Ham pr disasters 44! Will there be karma? Or will the slippery mackerel of consequences pass them by?

[jeffgoldblum]

Still not bored , still interested, if you find this thread not for you please pass us by.

Well, you can't speak for everyone.

That’s the one ! Thank you .

Gaudeo audire id.

I’d read those!

John Crace in The Guardian? A spoof synopsis rather than a review, though.

Cross post.

Yes, it was marvellous. John Crace is one of the best writers there.

🫠

I enjoy the historical/cultural digressions. There are so many genuinely witty, intelligent, well-informed posters here, which is a large part of the reason I like to hang out on these threads (although HAM's antics are also entertaining in themselves!).

But I'm sure I would find the digressions equally interesting on a spin-off thread. I'm rather impressed that the HAM PR Disaster Series has become a big enough phenomenon to support spin-offs! HAM themselves would kill for this level of cultural momentum...

I like the way threads meander into digressions. Let's face it, everything you can say about the HAMS has been said and it's nice to have a bit of a break from it.

I enjoy the digressions, and often learn from them (and then quote them on other threads!).

I think the details about burning were upsetting for some, and others got frustrated by the Latin. I scrolled past some of the burning posts, and loved the Latin.

I think h will be just as vindictive against m, they will both be giving all the dirt they have on each other. It will be acrimonious and messy. H has more to lose as she will have tons of evidence collected over the years of drunken high rages, all the spite he has spewed about his family. It will be an extinction level event, total scorched earth.

John Crace in the Guardian? It should be open access.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/sep/23/peoples-earl-charles-spencer-swan-song-diana-my-sister-digested-read-john-crace

This is from an article in the DM re Ari Emmanuel's upcoming book. It's a comment from an oft quoted PR expert. I think it's quite a funny analogy , and does rather invite - who's the loose screw? ( Apologies if already posted in a link I have missed )

PR guru Mark Borkowski said earlier this month that the couple's return to Britain underlined their failure to achieve the success they had hoped for in the US.
He told the Daily Mail: 'It is a wounded brand. Leaving the US suggests Meghan has no power. No one is buying it any longer.
'The Meghan tragedy is that she has enjoyed unlimited access to amplification and, in reality, a steadily diminishing supply of affection.
'The Harry and Meghan brand isn't dead, but it has begun to resemble a glittering palace chandelier hanging by one screw: glamorous, expensive and increasingly unwise to stand underneath.'

ETA I'd read an historical thread @AutumnCrowAdInfinitumEtUltra with a dash of Latin - burnings too gory for me but I am sure I could scroll past those.

Charles Spencer was interviewed by Gayle King.
I transcribed some of the more hilarious bits...

On the subject of the Buckingham Palace response to the book he said:

"They have to gaslight. They have to such a pretend there's something wrong wrong with my mind or my memory - there's nothing wrong with either."

Which struck me as coming straight from the Panorama interview.

But the best bit comes from Harry, of course....

GK Have you talked to William and Harry before the book came out that you were going to do it or have you talked to them after? I'm curious about their reaction?

ES I decided not to have anyone involved in the books and nobody knew about it except my wife obviously and the publishers. I didn't tell any of the family until just before it was released publicly as a thing because I didn't want anyone to think, particularly with Harry who people know I had to stay in the summer, that he was in any way involved in this. It was really important to me that they weren’t.

GK And have you talked to them after the book?

ES I've told them both, yes I have.

GK Did they approve of the book?

ES I don't know about - I haven't asked about approval. Harry was sort of like “Is there anything in there that would be embarrassing to me?” I said absolutely not. I haven’t.. I'm very specific about people’s privacy.

GK No, It’s very complementary to both both William and Harry.

Classic. He dodged the question about whether W&H approved of the book
"I haven't asked for approval".

And Harry's response was to ask if there was anything in there that would be embarrassing to him!

Then CS rounds up that line of questioning with "I'm very specific about people’s privacy."

I'd have liked to be on the extension line when he made that call to William. If indeed he did call William.

Honestly, it's too funny. The straight faced lies and hypocrisy is olympic level.
In a competition between the three of them - well Harry isn't clever enough to win but it would certainly be a close finish between CS and Meghan.
(With Diana earning a posthumous award).

This is funny. The latest on the Amazon/Invictus story - apparently it's all down to Meghan being friends with Kris Jenner ...

https://archive.ph/eHo05

I think it may be like the Melania doc. The first week or so there were plenty of 'watchers' most of them from the media and some people simply out of curiosity. And one also has to suspect the 'watches' generated by their 'staff' and PR team. But then the people watching take a sharp drop off and it fades to nothing.

It was hilarious - cleverly pointing out that CS's favourite topic discussed in Swan Song is himself 😂

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/sep/23/peoples-earl-charles-spencer-swan-song-diana-my-sister-digested-read-john-crace

In the People interview, Spencer said he told his sisters and William and Harry about the book all at the same time, so he could have told them by text message rather than actually speaking to them over the phone.

"And Harry's response was to ask if there was anything in there that would be embarrassing to him!"

I guess he knows what his uncle can be like when talking about other people.

Oh dear - HAM's favourite venue in trouble

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/sep/29/soho-house-launches-investigation-out-of-date-food-shoreditch

I'm rather sceptical about the Amazon/Invictus story. Mostly because we've heard the "oh they're definitely been asked to be the face of/sponsored by..." before and it's then been made clear that no such thing has been considered by the other party.

But also, why on earth would any person do that only if "M appears" which seems to be coming in the story?
That sounds like wishful thinking on her part that she wants everyone to know that really she wouldn't wish to appear, but she is so indispensable that she has to put aside her own views for the public good.

The only reason why I can think that anyone would make that stipulation is because

1. They know that will give them more publicity - bad publicity, but still publicity
2. Because they want HAM to fall on their faces and look worse.

It's not something someone who wanted to honestly support Invictus or HAM would think was good for either of them.

I thought the Markle / Kardashian friendship had cooled after the birthday photos debacle?

I'm baffled too tbh. What's in it for anyone supporting these two car crashes??

Yes but then Meg sent a gift basket and some bizarre message to Kris on Mother's Day. Didn't publicly celebrate her own and Kris has enough offspring to celebrate her. As ever, weird

This is exactly the problem - they had “unlimited amplification” but the irony is there was nothing actually there to amplify.

They had no content as there’s really not much to them apart from the swanning about. 🦢

🤣 no of course he didn’t speak modern day cockney 🤣