Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
GHScorpiosRule

The Royals: All the People Who Unironically Wear Robes and Crowns

Recommended Posts

In the picture in Camilla’s study, I would really like to know what it says on the picture of the squirrel (directly behind C’s head.)

 

Love that Camilla is wearing jeans in the anniversary picture.  They look like just a regular English countryside couple.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, phoenics said:

Thanks to everyone who chimed in on my royal/peerage question... but one more question...

 

About this - so you know how Princess Caroline is an HRH because she married HRH Prince Ernst of Hanover?  Doesn't she now outrank everyone else in her princely family - except the sovereign (Albert)?  I read that when she married Ernst (who had to get permission from QEII to marry her) that she outranked her brother at the time.  Is that true?

So that means HRH outranks HSH except when that HSH is sovereign/monarch?

I may be wrong but I think it depends on how you are defining rank. If you are talking about perception of who is more important you might say that because a kingdom has been viewed as “greater” than a principality. Although Prince Ernst’s HRH comes from a defunct kingdom and is now honorary so I find it a stretch to say the he and Caroline outrank anyone based on that alone. 

In terms of actual authority you really can’t compare rank from different countries like that. 

Edited by Dani
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

The one I thought of immediately was that it used to be the tagline for Cialis.  Maybe it was "when the moment's right" but still.

Your comment just gave me a seriously needed laugh. Thinking about cookies and Cialis in the same sentence...thank you. 😂😂😂😂😂

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, phoenics said:

Thanks to everyone who chimed in on my royal/peerage question... but one more question...

 

About this - so you know how Princess Caroline is an HRH because she married HRH Prince Ernst of Hanover?  Doesn't she now outrank everyone else in her princely family - except the sovereign (Albert)?  I read that when she married Ernst (who had to get permission from QEII to marry her) that she outranked her brother at the time.  Is that true?

So that means HRH outranks HSH except when that HSH is sovereign/monarch?

You can't compare between countries, each country has its own rules. The Queen does not out-rank the President of the United States just because she is HRH & he/she isn't, HRH does not out-rank HSH, they are all heads of state.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Well, looks like Harry & Meghan didn't think of everything

archewellfoundation.com is now owned by a troll

Quote

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced Tuesday they were planning a new nonprofit called Archewell Foundation, but apparently they didn't lock down at least one potential URL for a website. Instead, a cybersquatter scooped up archewellfoundation.com -- but there's nothing charitable about it now.

The anonymous owner linked it to Kanye's "Gold Digger" music video on YouTube. The troll's intent seems pretty clear ... passing judgment on Meghan's intent in marrying Harry.

 

  • Sad 9

Share this post


Link to post

Well that took a turn. I'm now hoping the "Archewell" thing was a feint and in a while they'll announce what the real name is. Because for sure by now they're aware of how much "Archewell" lends itself to jokes that would likely distract from their goals.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

11 hours ago, Frost said:

I think Louis looks incredibly like his great-grandfather, King George VI.

The Queen is Prince Louis of Cambridge's great-grandmother. Hence, her late father,George VI, is one of the boy's eight great-great-grandfathers!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, phoenics said:

Thanks to everyone who chimed in on my royal/peerage question... but one more question...

 

About this - so you know how Princess Caroline is an HRH because she married HRH Prince Ernst of Hanover?  Doesn't she now outrank everyone else in her princely family - except the sovereign (Albert)?  I read that when she married Ernst (who had to get permission from QEII to marry her) that she outranked her brother at the time.  Is that true?

So that means HRH outranks HSH except when that HSH is sovereign/monarch?

Technically, yes - Caroline as an HRH outranks the non-reigning HSH in her family. She took up his HRH because it outranked her HSH - a woman will take the rank of her husband if his rank is higher than hers. But that's really going into technicalities. I don't think it's given much weight, especially as the House of Hanover no longer reigns over anything. Monaco recognizes Ernst August as a Prince and HRH, but the style had no legal standing.

Taking it further, His/Her Imperial Highness (as in Japan) would outrank an HRH. But this ranking system is left over from a time when kingdoms/empires were dominant on the world stage, territories fell under their control, and their marriages and alliances took a closer look at the status of those being used for those purposes. Now it just seems to be sovereigns, their heirs, and the rest.

Heads of State are equal, but there is an order of precedence when they are all thrown together. Queen Elizabeth comes first among them simply because she's held her office for the longest time. 'Emperor' technically outranks 'Queen,' going by the rules of the old world, but in modern times, Emperor Naruhito would be among the last in the order of precedence among Heads of State because he just got that role last year. You can see this order of precedence in action during the enthronement of Naruhito - Carl Gustav of Sweden (became king in 1973) was seated between the Sultan of Brunei (1967) and the king of Eswatini (1986) during the ceremony. Those same people were seated at the main table during the banquet, along with king of Lesotho (1996), I believe, with CG and the Sultan being next to the Emperor and Empress. If Queen Elizabeth were in attendance, she would have bumped everyone down one notch and would have the place next to the Emperor (with the Sultan next to the Empress). Everyone's equal, but precedence is determined by how long a HoS has been in that position.

 

Edited by Luciano
  • Like 4
  • Useful 5

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

Because for sure by now they're aware of how much "Archewell" lends itself to jokes that would likely distract from their goals.

Can you clue me in?  I'm not in on the jokes apparently.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, SuprSuprElevated said:

Can you clue me in?  I'm not in on the jokes apparently.

Archway cookies, Snackwell cookies. It's a name totally lacking gravitas.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Luciano said:

Technically, yes - Caroline as an HRH outranks the non-reigning HSH in her family. She took up his HRH because it outranked her HSH - a woman will take the rank of her husband if his rank is higher than hers. But that's really going into technicalities. I don't think it's given much weight, especially as the House of Hanover no longer reigns over anything. Monaco recognizes Ernst August as a Prince and HRH, but the style had no legal standing.

Taking it further, His/Her Imperial Highness (as in Japan) would outrank an HRH. But this ranking system is left over from a time when kingdoms/empires were dominant on the world stage, territories fell under their control, and their marriages and alliances took a closer look at the status of those being used for those purposes. Now it just seems to be sovereigns, their heirs, and the rest.

Heads of State are equal, but there is an order of precedence when they are all thrown together. Queen Elizabeth comes first among them simply because she's held her office for the longest time. 'Emperor' technically outranks 'Queen,' going by the rules of the old world, but in modern times, Emperor Naruhito would be among the last in the order of precedence among Heads of State because he just got that role last year. You can see this order of precedence in action during the enthronement of Naruhito - Carl Gustav of Sweden (became king in 1973) was seated between the Sultan of Brunei (1967) and the king of Eswatini (1986) during the ceremony. Those same people were seated at the main table during the banquet, along with king of Lesotho (1996), I believe, with CG and the Sultan being next to the Emperor and Empress. If Queen Elizabeth were in attendance, she would have bumped everyone down one notch and would have the place next to the Emperor (with the Sultan next to the Empress). Everyone's equal, but precedence is determined by how long a HoS has been in that position.

 

Wow - Thank you so much for your response!  I learned so much.  I'm gonna go and think of more questions - your responses are just so informative.  This explains quite a lot about how royalty and all of this works and why as Americans, some of it feels so foreign.  

If seniority can trump "rank", then I think I understand a little bit better how difficult it is for outsiders to "marry into" royalty... and the more of an outsider you are joining in, the harder it must be. Especially if you have "ideas", lol.

This also makes it clear how staff within these royal establishments are taught to play by the seniority rules, even amongst themselves... kinda like on The Crown - how QEII wanted to have her same personal secretary, but couldn't because there was the rule of seniority and without that things fall apart amongst them (keeping order, I guess).

As an American I "get" it, but it's hard to reconcile.  I can see how a fresh face bursting with new ideas (that really are majorly successful) could rattle people because "that's not how it's done" - but to be honest, some of that is also envy and jealousy.  I see this in corporate work all the time.  Folks who have been in their roles for years... and then a fresh new face comes in and takes everything and everyone by storm... because 1) their ideas WORK and 2) the senior folks had become stale and stagnant in their thinking...   It's the old blockbuster mentality vs netflix.

I get that part of the charm of royalty and the tradition of it is that it doesn't move or change but I don't know how realistic that really is nowadays.  The Windsors, for example, have had to grow, change and adapt - or else they wouldn't be here.  But at the same time, they have to project "sameness" and "constancy".  

What a tightrope.

The only thing that still bothers me though - at least about BRF - is that there was all this pushback against Meghan for "having ideas"... everything she did was criticized... but the moment she and Harry left, BRF snapped up the "idea" talent so they could have that "freshness" too.  It's like the ideas and freshness are good, but not when it came from Meghan.  That's ... well ... there's a word for that.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

My issue with Archewell is that it clearly feels like a node to their child. But what if they have another kid?  Will they name it something with "Well" in the name?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

6 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

My issue with Archewell is that it clearly feels like a node to their child. But what if they have another kid?  Will they name it something with "Well" in the name?

Based on their statement, Archie's name actually came from the "Arche" thing - apparently that was the inspiration for his name.  And not only that, it was the inspiration for their whole work ethic and how they approached their work. 

As to kids, maybe they won't have more children, or maybe they'll do something else for that child.  

Edited by phoenics
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The monarchy doesn't work like the corporate world and many times, it's been always been done that way because we've tried all of the other ways and this is the one that works best. (I recently had to suffer through a "fresh face/new ideas/throw out the old" person and it was more of a "I have no idea how this business really works and don't understand how everything interlocks and all of my fresh new ideas would actually add eleven steps to the back end of a procedure just to eliminate four on the front end.")

As to the seating and order of precedence, I read a fabulous book regarding the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand who had married Sophie of Hohenberg for love. Franz Josef and his protocol officers weaponized the order of precedence in everything to try to force Sophie out/punish Franz Ferdinand. The chapters on how she wasn't even allowed to enter a ballroom until everyone else had entered...it's just fascinating. I'm not sure any royal bride, who is loved by her husband, has ever been treated as poorly as she was. 

  • Like 8
  • Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post

How do you even pronounce Archewell?  A hard /k/ similar to the original Greek, or stick with the /ch/ sound like in Archie?  And do you pronounce the 'e' and make it 3 syllables - Arch-e-well, or is it just  2?  And couldn't they have found a Greek-root counterpart for "well"?  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ancslove said:

How do you even pronounce Archewell?  A hard /k/ similar to the original Greek, or stick with the /ch/ sound like in Archie?  And do you pronounce the 'e' and make it 3 syllables - Arch-e-well, or is it just  2?  And couldn't they have found a Greek-root counterpart for "well"?  

I think what's hard is that the press intrusion forced them to reveal details about this, but not the full rollout they had planned for much later after everything had recovered from Covid-19... so we aren't getting the full picture, just bits and blobs because they 1) weren't ready to release details yet and 2) they still don't want to overshadow what's going on with the coronavirus.

Also - they explained the meaning behind "well" too:  https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32058518/meghan-markle-prince-harry-charity-archewell/

I expect we will get more details once they are ready to release.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, BlackberryJam said:

The monarchy doesn't work like the corporate world and many times, it's been always been done that way because we've tried all of the other ways and this is the one that works best. (I recently had to suffer through a "fresh face/new ideas/throw out the old" person and it was more of a "I have no idea how this business really works and don't understand how everything interlocks and all of my fresh new ideas would actually add eleven steps to the back end of a procedure just to eliminate four on the front end.")

 

I think the monarchy works exactly like the corporate world - it just has more rules, protocols and it's been around much longer than any corporation.  They don't call it The Firm, for nothing.  It's just worse than most corporate environments because whole lives are lived and worked in it.

But my point is that in Meghan's case - her ideas did work and she was hugely successful to the general public before the press launched years long propaganda campaigns against her.  The fact that when asked several pages back, many royal watchers on this thread didn't even know about the success of the cookbook, vogue issue (and all the records it broke) and smartset collection success tells a lot.  Because propaganda buried it.  And in some cases (like twitter), when some who just *hate* her get prodded as to why, they can't really pinpoint why - except for the tabloid articles that have been debunked or are examples of when Meghan was bashed for the exact same behavior as other royals like Sophie or Kate.

At the root of a lot of that is racism - racism isn't just about burning crosses, etc.. it's about extending the benefit of the doubt and privilege to white counterparts for the same things that black people are excoriated for.  Some of that racism is unconscious - some of it not.  But the root of it is why propaganda campaigns against MM have been so successful.  It's not because of her actions - not when you realize none of the other royals had to be so perfect and even those that weren't still aren't getting such treatment.  Even Camilla suddenly enjoyed a new "perfection" when the tabloids pitted her against Meghan for a non-issue.

I also disagree that the monarchy has tried all the different ways and this is what worked best.  That's just not true.  The monarchy exists because of CENTURIES of imperialism and colonialism that subjugated peoples of color and destroyed lives in order for this one family to remain in power.  Let's not sugarcoat this - because this is at the root of a LOT of the drama we've seen play out.  I think I can agree that the things the monarchy does to remain in existence work in order to keep it going and it will sacrifice whatever it needs to sacrifice in order to remain afloat.

But best ideas?  No.

The fact that BRF is now snapping up H&M's old talent at such high levels proves that the old ways weren't sacrosanct and that at the core, it was Meghan they hated, not her ideas or even her way of doing things. 

It makes the monarchy seem rather small, imo, and petty, and that's not a good look. 

Excoriating the black one for her fresh ideas and approach (hello the leaks were coming from inside the palace) and then appropriating them for themselves just looks like BRF isn't done practicing colonialism like they wanted everyone to believe.  

MM's short duration as a senior royal just crystallized for me that BRF is still an institution entrenched in imperialism and colonialism, just in a slightly different way.  That's a shame.

 

Edited by phoenics
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

They don't have a history of success with their media roll outs, so maybe this one was better planned and got gummed up a bit.

It seems like all stories are CoViD stories right now. It would have been better to not respond at all. A new projection would have pushed this info off the front page in 8 minutes or less.

In better news,

Here's Anne looking cheeky.

 

and an old past Easter pic from Mary.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I can only have so much sympathy for press leaks buggering up detailed official announcements, unfortunately.  And I'm reaching the end of that sympathy for Harry and Meghan.  They can't blame the Palace this time.  COVID is taking up al the airtime, so if they had just kept quiet until they were ready to launch, any stories about possible new trademarks or foundation names might have blown over or gotten lost in the more serious news coverage.  But they gave the rumors credence, and now the coverage goes from idle rumors to full news.  Let the press run with it until all the details are ready to be rolled out.  And don't publicize/verify before everything is in place - you'd think they would have learned after their Sussex Royal website jumped the gun.

As for "Archewell", yeah I saw their explanation.  But personally, I think taking a Greek root (arche) and pairing it with a Germanic root (well) is a bit clumsy and awkward.  That's just personal preference, though!  If they are committed to this linguistic atrocity, I'll get used to it!  (Um, that was a joke, btw.)  I still want to know how to say it!

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, BlackberryJam said:

It would have been better to not respond at all. A new projection would have pushed this info off the front page in 8 minutes or less.

The tabloids are dying - their meal tickets have left the country - but they still are desperate to squeeze every last cent they can get from manufactured outrage drama that they can, so you can be sure that even if H&M had been silent, the press would have twisted this into something disparaging against H&M.

I do find it hilarious though how the tabloid folks are all over twitter begging folks to buy their rags and calling it "journalism".  It is NOT journalism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, phoenics said:

The tabloids are dying - their meal tickets have left the country - but they still are desperate to squeeze every last cent they can get from manufactured outrage drama that they can, so you can be sure that even if H&M had been silent, the press would have twisted this into something disparaging against H&M.

Sincerely, why does that bother them so much?  Say nothing, let it die out - as it will very quickly in this climate - and don't get forced into doing things half-assed because the tabloids are mean.  Take a page from Beyonce's playbook - she didn't even confirm she was married until months if not years after the fact.  I think the excuse of "the press will be disparaging" only goes so far, and H&M are nearing the end.  It's just not professional.

  • Like 5
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, ancslove said:

I can only have so much sympathy for press leaks buggering up detailed official announcements, unfortunately.  And I'm reaching the end of that sympathy for Harry and Meghan.  

That feels wholly unfair - and it wasn't a "leak".  That part of your comment was inaccurate - it wasn't a leak from anyone that led to this.

Before Coronavirus became such a concern, H&M were planning to announce their new endeavor on March 31.  So they had to file for trademarks and patents prior to that. 

The Telegraph reporter was monitoring the applications (they are publicly available by law and there is no way to hide a filing) and found theirs.  She went to them for comment to confirm her story and they gave her a statement, and then asked that attention go back to Covid-19.

The "rollout" is clumsy because it was never intended to be a rollout once Covid-19 happened, forcing them to change their original March 31 release plans and delay rolling out Archewell until later this summer or fall (whenever we recover from the pandemic).

I don't understand how one can't have sympathy for a situation like that, but to each his own I guess.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ancslove said:

Sincerely, why does that bother them so much?  Say nothing, let it die out - as it will very quickly in this climate - and don't get forced into doing things half-assed because the tabloids are mean.  Take a page from Beyonce's playbook - she didn't even confirm she was married until months if not years after the fact.  I think the excuse of "the press will be disparaging" only goes so far, and H&M are nearing the end.  It's just not professional.

The press doesn't treat Beyonce the way it treats H&M.  The press has never ever just let things drop when it comes to H&M. In fact, some stories they dug out of mothballs to attack them for.  Why - in the beginning, they dug through years old posts of Meghan's on instragram to attack her.  Nothing in the 4+ years of covering H&M have the press demonstrated that they are capable of letting "it die out" when it comes to H&M.  They press on and pile on because it gets them clicks - regardless of what H&M do.

Meghan's maternity leave time was a prime example of how even doing NOTHING, they would attack her.

So I just don't think this "they should have said nothing!" argument bears out, based on historical data to date.

I don't get the "unprofessional" accusation either - doesn't jibe.

Also - as to why it bothers them so much... I dunno... but seeing 80+ articles a day bashing you for things you didn't even do with made up lies and propaganda - that's probably upsetting.  Especially if it's for your "job".  No one likes to be maligned and honestly I don't feel comfortable maligning anyone for how they choose to fight back against a propaganda war against them.  Like Jesse Williams said, "if you don't have a hand in our oppression, you don't have a say in our solution."  So I just can't - won't - fault them or disparage them for choosing to speak up to try to protect what's theirs.

Edited by phoenics
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, phoenics said:

 

I think the monarchy works exactly like the corporate world - it just has more rules, protocols and it's been around much longer than any corporation.  They don't call it The Firm, for nothing.  It's just worse than most corporate environments because whole lives are lived and worked in it.

But my point is that in Meghan's case - her ideas did work and she was hugely successful to the general public before the press launched years long propaganda campaigns against her.  The fact that when asked several pages back, many royal watchers on this thread didn't even know about the success of the cookbook, vogue issue (and all the records it broke) and smartset collection success tells a lot.  Because propaganda buried it.  And in some cases (like twitter), when some who just *hate* her get prodded as to why, they can't really pinpoint why - except for the tabloid articles that have been debunked or are examples of when Meghan was bashed for the exact same behavior as other royals like Sophie or Kate.

At the root of a lot of that is racism - racism isn't just about burning crosses, etc.. it's about extending the benefit of the doubt and privilege to white counterparts for the same things that black people are excoriated for.  Some of that racism is unconscious - some of it not.  But the root of it is why propaganda campaigns against MM have been so successful.  It's not because of her actions - not when you realize none of the other royals had to be so perfect and even those that weren't still aren't getting such treatment.  Even Camilla suddenly enjoyed a new "perfection" when the tabloids pitted her against Meghan for a non-issue.

I also disagree that the monarchy has tried all the different ways and this is what worked best.  That's just not true.  The monarchy exists because of CENTURIES of imperialism and colonialism that subjugated peoples of color and destroyed lives in order for this one family to remain in power.  Let's not sugarcoat this - because this is at the root of a LOT of the drama we've seen play out.  I think I can agree that the things the monarchy does to remain in existence work in order to keep it going and it will sacrifice whatever it needs to sacrifice in order to remain afloat.

But best ideas?  No.

The fact that BRF is now snapping up H&M's old talent at such high levels proves that the old ways weren't sacrosanct and that at the core, it was Meghan they hated, not her ideas or even her way of doing things. 

It makes the monarchy seem rather small, imo, and petty, and that's not a good look. 

Excoriating the black one for her fresh ideas and approach (hello the leaks were coming from inside the palace) and then appropriating them for themselves just looks like BRF isn't done practicing colonialism like they wanted everyone to believe.  

MM's short duration as a senior royal just crystallized for me that BRF is still an institution entrenched in imperialism and colonialism, just in a slightly different way.  That's a shame.

 

The purpose of corporation is to make money by producing merchandise at the lowest possible cost that will sell for the highest possible price and increase its market share by doing so. There are many debates about the purpose of the BRF, but a money making corporation it is not. And therefore, the way it works and approaches things is completely different. 

I have no idea what changes Meghan wanted to make to the BRF as an institution, but I thank fuck and all that is holy that she got that idiotic jackass Harry as far away as possible. I've loathed that dude for more than a decade and he can fall in a hole. 

The British press was horrifically racist and awful to Meghan. There is no doubt about that. But her cookbook...well, it's not a revolutionary fundraising idea. I mean, I wrote recipes for a bake sale cookbook four decades ago. (My brownies rock!) Further, the Royal Foundation had nearly doubled it's donations a year or so before Meghan came along. Her cookbook earned less than 5% of one year's donations. So a nice earner, but it certainly didn't carry the RF. And zero dollars of her Vogue issue went to charity. I mean, good for Vogue, great for Vogue even.  The numbers aren't in yet for the Smart Works, but those were at a high price point.

I thought that the other royals were picking up the recently fired H&M staff so they wouldn't be out of a jobs and they were already pre-vetted, not because they were doing such an amazing job.

And ...Beyonce's taken a lot of shit. I mean... a lot. And there's a woman who knows how to work the press. 

  • Like 8
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just think Harry and Meghan - especially Harry - seem incredibly naive about the press, given their backgrounds.  They often seem to be caught flat-footed and end up coming off as reactionary.

The tabloids suck, to be sure.  But that shouldn't be surprising, at this point.

edited to add: Case in point, this Archewell announcement.  They know (or should know, or should have people who know) that these things are public record.  They know they are subject to huge amounts of scrutiny for everything they do.  They know there has been tons of speculation about what their "post-Royal" brand would be.  And yet they seem surprised that their new brand name is a story.

The argument could be made that the press should back off and let them go at their own pace.  But since when has the press - not just tabloids, but all of them - EVER done that?  They should have been ready with what they wanted to say.  It's like they either don't have PR people, or aren't listening to them.  They seem to think they can just assume that information will only come from them, at their pace and direction.  They are celebrities, and clearly want to continue to be.  That's just not how it works when you're actively trying to use your fame, whether for good or greed.

Edited by Jane Tuesday
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Jane Tuesday said:

I just think Harry and Meghan - especially Harry - seem incredibly naive about the press, given their backgrounds.  They often seem to be caught flat-footed and end up coming off as reactionary.

The tabloids suck, to be sure.  But that shouldn't be surprising, at this point.

YES, that is it. They are reactionary rather than pro-actively ignoring little tidbits that come out, refusing to confirm and then doing a big, splashy, coordinated rollout on their own time. They let the press control the conversation. 

 

In other news...

Kate's voice always weirds me out. It's somehow both deeper and more nasal than I expect. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

They can't go into this new stage of their lives thinking "the press" is the enemy.  They aren't at war, so they don't need to react to every move.  They need to start picking their battles better, especially when it comes to their official deeds and events.  And it's just not true that "the press" or even just "the tabloids" are all against them.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, phoenics said:

The tabloids are dying - their meal tickets have left the country - but they still are desperate to squeeze every last cent they can get from manufactured outrage drama that they can, so you can be sure that even if H&M had been silent, the press would have twisted this into something disparaging against H&M.

Sure but there's only so many juicy stories they can invent out of the name of a foundation.

But both can be true.  Tabloids can suck and H&M (or whoever they're working with) can be not great at this.   Sure, they may have felt compelled to release information earlier than they wanted to but March 31st is pretty close to when the information actually came out so I don't think they were pushed that much. 

And it's a pretty basic knowledge that, as soon as potential names of a foundation are considered, the domains/URLs of that name and similar names should be registered ASAP in order to avoid poaching.  Ditto for social media accounts...etc.

 

  • Like 6
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think the best reaction H&M could have had to their organization's name coming out would be to just confirm that it is indeed their organization and that more details would be released at a more appropriate time. Going into how the name came to be about just made that into a story itself. With the longer statement, it comes across as if they announced it rather than the whole thing actually being the result of a reporter keeping an eye out for trademarks.

Give the bare minimum until all is set in place and ready to be announced.

Edited by Luciano
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I think there's a big difference between excoriating someone and being all, 

giphy.gif?resize=640,640&ssl=1&crop=1

(thought bubble of "why are Harry and Meghan always so bad at this?").

Excoriate implies a lot more emotion than I think is happening here. Of all of the royals out there, I find H&M two of the least interesting. It's hard for me to work up a feeling greater than exasperation regarding them as a couple.

As to them relocating at such a difficult time, my response was much more 

di7rl4m.gif

than anything. 

Edited by BlackberryJam · Reason: Clarity?
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

I meant to edit slightly and double posted. Here is some palate cleansing Haakon and Mette Marit.

 

Edited by BlackberryJam · Reason: double post
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Mittengirl said:

In the picture in Camilla’s study, I would really like to know what it says on the picture of the squirrel (directly behind C’s head.)

It says "Welcome." I don't know if there's anything else, but I can read that much.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I think I found the squirrel picture. If this is the one Camilla has in her study, I love her for having it (and being pic’d in front of it).

Edited by Mittengirl
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Luciano said:

I think the best reaction H&M could have had to their organization's name coming out would be to just confirm that it is indeed their organization and that more details would be released at a more appropriate time. Going into how the name came to be about just made that into a story itself. With the longer statement, it comes across as if they announced it rather than the whole thing actually being the result of a reporter keeping an eye out for trademarks.

Give the bare minimum until all is set in place and ready to be announced.

You know what?  That's totally fair - this I can agree with.

Edited by phoenics
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, BlackberryJam said:

I think there's a big difference between excoriating someone and being all, 

giphy.gif?resize=640,640&ssl=1&crop=1

(thought bubble of "why are Harry and Meghan always so bad at this?") and excoriating them.

Excoriate implies a lot more emotion than I think is happening here. Of all of the royals out there, I find H&M two of the least interesting. It's hard for me to work up a feeling greater than exasperation regarding them as a couple.

As to them relocating at such a difficult time, my response was much more 

di7rl4m.gif

than anything. 

Those gifs express the exact same emotion to me, lol, but ok blackberryjam.

Edited by phoenics

Share this post


Link to post

51 minutes ago, Mittengirl said:

I think I found the squirrel picture. If this is the one Camilla has in her study, I love her for having it (and being pic’d in front of it).

Yep, that's definitely it! 🤣

 

20200409_160659.jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I love that Camilla has that squirrel sign in her office. I kinda want one myself, for my office, if I ever get to go back to my office. I would put it in my house, but I'm a recluse, no one is welcome in my house lol 

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post

Here is something much more fun!

The retrospective of the Chaz and Camz wedding!

Here.

What the fuck is on her head? I kind of love the ridiculousness of it. I mean, if you can’t wear a wheat stalk halo at your wedding, when can you wear one?

Wills was looking good back then and Peter Phillips in glasses? Yes, please. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Harry and Megan are rather boring to me (And H&M makes me think of the store) so I tend to not pay attention too much to them. I do find it rather ridiculous that they didn't lock down the url when they registered (or even thought of ) the name.  I would think both are smarter than that. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, SuprSuprElevated said:

I think Kate's smile could light half the globe.

I'm re-watching The Mary Tyler Moore Show and this comment made me think of "who can turn the world on with her smile"  

Getting on to what's important (LOL) and that's what Kate is wearing - I don't care for the mustard color.  But at least she didn't wear a Breton striped top.  I think just as William has dozens of blue pullover sweaters, Kate has dozens of those striped tops.  I really like her hair pulled back like that and I love the earrings.  I'm assuming like many of us working from home, she's wearing a pair of yoga pants or pajama pants!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The archewellfoundation.com site has been taken down, I wonder how they managed that? Maybe it has to do with the name? But people have made sites with celebrity names in the past, so I'm not sure why this would be different.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I’m curious; who is handling Harry and Meghan press/PR now that they are no longer senior royals? I believe it used to be Kensington Palace, but I assume that’s changed? Maybe that’s why this recent foundation mishap happened? Who’s driving the bus here?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, GaT said:

The archewellfoundation.com site has been taken down, I wonder how they managed that? Maybe it has to do with the name? But people have made sites with celebrity names in the past, so I'm not sure why this would be different.

One explanation is that the domain wasn’t bought by whoever put the video up and they just hacked the site. 

I didn’t see the site but most stories say that the video wasn’t at archewellfoundation.com but that the site redirected to YouTube. Judging by how often a get redirected to spam it can’t be that hard to hack a site it that manner. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, callie lee 29 said:

Harry and Megan are rather boring to me (And H&M makes me think of the store) so I tend to not pay attention too much to them. I do find it rather ridiculous that they didn't lock down the url when they registered (or even thought of ) the name.  I would think both are smarter than that. 

You would think they'd be smarter, but sometimes they seem kind of stupid. The rushed announcement that they were splitting from the royal family that was a holy mess, then this latest announcement about their foundation. Also when Elton John went defending them to the press about their carbon footprint ("I THREW MONEY AT THE PROBLEM SO PLEASE DON'T BE MEAN TO THEM!"), and the timing of their move to California was not smart. I mean I'm just an idiot isolating myself in my house and even I know how those moves are going to look to the tabloids. Harry and Meghan in all their wisdom and experience with the tabloids didn't go, "well, maybe we should hold off on this." Some of what they've done screams how detached they are from reality, like a lot of other wealthy, privileged people. 

I think William and Kate are more boring than Harry and Meghan. But I almost think that's by necessity. Harry and Meghan have at least made some interesting moves like splitting from the royals. William and Kate obviously cannot do that.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Minneapple said:

You would think they'd be smarter, but sometimes they seem kind of stupid. The rushed announcement that they were splitting from the royal family that was a holy mess, then this latest announcement about their foundation. Also when Elton John went defending them to the press about their carbon footprint ("I THREW MONEY AT THE PROBLEM SO PLEASE DON'T BE MEAN TO THEM!"), and the timing of their move to California was not smart. I mean I'm just an idiot isolating myself in my house and even I know how those moves are going to look to the tabloids. Harry and Meghan in all their wisdom and experience with the tabloids didn't go, "well, maybe we should hold off on this." Some of what they've done screams how detached they are from reality, like a lot of other wealthy, privileged people. 

I think William and Kate are more boring than Harry and Meghan. But I almost think that's by necessity. Harry and Meghan have at least made some interesting moves like splitting from the royals. William and Kate obviously cannot do that.

It's not just how those things look to the tabloids, it's how they look to regular people. The stories don't need to be sensationalized for them to come out looking poorly. 

I want Kate to turn 40, get a funky haircut and take fashion tips from Helena Bonham Carter. Or something. She always looks so perfectly respectable and comfortable in that very dull role. College Kate wore hot pants

99bf5bc51c425bd619fffdb9e1354c96.jpg

and bunny ears

got in shaving cream fights

modeled a sheer...

kate-middleton-college-2.jpg?resize=980:

 

I know she has a wild side in there, wanting to get out.

Wills even went bearded for a bit.

These two have fallen so far into stolid respectability that even Kate showing her knees would be a shocker. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Minneapple said:

You would think they'd be smarter, but sometimes they seem kind of stupid. The rushed announcement that they were splitting from the royal family that was a holy mess, then this latest announcement about their foundation. Also when Elton John went defending them to the press about their carbon footprint ("I THREW MONEY AT THE PROBLEM SO PLEASE DON'T BE MEAN TO THEM!"), and the timing of their move to California was not smart. I mean I'm just an idiot isolating myself in my house and even I know how those moves are going to look to the tabloids. Harry and Meghan in all their wisdom and experience with the tabloids didn't go, "well, maybe we should hold off on this." Some of what they've done screams how detached they are from reality, like a lot of other wealthy, privileged people. 

I think William and Kate are more boring than Harry and Meghan. But I almost think that's by necessity. Harry and Meghan have at least made some interesting moves like splitting from the royals. William and Kate obviously cannot do that.

Yes, I agree with this. I've done some marketing work for a local-yokel company in the middle of nowhere so not like I'm operating on world-class PR knowledge, but I am still astonished by how boneheaded some of their media moves are. Just basic stuff. How can not only 2 people but also their entire publicity teams be that inept?

And I say this as someone who doesn't dislike them and has no issue with their decision to break way from the palace. But from the beginning I predicted they would mishandle it because trying to break free but still remain part of it was a mistake. That was the first clue they were not being realistic.

Edited by Zella
  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Giant Misfit

Don't get snippy in your responses with other members' opinions with which you do not agree.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size