Newsweek is:
1 Like
Harry is still named in a lawsuit against P. Diddy. Whether they changed the description of P. Diddy’s parties has nothing to do with what the article stated which was Harry’s name is included in the lawsuit.
A major flaw would be if the lawsuit was amended and had removed Harry’s name.
And that needs to change in my opinion. People need to reject lies for entertainment…reject tired, old tropes.
And I’m hopeful. It seems weird to say but this whole Harry/Meghan/Kate/William seems like a microcosm of what has been broken in our media consumption.
I think back and remember seeing tabloids by each checkout lane at the grocery store. I was young and the big headlines and paparazzi photos were eye catching. My parents didn’t buy them but I did look at them every time we had to wait in line. Back then I saw it as harmless, unadulterated gossip…entertainment. Unfortunately it seems to me that the tabloids of yesteryear have bastardized our current news.
So back to what makes me hopeful. I’ll give two examples.
- The Ronna McDaniel story. A large media outlet responded to the overwhelming reaction of its viewers and on-air talent. Whether you agree with it or not, the voices which objected to the hiring presented their case before the public…and refreshingly imo, did so without personal attacks on her appearance or some other weak argument.
As a parent I applaud this message: “It is a sign of strength, not weakness, to acknowledge when you are wrong.”
- The Bachelor. Yeah, I’ve never watched a single episode, because the premise is ridiculous to me. However I saw an article this morning in my newsfeed labeled: ‘The Bachelor’ finale limo twist is a first for the franchise: ‘Women choose solidarity over competition’.
I have no idea who these people are or exactly what happened within the context of the show, but my goodness, I like the idea of rejecting cultural stereotypes/tropes. Pitting women against each other is not only tiresome, it does a disservice to women.
This leads me back to Harry and Meghan. Pointing out media narratives that are often unsubstantiated (aside from anonymous palace sources) and appear to have both a financial and institutional benefit to certain people is needed more than ever…in my opinion.
Bias is fostered/encouraged/promoted when news outlets blindly repeat/accept stories without delving any deeper…as in the case of cropping photos and misleading headlines. Unlike @vpa2019 I refuse to accept the idea that the factual nature of “Harry was mentioned in the lawsuit” makes the sensationalist/biased (anti-Harry) nature of the article beyond reproach/acceptable. I don’t think it’s just a coincidence that there has been a bias slant to the coverage…others may feel differently. Perhaps consider the possibility it might have something to do with Harry’s current lawsuits with certain media organizations.
Regardless, I believe we can be better (like in the Ronna situation) if we reject apathy and try to change how our news is delivered.
It’s quite astounding when you see how many news outlets fall under such few media corporations…concentration of media ownership is concerning to me.
3 Likes
Agree. And if you Google Prince Harry + Diddy Combs, you won’t find articles from the credible media sources because they didn’t pick it up.
1 Like
Feel free to move the conversation about media bias to the current thread in the PF.
4 Likes
3 Likes
Harry has his work.
And they both have new projects to keep them busy.
I don’t know anything about polo, but Harry and Meghan are in Florida.
She’s a beautiful lady, and how does she walk in the grass in those heels? Quite a talent.
3 Likes
Quelle surprise! A positive article from the Daily Mail!
2 Likes
Just don’t read the comments. The usual racists and career Meghan haters are out in full force. It simply drives them berserk to see these two people happy and thriving.
5 Likes
“On his podcast “The Rest Is Entertainment,” Osman provided insights into the publishing industry, discussing the financial success of Prince Harry’s critically acclaimed memoir.
“I’ve done some back-of-the-envelope calculations because I like to. I know what you get paid per book. [He] got a $20 million advance,” the author said about Harry, whose book is “one of the most successful” and “fastest-selling nonfiction books of all time.”
Beyond the advance, the writer of “The Thursday Murder Club” claimed that the prince had earned an extra $6 or $7 million based on the sales of the book’s hardback alone.
He added that Harry has also earned money for “audiobooks and rights to other things,” while the rest of the hardcover sales go to the publishing house to recoup the advance they paid the prince.
Still, according to the book author, the Invictus founder is set to enjoy another financial windfall from the sales of the paperback, which has yet to debut on the shelves.”
“In his podcast, Osman shut down speculation that the 416-page book wasn’t successful because it was sold for a discounted price when it debuted last year.
“Harry is not making less money if it’s half-price. He makes exactly the same if you charge $28 and if you charge $14,” the crime novelist claimed”
1 Like
Those two Netflix shows sound positively underwhelming.
Is it really a good look for Harry to be promoting the most expensive and exclusive sport in the world? Especially one that many consider cruel to animals? Although, if it is more of a juicy BTS series like Drive to Survive that could be fun, but I doubt it will be that with Harry as its face. The whole polo thing is just a little too reminiscent of Pretty Woman in my book, which is not the best reference 
The gardening and cooking show also sounds like a snooooooze as described in People magazine but maybe it will have more personality than the article indicates. She has done good work with immigrant communities using cooking as a focal point so hopefully there will be some of that, and less of the Gwyneth 2.0 that the press release is describing.
They are indeed a very attractive couple. Nice to see them looking happy. Hopefully they can get their staffing issues in order and settle on some kind of business path forward. There’s been a lot of throwing stuff at the wall for the past few years. I’d say it’s time to pick a lane. They’ll have plenty of fans and support when they do.
The thing about them is that the only interest they hold for me is the royalty connection and all the drama. Apart from that, I have no interest in watching her shows, or listening to their podcasts. I’m just not interested. I’m sure I’m not the only one. That’s why I think they’re having problems making things stick, as you say.
5 Likes
Yes, totally agree. I mean, I would have maybe been interested in MM to the same degree I’m interested in any other B/C level actress-influencer type.
Harry’s the more interesting case study. He had (has?) SO much goodwill built up among Americans both for his tragic childhood and his endearing public persona (nazi halloween costume notwithstanding). I wonder if he’s squandered it all or if it’s still there. He comes across pretty well when he appears at events and in interviews. And I believe he’s earned a fair bit of respect and trust in the realm of the Invictus Games, which is a worthy legacy.
3 Likes
Underwhelming? That’s an understandable opinion before we see the product. We shall have to wait and see if their projects are successful.
Frankly I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other. I will say I am impressed with their perseverance. Weaker people would’ve caved under the pressure.
Harry and Meghan have charisma and seem like genuinely kind, caring people. They don’t seem to shy away from work. I think it’s nice to see two people relatively free from their tormentors, trying to pursue their interests…especially after having endured so much abuse in the UK tabloids.
If they fail, they’ll probably be fine. If they succeed, they’ll have earned it.
5 Likes
“Love Like A Mother” is a nice sentiment. This project supports Alliance for Moms.
I miss my mom.
1 Like
Harry is going to be back in London on May 8 for a service at St. Paul’s commemorating the tenth anniversary of his Invictus Games. It will be interesting to see if or how long he stays to visit with his ailing father and sister-in-law.
1 Like
I don’t understand all the press about Harry’s change in residence in the Travalyst filing. The news articles are making it seem that this is some kind of political statement on Harry’s part. But isn’t the reality that this is a required government filing (kind of like a SEC filing but for nonprofits), that requires him to state where he was actually physically located during the past X amount of time, and to specify when he actually made the move?
Maybe because it’s tax time here in the US, but I’m analogizing it to the difference between domicile and residency. If you spend more than X number of days in a state where you have an abode you are a resident and have to pay taxes to that state, even though you may be a domiciliary of another state. Clearly Harry is residing in California, but if he still had an abode in England, I’m not sure where his domicile would be.
And a couple of articles I read were trying to make a big deal of the fact that Harry reported the date of the change of his residency was when he returned the keys to Frogmore Cottage. As if he changed as of that date due to anger or trying to get back at his father. But if he no longer had a place of abode in England as of that date, isn’t it an “of course” that this was the date of the change in residency?
1 Like