Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
deaja

Oprah with Harry and Meghan: A CBS Primetime Special

Recommended Posts


9 hours ago, Enero said:

I’m glad she didn’t ask about her father. Because in essence his behavior and behavior of her half sister is nothing new. Many celebrities and public figures have had to deal with their family members selling them for a buck. Giving him any more attention would feed the troll. Basically they weren’t worth mentioning. 

I’m glad she focused on what we didn’t know which was the depth of the insanity going on behind the scenes at the palace. 

Quoting myself here. They did address her family in the CBS This Morning follow up. It wasn’t a long discussion but Meghan basically d pressed what we all knew. That she felt betrayed by her father’s behavior. And really didn’t have anything to say about Samantha. She made it very clear that she doesn’t know her and hasn’t seen her in 19 years. So again, nothing surprising here. 

She also stated that her mother has been dealing with all this with quiet dignity despite the tabloids attempting to get her to spill all of Meghan’s secrets. 

  • Like 10
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, cambridgeguy said:

They're not stupid - given their experience with the press they know exactly how this works.  They're also smart enough to know that criticizing Elizabeth herself is a bad move even though she (presumably) could have limited some of the crap they had to put up with. 

I am sure they are aware that criticizing Lizzie is a no go.  But even so, I still came away with the feeling that they really did feel a lot of warmth and affection toward her and still keep in touch with 'the grandmother' if not The Queen.  It was the same with Harry's interview with James Cordon, he spoke of her affectionately and mentioned they zoom her and she sent Archie a waffle make for Christmas.  It didn't come off as rehearsed.  He never paused, trying to be careful about his words when he spoke of her, like he did with Charles. 

  • Like 6
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post

Well, Oprah just said on CBS that Harry told her it was neither of his grandparents who raised the issue of the baby’s skin color. So that rules out Prince Philip.

  • Like 13
  • Useful 9

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Veronica said:

I remember shortly after her death hearing that  Diana had actually left Harry more because she knew William as the future king would have more than enough, but she wanted to make sure Harry would be okay. No idea how true that is, but that’s what I thought Harry meant when he brought up that his mother knew, or however he phrased it. 

This is true. I remember watching an interview with Diana where she said that William will be King but Harry would be the wealthy one because she was leaving him most of her money. 

1 hour ago, BW Manilowe said:

Charles was fugly? So was Diana’s wedding dress, at least in comparison to those of her now daughters-in-law (& maybe some other post-Diana BRF brides).

Her dress was fugly but it WAS the 80’s 😄

  • Like 6
  • Laugh 7

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Rickster said:

Well, Oprah just said on CBS that Harry told her it was neither of his grandparents who raised the issue of the baby’s skin color. So that rules out Prince Philip.

[clearing throat into my hand]

Ehem... Charles... Ehem. 

 

 

Wow. I know everyone dismisses Piers automatically, but one of his guests was Andrew Morton, and I'd forgotten what a blockhead this guy was. It was worth watching just to see that doddering old fool expose himself as irrelevant. 

And he also had a current "Royal Expert" on, who was enormously offended that the public marriage wasn't the "real" one. It was pathetic. The press didn't know that, and she appears horrified. 

  • Like 9
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

3 minutes ago, Kromm said:

 

And he also had a current "Royal Expert" on, who was enormously offended that the public marriage wasn't the "real" one. It was pathetic. The press didn't know that, and she appears horrified. 

I love that they had their own private marriage ceremony. So romantic! 

  • Like 23

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Snow Apple said:

My opinion is that Megan's thoughts of suicide reminded Harry of what his mother went through, and when Megan was refused help, that he needed to get his wife out of there.

I’m sure a lot of what Diana experienced informed a lot of Harry’s actions to get the hell out of Dodge

I continue to be surprised that Queen Elizabeth is described as such a warm grandmother given how cold she and Philip were to their kids. But at the same time, she’s the Monarch and if she had wanted and demanded that Harry and Meghan be treated better, including not getting cut off by Charles, I would think she could make it happen. But Harry seems to be able to separate Grandma from “the Monarch”. I do have to wonder if Elizabeth, being in her 90s, is letting Charles make more decisions for the Crown as she prepares him to take over (or if not, be the power behind the throne as William takes over)

  • Like 11
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Rickster said:

Well, Oprah just said on CBS that Harry told her it was neither of his grandparents who raised the issue of the baby’s skin color. So that rules out Prince Philip.

I stand corrected. I was hoping it was Phillip since he has a history of racism and maybe just making comments. 

It must be extra hurtful for Harry having a formal conversation with his own father about the color of his wife and child. I don't get it. Skin tone shouldn't matter but even if it does (again, it doesn't), Archie is never a contender for the throne. 

Megan must feel betrayed. First her own father, and now the act of Charles walking her down the aisle must feel like a sham.

  • Sad 5

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, bmoore4026 said:

OK, I could kick myself for missing this and I need to know: does anyone know if this will be rebroadcast?

An article on CNN.com about it says it’s available on CBS.com.

If you’re in England & somehow haven’t seen it yet, the same CNN.com article says it’s on ITV at 9PM local time tonight.

Bolded for emphasis.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, DanaK said:

I continue to be surprised that Queen Elizabeth is described as such a warm grandmother given how cold she and Philip were to their kids. But at the same time, she’s the Monarch and if she had wanted and demanded that Harry and Meghan be treated better, including not getting cut off by Charles, I would think she could make it happen.

She's been the head of that family for 60+ years, so some responsibility for the climate in her firm has to rest on her shoulders. She's getting on a bit now, but between watching her sister and children suffer from the constraints, she had ample time to do some weeding.

I think its quite smart to not reveal who made that racists baby comments. Makes it impossible to come out with a straight denial. Let it dangle over their heads. If it was Charles or William, future heads of the Commonwealth, that would be quite explosive.

Edited by Aulty
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Growsonwalls said:

I'm so disturbed by the suicidal ideation shaming that people think is okay "just because you're rich."

The people who are not disturbed by it, don't believe it.  Credibility is gone when you constantly play the victim.  If she had not married who she married (because he was a British Prince, not because he is a white man), few people would know who she was or cared.  She did not get all this press when her sole claim to fame was Suits.

And her husband is whining because his security is no longer covered by the British tax payer.  The British tax payer paid $70+M for his wedding and he inherited $14+ M from his mother.  Get a job, Harry!  Like everyone else has to do.  Not a fan of his either.  Once an adult, he is no longer the victim that had to been forced to walk behind his mother's coffin as a boy.

Edited by Kid
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Growsonwalls said:

You can't not believe suicidal ideation. It's actually a huge thing that it drives more people to suicide. This is very offensive, FYI. I know from personal experience.

I don't believe HER!  She has lost all credibilty with me which is what my second statement states.  

I know from personal experience, as well.  

Edited by Kid
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

How would Meghan have known how her family behaves towards the Queen in private unless someone closely connected to the family told her? I doubt that's in Google.

In terms of titles, if the Queen could issues a Letter of Patent superseding her grandfather's decree so that George's younger siblings would have titles equivalent to his, she could do the same to give his (or her since George was -6 months old when she did it) cousin some minor title. If that is what is needed to give Archie security.

But I blame her less than I blame Charles. If he is the one paying for everyone's security, it makes sense that he would yank it from Eugenie and Beatrix who at this point are grown women who should be making their own way in the world. But Archie is his infant grandson. He's a billionaire, if he can set up trust funds for Camilla's adult children, he can help make sure that his own grandchild is safe.

Suddenly yanking Harry's security while he was in Canada was a dick move. So is refusing to take his calls.

Also a very stupid one. The Queen is beloved, Charles isn't and should be even less so after this. He needs all the public support he can get if he wants to be king.

1 hour ago, Rickster said:

Well, Oprah just said on CBS that Harry told her it was neither of his grandparents who raised the issue of the baby’s skin color. So that rules out Prince Philip.

Charles and Andrew are where I'm putting my money. Andrew seems like a parasitic jerk.

1 hour ago, Kromm said:

he also had a current "Royal Expert" on, who was enormously offended that the public marriage wasn't the "real" one. It was pathetic. The press didn't know that, and she appears horrified. 

I love the meta of that. They had a private marriage for themselves. The public one was about being part of the Royal Family which means putting on a big show for the public. Queen Elizabeth wanted her own wedding to be austere because the country was struggling to recover from WWII. Her ministers persuaded her that the country needed a grand show. Ordinary women sent her their dress coupons for her dress.

Receipts: the Buzzfeed article comparing how the press treats Kate vs how they treat Meghan. And the off-the-shoulder dress scandal.

  • Like 16
  • Useful 2
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post

On a completely different note, I found Meghan’s vocal tic of ending most sentences with “Right?” very annoying and distracting. Right?

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 7

Share this post


Link to post

Here's an interview with the "Royal Expert/Royal Editor/Journalist" who actually wrote the "Kate in Tears" newspaper article.  Note other topics are discussed first and they don't get into this until around 6:40.

Make of it what you will. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Useful 2
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Here's an interview with the "Royal Expert/Royal Editor/Journalist" who actually wrote the "Kate in Tears" newspaper article.  Note other topics are discussed first and they don't get into this until around 6:40.

Make of it what you will. 

 

LOL. That woman is *spinning.

It's also clear that she doesn't understand the difference between Kate and Sophie joining the family versus Meghan. Hmm, I wonder why?

  • Like 8
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, PepSinger said:

LOL. That woman is *spinning.

It's also clear that she doesn't understand the difference between Kate and Sophie joining the family versus Meghan. Hmm, I wonder why?

I love her insistence that the article HAS to be true because nobody contacted her debating it, when Meghan's precise point was that nobody was WILLING to debate it. The nonsense about there being various different people in various hierarchies was word salad. Complete nonsense. The later part that basically boiled down to "maybe Kate cried too" also seems to have been engineered to deliberately miss Meghan's point too: that Meghan, at her WEDDING, was allowed to take the blame. Left swinging in the wind.  Miss Royal Editor ignored that aspect totally with her word salad. 

Edited by Kromm
  • Like 24

Share this post


Link to post

12 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I was surprised by this.  My impression had always been that whatever his issues with Diana, he was generally a decent parent to his kids. 

A decent parent doesn't force his two young boys to walk behind their mother's funeral cortege because of his fears someone would take a potshot at him. 

  • Like 10
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post

Until this interview, I never thought that there was any talk of Meghan continuing to work as an actress. 

I have a more sinister view of why some at the palace wanted Meghan to continue on Suits, she would have stayed in Canada filming for months at a time, there would have been endless tabloid articles linking her to other men, and I bet the hope was that H & M would split, and he would move on to someone more suitable to the RF (yes, meaning all Caucasian).     

I think since Meghan was married to the previous husband for a while, that the RF hoped she wasn't going to be having children, since she didn't have any before marrying Harry.   

Edited by CrazyInAlabama
  • Like 17
  • Useful 5
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, WinnieWinkle said:

It surprised me!  I don't really read much royal news though so I guess I was still thinking back to the wedding when Charles walked Meghan down the aisle and seemed so kind to her mother.  I'd like to think his behavior then was the real Charles but I am thinking, no, it probably wasn't.

Yes, he really seemed to welcome her to the family.

"Seemed to" being the operative phrase. With the cameras rolling and the whole world watching. 

And yet Charles had the gall to often accuse Diana of photo opping with the boys. 

  • Like 13
  • Useful 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Umbelina said:

That the Palace gives parties for the press!  Hosted by royals!

So does the White House. I don't find this unusual in the least. 

7 hours ago, GaT said:
9 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Unless I missed it when I was reading comments here and watching the interview, did the question about Meghan's "bullying" of the emails at 5:00 am to staff make it in? I distinctly remember seeing that question in the previews/trailers for the special.

It wasn't covered, maybe it will be part of the stuff that's shown tomorrow on CBS This Morning.

I'm pretty sure Oprah made a comment toward the end that the bullying accusations came out after the interview had been taped, so it wouldn't be covered.

  • Like 6
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, CountryGirl said:

A decent parent doesn't force his two young boys to walk behind their mother's funeral cortege because of his fears someone would take a potshot at him. 

I always thought this was his motivation as well.  Except, I thought he was more worried about nasty comments which the public would not make with the boys there.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Kid said:

I always thought this was his motivation as well.  Except, I thought he was more worried about nasty comments which the public would not make with the boys there.  

I was covering both meanings of potshots there. 

And ITA with the comment upthread that he had and has zero issues with throwing his own offspring to the wolves if it makes him look better.

  • Like 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

11 minutes ago, CrazyInAlabama said:

I have a more sinister view of why some at the palace wanted Meghan to continue on Suits, she would have stayed in Canada filming for months at a time, there would have been endless tabloid articles linking her to other men, and I bet the hope was that H & M would split, and he would move on to someone more suitable to the RF (yes, meaning all Caucasian).   

Bingo

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, PepSinger said:

Why was there confusion? Her father repeatedly talked to the press and released a private letter to the public. Her father earned that dismissal.

And the press deliberately sat on the story for a month and chose to go public with it right before the wedding.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, BW Manilowe said:

If you’re in England & somehow haven’t seen it yet, the same CNN.com article says it’s on ITV at 9PM local time tonight.

First of all, I'm not sure what you mean by 'somehow' - it hasn't aired in the UK yet, so it is perfectly reasonable for viewers in the UK to have not seen the interview. They have no legal means to do so until it airs. Second of all, I suspect you mean UK rather than England - the two are not interchangeable, and there is more to the UK than England alone.

39 minutes ago, statsgirl said:

if the Queen could issues a Letter of Patent superseding her grandfather's decree so that George's younger siblings would have titles equivalent to his, she could do the same to give his (or her since George was -6 months old when she did it) cousin some minor title. If that is what is needed to give Archie security.

Minor titles don't come with security attached. He needed the HRH for that.

  • Like 4
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Runningwild said:

I disagree. I think they do want us to feel sorry for them and they don’t have to make these deals. They could just choose to live more simply. 

I think people underestimate how expensive it is to "live simply" too. Yes, they have millions of dollars. But money goes fast when you need to pay for a place to live, groceries, a car, a kid, doctor visits, etc. Even before you get to needing to pay for security. I don't want to say "ohhh, poor little rich boy" because I personally have no idea what it's like to have a lot of money or walk away from a lot of money but as a boring regular person, living is expensive!

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

I might have forgotten exactly how the point about the baby's skin color was made last night, but I think the context in which is was said to Harry would be important. It could have been made as a profoundly racist comment, or, especially coming from a royal family member without sufficient sensitivity training, it could have been made somewhat innocently, like speculating on whether Archie would have red hair. I don't think we got that context last night.

I also have to say, for someone in their mid thirties who was college educated, had a career, was married before, had access to a tremendous amount of information about the royal family and the UK tabloids, as well as the very public discussions about Princess Diana's experiences, I find Megan comes across as unbelievably naive about what she was getting herself into, if her public persona is accurate.

 

  • Like 18
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, PepSinger said:

Diana still looking out for her baby -- even in death. 😪

That is was her money that allowed them to escape is really resonating with me.

  • Like 21

Share this post


Link to post

11 minutes ago, Rickster said:

I might have forgotten exactly how the point about the baby's skin color was made last night, but I think the context in which is was said to Harry would be important. It could have been made as a profoundly racist comment, or, especially coming from a royal family member without sufficient sensitivity training, it could have been made somewhat innocently, like speculating on whether Archie would have red hair. I don't think we got that context last night.

I'm watching a Loose Women clip where (inevitably) there's a split between the older, whiter ladies saying something like that, and the black panelist, who (in my opinion correctly) pointed out that Meghan linked the concern to whether or not Archie got a title and protection. 

To me, the undertone was if he'd eventually be allowed to perform Royal Family duties, while looking black. No title = a surefire way to make sure he wouldn't. 

Edited by Kromm
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, MerBearHou said:

Again, I don’t believe any of it and I think Harry is a weak, easily led, damaged man and Meghan is a very savvy conniver.  It has nothing to do with race.  So no, I’m not victim blaming because I don’t think for one second that Meghan is a victim, except in her own mind when things don’t go her way.  I’m out.  

Do you have proof to back up what you said?  You are asking Meghan and Harry to back up what they said?

  • Like 16
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, MerBearHou said:

Again, I don’t believe any of it and I think Harry is a weak, easily led, damaged man and Meghan is a very savvy conniver.  It has nothing to do with race.  So no, I’m not victim blaming because I don’t think for one second that Meghan is a victim, except in her own mind when things don’t go her way.  I’m out.  

A savvy conniver would have figured out a way to stay in England and bask in the privileges that go along with being part of the Royal Family.

  • Like 13
  • Useful 2
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

9 minutes ago, CountryGirl said:

Diana was royal-adjacent her entire life and she was still totally unprepared for marrying into that family. All the Googling in the world couldn't have prepared Meghan. 

Too bad the Crown didn't come out 5-10 years earlier - then everyone would know!  I can easily see underestimating it, especially since Meghan had been in Hollywood for a while (if I could handle that, I can handle this sort of thing).

  • Like 4
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, CountryGirl said:

A decent parent doesn't force his two young boys to walk behind their mother's funeral cortege because of his fears someone would take a potshot at him. 

Your source?

I have read that it was Philip who *encouraged* Harry to do it, by saying that he would repent it if he didn't, and by promising to walk beside him. In any case, it's the royal custom for men. As a boy Philip walked behind her sister's cortege.

All in all, I think the tabloids and the public should blame itself by wanting Diana's funeral be public when both the Queen and the Spencer family originally had no other plan than it would be a private ceremony.

  • Like 7
  • Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Rickster said:

I might have forgotten exactly how the point about the baby's skin color was made last night, but I think the context in which is was said to Harry would be important. It could have been made as a profoundly racist comment, or, especially coming from a royal family member without sufficient sensitivity training, it could have been made somewhat innocently, like speculating on whether Archie would have red hair. I don't think we got that context last night.

I also have to say, for someone in their mid thirties who was college educated, had a career, was married before, had access to a tremendous amount of information about the royal family and the UK tabloids, as well as the very public discussions about Princess Diana's experiences, I find Megan comes across as unbelievably naive about what she was getting herself into, if her public persona is accurate.

 

Context for a racist comment like that actually doesn't matter - just as Archie's skin tone should not matter. 

5 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

Both Meghan and Harry said a couple of times that the entire family was welcoming and warm very early on.  So I believe that the Charles we saw at the wedding was probably real.

But then they both also talked about things changing.   My thought is that several things happened concurrently that probably contributed to whatever changed Charles. 

Harry tried to explain (a little bumblingly) about the symbiotic nature of the press and the Firm.  There are levels of control and access that they exert over the press (hello, Andrew! and William's alleged affair being quickly suppressed), but they are also aware that the press has a lot of power over how they are perceived and how to shape the narrative around you.  So they are also a little wary of the press  They use it but know that it can turn around and bite them. and don't forget, Tabloid press is the press in GB. And if we didn't already know, what the public sees is very different with goes on inside. Probably one of the reasons they were so freaked by this interview because it was not going to be a narrative they could control the public perception on.

I think that after the Oceania tour where we got the one-two punch of Meghan announcing her pregnancy and being so very well received Buckingham Palace started to get a bit nervous. I am guessing that among the courtiers and BP staff there might have been some fear that H&M could end up eclipsing Will and Kate.  And that just would not do.  At the time the terrible nitpicky stories about Meghan started coming out, people had always pointed to the courtiers as the culprits.  I formed a picture of a group that is absolutely dedicated to preserving the monarchy and it is  William and Kate who they want poised as the future glamorous young royals  Not H&M.  So they had to take them down a notch. It is all about molding perception.

But you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas and now the constant barrage of negative stories have taken on a life of their own complete with death threats and thinly veiled and flagrantly unveiled racism.  The amplification of all the nastiness onto social media has upped the game in a way even BP may not have anticipated.  So now they begin to believe the fiction they themselves helped to write, hence the telling Meghan to 'lay low' even though she hadn't made a public appearance in months.
 

I understand H&M's incredulity because Meghan was poised to be a good ambassador for the RF and could have brought some good will for them and they could have used her to if nothing else, cynically, make themselves look more woke and on top of a changing social landscape. But they threw her and her potential away for stupid, jealous reasons and now they have an even bigger PR problem.

Not sure if it was that complex.  I think the issues began when Meghan got pregnant, and the mixed blood would began to show.  

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

I also noticed that the tabs got really vile when it was announced Meghan was preggo. I think a lot of people will swear up and down that they're not racist ... until a mixed race baby comes along. 

  • Like 18
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, mochamajesty said:

Not sure if it was that complex.  I think the issues began when Meghan got pregnant, and the mixed blood would began to show.  

Except, that would presume a level of naivete on the part of Charles et al from the beginning that there would be no children. When in fact the very first thought would have been about kids.  When my husband and I (interracial marriage) announced we were getting married the first thing out of a almost everybody's mouth was to ask if we were going to have kids.

That is why I think if Charles changed it had more to do with just the pregnancy itself and more the reaction to it and the way the press had already begun to turn.

Edited by DearEvette
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, DearEvette said:

Both Meghan and Harry said a couple of times that the entire family was welcoming and warm very early on.  So I believe that the Charles we saw at the wedding was probably real.

But then they both also talked about things changing.   My thought is that several things happened concurrently that probably contributed to whatever changed Charles. 

Harry tried to explain (a little bumblingly) about the symbiotic nature of the press and the Firm.  There are levels of control and access that they exert over the press (hello, Andrew! and William's alleged affair being quickly suppressed), but they are also aware that the press has a lot of power over how they are perceived and how to shape the narrative around you.  So they are also a little wary of the press  They use it but know that it can turn around and bite them. and don't forget, Tabloid press is the press in GB. And if we didn't already know, what the public sees is very different with goes on inside. Probably one of the reasons they were so freaked by this interview because it was not going to be a narrative they could control the public perception on.

I think that after the Oceania tour where we got the one-two punch of Meghan announcing her pregnancy and being so very well received Buckingham Palace started to get a bit nervous. I am guessing that among the courtiers and BP staff there might have been some fear that H&M could end up eclipsing Will and Kate.  And that just would not do.  At the time the terrible nitpicky stories about Meghan started coming out, people had always pointed to the courtiers as the culprits.  I formed a picture of a group that is absolutely dedicated to preserving the monarchy and it is  William and Kate who they want poised as the future glamorous young royals  Not H&M.  So they had to take them down a notch. It is all about molding perception.

But you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas and now the constant barrage of negative stories have taken on a life of their own complete with death threats and thinly veiled and flagrantly unveiled racism.  The amplification of all the nastiness onto social media has upped the game in a way even BP may not have anticipated.  So now they begin to believe the fiction they themselves helped to write, hence the telling Meghan to 'lay low' even though she hadn't made a public appearance in months.
 

I understand H&M's incredulity because Meghan was poised to be a good ambassador for the RF and could have brought some good will for them and they could have used her to if nothing else, cynically, make themselves look more woke and on top of a changing social landscape. But they threw her and her potential away for stupid, jealous reasons and now they have an even bigger PR problem.

I wish I could like this post more than once.  I think you hit the nail on the head.  Meghan became a threat to the Firm after her tour, and they circled their wagons to protect their future--William and Kate.  

I also see Harry and Meghan being unwilling to play the same games with the press as the rest of the Royal Family.  Instead of selling stories unflattering to William, Kate, Charles, etc., they wanted to set the record straight.  Again, the Firm is not going to allow that to happen.  

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size