6 minutes ago, AdelaideCate007 said:

think this will ultimately only end up being damaging in the US. I think a lot people in the rest of the world will see it as being rude or impolite, especially towards the Queen and the family (and that's even people that maybe are on Meghan and Harry's side).

That is another thing I find interesting. They take it as a slight against the Queen personally more than anything else. Everything else is kind of ignored, they just see it as this young entitled couple being mean to Grandma. 

23 minutes ago, AdelaideCate007 said:

 

It is in a lot of ways.

 

As I guess one of the few (maybe the only one?) posting here who technically lives under the monarchy, all I'm going to add to this conversation is that a lot people here and in our press seem to be on the royals' side this time. I'm surprised tbh with the support I'm seeing, not so much from the more traditional side, but also from people who normally don’t care for the monarchy. I'd say its about half and half and that surprises me. 

 

I think this will ultimately only end up being damaging in the US. I think a lot people in the rest of the world will see it as being rude or impolite, especially towards the Queen and the family (and that's even people that maybe are on Meghan and Harry's side).

 

I'm not surprised by this. The damage is going to be more in the long-term, especially since the likes of Charles, Camilla, William and Kate are not a very good, or compelling, face for a monarchy. 

19 minutes ago, Skin said:

That is another thing I find interesting. They take it as a slight against the Queen personally more than anything else. Everything else is kind of ignored, they just see it as this young entitled couple being mean to Grandma. 

 

I think it's also a black American woman. If this was another Diana, some would have a different view. 

For people who want to watch the full 90-minute special, CBS appears to have it up here commercial-free.

20 minutes ago, Skin said:

That is another thing I find interesting. They take it as a slight against the Queen personally more than anything else. Everything else is kind of ignored, they just see it as this young entitled couple being mean to Grandma. 

 

Yes, one of the main takeaways I'm seeing here in Australia is that heaps and heaps of people think the whole interview is rude. I'm not taking a side, but its definitely playing one way in the US and differently in other parts of the world. I have a lot of friends who don’t normally care about the royals but are saying they think Meghan and Harry are being "impolite".

 

11 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

 

I'm not surprised by this. The damage is going to be more in the long-term, especially since the likes of Charles, Camilla, William and Kate are not a very good, or compelling, face for a monarchy. 

 

I think it's also a black American woman. If this was another Diana, some would have a different view. 

 

Nobody cares about Charles or Camilla really, but William and Kate are still very popular.

 

There is definitely some anti-American feelings seeping into this as well. 

That's about what I expected. I think the lasting impact back in the UK will be in the younger generations, at least anecdotally from English friends. I do think it kills the British press and the royals that they can't wholly control the response here, as they often couldn't with Diana. Meghan is more divisive than Diana was, but they will continue to get attention and sympathy.

19 minutes ago, AdelaideCate007 said:

Nobody cares about Charles or Camilla really, but William and Kate are still very popular.

 

There is definitely some anti-American feelings seeping into this as well. 

 

From what I've seen over the last few years I feel like William and Kate aren't anywhere near where they were early on (due in part to criticism of being workshy, various rumors about his infidelity, etc.), which is partly why they have suddenly gone on forced PR tours, but I guess compared to the others in the family other than the Queen they would be most popular. It doesn't seem like anyone in the family outside of the Queen gets much praise, compared to where things were 4-5-6 years ago where you could say there was a new generation in place.

It should be noted that Meghan makes a point of saying the Queen was always 'wonderful' to her, although I'm not finished watching the special. I wanted to get a fuller picture beyond the clipped highlights.

16 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

 

From what I've seen over the last few years I feel like William and Kate aren't anywhere near where they were early on (due in part to criticism of being workshy, various rumors about his infidelity, etc.), which is partly why they have suddenly gone on forced PR tours, but I guess compared to the others in the family other than the Queen they would be most popular. It doesn't seem like anyone in the family outside of the Queen gets much praise, compared to where things were 4-5-6 years ago where you could say there was a new generation in place.

 

Perhaps in the US, but I just on the telly that William and Kate have a 75% approval rating. Even among my friends who dislike the royals (both in Australia and South Africa), William and Kate are liked. This is definitely a case where the internet gives off a different impression than real life tbh. 

 

40 minutes ago, Vee said:

That's about what I expected. I think the lasting impact back in the UK will be in the younger generations, at least anecdotally from English friends. I do think it kills the British press and the royals that they can't wholly control the response here, as they often couldn't with Diana. Meghan is more divisive than Diana was, but they will continue to get attention and sympathy.

 

Yes, this. In the UK, this will really only have an impact on younger generations. Everyone else already made their mind up a long time ago on how they felt.

3 hours ago, DaytimeFan said:

The Letters Patent of King George date back to 1917. They are the reason that Archie is not styled a Prince. The Queen had to issue her own Letter Patent when George was born to provide for William's children to have titles. None of the Queen's other great grandchildren have titles (Princess Eugenie and Princess Anne's children Peter and Zara all have untitled children) but because William's are in the direct order of succession, the Queen made an exception for them.

This is true . But it's a far cry from the BRF saying Harry and Meghan said they didn't want it.

 

3 hours ago, DaytimeFan said:

Harry and Meghan lied about their security in Canada. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (the Canadian federal police agency) provided 24/7 protection to them while they lived on Vancouver Island fully at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer. However, that was provided under a mutual recognition arrangement with the UK's Metropolitan Police, so once the UK pulled their officers, the Canadian government advised Harry and Meghan that their police protection in Canada would end unless they paid for it privately. That is when they went to California.  

 

They didn't lie. When they first moved to Canada there were still working royals which entitled them to protection.  The security was pulled when they decided to step away permanently. That was when Meghan asked the BRF to keep some level of security for Harry and Archie.  I personally don't think taxpayers should have to pay for non working members of the family, but they didn't lie about the decision made.

4 hours ago, I Am A Swede said:

Frankly the feeling I'm getting is that most people here had already made up their mind even before watching the interview that whatever Harry and Meghan were going to say would be the undeniable truth.

 

Just as *I* get the feeling that *you* had *your* mind made up that Harry and Meghan had dark, ulterior motives in agreeing to the interview.

 

4 hours ago, I Am A Swede said:

I don't doubt that if for example William and Kate now did an interview refuting what Harry and Meghan said no one would believe them.

 

Oh, I'm sure many would believe William and Kate's version of events.  Just as there are those who insist, to this day, that there were "good people on both sides" of the Charlottesville incident.

 

4 hours ago, I Am A Swede said:

They would be accused of lying and everyone (or most anyway) would belive Harry's and Meghan's version even without any solid proof simply because they like them better than they like William and Kate.

 

Why is it that many victims of racism need "proof" that they have been victims of racism?  Can't you just take their word for it? 

 

But, you see, that's the problem with being one who has been victimized on account of their race or ethnicity.  Unless there's undeniable, physical proof that they have been targets of racism (and even then!), wypipo either say that they're lying, or that they blew a situation out of proportion, or that there is more than one side to the story.  This is why racism persists, because we look for any reason not to hold the racists accountable, thereby giving them a pass to continue being racist.

 

4 hours ago, I Am A Swede said:

Kate might have been a cold, snooty bitch, jealous that Meghan was stealing the limelight; or Meghan might have made a complete nuisance of herself expecting everyone to indulge her every whim.

 

What. Difference. Does. That. Make.  We know the BRF has covered for other members of their family who have behaved badly.  Why couldn't they do the same for Meghan?  What made her such a nightmare BTS that they just had to risk unwanted attention on the royal family as a whole and leave her to the wolves in the UK/international media, whose treatment of her has made their treatment of "floozies" Princess Margaret, Fergie and Diana look like kid gloves by comparison?

 

Are you saying Meghan should apologize for being a twat (even though, like you've said, we don't know for sure that she has been a twat -- and like I've been saying, that she's probably behaved no worse than anyone else in Buckingham Palace) before you feel bad for her?  Fine.  She can apologize.  Just as soon as Charles and Camilla apologize for making Diana's life a living hell.

 

Edited March 9, 20214 yr by Khan

1 hour ago, AdelaideCate007 said:

 

It is in a lot of ways.

 

As I guess one of the few (maybe the only one?) posting here who technically lives under the monarchy, all I'm going to add to this conversation is that a lot people here and in our press seem to be on the royals' side this time. I'm surprised tbh with the support I'm seeing, not so much from the more traditional side, but also from people who normally don’t care for the monarchy. I'd say its about half and half and that surprises me.

 

It doesn't surprise me, tbh.

 

There was a recent survey here in the U.S. about BLM and George Floyd and support among white Americans has dropped significantly. Risen, are the numbers of people (again, white Americans) who believed, in some way that George Floyd brought about his own killing by the police.

Support can be conditional sometimes, perhaps never genuine in the first place, which looks to be the case here.

3 hours ago, dragonflies said:

How the hell is she milking it? By speaking about it? Seriously? That is the kind of attitude her and Harry left to get away from 🙄🙄

 

Agree.

6 hours ago, Khan said:

 

Don't forget the persistent rumors that James Hewitt is in fact Harry's bio dad.   

 

 

I think it was either William, or that ghoulish-looking Prince Philip.  

 

5 hours ago, JaneAusten said:

Well Oprah shared a tidbit this AM on the CBS Morning show that Harry made a point to tell her it was NOT Elizabeth or Phillip who said it. That leaves William

 

I know some people at other sites earlier were guessing Phillip but I felt it wasn't him. Henry has spoken warmly of him warmly (even before the interview) when he said that him, Meghan, the Queen and Archie all do zoom together. And now he came out quickly today to say it wasn't him or the Queen.

 

It's something that Harry hasn't absolved anyone else from these comments. I wonder if multiple people made comments, I wouldn't be surprised if they did. Charles for all of his faults did seem genuinely happy at the wedding for Henry/Meghan so maybe it wasn't him. While there have always been reports that William has shown some disapproval towards Harry/Meghan's relationship/courtship from the beginning. 

 

I definitely think it could be someone that was close to Harry in the family. If it was someone not as close like the relative who wore the brooch or an uncle or something, I think he might have absolved his immediate family members from that report. But he hasn't and that makes me wonder.

Edited March 9, 20214 yr by xtr

Meghan said she had no clue who the Royals were yet friends just said she was obsessed with the  Royal family and took pictures in front of the palace.😂

Edited March 9, 20214 yr by Soapsuds

This is pretty gutwrenching in the middle portion - Meghan talking about being suicidal.

 

4 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

Meghan said she had no clue who the Royals were yet friends just said she was obsessed with the  Royal family and took pictures in front of the palace.😂

 

The source is the Daily Mail (trash) and someone she knew when she was 15? I don't think posing outside the palace as a teenager like millions of tourists every year is proof of an obsession.

Edited March 9, 20214 yr by Vee