Just call me Harry. (Everything Harry & Meghan)

[mag]

@VGThuy I agree. It is an interesting piece from the perspective of entitlement. I don’t see how Harry is required to fulfill anyone else’s expectations of him. I do think the author’s thinking has fueled some of the coverage of H&M. Not this author specifically, but in a more general sense. People who think they know him who really don’t. This goes for both fans and detractors. The same as people who think they know H&M or W&K based solely on news reports. The reality is none of us know anything about them, yet we all, me included, have an opinion on their life. Cements for me my conclusion that I have no desire to be famous!

 

[starrynight]

“Boohoo I thought he cared about me.” Blah.

That is actually the currency of royals though. That’s how they have their popularity in modern royalty and can maintain their position in British society. I think a lot of people believe the Queen truly cares and that’s what has made her so popular.

To be fair, Harry and Meghan are still trying to make people think they care about them and are ‘one of them’. They have just shifted their target audience from the UK to USA.

 

[becca]

I think that if Harry didn’t grow up with royalty he would be a very different person.

We are all equal in dignity but not in circumstances. We are responsible for taking advantage of the opportunities before us. Harry did do well in military and started cool things like Invictus Games.

However I agree with the poster that said he cannot criticize Thomas Markle and then do a tell all book.

I personally think they disputes with the royal family should be kept private. They have gained a lot from his royal status it’s the least they can do.

 

[taf2002]

I’m not wild about Harry any more — just disappointed

I had to check that this was not written by Piers Morgan. It reads just like his narrative of "I thought Meghan was my friend but she dumped me so she must be a stuck-up pig". Another variation of "I made that bitch famous". It's all self-serving.

If you want to cover celebrities & royals then just cover them. Don't put your own spin on their actions & then criticize what you made up in your head. So Harry used to be the writer's hero? Harry is still Harry, he's not a hero & he never purported to be. He's not a devil either.

 

[mag]

I will put out there that at this time, these articles are actually a good thing. As much as they are a bit cringe worthy, they are keeping the narrative alive. Keeping people interested in what H&M are doing. @starrynight is correct that making people think you care about them is what gives people like H&M a platform. If no one was interested, H&M would be having a hard time selling their brand - which is built on the idea that they care, that they want to inspire you to greatness, that they can somehow lift up the downtrodden and help make the world a better place.

I am not being sarcastic. Their goal to help is a good one, but they are trying to achieve their goal by inspiring others to do the heavy lifting and then promoting those who do. In order to be valuable they need a large loyal audience. People have short attention spans. Having multiple articles published almost daily by third parties is the way to keep people’s attention.

 

[clairecloutier]

I have to disagree. I think the world will still be interested in Meghan & Harry 6 months or a year from now, even if no more articles like that are published.

They have a story that is unique enough that they don't require Kardashian-level exposure to remain in the public mind.

If they need to take some time to reset and establish new goals and a lifestyle that works for them, then go with it.

 

[overedge]

I’m not wild about Harry any more — just disappointed

This is one of those articles that is more about the author than it is about the alleged subject of the article. But since H&M's name gets clicks, no matter how bad the article is, I'm sure the Financial Times is happy to publish this kind of clickbait.

However, I may be especially cynical right now about this sort of thing, since I just read an article in the NYTimes from a few months ago about "my ex-boyfriend is dating Lady Gaga"

 

[Winnipeg]

I thought they were striving for anonymity............

 

[MacMadame]

I thought they were striving for anonymity............

Did they ever actually say that or are just other people saying it? I saw them saying they wanted financial independence and more freedom to pursue their own projects and some stuff that implied they wanted to control their portrayal in the media more/better. But nothing about wanting to anonymous. But I don't read everything about them so maybe I missed it.

 

[Winnipeg]

You may be right. It is just a sense of them contradicting themselves seemingly often. Maybe, simply put, they aren't sure what they want or at least maybe Harry?

 

[MacMadame]

It as an honest question because I never got that out of what I read but I don't follow them that closely.

I got interested when they got engaged because I wanted to see how having an American, divorced, bi-racial woman with a title (Duchess) and also an HRH designation would do to the monarchy. If H&M are going to withdraw from being royal (which is not clear right now IMO, not all royals are senior royals), then they are just another celebrity couple and they will have to do something I'm interested in to keep my interest just like any other celebrity couple.

 

[overedge]

I imagine that H&M's idea of "anonymity" might be different from what most people would perceive as anonymity.

If they are completely anonymous, no one is going to want to hire them to give speeches, or going to pay attention to the causes they are promoting.

I keep thinking of John Profumo, who had to resign from the UK cabinet in the early 1960s after it was revealed that he was having an affair with a woman who was also having an affair with a Russian spy, and that he lied about it to the House of Commons. Admittedly these were different times, but Profumo truly did go "anonymous" and spent the rest of his life working behind the scenes for a charity. This is a good story about him:

Profile: Private man of honour: John Profumo: When the scandal broke

FOR the past 30 years, John Profumo has worked tirelessly for Toynbee Hall, a charitable settlement in the East End of London. He has washed dishes, helped with the playgroup, collected rents. He has raised money, served on the charity's council, become its chairman and its president - the only...

www.independent.co.uk

Now before the flamethrowers come out, I am not saying that either Harry or Meghan are consorting with Russian spies or doing something equally scandalous. But I do think there are productive ways to be "anonymous" like Profumo did, where doing good works doesn't need to rely on one's former occupation or status, or doesn't need public attention when it's convenient.

 

[starrynight]

Being royalty doesn't necessarily guarantee high level fame unless you keep current.

A great example is Sophie Rhys Jones (Sophie Wessex). Twenty years ago, the media were publishing topless photos of her and secretly taping conversations. I think these days they couldn't give two hoots because the attention has moved elsewhere.

 

[Kruss]

No mention of their wedding anniversary? It came up in my FB memories today, but I haven't seen much mention of it., here or elsewhere.

 

[loopey]

No mention of their wedding anniversary? It came up in my FB memories today, but I haven't seen much mention of it., here or elsewhere.

I wouldn't expect to find something so positive and non-contentious in here. That doesn't seem to be how this thread rolls. Now if someone had written an article about how their wedding anniversary reminded the world of why they should have never married, then I'm sure our "someone" would have gladly posted a link to that.

 

[MacMadame]

Here are some articles about their wedding anniversary:

How Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Celebrated Their Wedding Anniversary

The couple is said to be living in a Beverly Hills home owned by Tyler Perry.

www.vogue.com

What Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Got Each Other on 2nd Anniversary

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry celebrated their 2nd wedding anniversary on Tuesday, May 19 — find out what they gave each other

www.usmagazine.com

and... controversy!

The Royal Family Didn't Wish Harry and Meghan a Happy Anniversary

Remain calm—there's a perfectly good reason for this. Sorta.

www.marieclaire.com

 

[Wyliefan]

I wanna see the ring he got her! I love rings and I love drooling over fancy jewelry in general.

 

[overedge]

I wanna see the ring he got her! I love rings and I love drooling over fancy jewelry in general.

I'd first want to see actual proof that he gave her a ring. "A source exclusively tells us" could very well be "something the guy at the next desk made up"

 

[Wyliefan]

I'd first want to see actual proof that he gave her a ring. "A source exclusively tells us" could very well be "something the guy at the next desk made up"

True. Still, if there WAS a ring, I wanna see it.

 

[overedge]

True. Still, if there WAS a ring, I wanna see it.

Me too!

 

[mag]

I wouldn't expect to find something so positive and non-contentious in here. That doesn't seem to be how this thread rolls. Now if someone had written an article about how their wedding anniversary reminded the world of why they should have never married, then I'm sure our "someone" would have gladly posted a link to that.

I got Captain Tom on my Facebook feed this morning, no H&M. Of course, you are free to spend time looking for articles and posting them, or, just feel free to bitch about what other people post. Either way.

 

[attyfan]

There is also this "flashback" in honor of the occasion:

Happy 2nd wedding anniversary to Harry & Meghan – take a look back at their special day

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are celebrating their second wedding anniversary. Harry and Meghan married on 19 May 2018 at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. As the couple mark this milestone, Roy…

royalcentral.co.uk

 

[Vagabond]

True. Still, if there WAS a ring, I wanna see it.

 

[aftershocks]

Seems like Harry and Meghan is at least funding someone’s lifestyle.

The phenomenon of Meghan & Harry has been 'funding' a lot of people's lifestyles, as well as injecting royalty watching and the ancient royal firm itself with a lot more excitement and relevance! (M&H are dynamite together, and are very good and accomplished individually in their own rights). But I guess 'Sshhhh,' some bitter royal reporters, nasty Brit tabloids and stuck-in-the-mud royalists and royal courtiers are continually attempting to twist facts, make up fiction, and to set negative narratives in hopes the rest of the world won't notice the realities of who the Sussexes are for real. Not to mention their influence and impact!

Ah well. It's too late. Lots of astute observers and people around the world of goodwill (some of them V.I.P.s with means & resources) have got the Sussexes' backs!

It definitely makes sense that the Sussexes should and will be able to become financially independent of the royal firm, by virtue of their own creative ideas, energy, caring, enthusiasm and hard work ethic! As we know, the Queen and the Cambridges made sure to grab some top level former Sussex staffers who became avaialable when M&H departed for North America. The firm immediately employing former Sussex staffers (Sarah Latham, and David Watkins) didn't happen by chance, or out of sympathy.

As much as they are a bit cringe worthy, they are keeping the narrative alive.

These articles FWIW, are only keeping a 'negative narrative' alive about the Sussexes. Meanwhile, Meghan and Harry themselves are nobody's fools. They understand the battle they are up against vs British tabloid negativity, and with their lawsuits against Brit tabloid media (read established British media, as the core British publications and RR stand solidly together -- they are all pissed that M&H are out of their control, and they no longer have even minimal access). That's why we are seeing some RRs attempting to make a foray into the American media market with their gnarly opinions about the Sussexes softened a bit, but still way negative. That, and all the snooping by Brit-tabloid-paid reporters who are nosing around in the Sussexes' private business via available public records, in an effort to gain scoops. It should be surprising to no one that the Sussexes are a couple and a family who continue to sell. That's why it's so laughable to see the derogatory jabs at the Sussexes that try to portray them as paupers and/or grifters.

Yeah right, sure.


ETA:
It's either trivial, breathless, rehashed, speculative fluff (which anyone with half an interest in the Sussexes should be able to riff/ rip off by just browsing the Internet ). Or else, it's the trollish, negative, bitter crap originating chiefly from the Daily Fail and The Sun (this blimey pestilence often gets picked up worldwide in various iterations).

 

[aftershocks]

Anyway, Omid Scobie (who is not actually M&H's 'mouthpiece,' but he is a RR with insider Sussex sources) already wrote about how M&H planned to spend their wedding anniversary with their son, Archie. Quietly, privately, reflectively, thank you very much.

Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan Take the Day Off to Celebrate Their Anniversary "as a Family"

It's been two years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex became husband and wife.

www.harpersbazaar.com

There was nothing about what they gifted each other. None of our business, but we can imagine along with the worst of the leech RRs out there, with Katie Nicholl being the Queen of Slick 'n Easy Royal Fiction.

BTW, it was only last year that we got to see a glimpse of the 'eternity ring' Harry gifted Meghan for their first wedding anniversary. Some reports said it was also a 'push' present. Plus last year, Harry had Meghan's engagement ring gold band redesigned as a thin diamond band, so as not to clash with Meghan's gold wedding ring.

Voila! The below article offers an up close picture of the eternity ring and the redesigned engagement ring band seen on Meghan's finger at 2019 Trooping the Colour. Due to their private, non-working royal status, I don't think we're gonna see any new gifted jewelry Harry may have given Meghan, any time soon. We still have no idea where they went for their brief honeymoon in 2018. There's no telling where some of these stories come from. A lot are made up out of thin air, or imagined. And sometimes, perhaps leaked. The below article OTOH, provides a picture and details from the jeweler.

Duchess Meghan’s New Ring Is a Beautiful Tribute to Her Family

"Meghan was touched," a source tells BAZAAR.com of the anniversary gift from Harry.

www.harpersbazaar.com

 

[canbelto]

An article about some of the bills Harry and Meghan have run up:

Harry and Meghan ran up a $53 million taxpayer bill in just 2 years says Brit politician

The largest bill the taxpayer had to deal with was the couple’s wedding.

pagesix.com

 

[ribbon]

I thought her engagement ring was very classic, and I liked it. The engagement ring new band seems far too small for the size of the carats of main diamonds, and I thought the non-adorned previous band showed the three diamonds off far better. But, then again, Meghan always seems to prefer very fine/thin jewelry. I think the eternity band is actually more to her usual taste. I assume the new ring would be similar. I doubt the public will ever know, but we may unknowingly see it in a charity video like the Mother’s Day one.

​

Anyway, Omid Scobie (who is not actually M&H's 'mouthpiece,' but he is a RR with insider Sussex sources) already wrote about how M&H planned to spend their wedding anniversary with their son, Archie. Quietly, privately, reflectively, thank you very much.

Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan Take the Day Off to Celebrate Their Anniversary "as a Family"

It's been two years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex became husband and wife.

www.harpersbazaar.com

There was nothing about what they gifted each other. None of our business, but we can imagine along with the worst of the leech RRs out there, with Katie Nicholl being the Queen of Slick 'n Easy Royal Fiction.

BTW, it was only last year that we got to see a glimpse of the 'eternity ring' Harry gifted Meghan for their first wedding anniversary. Some reports said it was also a 'push' present. Plus last year, Harry had Meghan's engagement ring gold band redesigned as a thin diamond band, so as not to clash with Meghan's gold wedding ring.

Voila! The below article offers an up close picture of the eternity ring and the redesigned engagement ring band seen on Meghan's finger at 2019 Trooping the Colour. Due to their private, non-working royal status, I don't think we're gonna see any new gifted jewelry Harry may have given Meghan, any time soon. We still have no idea where they went for their brief honeymoon in 2018. There's no telling where some of these stories come from. A lot are made up out of thin air, or imagined. And sometimes, perhaps leaked. The below article OTOH, provides a picture and details from the jeweler.

Duchess Meghan’s New Ring Is a Beautiful Tribute to Her Family

"Meghan was touched," a source tells BAZAAR.com of the anniversary gift from Harry.

www.harpersbazaar.com

 

[Winnipeg]

If true, the article about the bills they ran up over the last 2 years would be seemingly reprehensible and a waste. Note, the caveat, if true.

 

[MacMadame]

If true, the article about the bills they ran up over the last 2 years would be seemingly reprehensible and a waste. Note, the caveat, if true.

There were plenty of questionable tallies. For example, how does he have any idea how much her jewelry collection is worth? Not to mention, he included items that were gifts which means they weren't paid for by the taxpayers. He also included Frogmore cottage which had renovations that were planned before H&M were even set to live there and had to be done anyway.

 

[mag]

I thought her engagement ring was very classic, and I liked it. The engagement ring new band seems far too small for the size of the carats of main diamonds, and I thought the non-adorned previous band showed the three diamonds off far better. But, then again, Meghan always seems to prefer very fine/thin jewelry. I think the eternity band is actually more to her usual taste. I assume the new ring would be similar. I doubt the public will ever know, but we may unknowingly see it in a charity video like the Mother’s Day one.

I agree about Meghan’s engagement ring. It is lovely. I bet she thanked her lucky stars Harry wanted Kate to have Diana’s ring as it doesn’t seem at like something Meghan would wear. I never understood the fuss around the changes. Meghan is the one that wears is everyday, it should be something that she loves and suites her tastes. I have posted on more than one occasion that I think it is weird that a man would pick out a ring a woman has not chosen herself.

As for the article about expenses, I agree with @MacMadame that it is a questionable compilation of items. Yes, H&M’s wedding cost more, but that probably had very little to do with decisions made by H&M and more to do with things like security. Whether they planned to be working royals for life or not, they would have had the same wedding. Britain was, contrary to some recent revisionist history, beside itself with happiness to welcome Meghan into the fold. The wedding was a celebration of that. The frogmore renovations were expensive, but they were, for the most part planned. H&M also put a lot of their own money, or perhaps it was Charles’, into the house so I don’t agree they should be paying anything back. If they decide to stay in the US after this year, the house will be able to be leased at a much higher rate because of work that has been done.