For me the difference would be whether there was proof that they actually brought the cameras with them (or tipped someone off) vs a camera crew being there for other reasons and just happening to capture the moment. It’s cringey when celebrities turn their good deeds into a PR puff piece about them. I have much more respect for the ones who do the work without needing constant accolades - and I’m actually surprised when I learn all that they do for communities and charitable organizations.
Allegedly, they were granted access to a location behind police barricades while desperate homeowners waiting to find out if their homes were intact, were not allowed through - so there’s that.
Every article I’ve seen has said the same thing. No idea whether it is true - I realize there is a tremendous amount of dislike for these two, so most articles that I see about them are negative.
The usage of “Kate” is ubiquitous by the general public and the media.
What is a faux pas is calling Kate “Princess Catherine.” In the UK, Prince/Princess [first name] is limited to those who are prince/princess in their own right, either by birth (e.g. William and Harry) or by Letters Patent (e.g. Philip). She is HRH The Princess of Wales. Similarly, Diana was never Princess Diana.
But that’s minor vs deliberately calling someone by the wrong name. That’s just rude. Don’t you agree, Fred?
I believe that the general public were introduced to her through the UK media. The intention may have been to make her more relatable, emphasizing her non-Royal background. Then years passed and as the Newsweek article points out, it was difficult to switch her media moniker:
*“The reason for the difference is simple, Diana was alive before the advent of the internet age and the pressures of search engine optimization, hence it was easier to drop her maiden name when she married in 1981.
In 2023,Google Trends data shows that people still overwhelmingly search for “Kate Middleton” rather than “Princess Catherine.”
In the last 12 months, U.S. searches for “Princess Catherine” at their highest point only amounted to seven percent of the peak volume of searches for “Kate Middleton,” both back in September 2022 when she was first given the title.”
“Britain is barely any different, with the same figure standing at just nine percent, though “Princess Kate” did slightly better, at 20 percent in Britain and 22 percent in America.”*
I care deeply about the truth. While Harry and Meghan don’t need me to defend them, I believe they’ve been unfairly portrayed by the British tabloids and other media. Unfortunately, many people accept these narratives without questioning the sources. To offer a more balanced perspective, I’ll share three reputable sources—two national and one local—that present a different view from what was shared here without citations by ljs1:
I can’t find anything to support your claim. The video in the article was from FOX news and if you watch the 10 minute clip they seem surprised to see Harry and Meghan. The newscasters discuss their surprise appearance and speculate that they’re there to help. It’s a little amusing that H/M detractors are upset that broadcasters referred to Meghan as Princess Meghan. Watch the video and you’ll hear directly from the mayor that H and M were serving food in the morning and weren’t recognized with masks on.
The only place I saw the 17 minute comment was a YouTube video from some random person who seems to have issues with the couple…less reliable than the mayor or Chef Jose Andres in my opinion. The mayor said they may have just arrived (at this specific spot), but they were there in the morning serving food and meeting displaced families.
As for security and a camera person (was there a crew?) I wouldn’t be surprised. 1. Because I would expect they always travel with a bodyguard/bodyguards. 2.Because a photographer can take photos to help promote the cause, assistance to the people impacted by the fires. News orgs will highlight the devastation and the impact on individuals. People should be aware and consequently people want to help. “How can we help” is a natural reaction if one is empathetic.
As for PR I don’t see it as anything different from what Jennifer Garner and others are doing. Meghan grew up in LA. She lives within a couple hr drive from LA. Harry and Meghan’s presence because of their affiliation with World Central Kitchen makes sense. It is not out of character for them…showing up and doing good.
On the brights side, I don’t think taxpayers are footing the bill for their work.
I agree with this. Jennifer Garner, however, is overall more likeable so the American press is kind to her. Unfortunately, M&H also have the British press on their backs, and they have an axe to grind.
I do also agree that M&H appear to be under an almost constant level of scrutiny, no matter what they do. IMO, there are gray areas on both sides of their family conflict - and those of us on the outside will likely never be privy to the actual truths.
Every time I see a press piece on them, I am reminded of the South Park episode parodying their demand for privacy while still wanting to be “seen”. If I were in their shoes and subject to the constant scrutiny, I would try to live my life peacefully and as far under the radar as I could. They choose to do otherwise and sadly for them, the snarky-press comments always follow.
But this is their problem: they need to make serious money (at least high single digit millions of dollars per year) to pay for their lifestyle, staff, house etc. They can’t just live quietly in Montecito and avoid all publicity and bring in that amount of income…
The advantage of being a working royal like Prince William is that at least the money side of things is much less of a concern.
Do you think their demand for privacy might have more to do with avoiding invasions like paparazzi climbing their fence, chasing them, flying drones over their home, or bugging their phones? Perhaps they embrace and enjoy their public roles but are simply asking for reasonable boundaries.
For the most part, I think that’s what living in California vs the UK affords them.
Even the king and queen of everything, The Rock and Oprah Winfrey, were heavily criticized for the way they responded to the Maui fire. I don’t think M&H can do much without getting some kind of blowback, so at least they’re out there trying.
But as always it’s going to be a tricky needle to thread for Meghan, trying to promote a show about abundance and aesthetics when so many parts of LA have been torched. I just don’t see her show (or its format in general) being relevant to anything these days. To me, it feels like the moment for that kind of warm and fuzzy lifestyle celebration has passed. The timing of course is not her fault at all, but I can’t help feeling that M’s projects always arrive just a beat too late for the zeitgeist.
No doubt. But most celebrities are able to live quiet, paparazzi-free lives. They can shop, go to work, take their kids to school, enjoy a meal, without being hounded - unless they do something controversial to draw the press to them.
M&H have not been able to shake the controversy of leaving the RF and moving to the U.S. and then adding to it with the book and interviews. American press gets bored easy and moves on to the next Hollywood scandal, but they (along with the British press) always keep one toe in the door when it comes to M&H.
Probably - but sometimes it seems like they do things or post pictures (which may or may not be authentic) that almost bait the press to say something about them.
I have no strong opinions on them either way but some things they say or do, does raise my eyebrows as far as whether they actually DO want to live a private life.
I think some of the scrutiny there may have had to do with conflicted feelings toward Oprah acquiring a large amount of property in Maui (before the fire). Also, as is the case in Western NC - a lot of money was supposedly raised, with very little of it being distributed to the actual displaced people. That’s probably a subject for another thread. I do agree with you that there are certain celebrities that can’t seem to escape criticism no matter what they do.
Please stop. Hundreds of thousands of people have been evacuated. Multiple fires are still burning. Celebrities, influencers, politicians, business owners, as well as many, many people whose name you wouldn’t know, are on the ground doing what they can to help. Kudos to all of them.
Celebrities of comparable A-list fame are orders of magnitude more wealthy, to take your example of Oprah, she’s worth about $3B, so ~100 times more than H&M, with huge passive income streams. Oprah doesn’t need to seek publicity to ensure adequate income to support her lifestyle. H&M do. It’s inevitably going to be a toxic relationship with the press when they simply can’t afford to hide away from it all.
While I have no particular interest in them, my thinking is that H&M would theoretically like to live a private life but also want to reap the financial benefits that accrue from being public figures – a virtually impossible tightrope to walk.
From the linked article that no one bothered to open:
“At the request of Meghan, and with the full support of Netflix, the release of the series — a heartfelt tribute to the beauty of Southern California — has been moved from its previously announced Jan. 15 premiere date to March 4, due to the ongoing devastation caused by the Los Angeles wildfires.”
The usual reason is that there is a large cohort of people who seem to have made it their mission to pick at and criticize Meghan in particular (is it really that clever or witty to call her Rachel? It seems pathetic to me) in an effort to, what? Drive her into complete obscurity? Self-destruction? That was certainly the objective sought by the British tabloids with an able assist from the royal family.
Of course, we’re always assured that the criticism has nothing whatsoever to do with her race, nationality, or simple misogyny so I’m always baffled by what it is that upsets the legions of haters. I guess it’s her continuing existence. How dare she marry the spare prince (and whipping boy) of the BRF and then have the audacity to be miserable because she’s been made a target of virulent hatred. Doesn’t she know that it’s her job to just take it?
