H and m pr disasters 34!

[jeffgoldblum]

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

Well exactly and who knows who might come forward to put an alternative point of view ??

The issue is (which honestly I'm amazed that Harry doesn't anticipate) is that stirring it all up again after 30 years might well bring out some stories about his mum which he'd rather not hear, or have made public.

We've all heard the hagiographies, so yes, it's possible that some journalist will think - let's balance things and give a more nuanced view, with historical perspective...and interview some people who have the not-so-flattering stories to tell.

I don't want this to happen but neither do I want to hear all the same 'Diana was a living saint!' stuff rehashed again.

No-one is a living saint, are they? Except perhaps David Attenborough and Judi Dench!! Please don't tell me anything bad about them.

😂😂 nothing bad about Judi or David!
I agree, and that's the danger of the hagiographic approach. If you apply critical thinking, it's nonsense.
I really don't think that Harry has the ability to manage this in an effective way.

From the article above

Diana said In the snippet from the Panorama interview used in the Netflix episode, Diana is shown saying: “I still to this day find the interest daunting and phenomenal. Because I actually don’t like being the centre of attention.

Harry is disrespecting his mother's preference for privacy if he is really doing this alleged documentary. Why not let her simply RIP? It's probably Meghan's idea to appeal to that strange target "audience" of theirs. But it may well be another thing they have put out there to distract from the actual going ons.

The book by Spencer is available to pre order on Amazon,.Release date 22nd sept. It is at number 9 on the Amazon' chart' so it does appear to be popular based on that.(by that I mean the 'interest' people have in Diana still).

I didn't know there was still a working charity in the name of Princess Diana, I had to look it up.

Sure, she was great. And too young to be married into that role. Her brother, now Earl Spencer is an interesting character & I might read his book due out shortly! His speech at her funeral was memorable. His book about his time at boarding school was very well written, and tough reading.

He's also been through, ahem, several divorces? Not that we are counting. I will likely still read the book.

That memoir was very harrowing indeed. Poor man.

Considering Harry used clips of the Bashir interview in his NF series it's not exactly a stretch to consider he would do so again.

I'm old enough to remember being told repeatedly that H&M would never do a Spotify deal, or a NF deal, or do a book or interviews in which they would denigrate his family for money.

IMO, Diana was used and taken advantage of by men pretty much all her adult life - seems the only man in her life that she loves that hasn't done so after her death is her eldest son. (And I am absolutely not a Diana fan, she was a vulnerable, flawed human who did some lovely things, but who also hurt many others).

I wouldn't watch a Diana doc by H&M on principle, she deserves to be left in peace FFS.

The bit that neither Harry or Megan get is no one like a hypocrite
if you want privacy and no press Then slope off somewhere quiet don’t get tangled up on social media and keep your head down , Prince Edward and Sophie are two good examples or Zara and Mike Tindall
it’s really not that hard ! As Diana found out at her cost you cannot turn the media on and off like a tap !
But privacy was not what this couple wants which undermines their reason for going to the US
Megan will leave Harry in time once he has Charles's money via inheritance

Good points, @MrsFinkelstein. Especially about her eldest son.

Yes, it was brave of him to write it for public consumption.

It caused him to have a breakdown, and he had to go for therapy and support in a specialist residential unit. He's been a very tortured soul.

They don't want privacy per se. They want control over their press coverage. They want adulation. They don't want anything negative said about them, and they want to live a, "Do as I say, not do as I do" life without criticism for being hypocrites. It's pretty standard stuff for celebrities and, indeed, royals, that's why they all engage PR machines. The problem is the press who lap up this crap without asking serious questions. There is no investigative journalism, or even simple pushback by asking one hard question, just the constant regurgitating of PR spin. In fact, it's pretty obvious that any face to face interviews they do are on the condition that they will not be asked any hard questions. And any journalist who denies that certain questioning was off the table, but went on to do a soft soap interview with them, is either a liar or really, really bad at their job.

The other royals don't constantly complain about negative press coverage.

Exactly! , thanks to Burrell I have only recently learned that Diana took cocaine!! A fact I was blissfully ignorant of!! And yes I judge because I’m afraid my feelings on drugs is very strong.

Was it in the last thread (or could have been the one before - so many!)

A comment by ?Alistair Campbell about Diana advising Tony Blair to up his image. Being pictured touching people, especially ill people, especially ill children, preferably bald children.

It certainly paints a slightly different picture about her intentions with much of her charity work. Her turning up unannounced at hospitals to visit patients - she was really visiting Hasnat Khan.

Diana was absolutely not a saint, she did a huge amount of food, but she could also be selfish and deliberately hurt others. Her treatment of Tiggy Legge-Bourke was unforgivable. A new doc will only allow journalists to dig into all the salacious details again - Hoare, Carling, Hewitt, and especially Al Fayed. Linking Diana with Al Fayed and the likelihood of him illegally taping her! This has the potential for blowing up in people's faces (I'm thinking Charles Spencer and H&M).

It could potentially be a nightmare for H&M PR wise. A real Pandora's box moment for them.

They don't want privacy per se. They want control over their press coverage. They want adulation. They don't want anything negative said about them, and they want to live a, "Do as I say, not do as I do" life without criticism for being hypocrites.

Yes, that was, in effect, the basis for the ANL legal case: the paper printed stories that celebrities didn't like. There was no evidence of any illegal activity.

Harry thinks that he should be able to control anything he doesn't like, and objects when anyone disagrees. The Master of the Rolls pointed out the issue when he lost his appeal on security:
'having studied the detail of the extensive documentation, he
could not say that the Duke’s sense of grievance translated into a legal argument for the challenge to RAVEC’s decision.'

Excellent post mrsfinkel ! , I think many of us share this sentiment.

I didn't know that, Jeff! 😱

Excellent points

Agree - those of us who lived through those last couple of years of Diana's life don't remember her as a saintly figure.

The Metropolitan Police investigation into 300 silent phone calls was not 'vilifying Diana after her death'.

Absolutely 💯

Me neither poppy ! And I wish I hadn’t….thanks Burrell!!

Somehow I doubt that kind of thing would feature in a programme made by Harry...

No …..very doubtful…..