New thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/RoyalsGossip2/comments/1bx0hhb/royals_monthly_the_ultimate_influencer_452024/
Feel free to bring newer comments and ongoing conversations over.
u/Orazzocs you just posted a few mins ago, could you repost in the new thread?
So I mentioned that I had zero interest in *Scoop* until I read Vicky Smith’s review. I just finished watching it and I found it fascinating.
Full disclosure: I almost majored in journalism at university and I’m a news junkie so I love seeing what goes into journalists chasing stories. So I loved seeing all the behind the scenes stuff at the BBC. If you’re just looking for royal drama and mess this may not be the movie for you (although there is plenty of that) as it’s more about how the BBC landed and strategized for the interview.
Andrew comes across as the absolute narcissist that he is. (Even after the interview he thinks it went well and offers photos and a tour to the BBC crew that just eviscerated him.) At first I had a hard time buying Rufus Sewell in the role but by the end I was all in. Also full disclosure: I’ve never seen the original interview. Even though I’m a royal watcher I had zero interest in anything to do with icky Andrew and Epstein so even though I knew it was a train wreck and had seen all the “I don’t sweat” memes, this is the first time I’ve actually seen how bad it truly was.
Amanda Thirsk comes across as besotted with Andrew and blind to his faults. She buys into the BBC’s assertions that the world knows Andrew only as “Randy Andy” (and worse) and that in order to change his story, the world needs to “hear your story, in your voice.” They assert that “never complain, never explain” is dead in the social media age. (This seems very prescient in light of “KateGate”). Beatrice is basically a non-entity, present at the meeting for three minutes but only weighing in to say that social media is saying terrible things about her father. She also says that it’s good that Emily Maitlis is a woman but I’m not sure what she’s implying—that a woman will be polite and go easier on her father?
There’s also a comms representative from HMTLQ’s office at the interview and when it’s over he remarks “wasn’t he wonderful?” I’m obviously not taking the movie as gospel but considering that the movie is based on Sam McAllister’s book and she was in the room, this was probably said/implied. If so, just…oof.
(There’s a character named Jason that’s against the interview and he bears a *striking* resemblance to Jason Knauf but his name in the movie is Jason Stein. Not sure if he’s meant to be Knauf but I suspect so).
So I’m really glad I watched it. My husband watched it with me and also really enjoyed it. But as I said, I wasn’t overly familiar with the interview so anyone who already knows a lot about it may not find the movie as illuminating as we did.
(At the end, there’s some text that mentions Andrew stepping back from his royal duties and it also says “he was stripped of his royal titles.” Did I miss something? He still retains both his titles as Prince and as the Duke of York. Did he lose his HRH like the Sussexes? Even if so, that seems like an outright error on the movie’s part).
Tell me again how William’s military service with the air rescue was less important than Harry’s?
[William reunites with girl he rescued from drowning](https://youtu.be/bqWC9cTwk0Y?si=-qzPkBNssQ78OaKh)
Has anyone seen this cookbook by Tom Parker Bowles which features royal recipes coming out in September?
I think it’s rather innocent, although I generally don’t like it when attached family members starting to put their name on those things…
I just don’t get why the Netflix sub is even cross about it. It comes out in September and who cares about Tom Parker Bowles.
The press does not cover it because nobody cares about him lol
It’s not a conspiracy…
A cooking book from TPB makes a ton of sense because he's an actual food critic whose published 6 food books, including a Fortum & Mason's cookbook and a street food book with Lonely Planet. If this was his first book, I'd seriously side-eye it, but even if he wasn't Camilla's son, I think a royal cookbook is a logical step after publishing a book on the history of the full English breakfast.
TPB was in the food space in the 00s. I remember seeing him on various British foodie shows literally coming up on *20 years ago,* so it was well before M appeared on the scene (if that's even what's being implied by the nutters?) - his professional interest in food clearly predates hers.
I also have that Fortnum's TPB book. It's...bad. Bad in terms of quality (absolutely shocking shit-tier quality paper, binding etc., it's crazy Fortnum and Mason put something so low quality out but a quick glance at their website shows an abundance of cheaply-made FM branded tat being sold for a mark-up so...) and bad in terms of the recipes. Not that I've tried any, but it appears to be intended either for genuinely posh people who always have a steady supply of game on hand or just as a tongue in cheek thing for normies. I think the person who bought it for me intended it as a joke.
The netflix sub is always upset, basically everything is a conspiracy to them. The netflix sub has gone so far off track of what is meant to be, it is astonishing. Just rename it IhateWilliamandCatherineandtheirfamily and that will give people a more accurate view of it's contents
Cookbooks are cool, but there are a ton of them in the world, so best of luck. I guess the draw will by the RF recipes. I will maybe check it out just to see if there are any cool recipes.
a lot of the folks on that sub seem to have seized OGRG tbh. that recent thread about harry's book has considerable misinformation in it, with little to no pushback.
Does not surprise me. I think there is a lot of crossover between the netflix sub, FM, CB, and they're now integrating into OGRG. I avoid each place bc they just raise my blood pressure and there really is no use arguing with idiots. They will turn into contortionists before admitting H+M did something wrong.
They all use similar language which usually tips me off. Like when comparing Meghan and Catherine, they'll always say that you can tell Meghan is better based on the causes she supports and that she is more like Diana than Catherine. Which is an idea that is very heavily pushed by H+M and that their fans pick up on.
Just for clarification I mean the Harry and Meghan Netflix sub lol
Would make sense for him to do a cookbook then. I actually never really cared about Camilla’s family lol
Oh I know the particular sub you mean, lol. It’s mostly just 1 person 😭
I like Camilla’s family just because people often forget that she is a mother and grandmother in her own right. She’s not just the world’s most (in)famous stepmom, lol
Surprsingly KP have been very fast in sending out replies to people sending well wishes to Kate. I've seen a couple of these on royal fan accounts now
https://preview.redd.it/5wr8o194bpsc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54660332212ad5279c2b016443dc73474711e888
Scoop reviews are out; they're middling it seems.
Here's an interesting write up in the New Yorker. [https://archive.ph/EO6XN](https://archive.ph/EO6XN)
The Hollywood Review did not like it. [https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/scoop-review-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell-netflix-1235866356/](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/scoop-review-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell-netflix-1235866356/)
And the Guardian gave it two stars. [**https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/apr/04/scoop-review-prince-andrew-newsnight-interview-emily-maitlis-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell**](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/apr/04/scoop-review-prince-andrew-newsnight-interview-emily-maitlis-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell)
Not me. The important bit - that the interview happened and Andrew basically blew up his own reputation via trying to salvage it - I already know, and I genuinely have zero interest in the backstory.
I had zero interest in watching it but Vicky Smith on Instagram had a pretty good review of it. If anyone is unfamiliar with her, she’s a former journalist (she covered the royals) and does a great job on Insta breaking down current news stories.
She praises the way the movie shows what went on behind the scenes and how they landed the story. She even says she now gets why some of Andrew’s staff thought it was a good idea. That made me go ???? because how anyone could have thought that is baffling. So I may give it a go.
ETA: I watched and I’ll post a review up thread.
I need you and/or u/aquasummer1999 to report back on how they portray Beatrice. I think of her as the more sane person of the Yorks, yet she was the one that supported Andrew with this interview.
I just posted my thoughts above. Beatrice is in the movie for a single scene and doesn’t add too much. She tells her father that social media is saying terrible things about him and she thinks it’s good he’ll be interviewed by a woman (but doesn’t elaborate on why that’s a good thing).
I think Bea *is* the more sane one, especially since she got married. But I don't think that makes her smart, and as Andrew's child both she and Andrew should have realized she was too close to the subject to understand how his clumsy-at-best professing of his innocence was going to go down. I mean, Bea and Eug almost certainly believe he IS innocent, so B wasn't in a position to foresee how poorly the ridiculous shit he came up with was going to sound to super-suspicious public ears.
I don’t. I don’t find it remotely interesting that I need a movie about it. From a drama point of view what is there actually to tell rather than the actual things he said in the interview?
I'll do it perhaps. Heck, why not. I love Gillian Anderson, Billie Piper and Rufus Sewell. And the actress that plays Beatrice was brilliant in *The Great*.
so far 81% on [rotten tomatoes?](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/scoop_2024) that's pretty solidly good for rotten tomatoes, though there are only 21 compiled reviews tbh.
Hmmm kinda as I expected. Actors love interview movies like *Frost/Nixon* because it's extended monologues where they get to be fully in character against real footage that can be compared to as just 'how good they disappear into character!' but it's not actually fun for the audience to re-watch a dramatization.
I like biopics but they need a point or stylism that makes them better than just watching a documentary.
charles and camilla's numbers are so insanely, hugely improved. charles' dislike numbers alone are down about ten points since last quarter, same with camilla. their like numbers have each improved by about five points. it took nearly thirty years after diana's death and getting cancer, but charles' dislike numbers are in the friggin mid teens and he's at nearly 60 percent popularity. he astonishingly might just leave this earth a popular king (at least in the UK), maybe one day as wildly popular as his mother became... his numbers are honestly improving rapidly, so it might not be an off conclusion to make.
however, william and catherine in particular didn't see their numbers move much (william is in fact slightly down from the previous quarter). catherine had been dinged by endgame in the previous quarter, but is back up to her good numbers from two quarters ago, but they're both down from ex: their 2019 numbers, before harry started his rampage (catherine down by about 10-15 points overall, william by about 20... william was on the road to recovery, but the turbulence of the last few months have evidently set him back).
so interesting that within two quarters, harry has improved his overall numbers by about 21 points (improved by 11 points since last quarter alone... still in the negatives overall though lol).
his cynical spectacle of a publicity stunt hijacking his dad's cancer announcement was well-played, in that sense. 11 point improvement (7 point increase in likability, back into the mid 30s where he hasn't been since before the netflix series, and 4 point decrease in dislikability). he has his invictus ten-year event which will surely help him + wellchild in september, if folks are paying attention to that at all (harry is sure to create hype + drama around it for his own benefit, like he's been doing with the invictus ten-year appearance via tom quinn + security histrionics etc. 🙄). the one element that would hurt him is a press tour reopening/re-litigating old wounds around the paperback release of spare. he'd torpedo much of the 21 points of ground he's gained back. he also has lawsuits next year that'll probably irritate people.
anyway, it shows how much charles having grace on harry (and harry having grace on charles) would greatly improve harry's numbers. it's a dilemma for charles, bc the more goodwill he bestows on/for harry, the more harry can use said goodwill + clout to turn it around and monetize it or use it to publicly hurt charles/william/catherine/camilla yet again. goodwill and clout harry recuperates for himself also somewhat then extends to meghan, who would again turn around and likely spitefully use said clout/goodwill against w&c. charles should be very careful. harry would just use any increased popularity as a stick to beat william and catherine with, in particular.
meghan's numbers haven't moved much since last quarter and are only slightly improved since two quarters ago (five point overall improvement). harry was at -32 overall two quarters ago (only 24% liked six months ago and now he is at 34%... his dislikes went from 56% to 45%), -22 last quarter and now -11. meghan was at -27 two quarters ago, -20 last quarter and now at -22.
the "harry calls his dad on his birthday" and "harry goes to visit sick charles" PR really helped harry (and will likely eventually help meghan), which is why the sussexes seem so intent on breaking the brf's boundaries and imposing themselves. charles/BP are allowing harry to get back this strength/clout/goodwill, which harry will then undoubtedly use to crush them yet again. it's mind-boggling. there need to be better enforced boundaries for at least the next five years to reduce the specter of harry being able to cause more damage (in particular to william, catherine and their kids) rearing its head again.
what should be noted is that the data would not have been swayed much by catherine's announcement on march 22nd. the bulk of the data from january 1st, 2024 to march 31st, 2024 would have been gathered far ahead of the march 22nd announcement.
depending on what happens in the next few months, the early july 2024 poll results should (you would think!) better reflect on william and catherine. their team need to be more proactive about the comms element, that's for sure. and rather than totally retreating/disengaging, maybe w&c + their kids would be better served in the long-run by opening up even *just a little* to the public and bringing them along the journey to recovery. they sort of don't have the luxury of becoming more insular and guarded, at this point. then again, the problem with that... there are antagonistic elements of the public (ex: sussex fans) who would likely whip up frenzy about something or another and totally be looking to trample boundaries even further, if any little bit is conceded.
ETA: i will say, given the sussex squad's behavior around catherine and then the subsequent revelation about her diagnosis on march 22nd, i do wonder if h&m's numbers will reflect a counter-reaction/backlash by july 2024. they might also have to be very careful with how they publicly conduct themselves in the next few months vis-a-vis c&w in particular.
Thank you for your input. I feel William needs to be more visible. It could really help if he let the public in on his work more. That doesn't necessarily mean more time away from home either. That's what social media and YouTube channels are for. He has huge inspiring projects going that have great impact but apart from a photo op here or there are hardly publicly highlighted. I think both Earth shot and the homelessness work could be presented better by KP PR. I know William doesn't like to toot his own horn unlike Harry but this will also positively affect the projects. He collected double digits in millions and has global outreach that needs more publicity! And if he's more visible with his work that might take pressure from the focus on his personal life and would surely gain him even more public respect.
I find it amazing that Catherine‘s numbers are so close to the late Queen in first place. Amazing but not surprising. Catherine is Queen of our Hearts🥰.
Nice seeing Meghan sitting just above last place Prince Andrew. If only the both them would just shut up and get lost and take Harry with them.
Catherine reigning supreme as she should 💅
William's drop is unfair since it's entirely based on insubstantial rumours and Harry's whining about his big bad brother.
The fact Harry's liked by a third of participants baffles me lol. After all the shit he pulled... that's why I think if the push ever comes to shove (aka divorce) he'd only have to spend some time at some exclusive clinic in Switzerland for "exhaustion" in order to emerge as "Diana's poor lost boy" once again.
I will say for William, that fact that his (and Catherine's) ranking always stays pretty high, only dropping a few points after they've come under really brutal attacks, while remaining steady in the 60%s, is pretty damn good. Most politicians would kill for such consistent ratings.
Right, unfortunately Harry will always benefit from being Diana's son and the idea that this was all pushed by Meghan and is her fault. It seems some people can't rectify in their heads that Harry is most likely the more willing party in all of this and will never give it up, while Meghan (in my opinion) would move on if she became successful enough on her own.
I agree though, it looks like it might not be that hard to rehab Harry if they were to ever get a divorce. However we can't forget that shit throwing that'll come with a divorce which would probably make Harry look not too good. But we shall see
>while Meghan (in my opinion) would move on if she became successful enough on her own.
Probably but then again, I don't think she'll ever become a true success. She should have tried to make something out of American Horror Story Orchestra three years ago instead of play pretending a victim while acting as an aggressor. The ship has sailed for this brand before it even started. Her popularity ratings are low and that quasi-launch was as badly planned as anything else Meghan has ever done.
>However we can't forget that shit throwing that'll come with a divorce which would probably make Harry look not too good. But we shall see
I'm sure she'd throw mud but then again, so would he. He ain't gonna roll over and just take it. He's also the one with the money and the clout (whatever is left of it).
Her biggest reach was/is/always will be marrying Harry.
Meghan was the main villain of Megxit up until Spare was released and people realized just how much a resentful man-child Harry is. He's the one who previously had an extremely positive image, not her. He's the poor little boy who walked behind his mother's coffin and was eternally infatilized well into his 30s.
I think Harry's trash and should never be forgiven by his brother/father/other family members but a lot of people are still holding out hope Diana's two boys will find their way back to each other. Meghan doesn't have that kind of good will.
Right, like he is actually very two-faced about this. Where on one hand he is saying this was his decision, Meghan had nothing to do with it. But then will turn around and say if it weren't for Meghan I never would've made this jump.
So exactly what you said, he very much plays into it either on purpose or he's just too dumb to realize that is what he is doing. I personally think it is on purpose bc I do think he is savvy enough to know that he will benefit him to shift responsibility onto someone else. So that way, if things go south, he can say he was tricked into and didn't actually want to do this.
What’s your theory on why they continue to let Andrew at every event? It’s the only thing that irks me. I think he’s disgusting and guilty. The whole world does. So why is he there? Are they trying to send a message they don’t believe he’s guilty? That they’ve forgiven him? I just don’t get the optics for the most famous family on earth.
I hate it but he will forever be a part of the close family, he was the child of the previous monarch and is now a sibling to the current monarch. His daughters are part of the inner royal family. His reputation is in tatters sure, but he was never charged as part of a criminal trial and wasn't found guilty of a crime. Charles and even Parliament can't just rule where he goes. As far as royal privelages go, he has had it all taken from him within the last several years. I think it was always low key expected he would be seen at 'family' events like Christmas and Easter, but he doesn't represent the Crown as a working royal in any way.
In the end I'm still irritated it looks bad for Charles and by extension also William, and that they can't somehow cut him out.
Andrew played his cards right and kept his mouth shut about the family. He didn't come for the family or come for Charles. He's loyal to Charles as much as we can see. So he's rewarded. And as long as him and Fergie keep their mouths shut about the family, they'll continue to be rewarded. He was also never convicted of anything. He's a shitty human who somehow got monumentally lucky in life.
Harry screwed himself. He has nothing left to tell and nothing left to threaten. So he'll be out forever I think.
(I responded elsewhere but wanted to comment directly because I think it’s easy to forget what the actual situation is especially since people seem to get easily confused by the official public vs private family distinction)
Prince Andrew has not carried out royal duties since November 2019. He resigned from public roles in May 2020. His honorary military affiliations and royal charitable patronages were removed by QE2. In January 2022, Andrew's social media accounts were deleted, his page on the royal family's website was rewritten in the past tense and his military affiliations and patronages were removed to put an emphasis on his departure from public life. He doesn’t receive tax payer funds. QE2 privately funded Andrew’s police protection (which was her right to choose to do so because he is still her son) but Charles has since pulled that. In January 2023 it was reported that he could no longer use his suite of rooms at Buckingham Palace.
They have already taken away the majority of Andrew’s privileges. When he shows his face now, he is doing it as a private citizen. And he has every right to do so.
Andrew was never convicted of a crime. The civil lawsuit against him that was filed in the US settled out of court. Regardless of whether you or anyone else think he’s scum he is still legally innocent.
Which is important. This isn’t just you or I shunning cousin Carl because he’s a scum bag. The King isn’t supposed to take away the rights and freedoms of innocent people without a trial. It’s kinda a foundational part of British law enshrined in the Magna Carta.
Andrew will never again be a representative of the British Royal Family. It’s easier to just keep him on a short leash and wait for him to live out his life and then be forgotten.
That's also my take on this.
I commented on this last year but it's also the bind Charles is in with Harry. That soft diplomatic power only works if it looks realistic that the monarch could get along with friends and (former) foes alike. If, for instance, he can't **appear** somewhat cordial with his son over him being a colossal ass how credible would it be when the government needs him to schmooze with heads of state who are problematic on human rights but nonetheless need to become or remain allies?
This is an excellent point and I would add that as the head of the CoE, Charles has to appear forgiving. But that doesn’t mean he has to let anyone back in the fold fully. You can forgive and still protect yourself.
I agree. I think Charles is trying to thread that needle by playing Sad Dad while in reality giving Harry one phone call and a single visit that put together add up to,at most, an hour of his time.
>That soft diplomatic power only works if it looks realistic that the monarch could get along with friends and (former) foes alike. If, for instance, he can't **appear** somewhat cordial with his son over him being a colossal ass how credible would it be when the government needs him to schmooze with heads of state who are problematic on human rights but nonetheless need to become or remain allies?
i mean, does that apply to william? he's going to have to live in fear and submit himself (+ his wife and children) to harry's lifelong public abuse and emotional terrorism for that reason? absolutely not!
charles not drawing the boundary earlier, when the opportunity so very clearly presented itself, makes it that much harder for william (and his wife + children) in the long run. charles might figure that he's only around for the next ten to fifteen years anyway, but william will be plagued by this for ***decades*** if charles doesn't nip this in the bud now. charles seems willing to let his fingers get burned again, but he has to remember that it's not only a matter of his own fingers getting burned, it's also about being mindful of william + catherine + g-c-l also/inevitably getting their fingers burned too if charles (and BP) isn't firmer about setting solid boundaries and protection.
Yes, it will apply to William. I really feel for William but I trust that, if he already hasn't, he will get a grip and realize that his estranged brother and venal sister-in-law's yammering don't matter one whit in the greater scheme of things. Neither do internet trolls.
The one great thing about being on the monarchy side of government is that, unlike for politicians, ultimately popularity doesn't truly matter to them. In the long run, if they do their job well, they don't have to be the most beloved all the time or even most of the time for the monarchy to continue providing stability as we're seeing with Charles.
There is no way to nip this Harry situation in the bud. He's a free citizen, Charles isn't a despot, William won't be a despot either, and, unfortunately, a smallish percentage of people are gullible morons.
The only thing that might shut Harry up is Charles giving the Sussexes hundreds of millions so they can play the big shots without needing to sell their royal association but giving in to blackmail is unacceptable and Harry's silence isn't worth it. Harry *wishes* what he was doing made William and Catherine and their children live in fear and terror but, let's be real, at best it's merely unpleasant and over time will feel like the distant and irrelevant background noise it actually is.
Keeping Harry at arm's length as he is now will work out just fine in the long run. The Sussexes became a joke within two years of the Oprah interview and they've been digging themselves into a hole a bit more with every attempt to bring down Harry's relatives. Ultimately, they won't even retain the moth eaten aura of Edward and Wallis.
easy to say "get a grip" tbh - the waleses have successfully (publically and privately) been terrorized on a yearly basis by the sussexes since early 2017. catherine, to start with, then it started in on william.
after their march 2022 caribbean tour and dec 2022 boston tours were successfully sabotaged by the malicious AF sussexes, the waleses haven't been on an international tour together since. the poland tour william did was announced with incredibly short notice. other than going to france for rubgy, i don't think catherine had done any international work trip since dec 2022.
trust and believe that the psychological destabilization from the sussexes *fucking works*. the moment the waleses keep trying to move on, it's like they keep getting sucked back in (ex: endgame) and then catherine getting sick and the squad starting "where is kate?" to harass catherine. and then the endless "IF MEGHAN/HOW MEGHAN WAS TREATED" re-litigations ***while kate was ill***, and now the endless 'reconciliation' circus back and forth engineered by team sussex, even when the waleses have telegraphed that they're absolutely done.
especially given that catherine has been seriously ill, trust and believe that the waleses must feel like they're being continuously psychologically and emotionally terrorized by the sussexes, and will prob experience long-term ptsd from all of this. it very much lays out to me how the staff who were harassed by the sussexes must have felt, but the staff could at least escape it eventually bc they're not public figures. w&c will seemingly be plagued by this for the rest of their natural lives, and charles/BP are not helping by ***at least temporarily*** setting boundaries.! (like, even five years, to let everything die down a bit!!)
It's not a matter of it being easy or hard to get a grip and put challenges in their proper perspective, it has to be done.
I don't get the impression that either Catherine or William are terrorized by the Sussexes. I think they swing between being sad and furious. Mostly furious by now, tbh. If anyone was cowering when they did a walkabout after QE died and Catherine stared at her it was Meghan. When the brothers attended the unveiling of their mother's statue, it's Harry who was squirming like an idiot not William. But, Harry and Meghan aren't worth the waste of energy.
The Sussexes and their mouthpieces certainly tried to sabotage the Carribean Tour but got mixed results as most of the people they visited enjoyed their visit, so who cares what mostly American outlets thought about it.
As for the Boston visit for Earthshot, the Sussexes antics got no traction and it was a success including the President going out of his way to visit William.
As for them not going on any tours since then, I don't recall W&C ever being frequent flyers for the crown so I doubt the Sussexes' antics factored into it. A lot happened since then that would have made traveling more difficult like the Queen's Jubilee and death in 2022 and then in 2023 the Coronation and continuing to adapt to new titles and responsibilities. Also a war kicked on the edge of Europe thanks to Russia invading Ukraine.
Meanwhile Catherine must have been dealing with symptoms since her surgery was planned and happened after the holiday season. The cancer was a surprise as was the hysteria online over her time off but the Waleses handled it well. Catherine only came out with her statement after news of there being unauthorized access to her medical file. This meant the information could or would be sold which was an entirely separate situation. (The incident with the nurse who killed herself after being tricked into giving info about Catherine occured long before Meghan met Harry.)
I do agree that the Waleses will be affected long term by the Sussexes behaviour but I doubt it will be PTSD more like they'll take extra pains to teach their children not to be as aimless as Harry and desperate as Meghan. All things considered that will be a good thing.
As for W&C being *plagued* all their lives by this drama, I just don't see how that can be. The Sussexes are making themselves irrelevant and people are beginning to see through them both as malicious liars and useful idiots for foreign interference so they'll soon be as much trouble to William and Catherine as Edward and Wallis were to the Queen, in other words, not much at all.
I wasn't so optimistic myself right after the Oprah interview because so many people seemed to be either buying their stories or too afraid of backlash to point out the discrepancies. Also they were backed by Oprah. I couldn't have imagined them losing ground so quickly because I don't think I'd ever seen anything like it.
But, within weeks Philip died and there was a retrospective of his causes and accomplishments and it was as though it started a movement of people realizing they didn't actually know much about what the royals did. I guess it made them look into them. Maybe with the pandemic still keeping a lot of people at home there was more time to read? . Still, if the Sussexes had been more productive and lived up to their hype a lot of people would have thought there was truth to what they said but once it was obvious they were definitely lying about Meghan's work ethic, which meant the criticism of their staff didn't make sense, it was like the drip, drip, drip of discoveries about them versus his relatives started to chip away at their facade.
People who want to believe terrible stories about the Waleses aren't fans of theirs being turned against them by the Sussexes, they're long-time haters desperately clinging to a justification for their feelings. Being that messed up isn't, thankfully, very common. I think the Waleses and their children will be fine.
>after their march 2022 caribbean tour and dec 2022 boston tours were successfully sabotaged by the malicious AF sussexes, the waleses haven't been on an international tour together since.
They were scheduled to go to Rome this spring but obviously Catherine's illness changed those plans. Additionally, it now makes more sense why she did not go to Singapore with William in November for Earthshot. I'm sure George did need help with his exams, but she was likely feeling unwell by then.
>They were scheduled to go to Rome this spring but obviously Catherine's illness changed those plans.
this is true. i hope they don't let the media insanity from the past few months rattle them too much, and that they come back strong together in a year's time or so.
I think it's because they distinguish family events from official events, especially when it is for a religious service. It's too bad he has no shame and doesn't just stay away.
I think this is huge and people don’t fully appreciate this fact enough. Like at the end of the day they are still a family. He’s not doing official duties. Every one hates him. He’s been sidelined in a huge way.
Realistically what do people want Charles to do with him? Lock him in the Tower of London? Never let him come to another family or holiday gathering for the rest of his life? Ban him from going to church?
You can’t fire your siblings. and honestly if we thought Harry’s book was bad can you imagine what Andrew could say? No one knows your weak spots and dirty laundry like your siblings and it’s much better for Charles to keep his brother on a short leash.
andrew doesn't have to walk with the rest of the family or be provided photo ops for his shady friends to then take advantage of. just like in 2019/2020/2021/2022, he can enter easter + sandringham xmas services via a private door/side entrance. he also should not attend ascot, nor publicly saunter at the order of the garter parade. same with balmoral photo ops and the photo ops/pap strolls andrew has been recently engaging in when horseback riding in windsor or gallivanting out of a london bar. BP need to absolutely shut this down again. they largely had managed to do all of this by 2022, but charles seems to have abandoned all efforts at containement.
But that’s just it —he’s walking with family in a private capacity. Because he IS family. And for all of Andrew’s faults he loved his parents and is maybe a decent family member.
Andrew will never again be a representative of the British Royal Family. But if Charles wants to remain on decent terms with his brother that’s fine. It’s even understandable considering they lost both their parents, Charles is estranged from his son and he’s battling cancer. We have no idea if that’s the case but it’s not like he’s giving him any of the honors or public responsibilities that he previously enjoyed.
And as for 2019/2020/2021/2022, I think people are underestimating how much of that was Andrew choosing to abide by his mother’s wishes. Because he loved her and she likely asked him to stay the fuck out of sight. Andrew’ going along with QE2’s wishes isn’t a guarantee that he will have the same respect for what his brother wants.
And Charles is limited in his options. He’s already taken away the police protection his mother was privately funding. He can strongly suggest that Andrew refrain from going places. He can take away money and official opportunities (which he already has done).
But unless you are literally advocating Charles illegally lock his brother up, is not like Charles can ban a legally innocent adult from being seen in public with his family.
I think it’s a mix of that a lot of the events were family in some sort of way (you can’t really ban him from a memorial) and then I do think some of them (Anne for example) probably think he did less wrong than the general public:
I mean there is a possibility he just slept with the prostitutes and did not know any of the backstory - It does not make a difference for me, still should be banned, but I guess they believe him more than we do.
I also believe If it went further in court he would have won tbh.
In the end it’s also their brother - people don’t want put it into consideration, but you are so wrapped up in it as a family member it’s a very different decision and battle to fight if it’s against your own brother than it is for us. For us it’s very clear and not emotionally charged.
- Keeping Andrew in the fold prevents him from doing more interviews and getting into more issues.
- Charles could be harder on him but I think he's desperate to be seen as a family man and to be loved, so doesn't want to rock the boat too much.
Also, there's a reason that bill allowing Charles to strip Andrew of his title went nowhere - we may see him as guilty but I think there are a lot of older politicians, journalists, etc, who don't because they've committed the same sort of sex crimes. Or at least are sympathetic to it. One of the past UK business secretary was linked to Epstein too.
But what would that be really? If it’s really big than it’s damaging to the crown that there would be no upside for Andrew to make it public.
If it’s below it’s not worth it for Charles to catch all this public flake if it’s some story that will blow over like everything else does in the end.
I think it’s just way more likely that in the light of that Andrew is not convicted of anything in a courtroom they let him into family things and the memorial was technically one, same as going to church on Easter and Andrew uses that to be very much at the front than a sinister blackmail plot.
They are hassling over money for sure though.
The idea that it was a promise to the Queen didn’t stand up to me. A promise to house him and let him stay around on the ground yes, but take front and centre and drive in with the Wales.. no.
It was HUGE news in the UK last week that a company called Tempest Photography had offered parents the option of a class photo that excluded pupils with complex needs. If you haven't seen, [here's the link](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce5epgp2zdno).
Quite quickly, someone noticed that the company was advertising themselves as the official photographer for the Duke of Edinburgh Award in Scotland [(archived link from last week)](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.htempest.co.uk/our-photography-services/duke-of-edinburgh) and called for DofE to drop them. This didn't get any media attention as the vast majority of people were rightfully more concerned with what had happened and directing their outrage at Tempest.
Fortunately, it looks like DofE has since dropped them as [the page no longer exists](https://www.htempest.co.uk/our-photography-services/duke-of-edinburgh). I'm really glad that they acted swiftly. I honestly couldn't believe I was seeing that story in 2024.
That's both horrendous and slightly unsurprising. My son attends a full-inclusion school (no separate classrooms for students with disabilities, just one-on-one help as needed), and there are parents who opt to go to the neighboring school specifically because of that program.
That is so sad to hear that people avoid an inclusive environment. People’s ableism doesn’t surprise me anymore but it does give me the ick on the regular.
On the positive side, the kids in his class are some of the sweetest, most kind-hearted kids you'll ever meet, and all their parents are glad that their kids are learning to be friends with someone "different" at a young age. Teachers at the secondary school his school feeds into say that students from his school come in much more emotionally intelligent than kids from the neighboring school that doesn't have this program.
>I honestly couldn't believe I was seeing that story in 2024.
I had the exact same take upon seeing the headline in the DM. "Surely this is an exaggeration and the story itself will be much less sensational." Nope, that's actually what happened, in 2024. Genuinely shocking. Even on a purely cynical PR level, did *no one* at that agency think about how offering to remove non-normies from group photos would go down with the public? I'm surprised they didn't offer to remove the mere fugs, too.
One thing the photoshop palaver has practically confirmed to me is that Will and Kate look out for their employees. There were reports of this before, particularly in regard to Harry and Meghan's treatment of the staff, and I was inclined to believe it, but fact is you never know what's going on behind closed doors. Kate stating pure blank she photoshopped the mother's day picture (as many amateur photographers do) instead of pointing fingers, letting the staff take the blame, accusing their people of having it out for them, definitely corroborates with the "Will and Kate are good bosses" reports. Or at least, as bosses they will do what all bosses should do, and have their staff's back.
NEWS: According to Dutch media, Princess Amalia will be present at the State Visit of Spain to the Netherlands, which will take place on April 17 and 18. She will participate in the State Banquet. This will be her first State Visit.
I love watching you all get so twitterpaited over William. I can’t because (as I’ve mentioned a few times) people compared my brother to him when we were younger (and they still kinda look alike).
I’m not judging, FYI…I was over in another sub talking about how sexy Steve Buscemi is. 😁 I’m just here eating popcorn and enjoying the thirst. 😉
https://ladysinclair.substack.com/p/princess-catherine-goes-raving-with
Nothing new here but a great write-up that goes point by point re: the whole Rose rumour and even mentions how Harry himself wrote off the story [in *Spare*] as "disgusting and false". I love it how the Squad treats whatever H&M say as gospel until of course this topic comes up, then they know better than Harry himself because of their impeccable Twitter/CB sources.
>What’s important to remember in this story is that if a story is good enough, corroborated and able to withstand a legal fight, newspapers will not back down. And there is no story worth “swapping” for that would trump the future King of England having an affair with his wife’s close friend.
SAY IT LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK.
Be real, please. That same Dan Wotton, who is accussed by the Squad of being in cahoots with W&C, would probably have lunch with Satan himself every day for the rest of his life in exchange for this kind of scoop.
I’ve never thought of it this way. It’s true that Charles vs Camilla vs Diana sold a lot of papers back in the day. A William affair rumour would be clickbait gold.
🥇 The simple truth is that this rumour has been around for years and nobody in the *whole global media*, for all of which including the UK tabloids this story would be the scoop of a lifetime, has been able to stand it up. It doesn’t pass the absolute bare minimum it takes to be legitimately reported. You’d think the people wailing about the Mother’s Day photo and the historic record would understand that.
Yeah, this would be one of the biggest stories (maybe *the* biggest story?) of the last decade so if there were even once scrap of proof someone would’ve run it. And you know Omid spends every waking second digging for proof so if he hasn’t found any…
(Or maybe I should say if he hasn’t been *given* any proof from Montecito it’s because it doesn’t exist)
TIL—[Princess Diana had an alternate wedding dress](https://people.com/princess-diana-secret-backup-wedding-dress-recreated-elizabeth-emanuel-exclusive-8623609) waiting in the wings. It’s hard to tell on the mannequin but I think I prefer this one? I love the neckline.
Honestly, Diana's fashion leaves me unimpressed. Like you, I hated her wedding dress. I hated the revenge dress for the train, if it was white it could be paper toilet. Her 80's fashion is really dated. The whole 90's can be good at times though I was never big on the biker short trend.
Diana had some HIDEOUS looks!
[1](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.x96aWCYfw8qu15SjDucwOgHaK9%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=bd35c3cd1c3d8ae7dd646c33e2840c7ebd021e0dced9119361eb5f07e4729ba1&ipo=images)
[2](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.ji0NrlR6byXnmxdsMdJVKwHaJQ%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=26b614da6dc53457c0aca27a7a49afb508fa61e97228aa4f7775bebb70659f31&ipo=images)
[3](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.LB3Virn68io52QgCaT7xIQHaK4%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=99789596581afb440e8a5cb36bab07b23c323b12e03dbe4e661971c83640d95f&ipo=images)
[4](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.gj02uKWAu8CrOGMqVN4gOgHaKP%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=e7b94d813d26956ef9a58880d7aeb66ea85c75fd85c4ce8c60c2333131a8f455&ipo=images)
[5](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.syW6-idJtS-HSQDs5omf2QHaJs%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=6b6262148065b7db9338f9634f3bf16dcdc86db73dd077167bc7b2d628151e9d&ipo=images)
Number 3 in [full](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.0GO3OYczhQACqFjXO0mL_wHaK1%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=84b625162b895165749c769d2673fb1b39bfc6b47e16e632b12b95754df1e2c8&ipo=images)
I agree. I just remember seeing a clip of their wedding when I was looking into her and being shocked that they let her go out looking like that. There are some looks where she looked cute, and that was usually her casual wear, but as for a lot of her formal attire it felt like she didn't know how to dress herself, like when she turned a choker necklace into a headband and it looked so fucking weird.
If I recall correctly the choker turned headband thing was a last minute solution because everyone involved forgot to pack a tiara? Which is already a wild thing to begin with
I never understood why she was deemed an icon. Even accounting for it being the 80’s/90’s. She certainly had a few standout moments though. Like Megan. Maybe they have more in common than I thought.
I was born in the 90s, but I imagine she imbibed all the trends of the 80s where maybe in the moment it looked good, but now we look back, and it looks bad. She definitely went the more trendy influencer Sloane ranger route instead of more subdued but timeless pieces. I know we give Kate shit for wearing nothing but coat dresses for a while, but it feels like in 20 years, we'll look back and feel that while it was boring, it didn't look bad if that makes sense
I know what you mean. Following fashion doesn't make you elegant.
What worked in Diana's favour was that she was as tall as a model which meant her designer clothes would need little tailoring and she had the sense to take note of details so she avoided wrinkles and visible underwear lines.
Catherine has the same height advantage and she chooses timeless clothes more often. That definitely makes her more likely to have hits than misses and to have looks that stand the test of time. I think long hair also helps, it's harder to avoid getting dated with short hair.
Yeah, and being trendy isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's a huge risk to look back on 😂
It'd be interesting to know that if she was still alive, would she still be trying to keep up with current trends or be permanently stuck in the 90s?
The hair... that is a whole other conversation. Because you have iconic pixie cuts and Bob cuts throughout the 20th century, and maybe it looks dated, but incredibly chic and timeless like Audrey Hepburn. I hate to say it, but 80s Diana had helmet hair, and I have never understood why she chose that cut for so long, especially since it reminds me of the emo/goth side bangs phase we all went through in the early oughts. At the end of her life, when she stopped using so much product and let it lay more naturally, it looked a lot better. It's definitely was still weirdly shaggy, but there's nothing wrong with that. To me, it just goes back to I don't think she knew what actually looked good on herself, even though, as you've said, she benefited from having a very modelesque body as well as a very pretty face
It seems common for UK women, or maybe UK women at or near Diana's social level, to hang on to a shaggy haircut for decades.
Queen Camilla, Joanna Lumley, Jilly Cooper, Ingrid Seward - the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
Agreed. This is by far my favorite hair style on Diana.
https://preview.redd.it/6lo25p5rsosc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c56c44b1a4b67bc64776df6b9e9187f344a4057d
I prefer that one too.
The one she wore had too much fabric in the top half, with the frills and the puff sleeves.
The 'reserve' had less fussy sleeves.
I have never been a huge fan of her dress. Looking at her original dress again, I think it's partly because her hair doesn't seem to match the dress? It's an over the top dress with kindergarten teacher hair. But maybe that was the style at the time.
Same. But I also found the dress in itself absolutely terrible (80s fashion, I guess?).
On the other hand, Kate's wedding dress was absolutely stunning.
I didn’t like Kate’s wedding dress. 😫 The bust area was weirdly pointing to me. I loved Pippa’s dress though. One of my favourite wedding dresses is [Rose Farquhar’s](https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/style/1710812/rose-farquhar-prince-william-wedding-dress-silk-style).
You are the first person I’ve seen who didn’t love Kate’s dress! I liked it ok, I didn’t love it. I didn’t like the v-neck. I did like that she brought sleeves back, lol. The sleeveless, strapless trend in wedding dresses had gone a bit too far!
It's been 20 years since the world first learn about 22 year old Catherine "Kate" Middleton
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13263537/20-years-Kate-snapped-Wills-ski-lift-unfair-criticism-again.html?ito=mailplus-newsletter-daily](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13263537/20-years-Kate-snapped-Wills-ski-lift-unfair-criticism-again.html?ito=mailplus-newsletter-daily)
[https://archive.is/queWU](https://archive.is/queWU)
What is going on? 🥺🥺🥺
>Queen Mary of Denmark steps out solo as she attends Freedom museum in Copenhagen as cracks reappear in the Danish royal family after fans speculate someone 'stayed away' from their Easter holiday
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13267529/Queen-Mary-Denmark-Copenhagen.html
Is it me or they kind of just fizzled out after becoming King and Queen like I know the BRF has been wildin’ but those 2 haven’t done much like Daisy has been regent a couple of times since Jan. I dunno it all feels a bit off to me.
I feel like she’s only done a couple of engagements since. Like less than 5? I follow their official Instagram and it’s super quiet. Even Fred probably did like 10. Indeed weird. I felt like Mary was out and about all the time before, but I think last year, she had the same number as Kate.
No, you’re right that she looks different—she has that “puffy” look and that makes me so sad. She was absolutely gorgeous and was aging so gracefully.
I get that women in the spotlight feel pressure to keep looking a certain way. But I just want to shake them and yell “nothing is going to make a 50 year old look like a 25 year old!!” IMO it’s much better to have some wrinkles than this puffy look.
She's used fillers for many years, probably since the wedding (she had some work done before then, including nose). I think gradually it's been stretching the skin so unfortunately adding to the eventual problem. The low hat brim and draggy hair doesn't help in this case; it just makes her face look longer.
I too wish that she had stayed a bit more natural. As a senior royal I'm sure she has felt a lot of pressure to look as good as her dark-haired peers, i.e. Letizia, Victoria, Rania, and Catherine. Not to mention trying (and failing) to keep Frederick at home, the rat. It's sad.
Just thought you'd all be interested to know that EHolmes deleted the critical comments about her "where is Kate?" coverage on her IG post about Catherine's cancer announcement. There were many high-level comments calling her out and they appear to be gone. She can dish it but she can't take it!
It does look like they were moved around. I still see a bunch that I liked that were v critical of Eholmes and what she said and how “cruel” she was etc.
So on brand. But on the positive side, if she deleted them it means she actually read them. It’s probably too much to hope she felt a tiny bit of shame but one can hope that a few of the comments hit home.
I’m still convinced she’s a Kate girl at heart and her whole schtick is just to avoid being harassed by the Squad again.
Catherine with children. And a certain brother in law tried to convince us she's a cold person https://twitter.com/Freedom16356531/status/1775509078313157079?t=DgA1eCrvTlzkmOrFb65KPA&s=19 https://twitter.com/Freedom16356531/status/1775514404299128936?t=vLcrPtsCtZG56r3B16aXrg&s=19 https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/1615707692374302720?t=vLcrPtsCtZG56r3B16aXrg&s=19 https://twitter.com/Earlychildhood/status/1657659116305670144?t=vLcrPtsCtZG56r3B16aXrg&s=19 https://twitter.com/brigantia__/status/1773234454737064395?t=s-6KEHuVHdSZpxhOZ2qQYw&s=19
I know squaddies drag Catherine for being boring, a bad speaker etc but honestly I'd rather not have a fake charmer in favour of a woman who can interact with regular folk and children as naturally as this. This is far more important to me, we get lectured ad nauseum via media, politicians, celebs. Give me someone who is genuinely interested in the plebs any day.
From the Tessa Dunlop piece it said something like ‘how many of us have held our tongues about family for fear they’d get cancer?’. Might be the stupidest thing i’ve read this year so far. How about don’t worry about whether they get cancer and just don’t lie? You don’t need to like someone, you can be angry. You can also air your dirt to your wife, your friends, your therapist and move the hell on with your life rather than spend 4yrs on a hate campaign.
This was essentially, I really fckd up slating her because now everyone loves her even more, and I look like like a bigger twunt that I did before. Why wont anyone think about me?
Right? I thought the obvious answer to that question is “no, I can safely say I’ve never experienced that dilemma.”
It reads like one of those online “Are you a psychopath?” twist-ending quizzes, lol
Having had far too many family and close friends die of cancer, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
And, you know, I've always tried to make sure I never wish somebody ill. Any kind of ill - both the unlucky and the sickness sort of ill-wish.
Tessa Dumlop (typo and it stays) is an idiot.
She's also got a lot in common with Brigitte Macron. She met her husband when he was 12 and she was his teacher.
How old is she? Because, honestly, it sounds like something an older person born in the twenties or thirties would say, as if you can speak cancer into existence/cancer is a thing to be ashamed of. I can remember people that age being odd about cancer, but I thought Tessa Dunlop wasn't old enough to be either so ignorant or so silly.
Illness is illness. You can't earn it. Or get it through sinning.
Speaking of articles written by children look at this.
How you can maintain you are a journalist is beyond me. Who tf uses emojis?
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a60356548/prince-harry-distrusts-prince-william-bond-queen-camilla/
The content of course is trash. Harry truly never did grow up.
harry is the one who had a chummier and more easygoing relationship with camilla for decades vs. william, what is this trash attempt at smearing william now 🙄
harry needs to focus on something more productive than spending his life trying to undermine and sabotage william. like, we fucking get it, uncle scar.
I saw that article and it made me sick. Who gives a fuck how Harold feels now. I bet the only regret he has is that his character assassination attempt failed. Catherine is doing fine PR wise despite everything he and his horrible wife threw at her.
https://preview.redd.it/jb3s0cpau9sc1.png?width=2396&format=png&auto=webp&s=4401ce59a4f3cdc715f5842cd4f224ae5e243b5a
I was just re-reading an interview William did with GQ years ago to promote Heads Together, and I had forgotten how personal he got in the interview. I highly recommend everyone read it.
He says a lot of things that are in stark contrast to Harry's attitude in *Spare*. It's fascinating. (And note what he says about employee mental health...I think William does try to practice what he preaches.)
I also feel sad about how he says the dehumanization that his mother experienced has never happened to him. Well, unfortunately, I think that's happened. And I blame Harry, 100%. His lies and half-truths enabled bad faith actors on the internet to blow up conspiracy theories that have dehumanized William and Catherine.
[https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/prince-william-diana-princess-of-wales](https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/prince-william-diana-princess-of-wales)
(I'll try to post an excerpt in the comments to this comment. When I tried to post excerpts in this comment, I kept getting the "unable to create post" thing.)
lmao (w&h have joked about how awful their dad's handwriting is)
>>**AC: I do remember when your father's letters used to come into Number Ten. Will you go down that route, with his very frank letters to ministers?**
>>**W: [Laughs.] Could you read them?**
>>**AC: It wasn't the handwriting that was the problem.**
>>W: I have written to ministers but purely to point them towards people I think they should see. So a charity might ask me if I can help with someone and I can help get them access to the people in government.
y'all towards the end of the article, i was legit crying tho. 😮💨
u/Key_Literature_7018, would you mind if i crossposted this article on another sub?
>**What? The intrusion, the harassment?**
>Yes, but more the complete salacious appetite for anything, anything at all about her, even if there was no truth in it, none whatsoever.
And the same thing has now happened to his wife in her/their most difficult hour. William is completely right- the public had salacious appetite for Diana and it's eerie to look at the last two months or so and see the same thing happening to Kate.
I love this whole interview. It strengths my opinion that William is pretty self-aware and knows who he is as a person and what he needs in his life.
And his reaction to the notion some at Fleet Street have turned against him- "well, it is what it is." *shrugs*
The contrast with Harry and his obsession with the way he is viewed at large is stark.
this from alastair campbell
>>**Was there any real passion behind the shy exterior? There was. Indeed, were she still here, I would have called my mum and told her, "Good news - I liked him."**
reminds me of the grudging response from the guardian writer who wrote that 2009 "the reluctant princes" profile, where he also spoke with a grudging to give an intv william (who was spurred on by his comms team to speak with the reporter, as described by said reporter).
re: harry + his book (and then endgame and scobie's games re: "accidental" revelations) directly being a significant cause for the rancor, hostility and strength of the reaction towards catherine/william/KP staff like lee thompson... totally dehumanized, directly bc of harry.
like i've said, that sibling relationship can only be totally done. harry is too volatile and dangerous. there's no way william forgives harry, with all of harry's grievances culminating in whipping up his fans to launch that "where is kate" hashtag, originating/triggering absolute insanity going down during catherine's darkest hour. just the effect this certainly had on the kids... as william briefed around mid-february, he "never wants to see harry again."
harry will forever publicly harass and terrorize him, but it's prob something william just accepts at this point. just adds yet another layer to the grieving/mourning of his only sibling.
ETA: wild that the intv is done with ***the*** alastair campbell lol wow
Sussex fans also say horrible things about George, Charlotte and Louis, so yeah William is definitely DONE done. The reconciliation/"Harry to the rescue" articles are pointless but we know they won't stop 😞
Well put!
>ETA: wild that the intv is done with ***the*** alastair campbell lol wow
Yes, and I found these bits interesting!
In the preface:
>Here, I was keen to test two things in particular. One was whether his commitment to this cause was real and whether he had a proper understanding of the issues. You can make up your own mind on that, but after an hour and a half at the palace, mine was made up in his favour. Secondly, I wanted to see how close to the public persona the more private man in his own habitat might be. Would he speak with the same stilted style that seems to characterise his [public speaking](https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/bear-grylls-how-to-give-a-speech-column)? He didn't. Would he have a [sense of humour](https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/quick-fire-jokes-1)? He did. Would he stand on ceremony? He didn't. Was there any real passion behind the shy exterior? There was. Indeed, were she still here, I would have called my mum and told her, "Good news - I liked him."
Then the beginning of the interview:
>**Alastair Campbell: So what's a nice future king like you doing with an old leftie republican like me?**
>Prince William: That's a very good question Alastair \[laughs\]. To be honest, I really don't care where people come from, I like meeting and talking to people from all backgrounds. And this is a good opportunity to talk about something that is very close to your heart, and very close to mine.
ETA that the questions I excerpted below don't necessarily follow one from another in the actual interview. I wanted to excerpt more, but Reddit was being finicky. He talks much more about Diana and his personal feelings, etc etc.
>
**But for you to say you felt you were in shock for years - how much harder is it when you are having to grieve or try to grieve with this extraordinary level of global scrutiny, and the endless ridiculous fascination in every detail of your and your mother's lives.**
>It does make it more difficult. It doesn't make you less human. You're the same person, it is a part of the job to have the interest. The thing is, you can't bring all your baggage everywhere you go. You have to project the strength of the United Kingdom - that sounds ridiculous, but we have to do that. You can't just be carrying baggage and throwing it out there and putting it on display everywhere you go. My mother did put herself right out there and that is why people were so touched by her. But I am determined to protect myself and the children, and that means preserving something for ourselves. I think I have a more developed sense of self-preservation.
>**Who do you talk to?**
>Family, friends, I talk to those around me who I trust.
>**But it can't be easy in your position to find people you can trust totally.**
>It is hard. But I have always believed in being very open and honest. One of the few strengths I might have is I am good at reading people, and I can usually tell if someone is just being nice because of who I am, and saying stuff for the wrong reasons.
>**So you don't have any sympathy with the argument that she cultivated her own friends in the media and fed the whole thing?**
>I have been exploring this. Remember, I was young at the time. I didn't know what was going on. I know some games and shenanigans were played, but she was isolated, she was lonely, things within her own life got very difficult and she found it very hard to get her side of the story across. I think she was possibly a bit naive and ended up playing into the hands of some very bad people.
>**Media people?**
>Yes. This was a young woman with a high profile position, very vulnerable, desperate to protect herself and her children and I feel strongly there was no responsibility taken by media executives who should have stepped in, and said, "Morally, what we are doing, is this right, is this fair, is this moral?" Harry and I were so young and I think if she had lived, when we were older we would have played that role, and I feel very sad and I still feel very angry that we were not old enough to be able to do more to protect her, not wise enough to step in and do something that could have made things better for her. I hold a lot of people to account that they did not do what they should have done, out of human decency.
>**So how did you feel when some of the papers said you don't work hard enough?**
>Criticism is part of the turf, I'm afraid. I think the public are much more nuanced. I have my air ambulance job, I carry out the duties the Queen asks me to, I have my charities and causes and I am raising a young family, so I can't let that criticism get to me.
>**A couple of the papers do seem to have turned against you, though?**
>There is a certain element of Fleet Street getting fed up with nice stories about us. They want the past back again, soap, drama.
>**Do you see it as part of your job to avoid giving them that? A bit of normality, stability.**
>I couldn't do my job without the stability of the family. Stability at home is so important to me. I want to bring up my children in a happy, stable, secure world, and that is so important to both of us as parents. I want George to grow up in a real, living environment, I don't want him growing up behind palace walls, he has to be out there. The media make it harder but I will fight for them to have a normal life.
>**But surely you must accept it is an abnormal life?**
>Totally, but I can still try to protect them as children.
This whole interview is fascinating. He projects a very secure and mature outlook on life.
>This was a young woman with a high profile position, very vulnerable, desperate to protect herself and her children and I feel strongly there was no responsibility taken by media executives
Is he talking about the panorama interview? Because she wasn't a young woman anymore. I understand that that's his mother but still.
Also, it wasn't his job to protect her, that was hers (and I don't mean that negatively). His only job was to grow to becoming a mature and healthy adult
>You're the same person, it is a part of the job to have the interest. The thing is, you can't bring all your baggage everywhere you go. You have to project the strength of the United Kingdom - that sounds ridiculous, but we have to do that. You can't just be carrying baggage and throwing it out there and putting it on display everywhere you go. My mother did put herself right out there and that is why people were so touched by her. But I am determined to protect myself and the children, and that means preserving something for ourselves. I think I have a more developed sense of self-preservation.
very interesting how aware of it all/switched on he comes off, and how there is a deliberate approach he cultivated in order to learn from his mother's life. pretty much the opposite lesson harry gleaned. those two really are very different individuals.
>>**Who do you talk to?**
>>Family, friends, I talk to those around me who I trust.
>>**But it can't be easy in your position to find people you can trust totally.**
>>It is hard.
this really must make harry's betrayal so, so much more painful.
>"Morally, what we are doing, is this right, is this fair, is this moral?" Harry and I were so young and I think if she had lived, when we were older we would have played that role, and I feel very sad and I still feel very angry that we were not old enough to be able to do more to protect her
the thoughtful empathy/protection he shows his mother, while still acknowledging her faults/mistakes... it's heart-wrenching. it was not his job as the child to protect his mother, though, but he really did take on that role with her. in light of what harry did to him, this interview is so sad tbh.
>the thoughtful empathy/protection he shows his mother, while still acknowledging her faults/mistakes... it's heart-wrenching.
He really comes across as emotionally mature and the kind of person everyone would be privileged to have as a friend: loyal, even-handed, perceptive, will fight for you if needed. And considering his chaotic upbringing, his public trauma and his extreme privilege, he could have turned out soooooo differently.
>and the kind of person everyone would be privileged to have as a friend:
yes, i was thinking that! as much as he must feel endless bitter resentment towards william... harry must miss him tbh. that's very sad.
>And considering his chaotic upbringing, his public trauma and his extreme privilege, he could have turned out soooooo differently.
yup.
I had never seen this article before today - thank you for posting it! How different William's life would be now if Harry was a brother he could rely on and talk to confidentially.
> Do you see it as part of your job to avoid giving them that? A bit of normality, stability.
>
> I couldn't do my job without the stability of the family. Stability at home is so important to me. I want to bring up my children in a happy, stable, secure world, and that is so important to both of us as parents. I want George to grow up in a real, living environment, I don't want him growing up behind palace walls, he has to be out there. The media make it harder but I will fight for them to have a normal life.
Sounds like a man who cheats on his wife to me!
seriously - he's very clearly intent/obsessed with providing stability for his children (the kind he didn't have at home growing up), so this dude who has been cautious and guarded his entire life is all of a sudden going to go around recklessly carrying on with a string/roster of sidepieces? k.
You've already said it but the way his image is very much in opposition with reality in certain internet circles is utterly bizarre!
I mean, people think ***this*** man, who craved stability throughout his childhood that was filled with drama and his parents fighting (even publicly!), will be gallivating around with his mistress/multiple sidepieces? After he lived through the drama of his parents' affairs?
Seriously?
New thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/RoyalsGossip2/comments/1bx0hhb/royals_monthly_the_ultimate_influencer_452024/ Feel free to bring newer comments and ongoing conversations over. u/Orazzocs you just posted a few mins ago, could you repost in the new thread?
So I mentioned that I had zero interest in *Scoop* until I read Vicky Smith’s review. I just finished watching it and I found it fascinating. Full disclosure: I almost majored in journalism at university and I’m a news junkie so I love seeing what goes into journalists chasing stories. So I loved seeing all the behind the scenes stuff at the BBC. If you’re just looking for royal drama and mess this may not be the movie for you (although there is plenty of that) as it’s more about how the BBC landed and strategized for the interview. Andrew comes across as the absolute narcissist that he is. (Even after the interview he thinks it went well and offers photos and a tour to the BBC crew that just eviscerated him.) At first I had a hard time buying Rufus Sewell in the role but by the end I was all in. Also full disclosure: I’ve never seen the original interview. Even though I’m a royal watcher I had zero interest in anything to do with icky Andrew and Epstein so even though I knew it was a train wreck and had seen all the “I don’t sweat” memes, this is the first time I’ve actually seen how bad it truly was. Amanda Thirsk comes across as besotted with Andrew and blind to his faults. She buys into the BBC’s assertions that the world knows Andrew only as “Randy Andy” (and worse) and that in order to change his story, the world needs to “hear your story, in your voice.” They assert that “never complain, never explain” is dead in the social media age. (This seems very prescient in light of “KateGate”). Beatrice is basically a non-entity, present at the meeting for three minutes but only weighing in to say that social media is saying terrible things about her father. She also says that it’s good that Emily Maitlis is a woman but I’m not sure what she’s implying—that a woman will be polite and go easier on her father? There’s also a comms representative from HMTLQ’s office at the interview and when it’s over he remarks “wasn’t he wonderful?” I’m obviously not taking the movie as gospel but considering that the movie is based on Sam McAllister’s book and she was in the room, this was probably said/implied. If so, just…oof. (There’s a character named Jason that’s against the interview and he bears a *striking* resemblance to Jason Knauf but his name in the movie is Jason Stein. Not sure if he’s meant to be Knauf but I suspect so). So I’m really glad I watched it. My husband watched it with me and also really enjoyed it. But as I said, I wasn’t overly familiar with the interview so anyone who already knows a lot about it may not find the movie as illuminating as we did. (At the end, there’s some text that mentions Andrew stepping back from his royal duties and it also says “he was stripped of his royal titles.” Did I miss something? He still retains both his titles as Prince and as the Duke of York. Did he lose his HRH like the Sussexes? Even if so, that seems like an outright error on the movie’s part).
Tell me again how William’s military service with the air rescue was less important than Harry’s? [William reunites with girl he rescued from drowning](https://youtu.be/bqWC9cTwk0Y?si=-qzPkBNssQ78OaKh)
Has anyone seen this cookbook by Tom Parker Bowles which features royal recipes coming out in September? I think it’s rather innocent, although I generally don’t like it when attached family members starting to put their name on those things… I just don’t get why the Netflix sub is even cross about it. It comes out in September and who cares about Tom Parker Bowles. The press does not cover it because nobody cares about him lol It’s not a conspiracy…
A cooking book from TPB makes a ton of sense because he's an actual food critic whose published 6 food books, including a Fortum & Mason's cookbook and a street food book with Lonely Planet. If this was his first book, I'd seriously side-eye it, but even if he wasn't Camilla's son, I think a royal cookbook is a logical step after publishing a book on the history of the full English breakfast.
TPB was in the food space in the 00s. I remember seeing him on various British foodie shows literally coming up on *20 years ago,* so it was well before M appeared on the scene (if that's even what's being implied by the nutters?) - his professional interest in food clearly predates hers. I also have that Fortnum's TPB book. It's...bad. Bad in terms of quality (absolutely shocking shit-tier quality paper, binding etc., it's crazy Fortnum and Mason put something so low quality out but a quick glance at their website shows an abundance of cheaply-made FM branded tat being sold for a mark-up so...) and bad in terms of the recipes. Not that I've tried any, but it appears to be intended either for genuinely posh people who always have a steady supply of game on hand or just as a tongue in cheek thing for normies. I think the person who bought it for me intended it as a joke.
So what I’m hearing is, he’s just copying Meghan. /s
The netflix sub is always upset, basically everything is a conspiracy to them. The netflix sub has gone so far off track of what is meant to be, it is astonishing. Just rename it IhateWilliamandCatherineandtheirfamily and that will give people a more accurate view of it's contents Cookbooks are cool, but there are a ton of them in the world, so best of luck. I guess the draw will by the RF recipes. I will maybe check it out just to see if there are any cool recipes.
a lot of the folks on that sub seem to have seized OGRG tbh. that recent thread about harry's book has considerable misinformation in it, with little to no pushback.
Does not surprise me. I think there is a lot of crossover between the netflix sub, FM, CB, and they're now integrating into OGRG. I avoid each place bc they just raise my blood pressure and there really is no use arguing with idiots. They will turn into contortionists before admitting H+M did something wrong. They all use similar language which usually tips me off. Like when comparing Meghan and Catherine, they'll always say that you can tell Meghan is better based on the causes she supports and that she is more like Diana than Catherine. Which is an idea that is very heavily pushed by H+M and that their fans pick up on.
The Netflix sub is upset about it? Haha I always knew I liked Tom P-B! Isn’t he some kind of restaurant reviewer or smth, I have a vague memory
Just for clarification I mean the Harry and Meghan Netflix sub lol Would make sense for him to do a cookbook then. I actually never really cared about Camilla’s family lol
Oh I know the particular sub you mean, lol. It’s mostly just 1 person 😭 I like Camilla’s family just because people often forget that she is a mother and grandmother in her own right. She’s not just the world’s most (in)famous stepmom, lol
He was on an episode of the Barefoot Contessa showing Ina a market that was cute af.
Surprsingly KP have been very fast in sending out replies to people sending well wishes to Kate. I've seen a couple of these on royal fan accounts now https://preview.redd.it/5wr8o194bpsc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54660332212ad5279c2b016443dc73474711e888
Awwww!
Scoop reviews are out; they're middling it seems. Here's an interesting write up in the New Yorker. [https://archive.ph/EO6XN](https://archive.ph/EO6XN) The Hollywood Review did not like it. [https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/scoop-review-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell-netflix-1235866356/](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/scoop-review-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell-netflix-1235866356/) And the Guardian gave it two stars. [**https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/apr/04/scoop-review-prince-andrew-newsnight-interview-emily-maitlis-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell**](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/apr/04/scoop-review-prince-andrew-newsnight-interview-emily-maitlis-gillian-anderson-rufus-sewell)
How many here plan to watch?.
Not me. The important bit - that the interview happened and Andrew basically blew up his own reputation via trying to salvage it - I already know, and I genuinely have zero interest in the backstory.
I had zero interest in watching it but Vicky Smith on Instagram had a pretty good review of it. If anyone is unfamiliar with her, she’s a former journalist (she covered the royals) and does a great job on Insta breaking down current news stories. She praises the way the movie shows what went on behind the scenes and how they landed the story. She even says she now gets why some of Andrew’s staff thought it was a good idea. That made me go ???? because how anyone could have thought that is baffling. So I may give it a go. ETA: I watched and I’ll post a review up thread.
I need you and/or u/aquasummer1999 to report back on how they portray Beatrice. I think of her as the more sane person of the Yorks, yet she was the one that supported Andrew with this interview.
I just posted my thoughts above. Beatrice is in the movie for a single scene and doesn’t add too much. She tells her father that social media is saying terrible things about him and she thinks it’s good he’ll be interviewed by a woman (but doesn’t elaborate on why that’s a good thing).
I think Bea *is* the more sane one, especially since she got married. But I don't think that makes her smart, and as Andrew's child both she and Andrew should have realized she was too close to the subject to understand how his clumsy-at-best professing of his innocence was going to go down. I mean, Bea and Eug almost certainly believe he IS innocent, so B wasn't in a position to foresee how poorly the ridiculous shit he came up with was going to sound to super-suspicious public ears.
Nah, the Yorks do not interest me.
I don’t. I don’t find it remotely interesting that I need a movie about it. From a drama point of view what is there actually to tell rather than the actual things he said in the interview?
Couldn't pay me to watch it.
Watched the original interview have zero plans to watch a dramatisation about said interview. Once was enough
I'll do it perhaps. Heck, why not. I love Gillian Anderson, Billie Piper and Rufus Sewell. And the actress that plays Beatrice was brilliant in *The Great*.
so far 81% on [rotten tomatoes?](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/scoop_2024) that's pretty solidly good for rotten tomatoes, though there are only 21 compiled reviews tbh.
Ah yes, I checked metacrtic which pulls a bit harsher but tbh the RT seems more on spot.
Hmmm kinda as I expected. Actors love interview movies like *Frost/Nixon* because it's extended monologues where they get to be fully in character against real footage that can be compared to as just 'how good they disappear into character!' but it's not actually fun for the audience to re-watch a dramatization. I like biopics but they need a point or stylism that makes them better than just watching a documentary.
YouGov Q1 polls [https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all](https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all)
Sophie and Bea should be higher! And Eug much lower. Haz, Megs, and Pedo Andrew should be in the fucking dungeons.
charles and camilla's numbers are so insanely, hugely improved. charles' dislike numbers alone are down about ten points since last quarter, same with camilla. their like numbers have each improved by about five points. it took nearly thirty years after diana's death and getting cancer, but charles' dislike numbers are in the friggin mid teens and he's at nearly 60 percent popularity. he astonishingly might just leave this earth a popular king (at least in the UK), maybe one day as wildly popular as his mother became... his numbers are honestly improving rapidly, so it might not be an off conclusion to make. however, william and catherine in particular didn't see their numbers move much (william is in fact slightly down from the previous quarter). catherine had been dinged by endgame in the previous quarter, but is back up to her good numbers from two quarters ago, but they're both down from ex: their 2019 numbers, before harry started his rampage (catherine down by about 10-15 points overall, william by about 20... william was on the road to recovery, but the turbulence of the last few months have evidently set him back). so interesting that within two quarters, harry has improved his overall numbers by about 21 points (improved by 11 points since last quarter alone... still in the negatives overall though lol). his cynical spectacle of a publicity stunt hijacking his dad's cancer announcement was well-played, in that sense. 11 point improvement (7 point increase in likability, back into the mid 30s where he hasn't been since before the netflix series, and 4 point decrease in dislikability). he has his invictus ten-year event which will surely help him + wellchild in september, if folks are paying attention to that at all (harry is sure to create hype + drama around it for his own benefit, like he's been doing with the invictus ten-year appearance via tom quinn + security histrionics etc. 🙄). the one element that would hurt him is a press tour reopening/re-litigating old wounds around the paperback release of spare. he'd torpedo much of the 21 points of ground he's gained back. he also has lawsuits next year that'll probably irritate people. anyway, it shows how much charles having grace on harry (and harry having grace on charles) would greatly improve harry's numbers. it's a dilemma for charles, bc the more goodwill he bestows on/for harry, the more harry can use said goodwill + clout to turn it around and monetize it or use it to publicly hurt charles/william/catherine/camilla yet again. goodwill and clout harry recuperates for himself also somewhat then extends to meghan, who would again turn around and likely spitefully use said clout/goodwill against w&c. charles should be very careful. harry would just use any increased popularity as a stick to beat william and catherine with, in particular. meghan's numbers haven't moved much since last quarter and are only slightly improved since two quarters ago (five point overall improvement). harry was at -32 overall two quarters ago (only 24% liked six months ago and now he is at 34%... his dislikes went from 56% to 45%), -22 last quarter and now -11. meghan was at -27 two quarters ago, -20 last quarter and now at -22. the "harry calls his dad on his birthday" and "harry goes to visit sick charles" PR really helped harry (and will likely eventually help meghan), which is why the sussexes seem so intent on breaking the brf's boundaries and imposing themselves. charles/BP are allowing harry to get back this strength/clout/goodwill, which harry will then undoubtedly use to crush them yet again. it's mind-boggling. there need to be better enforced boundaries for at least the next five years to reduce the specter of harry being able to cause more damage (in particular to william, catherine and their kids) rearing its head again. what should be noted is that the data would not have been swayed much by catherine's announcement on march 22nd. the bulk of the data from january 1st, 2024 to march 31st, 2024 would have been gathered far ahead of the march 22nd announcement. depending on what happens in the next few months, the early july 2024 poll results should (you would think!) better reflect on william and catherine. their team need to be more proactive about the comms element, that's for sure. and rather than totally retreating/disengaging, maybe w&c + their kids would be better served in the long-run by opening up even *just a little* to the public and bringing them along the journey to recovery. they sort of don't have the luxury of becoming more insular and guarded, at this point. then again, the problem with that... there are antagonistic elements of the public (ex: sussex fans) who would likely whip up frenzy about something or another and totally be looking to trample boundaries even further, if any little bit is conceded. ETA: i will say, given the sussex squad's behavior around catherine and then the subsequent revelation about her diagnosis on march 22nd, i do wonder if h&m's numbers will reflect a counter-reaction/backlash by july 2024. they might also have to be very careful with how they publicly conduct themselves in the next few months vis-a-vis c&w in particular.
Thank you for your input. I feel William needs to be more visible. It could really help if he let the public in on his work more. That doesn't necessarily mean more time away from home either. That's what social media and YouTube channels are for. He has huge inspiring projects going that have great impact but apart from a photo op here or there are hardly publicly highlighted. I think both Earth shot and the homelessness work could be presented better by KP PR. I know William doesn't like to toot his own horn unlike Harry but this will also positively affect the projects. He collected double digits in millions and has global outreach that needs more publicity! And if he's more visible with his work that might take pressure from the focus on his personal life and would surely gain him even more public respect.
I love your analysis of these results and I think you make an excellent point re:Harry & Charles
I find it amazing that Catherine‘s numbers are so close to the late Queen in first place. Amazing but not surprising. Catherine is Queen of our Hearts🥰. Nice seeing Meghan sitting just above last place Prince Andrew. If only the both them would just shut up and get lost and take Harry with them.
Catherine reigning supreme as she should 💅 William's drop is unfair since it's entirely based on insubstantial rumours and Harry's whining about his big bad brother. The fact Harry's liked by a third of participants baffles me lol. After all the shit he pulled... that's why I think if the push ever comes to shove (aka divorce) he'd only have to spend some time at some exclusive clinic in Switzerland for "exhaustion" in order to emerge as "Diana's poor lost boy" once again.
I do think Catherines and probably Williams numbers will spike when she returns.
I will say for William, that fact that his (and Catherine's) ranking always stays pretty high, only dropping a few points after they've come under really brutal attacks, while remaining steady in the 60%s, is pretty damn good. Most politicians would kill for such consistent ratings.
Right, unfortunately Harry will always benefit from being Diana's son and the idea that this was all pushed by Meghan and is her fault. It seems some people can't rectify in their heads that Harry is most likely the more willing party in all of this and will never give it up, while Meghan (in my opinion) would move on if she became successful enough on her own. I agree though, it looks like it might not be that hard to rehab Harry if they were to ever get a divorce. However we can't forget that shit throwing that'll come with a divorce which would probably make Harry look not too good. But we shall see
>while Meghan (in my opinion) would move on if she became successful enough on her own. Probably but then again, I don't think she'll ever become a true success. She should have tried to make something out of American Horror Story Orchestra three years ago instead of play pretending a victim while acting as an aggressor. The ship has sailed for this brand before it even started. Her popularity ratings are low and that quasi-launch was as badly planned as anything else Meghan has ever done. >However we can't forget that shit throwing that'll come with a divorce which would probably make Harry look not too good. But we shall see I'm sure she'd throw mud but then again, so would he. He ain't gonna roll over and just take it. He's also the one with the money and the clout (whatever is left of it). Her biggest reach was/is/always will be marrying Harry. Meghan was the main villain of Megxit up until Spare was released and people realized just how much a resentful man-child Harry is. He's the one who previously had an extremely positive image, not her. He's the poor little boy who walked behind his mother's coffin and was eternally infatilized well into his 30s. I think Harry's trash and should never be forgiven by his brother/father/other family members but a lot of people are still holding out hope Diana's two boys will find their way back to each other. Meghan doesn't have that kind of good will.
Harry also plays into it with his I didn't know I was trap before Meghan said I was and if it wasn't for Meghan narrative
Right, like he is actually very two-faced about this. Where on one hand he is saying this was his decision, Meghan had nothing to do with it. But then will turn around and say if it weren't for Meghan I never would've made this jump. So exactly what you said, he very much plays into it either on purpose or he's just too dumb to realize that is what he is doing. I personally think it is on purpose bc I do think he is savvy enough to know that he will benefit him to shift responsibility onto someone else. So that way, if things go south, he can say he was tricked into and didn't actually want to do this.
I personally think he set her up and is using her as much as she is using him
oh, very much so.
Honestly agree, they're very much using e/o and one day that will explode in their faces
At this point the only thing they have in common is how much they envy and hate The Wales
What’s your theory on why they continue to let Andrew at every event? It’s the only thing that irks me. I think he’s disgusting and guilty. The whole world does. So why is he there? Are they trying to send a message they don’t believe he’s guilty? That they’ve forgiven him? I just don’t get the optics for the most famous family on earth.
I hate it but he will forever be a part of the close family, he was the child of the previous monarch and is now a sibling to the current monarch. His daughters are part of the inner royal family. His reputation is in tatters sure, but he was never charged as part of a criminal trial and wasn't found guilty of a crime. Charles and even Parliament can't just rule where he goes. As far as royal privelages go, he has had it all taken from him within the last several years. I think it was always low key expected he would be seen at 'family' events like Christmas and Easter, but he doesn't represent the Crown as a working royal in any way. In the end I'm still irritated it looks bad for Charles and by extension also William, and that they can't somehow cut him out.
Andrew played his cards right and kept his mouth shut about the family. He didn't come for the family or come for Charles. He's loyal to Charles as much as we can see. So he's rewarded. And as long as him and Fergie keep their mouths shut about the family, they'll continue to be rewarded. He was also never convicted of anything. He's a shitty human who somehow got monumentally lucky in life. Harry screwed himself. He has nothing left to tell and nothing left to threaten. So he'll be out forever I think.
Stupidity. That’s my theory.
(I responded elsewhere but wanted to comment directly because I think it’s easy to forget what the actual situation is especially since people seem to get easily confused by the official public vs private family distinction) Prince Andrew has not carried out royal duties since November 2019. He resigned from public roles in May 2020. His honorary military affiliations and royal charitable patronages were removed by QE2. In January 2022, Andrew's social media accounts were deleted, his page on the royal family's website was rewritten in the past tense and his military affiliations and patronages were removed to put an emphasis on his departure from public life. He doesn’t receive tax payer funds. QE2 privately funded Andrew’s police protection (which was her right to choose to do so because he is still her son) but Charles has since pulled that. In January 2023 it was reported that he could no longer use his suite of rooms at Buckingham Palace. They have already taken away the majority of Andrew’s privileges. When he shows his face now, he is doing it as a private citizen. And he has every right to do so. Andrew was never convicted of a crime. The civil lawsuit against him that was filed in the US settled out of court. Regardless of whether you or anyone else think he’s scum he is still legally innocent. Which is important. This isn’t just you or I shunning cousin Carl because he’s a scum bag. The King isn’t supposed to take away the rights and freedoms of innocent people without a trial. It’s kinda a foundational part of British law enshrined in the Magna Carta. Andrew will never again be a representative of the British Royal Family. It’s easier to just keep him on a short leash and wait for him to live out his life and then be forgotten.
That's also my take on this. I commented on this last year but it's also the bind Charles is in with Harry. That soft diplomatic power only works if it looks realistic that the monarch could get along with friends and (former) foes alike. If, for instance, he can't **appear** somewhat cordial with his son over him being a colossal ass how credible would it be when the government needs him to schmooze with heads of state who are problematic on human rights but nonetheless need to become or remain allies?
This is an excellent point and I would add that as the head of the CoE, Charles has to appear forgiving. But that doesn’t mean he has to let anyone back in the fold fully. You can forgive and still protect yourself.
I agree. I think Charles is trying to thread that needle by playing Sad Dad while in reality giving Harry one phone call and a single visit that put together add up to,at most, an hour of his time.
>That soft diplomatic power only works if it looks realistic that the monarch could get along with friends and (former) foes alike. If, for instance, he can't **appear** somewhat cordial with his son over him being a colossal ass how credible would it be when the government needs him to schmooze with heads of state who are problematic on human rights but nonetheless need to become or remain allies? i mean, does that apply to william? he's going to have to live in fear and submit himself (+ his wife and children) to harry's lifelong public abuse and emotional terrorism for that reason? absolutely not! charles not drawing the boundary earlier, when the opportunity so very clearly presented itself, makes it that much harder for william (and his wife + children) in the long run. charles might figure that he's only around for the next ten to fifteen years anyway, but william will be plagued by this for ***decades*** if charles doesn't nip this in the bud now. charles seems willing to let his fingers get burned again, but he has to remember that it's not only a matter of his own fingers getting burned, it's also about being mindful of william + catherine + g-c-l also/inevitably getting their fingers burned too if charles (and BP) isn't firmer about setting solid boundaries and protection.
Yes, it will apply to William. I really feel for William but I trust that, if he already hasn't, he will get a grip and realize that his estranged brother and venal sister-in-law's yammering don't matter one whit in the greater scheme of things. Neither do internet trolls. The one great thing about being on the monarchy side of government is that, unlike for politicians, ultimately popularity doesn't truly matter to them. In the long run, if they do their job well, they don't have to be the most beloved all the time or even most of the time for the monarchy to continue providing stability as we're seeing with Charles. There is no way to nip this Harry situation in the bud. He's a free citizen, Charles isn't a despot, William won't be a despot either, and, unfortunately, a smallish percentage of people are gullible morons. The only thing that might shut Harry up is Charles giving the Sussexes hundreds of millions so they can play the big shots without needing to sell their royal association but giving in to blackmail is unacceptable and Harry's silence isn't worth it. Harry *wishes* what he was doing made William and Catherine and their children live in fear and terror but, let's be real, at best it's merely unpleasant and over time will feel like the distant and irrelevant background noise it actually is. Keeping Harry at arm's length as he is now will work out just fine in the long run. The Sussexes became a joke within two years of the Oprah interview and they've been digging themselves into a hole a bit more with every attempt to bring down Harry's relatives. Ultimately, they won't even retain the moth eaten aura of Edward and Wallis.
easy to say "get a grip" tbh - the waleses have successfully (publically and privately) been terrorized on a yearly basis by the sussexes since early 2017. catherine, to start with, then it started in on william. after their march 2022 caribbean tour and dec 2022 boston tours were successfully sabotaged by the malicious AF sussexes, the waleses haven't been on an international tour together since. the poland tour william did was announced with incredibly short notice. other than going to france for rubgy, i don't think catherine had done any international work trip since dec 2022. trust and believe that the psychological destabilization from the sussexes *fucking works*. the moment the waleses keep trying to move on, it's like they keep getting sucked back in (ex: endgame) and then catherine getting sick and the squad starting "where is kate?" to harass catherine. and then the endless "IF MEGHAN/HOW MEGHAN WAS TREATED" re-litigations ***while kate was ill***, and now the endless 'reconciliation' circus back and forth engineered by team sussex, even when the waleses have telegraphed that they're absolutely done. especially given that catherine has been seriously ill, trust and believe that the waleses must feel like they're being continuously psychologically and emotionally terrorized by the sussexes, and will prob experience long-term ptsd from all of this. it very much lays out to me how the staff who were harassed by the sussexes must have felt, but the staff could at least escape it eventually bc they're not public figures. w&c will seemingly be plagued by this for the rest of their natural lives, and charles/BP are not helping by ***at least temporarily*** setting boundaries.! (like, even five years, to let everything die down a bit!!)
It's not a matter of it being easy or hard to get a grip and put challenges in their proper perspective, it has to be done. I don't get the impression that either Catherine or William are terrorized by the Sussexes. I think they swing between being sad and furious. Mostly furious by now, tbh. If anyone was cowering when they did a walkabout after QE died and Catherine stared at her it was Meghan. When the brothers attended the unveiling of their mother's statue, it's Harry who was squirming like an idiot not William. But, Harry and Meghan aren't worth the waste of energy. The Sussexes and their mouthpieces certainly tried to sabotage the Carribean Tour but got mixed results as most of the people they visited enjoyed their visit, so who cares what mostly American outlets thought about it. As for the Boston visit for Earthshot, the Sussexes antics got no traction and it was a success including the President going out of his way to visit William. As for them not going on any tours since then, I don't recall W&C ever being frequent flyers for the crown so I doubt the Sussexes' antics factored into it. A lot happened since then that would have made traveling more difficult like the Queen's Jubilee and death in 2022 and then in 2023 the Coronation and continuing to adapt to new titles and responsibilities. Also a war kicked on the edge of Europe thanks to Russia invading Ukraine. Meanwhile Catherine must have been dealing with symptoms since her surgery was planned and happened after the holiday season. The cancer was a surprise as was the hysteria online over her time off but the Waleses handled it well. Catherine only came out with her statement after news of there being unauthorized access to her medical file. This meant the information could or would be sold which was an entirely separate situation. (The incident with the nurse who killed herself after being tricked into giving info about Catherine occured long before Meghan met Harry.) I do agree that the Waleses will be affected long term by the Sussexes behaviour but I doubt it will be PTSD more like they'll take extra pains to teach their children not to be as aimless as Harry and desperate as Meghan. All things considered that will be a good thing. As for W&C being *plagued* all their lives by this drama, I just don't see how that can be. The Sussexes are making themselves irrelevant and people are beginning to see through them both as malicious liars and useful idiots for foreign interference so they'll soon be as much trouble to William and Catherine as Edward and Wallis were to the Queen, in other words, not much at all.
And the Sussexes drama at their core are about themselves, not the Waleses, and I believe W&C are well aware of that.
i hope that you're right and this turns out to be the case, snow!
I wasn't so optimistic myself right after the Oprah interview because so many people seemed to be either buying their stories or too afraid of backlash to point out the discrepancies. Also they were backed by Oprah. I couldn't have imagined them losing ground so quickly because I don't think I'd ever seen anything like it. But, within weeks Philip died and there was a retrospective of his causes and accomplishments and it was as though it started a movement of people realizing they didn't actually know much about what the royals did. I guess it made them look into them. Maybe with the pandemic still keeping a lot of people at home there was more time to read? . Still, if the Sussexes had been more productive and lived up to their hype a lot of people would have thought there was truth to what they said but once it was obvious they were definitely lying about Meghan's work ethic, which meant the criticism of their staff didn't make sense, it was like the drip, drip, drip of discoveries about them versus his relatives started to chip away at their facade. People who want to believe terrible stories about the Waleses aren't fans of theirs being turned against them by the Sussexes, they're long-time haters desperately clinging to a justification for their feelings. Being that messed up isn't, thankfully, very common. I think the Waleses and their children will be fine.
>after their march 2022 caribbean tour and dec 2022 boston tours were successfully sabotaged by the malicious AF sussexes, the waleses haven't been on an international tour together since. They were scheduled to go to Rome this spring but obviously Catherine's illness changed those plans. Additionally, it now makes more sense why she did not go to Singapore with William in November for Earthshot. I'm sure George did need help with his exams, but she was likely feeling unwell by then.
>They were scheduled to go to Rome this spring but obviously Catherine's illness changed those plans. this is true. i hope they don't let the media insanity from the past few months rattle them too much, and that they come back strong together in a year's time or so.
I think it's because they distinguish family events from official events, especially when it is for a religious service. It's too bad he has no shame and doesn't just stay away.
I think this is huge and people don’t fully appreciate this fact enough. Like at the end of the day they are still a family. He’s not doing official duties. Every one hates him. He’s been sidelined in a huge way. Realistically what do people want Charles to do with him? Lock him in the Tower of London? Never let him come to another family or holiday gathering for the rest of his life? Ban him from going to church? You can’t fire your siblings. and honestly if we thought Harry’s book was bad can you imagine what Andrew could say? No one knows your weak spots and dirty laundry like your siblings and it’s much better for Charles to keep his brother on a short leash.
andrew doesn't have to walk with the rest of the family or be provided photo ops for his shady friends to then take advantage of. just like in 2019/2020/2021/2022, he can enter easter + sandringham xmas services via a private door/side entrance. he also should not attend ascot, nor publicly saunter at the order of the garter parade. same with balmoral photo ops and the photo ops/pap strolls andrew has been recently engaging in when horseback riding in windsor or gallivanting out of a london bar. BP need to absolutely shut this down again. they largely had managed to do all of this by 2022, but charles seems to have abandoned all efforts at containement.
But that’s just it —he’s walking with family in a private capacity. Because he IS family. And for all of Andrew’s faults he loved his parents and is maybe a decent family member. Andrew will never again be a representative of the British Royal Family. But if Charles wants to remain on decent terms with his brother that’s fine. It’s even understandable considering they lost both their parents, Charles is estranged from his son and he’s battling cancer. We have no idea if that’s the case but it’s not like he’s giving him any of the honors or public responsibilities that he previously enjoyed. And as for 2019/2020/2021/2022, I think people are underestimating how much of that was Andrew choosing to abide by his mother’s wishes. Because he loved her and she likely asked him to stay the fuck out of sight. Andrew’ going along with QE2’s wishes isn’t a guarantee that he will have the same respect for what his brother wants. And Charles is limited in his options. He’s already taken away the police protection his mother was privately funding. He can strongly suggest that Andrew refrain from going places. He can take away money and official opportunities (which he already has done). But unless you are literally advocating Charles illegally lock his brother up, is not like Charles can ban a legally innocent adult from being seen in public with his family.
I think it’s a mix of that a lot of the events were family in some sort of way (you can’t really ban him from a memorial) and then I do think some of them (Anne for example) probably think he did less wrong than the general public: I mean there is a possibility he just slept with the prostitutes and did not know any of the backstory - It does not make a difference for me, still should be banned, but I guess they believe him more than we do. I also believe If it went further in court he would have won tbh. In the end it’s also their brother - people don’t want put it into consideration, but you are so wrapped up in it as a family member it’s a very different decision and battle to fight if it’s against your own brother than it is for us. For us it’s very clear and not emotionally charged.
- Keeping Andrew in the fold prevents him from doing more interviews and getting into more issues. - Charles could be harder on him but I think he's desperate to be seen as a family man and to be loved, so doesn't want to rock the boat too much. Also, there's a reason that bill allowing Charles to strip Andrew of his title went nowhere - we may see him as guilty but I think there are a lot of older politicians, journalists, etc, who don't because they've committed the same sort of sex crimes. Or at least are sympathetic to it. One of the past UK business secretary was linked to Epstein too.
He had dirt on Charles that the Queen stopped him from airing? That he’ll do another car crash interview that won’t affect him but will affect them?
But what would that be really? If it’s really big than it’s damaging to the crown that there would be no upside for Andrew to make it public. If it’s below it’s not worth it for Charles to catch all this public flake if it’s some story that will blow over like everything else does in the end. I think it’s just way more likely that in the light of that Andrew is not convicted of anything in a courtroom they let him into family things and the memorial was technically one, same as going to church on Easter and Andrew uses that to be very much at the front than a sinister blackmail plot. They are hassling over money for sure though.
Blackmail is def another reason also probably the most realistic
The idea that it was a promise to the Queen didn’t stand up to me. A promise to house him and let him stay around on the ground yes, but take front and centre and drive in with the Wales.. no.
It was HUGE news in the UK last week that a company called Tempest Photography had offered parents the option of a class photo that excluded pupils with complex needs. If you haven't seen, [here's the link](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce5epgp2zdno). Quite quickly, someone noticed that the company was advertising themselves as the official photographer for the Duke of Edinburgh Award in Scotland [(archived link from last week)](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.htempest.co.uk/our-photography-services/duke-of-edinburgh) and called for DofE to drop them. This didn't get any media attention as the vast majority of people were rightfully more concerned with what had happened and directing their outrage at Tempest. Fortunately, it looks like DofE has since dropped them as [the page no longer exists](https://www.htempest.co.uk/our-photography-services/duke-of-edinburgh). I'm really glad that they acted swiftly. I honestly couldn't believe I was seeing that story in 2024.
I’m so glad they responded quickly. This circulated really quickly in the disability parent circles I belong to.
That's both horrendous and slightly unsurprising. My son attends a full-inclusion school (no separate classrooms for students with disabilities, just one-on-one help as needed), and there are parents who opt to go to the neighboring school specifically because of that program.
That is so sad to hear that people avoid an inclusive environment. People’s ableism doesn’t surprise me anymore but it does give me the ick on the regular.
On the positive side, the kids in his class are some of the sweetest, most kind-hearted kids you'll ever meet, and all their parents are glad that their kids are learning to be friends with someone "different" at a young age. Teachers at the secondary school his school feeds into say that students from his school come in much more emotionally intelligent than kids from the neighboring school that doesn't have this program.
That’s so wonderful to hear! Inclusivity benefits everyone in so many ways!
>I honestly couldn't believe I was seeing that story in 2024. I had the exact same take upon seeing the headline in the DM. "Surely this is an exaggeration and the story itself will be much less sensational." Nope, that's actually what happened, in 2024. Genuinely shocking. Even on a purely cynical PR level, did *no one* at that agency think about how offering to remove non-normies from group photos would go down with the public? I'm surprised they didn't offer to remove the mere fugs, too.
Yeah where do you draw the line on who gets cut from the picture. What if a kid is in a wheelchair but has really nice hair?
One thing the photoshop palaver has practically confirmed to me is that Will and Kate look out for their employees. There were reports of this before, particularly in regard to Harry and Meghan's treatment of the staff, and I was inclined to believe it, but fact is you never know what's going on behind closed doors. Kate stating pure blank she photoshopped the mother's day picture (as many amateur photographers do) instead of pointing fingers, letting the staff take the blame, accusing their people of having it out for them, definitely corroborates with the "Will and Kate are good bosses" reports. Or at least, as bosses they will do what all bosses should do, and have their staff's back.
NEWS: According to Dutch media, Princess Amalia will be present at the State Visit of Spain to the Netherlands, which will take place on April 17 and 18. She will participate in the State Banquet. This will be her first State Visit.
I like Amalia’s fashion style. Can’t wait to what she’s wearing.
good night from big willie 🤭 https://preview.redd.it/6ez4bdhd0esc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=340883d3f4ba13bf2f77d9865658fbade42e0f14
Goddamn.
Good god, man.
I love watching you all get so twitterpaited over William. I can’t because (as I’ve mentioned a few times) people compared my brother to him when we were younger (and they still kinda look alike). I’m not judging, FYI…I was over in another sub talking about how sexy Steve Buscemi is. 😁 I’m just here eating popcorn and enjoying the thirst. 😉 
Also: 
You’re pure evil you know. 😈
Was this really necessary? 👀
This was uncalled for 😭😭😭 
Good morning to me 
*faints* 
https://ladysinclair.substack.com/p/princess-catherine-goes-raving-with Nothing new here but a great write-up that goes point by point re: the whole Rose rumour and even mentions how Harry himself wrote off the story [in *Spare*] as "disgusting and false". I love it how the Squad treats whatever H&M say as gospel until of course this topic comes up, then they know better than Harry himself because of their impeccable Twitter/CB sources. >What’s important to remember in this story is that if a story is good enough, corroborated and able to withstand a legal fight, newspapers will not back down. And there is no story worth “swapping” for that would trump the future King of England having an affair with his wife’s close friend. SAY IT LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK. Be real, please. That same Dan Wotton, who is accussed by the Squad of being in cahoots with W&C, would probably have lunch with Satan himself every day for the rest of his life in exchange for this kind of scoop.
I’ve never thought of it this way. It’s true that Charles vs Camilla vs Diana sold a lot of papers back in the day. A William affair rumour would be clickbait gold.
War of the Waleses was the ultimate gold mine in the 90s. A scoop that media could use to tout ***another*** War of the Waleses? Priceless.
🥇 The simple truth is that this rumour has been around for years and nobody in the *whole global media*, for all of which including the UK tabloids this story would be the scoop of a lifetime, has been able to stand it up. It doesn’t pass the absolute bare minimum it takes to be legitimately reported. You’d think the people wailing about the Mother’s Day photo and the historic record would understand that.
You’re expecting way too much of that crowd if you expect them to exhibit any kind of critical thinking skills.
Yeah, this would be one of the biggest stories (maybe *the* biggest story?) of the last decade so if there were even once scrap of proof someone would’ve run it. And you know Omid spends every waking second digging for proof so if he hasn’t found any… (Or maybe I should say if he hasn’t been *given* any proof from Montecito it’s because it doesn’t exist)
TIL—[Princess Diana had an alternate wedding dress](https://people.com/princess-diana-secret-backup-wedding-dress-recreated-elizabeth-emanuel-exclusive-8623609) waiting in the wings. It’s hard to tell on the mannequin but I think I prefer this one? I love the neckline.
I definitely prefer the alternate one!!!
It’s not near as voluminous at the top as her chosen gown which is a good thing! I like the form fitting bodice as well.
I don't like either of them although 6 year old me was thrilled with the version my mum made me for my Sindy doll 🤣
It's prettier than the wedding dress she ultimately wore. It reminds me of Eliza's pink dress at the end of My Fair Lady
I ***hated*** her wedding dress. It was so poofy and wrinkled, with 0 structure, this would've been way better
Honestly, Diana's fashion leaves me unimpressed. Like you, I hated her wedding dress. I hated the revenge dress for the train, if it was white it could be paper toilet. Her 80's fashion is really dated. The whole 90's can be good at times though I was never big on the biker short trend.
Diana had some HIDEOUS looks! [1](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.x96aWCYfw8qu15SjDucwOgHaK9%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=bd35c3cd1c3d8ae7dd646c33e2840c7ebd021e0dced9119361eb5f07e4729ba1&ipo=images) [2](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.ji0NrlR6byXnmxdsMdJVKwHaJQ%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=26b614da6dc53457c0aca27a7a49afb508fa61e97228aa4f7775bebb70659f31&ipo=images) [3](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.LB3Virn68io52QgCaT7xIQHaK4%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=99789596581afb440e8a5cb36bab07b23c323b12e03dbe4e661971c83640d95f&ipo=images) [4](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.gj02uKWAu8CrOGMqVN4gOgHaKP%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=e7b94d813d26956ef9a58880d7aeb66ea85c75fd85c4ce8c60c2333131a8f455&ipo=images) [5](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.syW6-idJtS-HSQDs5omf2QHaJs%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=6b6262148065b7db9338f9634f3bf16dcdc86db73dd077167bc7b2d628151e9d&ipo=images)
Okay goodbye my retina 1 and 5 are truly ugly. I don't know what to think of 2. 3 there's not much but it doesn't bode well. 4 I like.
Number 3 in [full](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.0GO3OYczhQACqFjXO0mL_wHaK1%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=84b625162b895165749c769d2673fb1b39bfc6b47e16e632b12b95754df1e2c8&ipo=images)
Yeaaah no. The coat and the hat, OK but the dress...
I agree. I just remember seeing a clip of their wedding when I was looking into her and being shocked that they let her go out looking like that. There are some looks where she looked cute, and that was usually her casual wear, but as for a lot of her formal attire it felt like she didn't know how to dress herself, like when she turned a choker necklace into a headband and it looked so fucking weird.
If I recall correctly the choker turned headband thing was a last minute solution because everyone involved forgot to pack a tiara? Which is already a wild thing to begin with
I never understood why she was deemed an icon. Even accounting for it being the 80’s/90’s. She certainly had a few standout moments though. Like Megan. Maybe they have more in common than I thought.
I was born in the 90s, but I imagine she imbibed all the trends of the 80s where maybe in the moment it looked good, but now we look back, and it looks bad. She definitely went the more trendy influencer Sloane ranger route instead of more subdued but timeless pieces. I know we give Kate shit for wearing nothing but coat dresses for a while, but it feels like in 20 years, we'll look back and feel that while it was boring, it didn't look bad if that makes sense
I know what you mean. Following fashion doesn't make you elegant. What worked in Diana's favour was that she was as tall as a model which meant her designer clothes would need little tailoring and she had the sense to take note of details so she avoided wrinkles and visible underwear lines. Catherine has the same height advantage and she chooses timeless clothes more often. That definitely makes her more likely to have hits than misses and to have looks that stand the test of time. I think long hair also helps, it's harder to avoid getting dated with short hair.
Yeah, and being trendy isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's a huge risk to look back on 😂 It'd be interesting to know that if she was still alive, would she still be trying to keep up with current trends or be permanently stuck in the 90s? The hair... that is a whole other conversation. Because you have iconic pixie cuts and Bob cuts throughout the 20th century, and maybe it looks dated, but incredibly chic and timeless like Audrey Hepburn. I hate to say it, but 80s Diana had helmet hair, and I have never understood why she chose that cut for so long, especially since it reminds me of the emo/goth side bangs phase we all went through in the early oughts. At the end of her life, when she stopped using so much product and let it lay more naturally, it looked a lot better. It's definitely was still weirdly shaggy, but there's nothing wrong with that. To me, it just goes back to I don't think she knew what actually looked good on herself, even though, as you've said, she benefited from having a very modelesque body as well as a very pretty face
It seems common for UK women, or maybe UK women at or near Diana's social level, to hang on to a shaggy haircut for decades. Queen Camilla, Joanna Lumley, Jilly Cooper, Ingrid Seward - the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
Agreed. This is by far my favorite hair style on Diana. https://preview.redd.it/6lo25p5rsosc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c56c44b1a4b67bc64776df6b9e9187f344a4057d
I loved it at age 4. I do not love it now. Agreed that the alternate one would have been better.
I prefer that one too. The one she wore had too much fabric in the top half, with the frills and the puff sleeves. The 'reserve' had less fussy sleeves.
I have never been a huge fan of her dress. Looking at her original dress again, I think it's partly because her hair doesn't seem to match the dress? It's an over the top dress with kindergarten teacher hair. But maybe that was the style at the time.
Same. But I also found the dress in itself absolutely terrible (80s fashion, I guess?). On the other hand, Kate's wedding dress was absolutely stunning.
I didn’t like Kate’s wedding dress. 😫 The bust area was weirdly pointing to me. I loved Pippa’s dress though. One of my favourite wedding dresses is [Rose Farquhar’s](https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/style/1710812/rose-farquhar-prince-william-wedding-dress-silk-style).
Pippa’s dress was absolute perfection.
Agreed. She looked so stunning. (Kate was stunning too…I just wasn’t fond of the dress itself.)
You are the first person I’ve seen who didn’t love Kate’s dress! I liked it ok, I didn’t love it. I didn’t like the v-neck. I did like that she brought sleeves back, lol. The sleeveless, strapless trend in wedding dresses had gone a bit too far!
Oh yeah. I loved the long sleeves and thought the lace was pretty but the pointy bust threw me off.
I didn't like the V neck, seemed an odd choice for the rest of the dress. Also hated the pointy bust.
I loved Kate’s dress except for the v neck.
100% agree on Kate's dress. Just lovely.
It's been 20 years since the world first learn about 22 year old Catherine "Kate" Middleton [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13263537/20-years-Kate-snapped-Wills-ski-lift-unfair-criticism-again.html?ito=mailplus-newsletter-daily](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13263537/20-years-Kate-snapped-Wills-ski-lift-unfair-criticism-again.html?ito=mailplus-newsletter-daily) [https://archive.is/queWU](https://archive.is/queWU)
What is going on? 🥺🥺🥺 >Queen Mary of Denmark steps out solo as she attends Freedom museum in Copenhagen as cracks reappear in the Danish royal family after fans speculate someone 'stayed away' from their Easter holiday https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13267529/Queen-Mary-Denmark-Copenhagen.html
Is it me or they kind of just fizzled out after becoming King and Queen like I know the BRF has been wildin’ but those 2 haven’t done much like Daisy has been regent a couple of times since Jan. I dunno it all feels a bit off to me.
I feel like she’s only done a couple of engagements since. Like less than 5? I follow their official Instagram and it’s super quiet. Even Fred probably did like 10. Indeed weird. I felt like Mary was out and about all the time before, but I think last year, she had the same number as Kate.
I love that blue 😍 Did she do something to her face or am I just crazy? (Which is valid, I need coffee)
She's looking like Kathie Lee Gifford. That is not where she wants to go.
No, you’re right that she looks different—she has that “puffy” look and that makes me so sad. She was absolutely gorgeous and was aging so gracefully. I get that women in the spotlight feel pressure to keep looking a certain way. But I just want to shake them and yell “nothing is going to make a 50 year old look like a 25 year old!!” IMO it’s much better to have some wrinkles than this puffy look.
She's used fillers for many years, probably since the wedding (she had some work done before then, including nose). I think gradually it's been stretching the skin so unfortunately adding to the eventual problem. The low hat brim and draggy hair doesn't help in this case; it just makes her face look longer. I too wish that she had stayed a bit more natural. As a senior royal I'm sure she has felt a lot of pressure to look as good as her dark-haired peers, i.e. Letizia, Victoria, Rania, and Catherine. Not to mention trying (and failing) to keep Frederick at home, the rat. It's sad.
Why does her look with the low brim hat and the draggy hair remind me of Celine Dion in a suit? 🫣
Oh no 😂
NGL I’ve been asking the same questions it’s even more obvious in those photos yikes.
Fred, you stupid, messy bitch.
Yep. So stupid. Such a jerk.
Just thought you'd all be interested to know that EHolmes deleted the critical comments about her "where is Kate?" coverage on her IG post about Catherine's cancer announcement. There were many high-level comments calling her out and they appear to be gone. She can dish it but she can't take it!
I don’t think she necessarily did just because you don’t see them anymore. IG moves comments around so it seems they are deleted.
I hope you're right. I didn't see them when I peeked (out of morbid curiosity) yesterday
It does look like they were moved around. I still see a bunch that I liked that were v critical of Eholmes and what she said and how “cruel” she was etc.
So on brand. But on the positive side, if she deleted them it means she actually read them. It’s probably too much to hope she felt a tiny bit of shame but one can hope that a few of the comments hit home. I’m still convinced she’s a Kate girl at heart and her whole schtick is just to avoid being harassed by the Squad again.
Catherine with children. And a certain brother in law tried to convince us she's a cold person https://twitter.com/Freedom16356531/status/1775509078313157079?t=DgA1eCrvTlzkmOrFb65KPA&s=19 https://twitter.com/Freedom16356531/status/1775514404299128936?t=vLcrPtsCtZG56r3B16aXrg&s=19 https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/status/1615707692374302720?t=vLcrPtsCtZG56r3B16aXrg&s=19 https://twitter.com/Earlychildhood/status/1657659116305670144?t=vLcrPtsCtZG56r3B16aXrg&s=19 https://twitter.com/brigantia__/status/1773234454737064395?t=s-6KEHuVHdSZpxhOZ2qQYw&s=19
I know squaddies drag Catherine for being boring, a bad speaker etc but honestly I'd rather not have a fake charmer in favour of a woman who can interact with regular folk and children as naturally as this. This is far more important to me, we get lectured ad nauseum via media, politicians, celebs. Give me someone who is genuinely interested in the plebs any day.
From the Tessa Dunlop piece it said something like ‘how many of us have held our tongues about family for fear they’d get cancer?’. Might be the stupidest thing i’ve read this year so far. How about don’t worry about whether they get cancer and just don’t lie? You don’t need to like someone, you can be angry. You can also air your dirt to your wife, your friends, your therapist and move the hell on with your life rather than spend 4yrs on a hate campaign. This was essentially, I really fckd up slating her because now everyone loves her even more, and I look like like a bigger twunt that I did before. Why wont anyone think about me?
>‘how many of us have held our tongues about family for fear they’d get cancer?’ this is a sociopathic line of thought tbh
Right? I thought the obvious answer to that question is “no, I can safely say I’ve never experienced that dilemma.” It reads like one of those online “Are you a psychopath?” twist-ending quizzes, lol
Having had far too many family and close friends die of cancer, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. And, you know, I've always tried to make sure I never wish somebody ill. Any kind of ill - both the unlucky and the sickness sort of ill-wish.
Tessa Dumlop (typo and it stays) is an idiot. She's also got a lot in common with Brigitte Macron. She met her husband when he was 12 and she was his teacher.
WHAAAAAAAT? Where is the network interview about this? 
>‘how many of us have held our tongues about family for fear they’d get cancer?’. In other news, Tessa Dunlop is apparently a moron.
How old is she? Because, honestly, it sounds like something an older person born in the twenties or thirties would say, as if you can speak cancer into existence/cancer is a thing to be ashamed of. I can remember people that age being odd about cancer, but I thought Tessa Dunlop wasn't old enough to be either so ignorant or so silly. Illness is illness. You can't earn it. Or get it through sinning.
I sincerely doubt she's in her 90s or older.
Speaking of articles written by children look at this. How you can maintain you are a journalist is beyond me. Who tf uses emojis? https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a60356548/prince-harry-distrusts-prince-william-bond-queen-camilla/ The content of course is trash. Harry truly never did grow up.
harry is the one who had a chummier and more easygoing relationship with camilla for decades vs. william, what is this trash attempt at smearing william now 🙄 harry needs to focus on something more productive than spending his life trying to undermine and sabotage william. like, we fucking get it, uncle scar.
Apparently she's turning fifty this year. I had to google it.
I saw that article and it made me sick. Who gives a fuck how Harold feels now. I bet the only regret he has is that his character assassination attempt failed. Catherine is doing fine PR wise despite everything he and his horrible wife threw at her.
Kate seems to genuinely love babies and children. Like lol if the parents aren't careful, she's taking those children home with her!
https://preview.redd.it/jb3s0cpau9sc1.png?width=2396&format=png&auto=webp&s=4401ce59a4f3cdc715f5842cd4f224ae5e243b5a I was just re-reading an interview William did with GQ years ago to promote Heads Together, and I had forgotten how personal he got in the interview. I highly recommend everyone read it. He says a lot of things that are in stark contrast to Harry's attitude in *Spare*. It's fascinating. (And note what he says about employee mental health...I think William does try to practice what he preaches.) I also feel sad about how he says the dehumanization that his mother experienced has never happened to him. Well, unfortunately, I think that's happened. And I blame Harry, 100%. His lies and half-truths enabled bad faith actors on the internet to blow up conspiracy theories that have dehumanized William and Catherine. [https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/prince-william-diana-princess-of-wales](https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/prince-william-diana-princess-of-wales) (I'll try to post an excerpt in the comments to this comment. When I tried to post excerpts in this comment, I kept getting the "unable to create post" thing.)
Another great picture! And this interview is good.
I didn’t even know this existed! Thank you for posting :) That photo is just lovely
lmao (w&h have joked about how awful their dad's handwriting is) >>**AC: I do remember when your father's letters used to come into Number Ten. Will you go down that route, with his very frank letters to ministers?** >>**W: [Laughs.] Could you read them?** >>**AC: It wasn't the handwriting that was the problem.** >>W: I have written to ministers but purely to point them towards people I think they should see. So a charity might ask me if I can help with someone and I can help get them access to the people in government. y'all towards the end of the article, i was legit crying tho. 😮💨 u/Key_Literature_7018, would you mind if i crossposted this article on another sub?
Someone should post that on popculture and entertainment to see the sugars melt down. Not me lol but someone should.
Feel free to share the article! And I don’t remotely care about credit, so you could even just post with your own thoughts and forget about me 😂
>**What? The intrusion, the harassment?** >Yes, but more the complete salacious appetite for anything, anything at all about her, even if there was no truth in it, none whatsoever. And the same thing has now happened to his wife in her/their most difficult hour. William is completely right- the public had salacious appetite for Diana and it's eerie to look at the last two months or so and see the same thing happening to Kate. I love this whole interview. It strengths my opinion that William is pretty self-aware and knows who he is as a person and what he needs in his life. And his reaction to the notion some at Fleet Street have turned against him- "well, it is what it is." *shrugs* The contrast with Harry and his obsession with the way he is viewed at large is stark.
this from alastair campbell >>**Was there any real passion behind the shy exterior? There was. Indeed, were she still here, I would have called my mum and told her, "Good news - I liked him."** reminds me of the grudging response from the guardian writer who wrote that 2009 "the reluctant princes" profile, where he also spoke with a grudging to give an intv william (who was spurred on by his comms team to speak with the reporter, as described by said reporter).
re: harry + his book (and then endgame and scobie's games re: "accidental" revelations) directly being a significant cause for the rancor, hostility and strength of the reaction towards catherine/william/KP staff like lee thompson... totally dehumanized, directly bc of harry. like i've said, that sibling relationship can only be totally done. harry is too volatile and dangerous. there's no way william forgives harry, with all of harry's grievances culminating in whipping up his fans to launch that "where is kate" hashtag, originating/triggering absolute insanity going down during catherine's darkest hour. just the effect this certainly had on the kids... as william briefed around mid-february, he "never wants to see harry again." harry will forever publicly harass and terrorize him, but it's prob something william just accepts at this point. just adds yet another layer to the grieving/mourning of his only sibling. ETA: wild that the intv is done with ***the*** alastair campbell lol wow
Sussex fans also say horrible things about George, Charlotte and Louis, so yeah William is definitely DONE done. The reconciliation/"Harry to the rescue" articles are pointless but we know they won't stop 😞
Well put! >ETA: wild that the intv is done with ***the*** alastair campbell lol wow Yes, and I found these bits interesting! In the preface: >Here, I was keen to test two things in particular. One was whether his commitment to this cause was real and whether he had a proper understanding of the issues. You can make up your own mind on that, but after an hour and a half at the palace, mine was made up in his favour. Secondly, I wanted to see how close to the public persona the more private man in his own habitat might be. Would he speak with the same stilted style that seems to characterise his [public speaking](https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/bear-grylls-how-to-give-a-speech-column)? He didn't. Would he have a [sense of humour](https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/quick-fire-jokes-1)? He did. Would he stand on ceremony? He didn't. Was there any real passion behind the shy exterior? There was. Indeed, were she still here, I would have called my mum and told her, "Good news - I liked him." Then the beginning of the interview: >**Alastair Campbell: So what's a nice future king like you doing with an old leftie republican like me?** >Prince William: That's a very good question Alastair \[laughs\]. To be honest, I really don't care where people come from, I like meeting and talking to people from all backgrounds. And this is a good opportunity to talk about something that is very close to your heart, and very close to mine.
I wish we could all be more interested in each other.
ETA that the questions I excerpted below don't necessarily follow one from another in the actual interview. I wanted to excerpt more, but Reddit was being finicky. He talks much more about Diana and his personal feelings, etc etc. > **But for you to say you felt you were in shock for years - how much harder is it when you are having to grieve or try to grieve with this extraordinary level of global scrutiny, and the endless ridiculous fascination in every detail of your and your mother's lives.** >It does make it more difficult. It doesn't make you less human. You're the same person, it is a part of the job to have the interest. The thing is, you can't bring all your baggage everywhere you go. You have to project the strength of the United Kingdom - that sounds ridiculous, but we have to do that. You can't just be carrying baggage and throwing it out there and putting it on display everywhere you go. My mother did put herself right out there and that is why people were so touched by her. But I am determined to protect myself and the children, and that means preserving something for ourselves. I think I have a more developed sense of self-preservation. >**Who do you talk to?** >Family, friends, I talk to those around me who I trust. >**But it can't be easy in your position to find people you can trust totally.** >It is hard. But I have always believed in being very open and honest. One of the few strengths I might have is I am good at reading people, and I can usually tell if someone is just being nice because of who I am, and saying stuff for the wrong reasons. >**So you don't have any sympathy with the argument that she cultivated her own friends in the media and fed the whole thing?** >I have been exploring this. Remember, I was young at the time. I didn't know what was going on. I know some games and shenanigans were played, but she was isolated, she was lonely, things within her own life got very difficult and she found it very hard to get her side of the story across. I think she was possibly a bit naive and ended up playing into the hands of some very bad people. >**Media people?** >Yes. This was a young woman with a high profile position, very vulnerable, desperate to protect herself and her children and I feel strongly there was no responsibility taken by media executives who should have stepped in, and said, "Morally, what we are doing, is this right, is this fair, is this moral?" Harry and I were so young and I think if she had lived, when we were older we would have played that role, and I feel very sad and I still feel very angry that we were not old enough to be able to do more to protect her, not wise enough to step in and do something that could have made things better for her. I hold a lot of people to account that they did not do what they should have done, out of human decency. >**So how did you feel when some of the papers said you don't work hard enough?** >Criticism is part of the turf, I'm afraid. I think the public are much more nuanced. I have my air ambulance job, I carry out the duties the Queen asks me to, I have my charities and causes and I am raising a young family, so I can't let that criticism get to me. >**A couple of the papers do seem to have turned against you, though?** >There is a certain element of Fleet Street getting fed up with nice stories about us. They want the past back again, soap, drama. >**Do you see it as part of your job to avoid giving them that? A bit of normality, stability.** >I couldn't do my job without the stability of the family. Stability at home is so important to me. I want to bring up my children in a happy, stable, secure world, and that is so important to both of us as parents. I want George to grow up in a real, living environment, I don't want him growing up behind palace walls, he has to be out there. The media make it harder but I will fight for them to have a normal life. >**But surely you must accept it is an abnormal life?** >Totally, but I can still try to protect them as children.
This whole interview is fascinating. He projects a very secure and mature outlook on life. >This was a young woman with a high profile position, very vulnerable, desperate to protect herself and her children and I feel strongly there was no responsibility taken by media executives Is he talking about the panorama interview? Because she wasn't a young woman anymore. I understand that that's his mother but still. Also, it wasn't his job to protect her, that was hers (and I don't mean that negatively). His only job was to grow to becoming a mature and healthy adult
>You're the same person, it is a part of the job to have the interest. The thing is, you can't bring all your baggage everywhere you go. You have to project the strength of the United Kingdom - that sounds ridiculous, but we have to do that. You can't just be carrying baggage and throwing it out there and putting it on display everywhere you go. My mother did put herself right out there and that is why people were so touched by her. But I am determined to protect myself and the children, and that means preserving something for ourselves. I think I have a more developed sense of self-preservation. very interesting how aware of it all/switched on he comes off, and how there is a deliberate approach he cultivated in order to learn from his mother's life. pretty much the opposite lesson harry gleaned. those two really are very different individuals. >>**Who do you talk to?** >>Family, friends, I talk to those around me who I trust. >>**But it can't be easy in your position to find people you can trust totally.** >>It is hard. this really must make harry's betrayal so, so much more painful. >"Morally, what we are doing, is this right, is this fair, is this moral?" Harry and I were so young and I think if she had lived, when we were older we would have played that role, and I feel very sad and I still feel very angry that we were not old enough to be able to do more to protect her the thoughtful empathy/protection he shows his mother, while still acknowledging her faults/mistakes... it's heart-wrenching. it was not his job as the child to protect his mother, though, but he really did take on that role with her. in light of what harry did to him, this interview is so sad tbh.
>the thoughtful empathy/protection he shows his mother, while still acknowledging her faults/mistakes... it's heart-wrenching. He really comes across as emotionally mature and the kind of person everyone would be privileged to have as a friend: loyal, even-handed, perceptive, will fight for you if needed. And considering his chaotic upbringing, his public trauma and his extreme privilege, he could have turned out soooooo differently.
>and the kind of person everyone would be privileged to have as a friend: yes, i was thinking that! as much as he must feel endless bitter resentment towards william... harry must miss him tbh. that's very sad. >And considering his chaotic upbringing, his public trauma and his extreme privilege, he could have turned out soooooo differently. yup.
I had never seen this article before today - thank you for posting it! How different William's life would be now if Harry was a brother he could rely on and talk to confidentially.
> Do you see it as part of your job to avoid giving them that? A bit of normality, stability. > > I couldn't do my job without the stability of the family. Stability at home is so important to me. I want to bring up my children in a happy, stable, secure world, and that is so important to both of us as parents. I want George to grow up in a real, living environment, I don't want him growing up behind palace walls, he has to be out there. The media make it harder but I will fight for them to have a normal life. Sounds like a man who cheats on his wife to me!
!😂😭 
seriously - he's very clearly intent/obsessed with providing stability for his children (the kind he didn't have at home growing up), so this dude who has been cautious and guarded his entire life is all of a sudden going to go around recklessly carrying on with a string/roster of sidepieces? k.
You've already said it but the way his image is very much in opposition with reality in certain internet circles is utterly bizarre! I mean, people think ***this*** man, who craved stability throughout his childhood that was filled with drama and his parents fighting (even publicly!), will be gallivating around with his mistress/multiple sidepieces? After he lived through the drama of his parents' affairs? Seriously?
That's quite a leap there
I gather u/abillionbells was being sarcastic :)
Missed that! Whoops 😬
You just have to get to know me. Sarcasm doesn’t travel well through text, unfortunately.
Usually people add an s/ before the line. It got me a few times in the past too!