Hi there! For other like me (who live under a rock) a brief Harry/Megan catch up please?

MolteniArcore said:
It's made clear why in the documentary.



Sadly they aren't just celebrities in the eyes of the press - they are still Royals.

Just imagine what would happen if Harry was kidnapped or something? There would be hell on. It doesn't matter if he's in the Royal Family or not - he's the King's son. He's paying for his own protection and he needs to make money to pay for that - as such I don't have a problem with him using Netflix for that purpose.

Like the Royals or not we have them. He is Charles son. That has ramifications to the country. Fair enough if people don't like them or don't want to watch the Netflix stuff, but there is a need for security above and beyond what David Beckham would need.
Click to expand...
All through their own choices of seeking attention. Fade into obscurity and live their life in private and it all goes away. Choosing to be the news is their own choice.

MolteniArcore said:
I would suggest they do have an agenda against Meghan. If you look at the coverage she has received it is pretty obvious.

The 'not playing ball' stuff is from the media, they write that. But even before she could be accused of not playing ball she was getting headlines and being harassed, mainly because she was mixed race. Stuff like 'Straight outta Compton' and saying she was from the ganglands of the US...
Click to expand...
There will always be some negative reporting. Even the same paper will have a mix and some of it to capture different audiences and sadly some will be inappropriately racist and that can be rightly criticised but for every negative story there were 10 positive ones. The tide turned and went overwhelmingly negative after they were married when she wasn't giving the press what they wanted.
 
Nano said:
That is probably true now but it wasn't initially. She refused to play ball so they turned on her. Once that starts selling papers and getting views they run with it. The media don't have an agenda (except for Piers Morgan) other than making money and controversy sells more.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but they were never going to take to her in the same way as Kate, there was zero chance of this. I'd call that an agenda in the making.

They just look for excuses to go after her, but like you say it sells, as a lot of the people that buy those rags want them to go after her too, as "she's not like them".

Piers Morgan is really weird about it, like it's some sort of vendetta, probably started with the Good Morning Brittain thing, but maybe came before this too. He says he doesn't care but then tweets about her every day. It's like someone at school picking on someone who they fancy, and then turning it into a pure attack when it doesn't work (like it never will work).
 
Nano said:
All through their own choices of seeking attention. Fade into obscurity and live their life in private and it all goes away. Choosing to be the news is their own choice.
Click to expand...

The press won't let them sadly. The paps still chase them. They still will get stories printed about them.

What is 'drifting away' though? Is it Meghan going back to what she used to do? That seems fair enough. But she was a high profile actor who used to do work all around the world for charities and organisations. That would pick up media attention - it did before.

Or is drifting away not allowing them to work? So they would have to live off handouts (that would be a news story), work in Walmart (that would be a story)... everything they do is a story. Why? Because he's the King's son. That can't be changed.
 
MolteniArcore said:
The press won't let them sadly. The paps still chase them. They still will get stories printed about them.

What is 'drifting away' though? Is it Meghan going back to what she used to do? That seems fair enough. But she was a high profile actor who used to do work all around the world for charities and organisations. That would pick up media attention - it did before.

Or is drifting away not allowing them to work? So they would have to live off handouts (that would be a news story), work in Walmart (that would be a story)... everything they do is a story. Why? Because he's the King's son. That can't be changed.
Click to expand...
Yes; there are a lot of people severely underestimating the general public interest in the King’s son. He could go and live on a desert island I suppose, but even then there’d be drone footage of him trying to light a fire or whatever.
 
atypical_boro said:
Yes; there are a lot of people severely underestimating the general public interest in the King’s son. He could go and live on a desert island I suppose, but even then there’d be drone footage of him trying to light a fire or whatever.
Click to expand...

Sadly I don't think Harry and Meghan actually have a way of staying our of the way of the media unless the media choose not to write about them. But they won't.

I honestly don't understand why people are angry at Harry and Meghan - they should be angry at the media for harassing them and reporting on them. If the media ignore them they go away.
 
Mad how people get wound up by Harry & Megan. Seen the first one, just seems like Harry doesn’t want to be in the royal family.. I guess Megan is the closest he’ll get to having a normal relationship.

He defo has a bit of PTSD regarding the press.. which is understandable. But pretty boring overall especially given it’s about a Prince and a Hollywood actress.

Oh!! The Straight out of Compton stuff!! Jeez I remember when that came out snf couldn’t believe they got away with it. Harry should have just went down to the paper and kicked off!! So bad!

I was surprised about the historical slavery stuff involving the monarchy.. though TV it would have just been a glorified Hello magazine shoot.
 
atypical_boro said:
Yes; there are a lot of people severely underestimating the general public interest in the King’s son. He could go and live on a desert island I suppose, but even then there’d be drone footage of him trying to light a fire or whatever.
Click to expand...
There would be minor interest if there was no controversy. Anne, Edward and Andrew were in the same situation and other than Andrew being a sweatless paedo there hasn't been anything newsworthy about them for decades. I even had to Google to make sure I got their names right which is how irrelevant they are. Harry could do whatever he wants. It is the controversy that brings all of the negative press. Stay away from that and he's just a minor celebrity but he doesn't want to be a minor celebrity, he wants all the benefits of fame without the negatives (which isn't possible for any celebrity that wants to stay relevant).
 
Nano said:
Why does he need 24x7 private protection? If they were being truthful about wanting to live their own private life then they can do that. If they withdraw from public life then interest in them goes away. They are just celebrities. I'm sure many celebrities want 24x7 private protection but don't have it because it isn't needed. They have the level of security that is required.

They aren't being truthful. You don't need that level of security if you stop telling everyone where you are going to be and where. They also don't dislike the media, they are obsessed with the media but they want to be able to control it and they can't do that in the UK so they do TV deals and interviews on US TV where they control the narrative.

I'm just never going to believe anyone that claims to want privacy while being such an attention seeker. You can't have your cake and eat it.


That is probably true now but it wasn't initially. She refused to play ball so they turned on her. Once that starts selling papers and getting views they run with it. The media don't have an agenda (except for Piers Morgan) other than making money and controversy sells more.
Click to expand...
How do you know she refused to play ball?
 
BoroMart said:
How much is a lifetime of 24x7 private protection for you, your wife and your children, so potentially 3 security details in three locations, plus another for the family home. What is his income? He didn't ask to be born 'royal', he didn't ask to be pushed into the public spotlight at and cruelly made to play out his grief in front of the world. I've had the choice on how much to involve my 7 and 9 year old children (at the time) at their mums funeral, the idea of parading them like that is shocking. So I feel empathy for the guy, I understand why he's seemingly angry at the whole life. But he never asked for it. He's seemingly rejected this life he didn't ask for, so why should he financially suffer because of it?

He got some income inherited from his Mum, but IIRC it wasn't the kind of money for a lifetime security detail. He has to find an income stream, if he's monitising through seemingly attacking the very institution that have harmed his happiness and mental health then that is his choice. The royal system cannot be allowed to exist free from critiscism, purely because some people slavishly adore it.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I understand your argument. I don’t know the answer to your question, never having been involved in the provision of private security, but if he wanted to no longer be part of the jamboree, then why retain the titles they have and continue with a high profile media campaign?
And yes, I am an ardent republican.
 
Nano said:
Why does he need 24x7 private protection? If they were being truthful about wanting to live their own private life then they can do that.
Click to expand...
I think that's probably obvious why, someone will see him as an opportunity to extort. What if someone kidknapps his kids to extort money? Or a right wing nutjob breaks into his home with a knife.
 
Nano said:
There would be minor interest if there was no controversy. Anne, Edward and Andrew were in the same situation and other than Andrew being a sweatless paedo there hasn't been anything newsworthy about them for decades. I even had to Google to make sure I got their names right which is how irrelevant they are. Harry could do whatever he wants. It is the controversy that brings all of the negative press. Stay away from that and he's just a minor celebrity but he doesn't want to be a minor celebrity, he wants all the benefits of fame without the negatives (which isn't possible for any celebrity that wants to stay relevant).
Click to expand...
Andrew is a paedo with an unheard of (made up) sweating illness and he attracts much less negative attention than Harry. Harry gets it cos he’s married to a mixed race, slightly gobby american (whose done no wrong), Meghan gets is cos she is a mixed race, slightly gobby American actress whose done no wrong except fall in love with someone without fully understanding how “sacred” his family was in the UK, and not backing down when the people who feel her profile is “unsuitable” tried to wreck it.

It’s also an open secret that William has been having an affair for years, and it barely gets mentioned in the media.
 
The Ruthsayer said:
Fair enough, I understand your argument. I don’t know the answer to your question, never having been involved in the provision of private security, but if he wanted to no longer be part of the jamboree, then why retain the titles they have and continue with a high profile media campaign?
And yes, I am an ardent republican.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing weening himself of a lifetime of privilege is tough, it's all he has known. Well, I guess he has served in the forces so has known a bit more than that, but you get the picture. He isn't perfect, and I'd like him to give up all titles, but I'd like them all to.

Thinking about that security. 24x7, but knowing that the home needs constant protection, and he, his kids and his wife might all be in different places at any one time, that's 4 security details. Probably two people at a time, so 8 people in day light hours, and probably 2 at night at home. Works out roughly 800 man-hours/week so up to 20 people. Trained armed security no idea how much, 60k? That's 1.2m just in labour costs. Multiply by another 45+ years, so 60mill lifetime protection, as a guestimate starting point. I'm sure anyone can argue 15m either way of that, but ball park, it's a fookload of money that I doubt he currently has and that he shouldn't be expected to pay as an accident of birth.

As a republican, if I'm honest that it's wrong that they should gain powers and wealth as an accident of birth, I'm honest enough to say that if they don't want that life they shouldn't be hurt by that same accident of birth physically or financially.
 
I don't get the 'what about their titles' arguments. It doesn't matter one jot to the press if Harry is called Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex or Harry the Ginge. What matters is he is the son of the King, Princess Diana and will be the brother of the King one day.

Tell you what though - the arguments that are being made now (in Parliament and by the wider public) will only... that's right... mean MORE PRESS COVERAGE.

If people really want them to go away how about just ignoring them, not clicking on stories, not watching the TV programmes, not buying newspapers etc etc. If there is no public interest you won't hear stories about them.
 
sherlock1969 said:
Huh?

Just because people don't accept something doesn't mean it's not true. You'd have to be an absolute idiot to deny that racism is a major issue in the UK today.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly right.

I was responding to someone who said -

"The UK is partially racist, whether people want to accept that or not, it's undeniable".

The point I was making is that if people deny that the UK suffers from racism, ingrained or systemic or unconscious, or whatever form of racism, then it can't be said to be undeniable. People do deny it, all the time and every day. And too much of it is wrapped up in what it termed "banter".
 
I think all lot of it cultural rather than racism, british people to tend to be far more reserved and demure, than americans who can come across as completely unnecessarily over the top brash loud and over opinionated in my experience
 
Last edited:
As a republican, I have to be careful not to allow my antipathy for the institution to spill over into personal invective (and I confess I don't always do this but I try).

Not seen the series (well bits of it as the good lady watched it) and it seems fair enough, there was nothing I saw that gave any cause for a royalist to get upset. And yet, they are popping their lids and you have to wonder why. I did see bit where Meghan did the ridiculous bow/curtsy thing, she was laughing at herself for goofing. But we have the RWNJs saying she is making fun of the Queen/Institution.

It proves, as I have always insisted that the Royal Family is just as damaging and poisonous to the individuals within it as it is to the country.

Time to close it down, for them as well as us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top