I feel bad for the racism in the tabloids and vile press and mental health issues. But the complaints about title and security are not going over well with me. His children do not receive titles and are not entitled to security.
And, if you choose to leave employment (step down) I cannot figure out how you get free security. They want the British taxpayers to pay for that?
I’m surprised at the hyperole here - ex. being stunned and horrified by criticism of a couple on Oprah.
I can see why Harry might be upset with the media and anyone who’s leaking personal information about his wife and child to them. That sort of thing didn’t work out too well for his mother.
The palace is well versed in dealing with the press and can spin stories however they want, so I don’t fault Harry and Meghan for wanting to explain things from their point of view. For all we know, using the press in this way is something he learned at home. He just did it in person instead of planting stories or providing leaks to the press. And I think it’s unfair to suggest Meghan is just putting on a performance and leading Harry around by the nose. He’s a grown-up and can do whatever he wants. After the way his family and the press treated his mother why would it surprise anyone that he might object to them treating his wife the same way?
Harry never had much of a choice about being in the public eye. He’s been in the spotlight pretty much since he was born. If you’re going to parade your children and grandchildren around in public for your own benefit it seems like common decency to provide security for them. I think Charles needs to do a better job of taking care of his family.
Of course Archie would get security when he was with his parents, when he was on the palace balcony, etc. Where else would he need it? I really doubt he was traveling alone, and probably the first place he’d go without his parents would be to nursery school several years after his birth. I’m sure they could have worked it out.
A neighbor was Secretary of the Army during Nixon admin (so Viet Nam era) He got secret service protect when SS thought he needed it. If his children were with him, they got it too, but not when they weren’t with him (or when he didn’t need it). Trump’s grandchildren were protected when they are with him, but not their own details to go to school.
I don’t think anyone has denied the racism to which Meghan was subject in the UK. And the tabloids are sexist and abusive as well, constantly focusing on every tiny detail of royal life, from what they eat to what they wear. The paramount focus of the monarchy always has been the protection of the crown and its direct heir, not the rest of the family. It is not a job I would want.
But the point is, Meghan did want and accept the job, knowing those were the terms. It is a high price to pay, but some find the tradeoff worth it for a life of unlimited privilege and wealth.
She also knew the benefits she would lose if she decided to leave that position;the ex-spouses of Anne, Andrew and Charles, and the Duke of Windsor years ago, were all precedents for that.
Meghan turns 40 soon, and perhaps middle-age will bring her peace and contentment.
Yes, they didn’t directly disparage the Queen, but as Queen, she is the one who has to deal with it. They could have dealt with these issues privately and let a very old woman live her last years in peace.
You mean Harry should have given the same courtesy to his family that they extended to his mother? Harry was very clear that the reason he chose to leave is because he felt that his wife and child were being subjected to the same treatment as his mother, but with social media and race thrown into the mix he believed the danger to his family was greater than what his mother faced. And we see how that worked out for her. This is probably one of the most difficult things he’s faced in his life. If his father wanted a different outcome maybe he shouldn’t have quit speaking to him.
I am not saying that I approve of the interview. I am merely stating that they did not blame the Queen.
How come the Swedish royals are relatively left alone while the British royals are followed so much? Is it size of the country, the press?
It isn’t misogynistic to point out the flaws in a celebrity couple’s position when they go on national television to promote it, @joblue. Many of their complaints (title, security) revolve around matters well settled before they were even engaged. Their complaint about a lack of paternal monetary support is a private family matter over which families often differ. It is sad that the family did not offer more support to them, but family relations are often troubled, and it is quite possible the family they disparage have their own valid set of complaints and insults from the couple, is it not?
The royal family may be dysfunctional, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the Sussex couple were saints.
Their positions on the dreadful treatment by the press evoke sympathy, but this interview is not likely to improve that. No one came out of this looking good. Except Oprah.
Substitute Norway, Spain, Denmark, etc in the above question and it would be equally valid.
That said, the Swedish royals, and those on other countries, get UK-level press attention - positive and negative - in their home countries. We don’t hear about it because it is the British RF that enamors many Yanks.
The Spanish royal family has certainly taken its share of hits. The former King Juan Carlos had to abdicate. The sister was involved in some sort of corruption. Queen Letitia gets a lot of Spanish media attention for her fashion sense. It’s just off our American radar because of the language differences.
It will be interesting to see how the Royal Family responds. Unless they want to throw one of the members under the bus, which I doubt, they will have to categorically deny that any member of the family worried about the baby’s dark skin, in effect, calling Harry a liar. (Remember, only Harry had this conversation. Meghan’s remarks were hearsay.)
It’s interesting to see how many people take one-sided unverified statements as gospel without hearing the other side. Some of H & M’s claims have already been debunked: the ‘wedding’ three days before the wedding, for example, the title for Archie as another.
Oprah being a friend rather than an unbiased reporter never probed any of that. I would have asked “How could you fly to New York for the baby shower without a passport, if as you say your passport was taken away?” “Did you speak with your obstetrician about your suicidal thoughts?” “Did that doctor not recommend a psychiatrist?” “Why are you on such bad terms with your family, Meghan, that only your mother attended your wedding?”
And yes as a retired lawyer, I viewed the interview as a very poor deposition.
The interview was bound to be one sided. Oprah is a friend and neighbor. The thing I keep wondering about is Meghan saying she was suicidal and looking for help from Palace staff and HR which she says she did not get . And Harry coming on later and saying he couldn’t talk to his family about this. Why was she trying to figure this out herself? Just get your wife some help, man, despite what you think your family or the media thinks about it!
Where was this debunked?
“Clarified” might be a better word than “debunked.” It was a private exchange of vows, not a marriage ceremony.
To be a wedding in Britain, it must be public (in case anyone objects) and there must be witnesses.
I also read the security decisions are made by the Home Secretary not the Royal Family since British taxpayers pay the freight.
Okay, in my opinion, that is splitting hairs. Her point was that they had a private ceremony where they said vows that were more meaningful to the couple. She said something about those vows and pictures are what they have hanging on their wall at home.
Oprah negotiated the interview, she negotiated the scope of the questions. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Sussexes also approved the final cut. It wouldn’t have been done unless Oprah agreed to not bring up certain subjects.
This wasn’t a deposition, but a carefully negotiated friendly interview made to put Harry and Meghan in the best light. By Oprah’s team and the PR team of the Sussexes.
I thought it was a good interview but these things are highly structured
It floors me that anyone here would question the validity or course of action someone who considers suicide took.
You don’t have to like Oprah - but she is a very, very seasoned professional in exactly what she did - sitting down, asking questions, raising questions, building a bit of a relationship with both the interviewees and the audience who will view the interview.
Of course the questions would be curated beforehand.
Also noted: “Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey was a cultural earthquake, with upwards of 17 million viewers measured by Nielsen’s TV ratings scale.” Who was watching to be informed? Who was watching to criticize?
Raise your hand if you were already skeptical of Meghan and/or Harry prior to watching the interview. (my guess, is many people)
Raise your hand if your view of Meghan and/or Harry largely flipped because of the interview.
(my guess is few people)