Perhaps it’s worth considering the credibility of the sources —especially if there’s a pattern of gossip or failed fact-checks.
“Overall, we rate Page Six as Right-Center biased due to its sensationalist coverage of celebrity news and occasional politically adjacent topics, which sometimes reflect a conservative tone. Given its reliance on gossip and failed fact checks, we also rate it Mixed for factual reporting.”
The disparaging attacks on Harry and Meghan are exhausting. My empathy for them grows with every unsubstantiated negative opinion that gets magnified in the echo chamber of both corporate and social media platforms.
I choose to believe the mayor and Chef Jose Andres. Why would anyone care what Justine Bateman thinks?
As for:
The group shot I saw included 2 officers, the governor’s wife, the mayor and a few others. In my opinion it looked more like an impromptu photo…and if there wasn’t a negative bias, it would be taken as a sign of resilience…an “LA Strong” pic.
I don’t rely on any sources. I simply added the article for debate and speculation, just as we all do on this thread.
I believe this is important because tabloid gossip media impacts public perception. It often fuels and incites the online abuse directed at Markle, encouraging hatred of her without any valid reason.
Sadly, there is profit in hate.
H&M serving at a shelter where the mayor, governors wife, and other important people are does have the appearance of being a publicity shot/or staged “event”.
I can see your point because while they were there offering assistance, photos were taken. And then it was an “event” that was organized by some group affiliated with the city/state…hence the mayor, the governor’s wife and World Central Kitchen.
I just find it interesting how Harry/Meghan haters try to twist perception with phrases like “disaster tourists” and “staged” (versus “organized”) when they were actually showing up and working…and definitely longer than the oft repeated 17 minutes. Again I choose to believe the mayor and Chef Jose Andres.
Lastly, publicity promoting “coming together and assisting fire victims and first responders” is a good thing…LA Strong indeed.
There have been a number of celebrity call-outs and clapbacks with the LA fires. The good news is nobody cares too much about what Justine Bateman says 
(although I will always love Mallory Keaton and I quite like her stance on aging). But she is D list at best compared to H&M.
Khloe Kardashian called out the mayor for her response to the fires, then she got heaps of clap backs for being one of the biggest water usage offenders back in 22 when CA was in severe drought.
Tommy Lee called out any celebrity that is promoting their music right now instead of focusing on the fires, then he got clapped back for promoting his music in the aftermath of the Lahaina and other fires in the past.
To Tommy and Khloe and Justine, all Angelenos, I would just say : step away from Twitter and get out there and help! None of them comes across as anything other than silly or hypocritical when they chime in with criticisms like this.
I don’t think there is much they can do except give money. If you are hungry you don’t really care if the sandwich is made by Meghan or Khloe or the mayor or just a red cross volunteer. It is like when a president does a fly over of a fire or hurricane or whatever. Yes it brings the press but it takes a lot of resources (fire, police, secret service, local and federal). If M&H own a backhoe or a firetruck, then they can lend it and be helpful. If they own water rights and can donate them, great. Otherwise, don’t go to the scene for a photo op. Send a check.
No, not really. It’s just gotten kind of amusing to see the common energy used by so many internet warriors against a woman who’s done nothing wrong or immoral and hasn’t harmed anyone. It’s as if hating Meghan Markle gives some sort of personal satisfaction.
I mean, she can absolutely never win with certain people no matter what she does. The hatred seems to be based on her simply existing.
It is very sad that Meghan has alienated both her own family and her in-laws.
It is even sadder imo that Meghan has been abused by both her own family and her in-laws.
Well certainly no one on this thread ‘hates’ her, but there is plenty of vitriol on other forums and in the press that is posted here along with the good. Meghan Markle is beautiful and ambitious, but in my opinion the vitriol is based on a number of factors. Some of them are:
Her interview with Oprah, in which she called some members of the royal family racist amongst many other untruths.
Her bullying of palace aids - the palace report has been swept under the carpet for now
The many resignations of staff which suggest a difficult work environment
The fact that she has discarded and alienated friends and family members (husbands, Jessica Mulroney, her father, her half-siblings, her in-laws for example)
Self importance - for example, clearing out a huge section of Wimbledon so that she could sit alone, which has never been done for anyone, including the Royal Family, at Wimbledon before.
Causing the Queen and Prince Philip such unnecessary angst in the twilight of their lives.
Naming their children after Royal nicknames without consent, causing friction - the Queen’s nickname (Lilibet), Prince George’s nickname (Archie)
Being difficult in the run up to her wedding - for example, demanding a particular tiara, making Princess Charlotte cry, making Catherine cry (I think these were detailed in Spare, but I have not read it)
These, and other countless things are the reason…so it is not based on her ‘simply existing’…
I hope she keeps showing up for causes that inspire her.
You’ve obviously done an awfully deep dive and have accepted the BRF’s and Daily Mail’s version of Harry and Megan’s time as working royals as gospel truth. I watched the interview in question and at no point did she ever call any members of the royal family racist. What she did say was, there were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he is born” with regard to her son.
She never revealed who expressed those concerns. You may not think that mentioning “concerns” suggests racism. I happen to believe it does along with the incontrovertible fact that the first Black equerry was not hired into the royal household until 2017. That’s quite an oversight.
I also believe that information from either of these sources is highly unreliable. We know that the palace PR representatives were caught in an embarrassing lie about the infamous photoshopped picture of Kate and her children. As a result of that lie, statements from the palace now must be independently vetted before going into print in credible publications. It’s been well established that senior royals have fed negative stories about both Harry and Meghan to the royal rota in exchange for not printing unflattering stories about Charles, Camilla, William and best of all, uncle Andy. I don’t agree with you that the Sussex’s should have accepted that kind of treatment.
Clearly, I’m not going to convince you that your contempt for Meghan Markle is unwarranted. You certainly aren’t going to convince me that she’s a liar who deserves the treatment she’s receiving and this forum is not for debates in any case.
I’ll just say that the more bullying and abuse is directed is at this woman who had the nerve to marry a member of the BRF, the more I see her as an underdog who is being treated unfairly. I’m sure she’s not a perfect human and she may have made some mistakes (although I’m not sure what they were) but the attacks on her are malicious and unwarranted.
I’m not really a fan of Meghan, but some items in your list are unfair.
I have read Spare, and the account of how Meghan allegedly made Princess Charlotte cry is very, very different. The Oprah ? interview version is consistent with Spare. In that version, Kate is a ten star brat–most people would use a different word starting with a B. I wasn’t there–so who knows–but I found the Spare version one heck of a lot more believable than the one Kate & BRF linked to the press. So, even if you find the Kate & BRF version more believable, at least acknowledge that the version is not universally accepted as true.
My understanding is that H & M did get the Queen’s permission to use the name Lillibet. Apparently the now King thinks they needed his permission too. Since he wasn’t the reigning monarch at the time, I don’t think his consent was required. H&M probably knew he’d say no if asked because they were fairly estranged by the time Lillibet was born.
Meghan is close to her mom. She also is supposed to be close to her cousin. There are a heck of a lot of half siblings who don’t like each other, so M not liking her Markle half siblings is not exactly shocking. If you think the Oprah interview was in poor taste, how do you justify “Princess Pushy, parts 1 and 2?” I haven’t read it, but I have read some reviews. Samantha Markle’s says her stepmother was absolutely horrible. In SM’s retelling, she “adored” Meghan. So, it’s all Meghan’s fault they don’t get along. But if you had a half-sibling who wrote truly ugly things about your mom, whom you are close to–would she be your best buddy?(And even accepting SM’s version as gospel, she was not exactly nice to Doria.) Moreover, SM admits that one of her grandmothers was a racist and said horrible things about Doria and M based solely on the color of their skin.
BTW, SM has this whole sob story about how she couldn’t cope after her divorce, so her ex-H’s parents volunteered to take her kids. They legally adopted them. Suspicious much? Oh and SM says her own mother was awful. Maybe…I don’t know…but personally, given how many people SM herself is estranged from, I don’t think it’s all that surprising that Meghan is on her list and I don’t jump to the conclusion it’s all M’s fault.
Thomas’s behavior was despicable; he wanted to make a buck out of his daughter’s wedding. Then he was paid for a letter Meghan wrote him about it and the letter was published. Are you aware that’s illegal in the US? If you doubt me, check some of the legal cases involving JD Sallinger, whose ex-lover Joyce Maynard attempted to publish the letters he wrote her. Basic premise:the author of a letter owns the words in it, i.e., the copyright. If you want to publish a letter someone wrote, you need the permission of the author. The recipient owns the physical letter, but cannot publish it. Selling someone else’s writing is theft. If Thomas didn’t know that the sleazes who bought it did, which may be why the sale allegedly took place in Mexico. (That just muddies the waters. Short version: it’s probably an attempt to avoid criminal prosecution. )
As for Harry’s family, not everyone is estranged. Charles and WIlliam and Camilla, yes. But supposedly, H &M remain good friends with his cousins Eugenie and Beatrice and get along well with his mother Princess Diana’s family.
And, maybe he shouldn’t have written it, but the account in Spare of William hitting Harry because he didn’t like the way Meghan was behaving, if truthful, explains why H and W are estranged.
As for the staff turnover, there are a few accounts that say it’s just not true. Others say that basically William wanted all the staff for H&M to be loyal to W &K and report back everything H&M did to him.
Look at the last two “spares.” Prince Andrew is…not a nice man. I base this on listening to his interview on British TV in its entirety. I don’t need to know what anyone else says about him; based on his own words, he is…not nice. But then someone who was friends with Epstein isn’t likely to be.
Margaret was a beautiful, intelligent woman who was given a lousy education and who married a man who would sleep with anyone who would consent. Tony A-J had a girlfriend throughout their engagement and impregnated another woman during that time. (Not rumor; confirmed by DNA.) Margaret had a drinking problem and allegedly also had a drug problem. She also spent most of her time later in life outside the UK on the island of Mustique. She was allegedly promiscuous.
So, maybe Harry didn’t see a great life for himself in the UK once he was no longer needed as a spare. I think he’s far from perfect, but he certainly wins any likability contest with Andrew. He hasn’t messed up his life to the extent that Princess Margaret messed up hers. (BTW, she supposedly said that once her sister had children, she had no real job. She also said that if there were 2 sisters and one was queen and therefore had to be believed to be perfect, the press was going to make the other sister into everything that is bad. The press seems to be repeating this with Kate and Meghan.)
When H and M first left the UK I watched some of the shows. In several, the British royal photographer–I think that’s his title, anyway who took a lot of photos of the BRF–said over and over again how happy Harry was before he met Meghan; how he used to go out for a drink with the press pool and was always the life of the party. Then he met Meghan and he wouldn’t socialize anymore and he became so depressed. She changed him.
Before M came into the picture, H, W and K formed some mental health charity. W said he and K had been worried about H’s mental health and struggle to come to terms with his mother’s death and suggested he get therapy. Not once did anything of these Brit shows point out that his own brother and wife were worried about H’s mental health problems before he met M. Not once did anyone point out that a bachelor prince might go out drinking with the guys, but most men change their habits after they get involved in a serious relationship.
I think the Brits are angry that Harry left the UK. Harry was their “bonny boy,” and so they blame everything he’s done, especially leaving the UK, on M. And some of the press seem to be positively hoping for a divorce.
For the record, I’m really not a fan of Meghan’s, but I do think a lot of the bad press is orchestrated to get ratings and make money. H is a grown man; he’s responsible for his own choices.
You have managed to paint me in a very unfavourable light and have said some things that are untrue:
I never said that anywhere in my response
I have never said that I have contempt for Meghan
I have never said that she is a liar who deserves this treatment
We will have to agree to disagree on this subject. You will always see the best in Meghan, and that is your prerogative. I happen to see the good and bad, and that is my prerogative.
This story is a great example of the adage “There are three sides to every story…” In this case there is the side of the BRF, then there is the side of M&H and somewhere in the middle is the truth.
Both sides have made incendiary allegations against the other (claims of racism, claims of bullying staff, etc.) but neither side has named names or provided receipts. The suggestion of racism against Meghan’s unborn children is particularly damaging to the BRF. If she was going to assert that it happened, then she should have gone all in on it and exposed those who participated. To air it in the way she did, and leave it hanging without further explanation or evidence, was highly irresponsible. This is not just your average family - this is the most well-known royal family in the world.
FWIW, I think context matters in how those conversations were had about the baby’s color. And to my knowledge, M&H have provided no further information or clarification. Merely wondering what traits a child will have from each parent is not racist. Making derogatory comments about those traits would be. If they discussed whether the kids would have Harry’s red hair, would that be racist?
I have no contempt or hate for them. I do think the British press in particular has been rough and relentless but some of the responsibility has to rest on the shoulders of M&H for the bombs that they dropped in the wake of their exit from royal life. They obviously felt compelled to tell their story, but it has a lot of holes in it, leaving the British and American public to take sides and fill the holes with further gossip and speculation.
Meghan seemed to be generally well-liked at first by both the press and the public, and on her way to being accepted into British Royal life and then it all suddenly went south. I’m curious what the catalyst was for the flip. Suddenly the press started picking on her lack of royal etiquette, what colors she wore. Was it because she refused to have Archie at the designated royal hospital and pose for pictures on the steps? Was it the pictures and videos of her smiling and chatting with the Queen? Or was there a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff going on that wasn’t made public? If one accepts a proposal from a member of a royal family, I think there needs to be an acceptance of the rules and etiquette that go along with that. Meghan has implied that she was not aware of what Royal life would be like. I’m not sure how you date a prince with a mother who very famously and publicly battled the royal family her whole married life, and you still say that you weren’t aware of what that life would be like.
I don’t think she was prepared for life as a member of the BRF. I believe Diana went through a lot of training on what her life would be like. Catherine dated William for years before she agreed to that lifestyle, leading her to be called Waitie Katie in the press. Meghan married Harry fairly quickly and allegedly turned down offers to help her prepare for the lifestyle. As Americans, I think most of us have no clue what all of the rules are that she would have to live by.
I’ve been going down the rabbit hole that is the Blake Lively/Justin Baldoni feud/lawsuit.
If you look at the lawsuits, it shows the interworking of PR firms and how they try to manipulate and spin the news for their clients.
It shows a lot imo how PR firms try and tell us the public how we should look at public figures. And how it can implode.
I think there is a lot of spin behind what we hear on both sides of this issue. I also think that the Sussex’ spin isn’t as productive as they would hope. They keep trying but the public seem to have made up their minds. I personally don’t think it’s good to go up against an institution like the British royal family.
I think Kate made Meghan cry, not vice versa, and she apologized for it. Meghan should not have mentioned that specific. What is to gain? They could have spoke in generalities about that, meaning saying the making Kate cry was made up, absolutely.
Archie was to be the first bi-racial baby born. I don’t think it’s wrong to discuss that matter, but those conversations should be extremely private between spouses. Didn’t many of us wonder, too? So private that H and M should never have known…no one should have.
Harry is very bitter, understandably. I still think the tell-all backfired. I believe him. But it was very short sighted. He left, just leave it behind. You don’t always have to seek revenge, especially in public.
I think they are naturally philanthropic people. She was before she met him. She’s from LA and I imagine feels the horror and heartbreak of the area surrounding the fires. Who wouldn’t want to help, feel the need to do something. Why should they just send a check? Kudos for them in going. I’ve driven that stretch maybe 6 times in the last few years on vacation, taking home tours and dined at Moonshadows. When you’ve been somewhere and you see the devastation, it has a more visceral feeling than a place you’ve never been. Imagine living there.
They didn’t want “privacy”, they wanted to stop the paps peering into their houses, talking to neighbors, stalking them, anything we would want.
They’ve made missteps along the way, but I think for the most part they seem like genuine decent people.
The part that I think she’s massaging the truth a bit is when she talks about nor really knowing much about the royal family and what is involved, I think she knew, but decided she just didn’t like it. What I’m surprised at is she couldn’t just ignore the rags, knowing they were rags. She should have done with the Queen says, “keep calm and carry on”. I don’t think she gave it enough time.
