as patrons (or more realistically, for me at least, someone like JK Rowling or David Attenborough).

It has always been thus, yes, and more particularly re Invictus which is also prominently featured on Harry’s page. Also not technically a royal patronage but given he’s the king’s son, frankly it basically is as far as the outside world is concerned.

As a pp says, Zara and the York sisters have patronages but they’re not on the website (it’s more than just being in a website or not ofc, this is all about perception and statements). Harry has chosen to out himself into the same “non-working royal” category as them. So why this inconsistency?

No one “jumped on” anyone.

If the point is to comment and never have any reply except agreement then ignoring all replies is the way to go.

No need to go back to lurking! If you've got an opinion, share it, that's the whole point of discussion ☺️.
Perhaps vilification was a strong word though. Anyway. Enjoy your holiday.

We have all met narcissistic people. You cannot win with them. It's exactly the same for RF and HAM.

Meg was given a huge amount when she married. They were adored by British public. It still wasn't enough. My point is, nothing will ever be enough for this pair

I don’t think the RF shout invite them to anything official or attempt any rapprochement. If Charles as an ailing father and grandfather wishes to meet them (or at least the children) privately, that’s fine but it should be on the condition that it’s entirely private.

I think the Sandringham church event is the last thing on the planet that the Sussexes would attend - the public there are famously ferocious royalists and would not welcome them. Plus to the HAMs it would be boring, with a dress code for Meghan and few opportunities to simper at the camera. And 2 young Californian children will not have been raised to sit through long, formal church services.

I struggle to remember but agree he probably didn't put a stop to anyone that wanted to criticize her before she died.

What an unforeseeable tragedy and how it must have changed him to see his sons lose their beloved mother.

But like I say, they've held those patronages since finding freedom so nothing has really changed. If organisations, for whatever reason, still want to be involved with Harry or Meghan that's up to them. I'm not sure what you want to be done about it? I guess they could be taken off the official website but I doubt anyone depends on that as a primary source of knowledge. The website is an outdated confusing mess anyway compared to the official websites of other European royal families.

Harry and Meghan are not representing the monarch and aren't being supported by taxpayers, so there's no 'half in half out'. It's a crucial distinction.

I meant more of the mental capacity of such a move as opposed to wrapping up things in boxes. I'm no stranger to international moves having done 7 myself. My favourite was when someone had hung all my clothes up in the wardrobes but sadly to my dismay had hung the hangers the wrong way. Other moves - 10. It does require mental thought. I think Harry was a liar.

Just a reminder: the Buckingham Palace statement regarding the Sussexes stepping back to be non-working royals also made clear that their 'honorary military appointments and Royal patronages' were returned to the Queen.

In case there were any uncertainty, those appointments and patronages were listed in a note for the press.

Harry retained Invictus, among other charities. Meghan has retained SmartWorks.

BP statement on the Sussexes 2021

Thanks - it can get a bit confusing!