The Duchess of Sussex reactivated the @meghan Instagram account on Wednesday after a five-year hiatus and shared a new video. The video, filmed by the Duke of Sussex, was shot on a public beach near their home in Montecito. The caption-less clip features the Duchess dressed in all white, walking along the beach and writing '2025' in the sand.
The Duchess previously had a personal Instagram account with 3 million followers, which she closed a few months before her May 2018 wedding.
They should invest in new camera it would make better photo #1
ReplyDeleteAva
Harry made a video, the photos have the media made a copy off. So please 🤦♂️🤦🤦♀️
DeleteOkay, what is the point of these look at me photos. The huge white shirt looks like it would be nice and cool at the beach.
ReplyDeleteAs pointless as my Instagram profile?
Delete01.29, what is your instagram profile? 😊
DeletePointless
ReplyDeleteAlles so eitel…
DeleteAgree.
DeleteGood for her but her comments better be switched off, she is not very popular on social media
ReplyDeleteShe switched her comments off
Deletenot a royalist or a fan of the royals but I do wish this couple all the very best. may they find health and happiness we all deserve...
ReplyDelete100% Agreed.
DeleteAll the best for the Sussex-Team. ♥︎♥︎♥︎♥︎♥︎
Ada
Hmmm. I wish her well in her quest for success, but I hate what happens here in the comments when she is the subject of a post. Let’s be kind to one another, commenters.
ReplyDeleteHeard hear 👏👏👏
DeleteMaybe she should have been to the family, nothing but a very sad woman.
DeleteForget the wasters!!!
ReplyDeleteThen please stop commenting.
Deleteshe has a new Netflix show
ReplyDeletehttps://www.instagram.com/meghan/
So happy to see H and M and their children living a good life away from those that don’t care for them, even more happy that they are in USA, Rem
ReplyDeleteTwo things can be true at the same time…Meghan could have been bullied and she could also be a bully…each side is not 100% pure and innocent.
DeleteR.i.P. Queen of hearts.
DeleteMESH
What a beautiful young woman. I always thought that there was something special about her. To still stand straight after all the media and public bullying, is definitely a sign of strength.
ReplyDeleteYoung woman?
Delete43?
she did the bullying first- to her in-laws, every one else was defending her families and in-laws.
DeleteYou seem to forget the Oprah interview the book the Netflix serie, the question is who bullied who.she should stop using the Sussex titles and than people will leave her alone
DeleteShe is not young, she is 43 :)
DeleteShe is not young, she is 43 :)
DeleteShe is not bullied, but people comment on bad behavior and complaining.
DeleteIf Meghan isn't bullied no one is, I guess it's hard to see our own fault and behaviour even if claim other people are the one with bad behaviour.
DeleteAnon 14.41 It's important to acknowledge that everyone can play a role in the dynamics of any situation, and self-reflection is key to understanding how our actions might affect others. While Meghan has certainly faced intense criticism, it’s worth remembering that sometimes people’s behavior, on both sides, can contribute to the overall tension.
DeleteAnon 04:27…Hi Meghan!
DeleteStop being nasty. Age is relative. She is still young, especially to people who are older than she is. When you are an immature 20-year-old, yes, 43 is old. When you are in your sixties, seventies, eighties...43 is young. What is the point of these comments? Substitute any other person for Meghan, these comments would not have been made.
DeleteAnon 16.21 Fully agree! Ultimately, the focus should perhaps be less on age and more on the broader context of the situation or the individual’s actions, not just their age. 😊
Delete@Anon 16:21 Well said! Perfectly true.
Delete- Anon 9:13
I agree with you. She could have been a bully, but she was (still is) also bullied in the press the same way as the current princess of wales was (and still) bullied.
DeleteMay 2025 be the year she finds the success she has been looking for.
43 is young.
T
Everyone in the UK will follow this account!
ReplyDelete🤣😂😅
DeleteSure they will. Yet an other opportunity to write nasty comments. Many are busy creating new fake accounts in instagram for mean comments.
DeleteWhy are you almost all anonymous here, especially when it's about Meghan?
I'm very curious to follow her, with my own name.
Well she has gotten 1,1 million followers in a few days 😂🤣
DeleteJust me, I think anonymity online sometimes gives people the freedom to express themselves without consequences, but it can also encourage negativity. It’s great that you’re engaging in the conversation openly (even though I do not see your name here either)—that can definitely help foster a more respectful dialogue. Meghan, like anyone in the public eye, certainly sparks strong opinions, but it’s always valuable to remember that every story has multiple sides.
DeleteIt is all a faux blurb, to advertise yet another failure she will 'release' in the coming months. Even a fake 'photo shoot'. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14243351/Royal-fans-notice-blunder-Meghan-Markles-new-Instagram-video.html
ReplyDeleteAll of her haters will go mad!
ReplyDeleteNot haters…just people seeing through their phoniness.
DeleteSadly we see it here… so much vile negativity from people making judgements. LRB
DeleteO dear, not again…
DeleteIf you cannot bear other opinions…
Why are you posting the commercial activities of this Montecito couple? Will you do the same for other people with royal connections?
ReplyDeleteI come to this blog for the fashion and protocol of OFFICIAL royal engagements - where members of the royal family represent the country, diplomacy or do charity work, representing public good, not personal commercial activities to make millions.
I would love it if the author of the blog occasionally posted photos and activities of first ladies or female politicians. I respect that the author of the blog does not do this, although I think it is a loss, because many first ladies are great inspirations for fashion and style (Mme Macron, Mrs. Agatha Duda from Poland or finish first lady Mrs. Stubb).
Stephanie
I absolutely agree with you 👏👏👏👏
DeleteYou are the first one who sees that this is nothing less than a commercial.
DeleteYou are totally right with your comment!!
Agree with your comments 100%; re the commercial activities of the couple.
DeleteYou make a valid point about the focus of the blog, especially in relation to official royal duties and the public roles that come with them. It’s understandable to want content that aligns with that theme, particularly when it involves diplomacy or charitable work.
DeleteYes, another commercial, another failed show.
DeleteThis blog is called Newmyroyals and not Newmypoliticians the last time I checked. If you want to know what politicians are wearing go to one of the major news networks!
DeleteAgain, it is a choice to look at the posts about Meghan. It is such a simple concept. If you don't want to see her, don't look. Problem solved.
Delete@12:38. I agree. Would much prefer to be seeing a little more of other statespeople than the commercial activities of the lesser royals.
DeleteThis is an excellent comment
DeleteBeautifully articulated well said
Totally agree
Firstly who does not understand the concept of ‘scroll on by’? If it is not a person who interests you don’t click don’t comment. There are very many people covered on this blog who are not working royals, but we don’t get the same negativity about them. Just the Sussex’s - what harm have they done you? I say this often I despise the stay behind British royal family - so I don’t comment on the posts about them on this blog. Why can others not choose to do the same? LRB
DeleteI completely agree with you Stephanie. First Ladies have some beautiful items. Forget the politics and love the clothes. Mrs Trump is about to set the fashion world on fire,as did Dr Biden with her choices.
DeleteLowri.
Maybe those of you who want to see more political fashions can start your own blog. It's an idea anyway. Unfortunately for you, this is a royal fashion blog. Until then, if you don't care for someone that is featured, don't look.
DeleteAnonymous 12.38 can you go over to the article on Zara and make the same comment? She is not a working royal yet all the comments there are positive. Equally the Yorkie sisters etc etc. Why not just scroll by if you are not interested in Meghan? LRB
DeleteLRB 20.40 The key point seems to be that people should have the freedom to choose what to comment on without being met with hostility, especially if it’s something they don’t personally like. In your case, you avoid commenting on the British royal family posts you don’t enjoy, and you’re asking for the same respect when it comes to the Sussexes. Everyone can choose where to focus their energy.
Delete@Anon 11:57 You, like so many others, seem to think you can say whatever you want and it should be acceptable because of "freedom of speech". This is a fashion blog, and the comments are supposed to be about fashion. When Meghan is the feature of the post, the comments are rarely about fashion. They are personal attacks fueled by gossip, rumors and innuendo. Not one person here has any first hand knowledge about Meghan and Harry's lives, yet they feel free to make disparaging remarks based on things written by tabloids. Tabloids write what sells because their business is to make money. If happy stories about Meghan and Harry sold more than the distasteful stories, that would be the angle they slanted everything. It is actually sad to see how many people are so gullible, or delight in another's downfall, that they allow themselves to be conditioned to believe what is written. If entries on this blog were a school assignment, the majority of commenters would receive a failing mark. The assignment is to comment on the fashion of the royal, not to continue the agenda of the gutter press. You say that "people should have the freedom to choose what to comment on without being met with hostility, especially if it’s something they don’t personally like". That is true. Where you are wrong is that the assignment is FASHION. Too many people here stretch, bend, abuse and hide behind the First Amendment because they have decided it is an excuse to say vile things about perfect strangers, and they get a thrill out of it.
DeleteAnon 16.11 Everyone has the right to express themselves, and it’s certainly natural for people to have strong opinions about public figures, especially when they are frequently in the spotlight. However, I still think it’s important to maintain respect and focus on the topic at hand—fashion—especially in a space like this that’s meant to celebrate style and creativity. Personally, I don't see any gossip here, just differing opinions about Meghan's choices.
DeleteC'est vraiment une belle femme ; avec ses enfants et époux, qu'elle continue à nous montrer des photos à condition qu'elles soient meilleures !
ReplyDeleteGood for her and Harry not to be brought down by the onslaught of online hatred directed toward them. She is a beautiful woman with an elegant style and wish them both good luck.
ReplyDeleteHarry will bring himself down through no other actions but his own.
DeleteHi Meghan!
DeleteHow much Meghan pays you to sugar coating her like that? She is a meaning person. It is very well known fact in Hollyhood and her neighborhood.
Delete@ladarlana What does Hollywood have to do with it? I realize using the word "Hollywood" is the ultimate insult on this blog, but it only makes the commenter sound ignorant. Hollywood is a dot on the map of California, not the entire state, or even half of the state. They don't live there, or even near there. They are not Hollywood insiders either. Being a person that believes what you read in the tabloids says far more about you than it does about them.
DeleteThank you, Anonymous 14:45, 15:59, and ladarlena for proving that I am absolutely correct. Your online hatred of lovely Meghan backs me up perfectly. So appreciated.
DeleteEntspannt euch, Leute!
DeleteSo basic.
ReplyDeleteHaters will be haters, even on this blog. Time to grow up!
ReplyDeleteGrowing up means recognizing that not everything deserves a response, and sometimes it's better to ignore the noise and stay positive 😉
DeleteYes, Harry needs to grow up and stop blaming everyone else for his problems.
DeleteWhat does this even mean, “haters”?! To have a view opposite to yours doesn’t mean hate (generally), it means a different opinion. Let’s not tell other commenters here - strangers - to grow up!
DeletePeople should take a good hard look in the mirror because the lack of self-awareness is just to funny. PS hate from haters is not different opinions, it's is easy to read the difference.
DeleteAnon 20:57…calling Meghan and Harry out about their BS isn’t hating…maybe you should look in the mirror and figure out why you’re so gullible.
DeleteAnon 20.57 I see where you're coming from. You’re saying that the comments aren't necessarily hate but just differing opinions, even if they’re strongly worded. It’s true that people may express their views passionately, but that doesn't always equate to hate. Sometimes the line between critique and negativity can be blurry, and it’s important to acknowledge that people may just feel strongly about certain topics or individuals. Everyone’s perspective can be different, and it’s good to allow room for those differences without immediately labeling them as hate.
DeleteIsn't it funny we never see nasty comments about Charles under post's about him and Camilla. And he has done EXACTLY the same as Harry. He outed his parents in books calling dad a bully, mother cold and aloof. Made his childhood cold and lonely. His dad forced him into a loveless marriage, even if his wife was in love with him. Broke his wife's heart, and destoyed his own marriage through infidelity. I don't blame Di getting lovers after living in hell for years. We never see nasty comments about Camilla, the mistress who helped ruin Charles & Dianas marriage, but oh, Meghan on the other hand what a nasty woman for telling the truth...
DeleteAnon 16.25 You raise an interesting point, and I think it's important to consider the way different individuals handle their public narratives. Charles and Camilla, despite their tumultuous past, didn’t profit by selling personal stories or exploiting their experiences through books or interviews in the same way that Meghan and Harry have. While Meghan’s and Harry’s decisions to share their personal lives publicly have certainly sparked debate, it’s worth acknowledging that their approach has been different in terms of media engagement. It’s easy to get caught up in the public narratives, but it’s also crucial to recognize the various ways people handle their own stories and the impact those decisions have on public perception. Everyone’s situation is unique, and maybe it’s time to focus less on judgment and more on understanding the broader context.
DeleteNo they threw Harry and later Meghan under the buss for free with help from Camillas media friends, so they could get good pr themselves.
DeleteThe whole writing in the sand, getting wet feet, it was all and advertisement, self-promotion, for her newest 'project'. Even the photos were staged, as evidenced by the photos she released, and what sharp-eyed people around the world saw; This set of photos should never have been allowed here. This is similar to Fergie doing a video advert for something or other.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/royal-fans-spot-blunder-meghan-34409517
Whether intentional or not, it seems the photos sparked a lot of conversation, which is often the goal in today's media landscape. That said, it's fair to critique the choice of images or how they were presented if they didn't feel appropriate or authentic to the moment.
DeleteAnd what do you think about the Wales ‘Disney video’ of earlier this year - all staged… where are your comments on that? LRB
Delete@LRB I've read all your comments to all the posts above and I agree with you on all of them.
DeleteThere are always two sides to every story; I'm sure there's a horrendous side to what Meghan experienced that people blindly ignore and put her down. They should read their history books. Some of us have lived it. She and Harry made the best move and I wish them all the happiness for taking a stand.
- Anon 9:13
@20:42
DeleteThe difference is the PoW did not make any promotional video and/or social media post to promote/sell a product or tv-show.
Of course that video was "staged", but then so is every appearance, photo opportunity, etc... that any royal makes.
Like @15:12 said: this is only for advertising the tv-show.
While every royal appearance is often carefully staged, there's a distinct line between public engagements and using personal platforms to actively promote commercial ventures. The video in question does seem to be a clear form of advertisement for the show, and that’s something the Sussexes have been more open about, which has led to criticism from some. It's understandable to see why this stands out, especially when royals traditionally haven’t used their platforms this way.
DeleteJ aime et elle est si belle
ReplyDeleteFroufrou
Meghan always looks good in white. Her simple style is to my liking.
ReplyDeleteNice beach clothes, suits her well.
ReplyDeleteImo for those that think she shouldn’t be shown, I would add the York sisters to the list.
@16:46
DeleteIf that's the case, I suppose Zara Tindall shouldn't be on the list also.
Agree, nice beach clothes. Meghan’s style is not always to my taste because I find she bares alot of skin, or see through clothing. Otherwise I prefer what she wears to the Yorks. Zara sometimes wears some ‘out there’ outfits, always a surprise.
DeleteGo check the Netflix trailer for her new show - and then read the comments. Eye opening. You can also see that her fashion colour preferences vary from white to beige.
ReplyDeleteThat comment section is hilarious. Really high time the fans wake up to the fact that they are deluded.
DeleteWhat will Meghan cook and bake?
ReplyDeleteProbably a lot of controversy? 😵💫
DeleteShe does Instagram and Netflix, oh ah yes and really? What are her talents exactly? I know already that she excels in breaking up and/or hindering family relations - not only for herself but also for her hubby and her children. Anything else re-markle-able? I only see mildly disgusting and mostly boring things.
ReplyDeleteI wish the Duchess well with her new project. >Looks interesting.
ReplyDeleteIt's just been reported that Mike Tindall has made record profits from his non-royal, commercial interests and his wife is currently bringing home a paypacket from working as a model for a luxury fashion brand.
Together, they make an "interesting" sum each year from sponsering products.
p.s. I agree with Anon16:07's comment about the Duchess's fashion style.
@deadeggs, Zara and Mike do not have any royal titles, this makes a huge difference in status. Same applies to Peter Philips. Their mother does have one and she happens to be the one with the fullest and imposant working agenda. She knew exactly what she did and why when she opted out for her children.
DeleteIt’s true Mike and Zara make an “interesting “ sum of money each year but they aren’t officially royals and they didn’t burn any bridges with their family…so far anyway!
DeleteThe only reason Zara is not a titled royal is by the grace of her mother. It is probably the single most loving she ever did for her children. They were able to grow up far more normally than their cousins. Historically, look at the "spares" in the BRF alone. They are never treated as well, and several generations of them have suffered the effects of being #2. There is something terribly wrong with a system/family that can dictate how their children will live in their adult lives, especially in these modern times. Even worse, being shunned for daring to choose life outside of a royal life. None of us would allow our lives to be controlled that way. Why should Harry be any different? Being born a prince should have no bearing on whether or not he and his family earn their own living. It is especially difficult when they were brought up to do only thing--to be a royal. It cannot be easy to reinvent yourself midway through life, especially with very few transferrable skills. I will always give them credit for making their own way, without taking government money or Charles money. That cannot be said about many of the royals in the BRF.
DeleteAnon 00.49 The Sussexes' decision to share their personal experiences and family dynamics, particularly through high-profile interviews and media deals, has undoubtedly led to criticism. Some feel that by monetizing their family drama, they’ve crossed a line that other royals haven’t. While it’s true that the royal family system can be restrictive and difficult, Harry and Meghan’s choice to publicly air their grievances and profit from them has contributed to a unique and often controversial narrative. This is seen as different from how others, like Zara, have chosen to navigate their lives—keeping their personal matters more private. Ultimately, it’s the monetization of their struggles that has caused some to view their actions more critically, as it’s not just about stepping away from royal duties but also capitalizing on personal and family conflicts.
Delete@anon 12:09 Your comparison of Harry and Meghan to Zara is very off. Zara has never had the same expectations or restrictions put on her. She has had freedoms that William and Harry have never known simply by being untitled. She was never born into a role or "career" with the family. Zara has not been affected by the press in the way that William and Harry have been. They weren't too interested in her because she plays no future role in the monarchy. She never had her every move scrutinized by the media. For example, she pierced her tongue in her early days. Neither William nor Harry could have ever done something like that, and the press would have made the biggest thing out of it if they had. They would have been declared unfit to represent the royal family. The stance (silence) the BRF took when the vile piece about Harry and Meghan's baby being compared to a monkey was printed was embarrassing. They allowed that racism to go unchecked. The practice is to remain silent on many things that they shouldn't, such as the scandal involving Andrew. Those are just two examples of things that should have been addressed head-on. When the media is not called out for extremely bad behavior, they will see it as permission to print anything. One strongly worded statement from the palace about the monkey article would have made it clear that a line was crossed and not to do it again. Instead, their silence spoke volumes. As for keeping personal matters private, historically, they haven't. Charles famously went on television to admit to his affair with Camilla. Before that, he sold out his father for the cruel way he was treated in his youth. Diana followed up Charles' interview with her side of the story. Let's not forget Andrew's disastrous interview about his sex scandal. Margaret and Phillip had loose tongues as well. Harry did nothing differently from his own father, the current King, except he made money from it. While distasteful, he also has no other source of income. The others ran their mouths for free because they were being supported in ways that people can only dream about. I can only imagine, because none of us can possibly know for sure, how it must feel to have no support from your family. Even if there was a little private support, public support is necessary with a family that has so much written and said about them. Without that public support, it lead people to believe that what was printed was true or that the BRF didn't care about them. As we see here on this blog, people will take a narrative and run with it, true or not. We each have different levels of perceived cruelty we can take before we fight back. I will always maintain that a well-timed and strongly worded statement from the palace, the Queen, or Charles would have altered the course of Harry and Meghan's lives. Without that, they made the decision, for better or worse, to tell their story publicly. Just as Charles did before him.
DeleteFrom Joann - I think we need to remember that both Mike Tindall and Zara are world-class athletes. That alone would help them make money through endorsements even if they had no royal connections. Mike was on the World Rugby championship win and also was on the national championship wins. I think at one point he was captain of the team. I'm not positive on that. As for Zara, she is a world class equestrian, having been on the British Olympic Team.
DeleteThey both have reputations on the world athletic stage which make them valuable commodities for advertisers.
I do think the comparison to Zara misses some key points. Zara’s situation is quite different from Harry and Meghan’s. While she’s been outside the formal line of succession, she hasn’t faced the same level of media scrutiny or public expectations. Zara has largely lived a private life, without the relentless pressure and intrusion that William and Harry experienced, particularly after their mother's death. It's true that she had more freedom to make personal choices—like getting a tongue piercing—without the media turning it into a scandal.
DeleteHarry and Meghan, on the other hand, were thrust into a public role with massive expectations. The issue isn’t just about airing grievances, but about how those grievances are shared and the platforms used to do so. The royal family, historically, has often kept matters of personal conflict and scandal behind closed doors, and for Harry and Meghan to publicly discuss their challenges—while still being a part of the family—feels like a break from that tradition. It can be hard for some to reconcile the desire for privacy with the public nature of their actions.
That said, it’s also important to remember that the couple has been vocal about feeling unsupported by the institution, and for them, sharing their story may have been a way to regain some control over their narrative. Whether their actions are seen as justified or exploitative, it’s clear that their decision to speak out and monetize their experiences has played a key role in shaping the public’s perception of them.
Hello Anon 17:02
DeleteWell said and you make some very good point. Thank you.
There are COUNTLESS other titled folks out there who have many, many commercial ventures. Why do the Sussexes get singled-out for theirs? I cannot count how many dukes and counts, and countesses, etc. allow tourists onto their estates, sell merchandise, etc. And many of them have family squabbles and issues. Why the criticism for one duke and duchess only? Hardly seems fair. Anyway, Meghan's fashion looks great in the clips from the new show!
ReplyDeleteThe key difference many people highlight is that the Sussexes have profited from sharing their personal family drama, particularly through interviews and media deals. While other titled individuals may have commercial ventures, their public lives don't seem to involve airing private family matters in the same way. For some, that makes the Sussexes' actions stand out and lead to criticism. It’s understandable that some feel the way they’ve chosen to navigate their royal status—by monetizing their personal experiences—sets them apart and fuels the scrutiny they face. While others may have commercial ventures, the controversy often lies in the way the Sussexes have chosen to use their platform.
DeleteAn.12.06: I can understand that people react on the Sussexes` storytelling on cost on their RF. The RF can not go out with their story, so it is very understandable that people react with criticism - it is not bullying!
DeleteCome on. King Charles himself shared his family drama in books and interviewes. Weren't we born in the 90'? Charles told his father was a bully, mother cold and aloof. And please even Charles got book deals, not one, not two, but many, but strangely enough no criticism.
DeleteAnon 16.09 Charles, as the heir to the throne, has long been seen as part of the establishment, with a more traditional and familiar public image. His revelations were framed as part of his journey to the throne, and many people were sympathetic to the challenges he faced growing up. His status within the royal family may have helped soften the response to his disclosures. On the other hand, Harry and Meghan are viewed as having stepped outside of the traditional royal framework, which has made them both more vulnerable to criticism but also more of a target for those who feel they’ve "betrayed" the institution.
DeleteWhen Charles discussed his family dynamics, it was in a different media environment. The public was more willing to accept personal revelations from royals as part of their journey, and the press coverage was less intense in its scrutiny. By the time Harry and Meghan shared their experiences, the media landscape had shifted dramatically, with a more polarized, 24/7 news cycle and a more sensational approach to royal stories. As a result, their decision to publicly address their struggles was often seen as more controversial, especially because it followed their decision to step away from royal duties.
DeleteCharles’s revelations focused on his personal relationships and upbringing, while Harry and Meghan's comments have often been framed in terms of institutional betrayal and racism, which led to much sharper and more divided reactions. The accusations of racism and the highly publicized rift with the royal family added layers of complexity to their story, leading to even more intense media coverage and public debate.
DeleteA key difference is that Harry and Meghan monetized their story, particularly through book deals and media interviews. While Charles also published books, his were largely seen as part of his personal evolution or duty to the crown, whereas Harry and Meghan’s deals were perceived by some as profiting from family drama, which added a level of criticism about the commercialization of their personal lives.
DeleteWhat Harry told us about the institution and the court his mom had already told us 30 years earlier. So did Sarah. So what did we learn? Nothing has been done, backstabbing and running to the press, throwing other royals under the buss for good pr for "your" royals was still going on. What's shocking is Harry was treated just as bad as Diana was for fortelling us the truth. People need to watch The Princess. It eye-opening. Whats sad is media especially the magazines Harry blacklisted was allowed to set the narrative and people believed every nasty word. And we still see they every week has a nasty story about Harry and Meghan. Everything that happens in the royal family they use as an opportunity to throw dirt on the couple in California. The way media treated Meghan vs Kate was disgusting. No wonder they moved. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellievhall/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-double-standards-royal
DeleteAnon 10.55 It seems like the focus is shifting away from the discussion about Charles' book, and now you're touching on broader issues surrounding Harry, Meghan, and the royal family. It seems as though you are shifting between different topics with each response.
DeleteDiana's book shocked the public and the royal family because it broke longstanding norms of silence and loyalty to the monarchy. The book played a significant role in shifting public opinion about Diana. It also led to a media frenzy and further tension between Diana and the royal family. Sarah’s book was another attempt by a royal to break the silence. However, her book was received with less controversy compared to Diana’s. The royal family seemed to have handled it more diplomatically, possibly because Ferguson had already been somewhat distanced from the royal fold by that time. Unlike Diana’s book, Harry’s has been met with mixed reactions. While some sympathize with his struggles and see the book as a necessary catharsis, others view it as an attack on the royal family and a breach of family privacy. While each book shares common themes of personal anguish and criticism of the royal family, the public response has varied. The main thread connecting them all is the persistent tension between ”personal truth” and public perception.
DeleteThe Princess documentary presented a one-sided view of the media's role in her life, without considering the broader dynamics within the royal family or the personal choices Diana made.
And at last I’m not sure that the BRF focuses that much on the couple in California at this point.
I am so disgusted by the conversation here. Meghan, at 43 is a young woman. She truly has been bullied by people and I don’t agree that she has done any bullying. When some one is assertive, which many American woman are, it is not bad. But of cause, the British press made her a token . My heart goes out to her and Harry.
ReplyDelete👏👏👏
DeleteIt is so nice to see some common sense thank you Anon 06:41. It astonishes me that given this is a fashion blog so very few comments on Meghan are about fashion… but when on different posts someone makes a non fashion comment they are called out on it. Well done harry and Meghan for rising above all this vile, bullying negativity not just here but all over social media and the vile British tabloid press who have before now hounded people to their death . LRB
DeleteI am always surprised that Harry and Meghan are receiving so many comments (bad ones and good ones). This is the best publicity they can have. I like them, they are a beautiful couple and have a beautiful little family with their 2 children. I like the way she is dressed on these pictures. She is so natural. I also saw a video yesterday with Harry following surfing lessons together with his son. Harry looks to be very good already on his surfing board.
ReplyDeleteAgree completely.
DeleteTotally agree!
DeleteI can't forget what she did to her father and to Harry's father. She's a zero.
ReplyDelete@anon 07:16.
DeleteAnd I can’t forget the stress, strain and scandal Camilla and Charles brought to his mother, Queen Elizabeth II and the British Monarchy.
They were “zeros” but now they’re whiter than white.
But that’s over 20 years ago and maybe you’re too young to remember.
Was Charles a zero when he called his dad a bully that mocked him and made his childhood lonely? Was Charles a zero when he called his mother cold? Obviously, you have forgiven him. You have also forgiven him for breaking his young wife's heart and making her life terrible. You have forgiven both QE and Charles for treating Harry as a secondhand human calling a young boy a spare. You have forgiven William for bullying Harry in public. Strange what we are willing to forgive some people for, but blame others for.
DeleteSpot on!
DeleteDeadeggs 10.31: Well. we should not forget that Charles was not allowed to marry the person he loved.
DeleteWhat about what Meghan’s father and step sister did to her? Both monetising their relationship with her and spreading lies which Meghan has just kept quietly dignified about. Imagine your father trying to make money out of your marriage? No wonder she won’t let him have photos of the children, he would no doubt sell them for millions… he has history. LRB
DeleteWhat is whiter than white, please?
DeleteAnon 15.49 Charles did share personal details about his relationship with his parents, including the challenges he faced with his father and mother, and those revelations were deeply criticized at the time. His actions, particularly during his marriage to Diana, also led to significant public backlash. However, over time, people have either accepted or moved past these issues, often because they were part of the broader narrative of royal life, and the expectations placed on the family have shifted.
DeleteAs for Harry, the treatment he’s received, particularly in terms of being labeled the "spare" and feeling marginalized within his own family, is heartbreaking. It’s clear that the way Harry has been treated, has left deep scars. But it’s also important to note that the dynamics within the royal family have always been complex, and not everything can be easily reduced to one person's fault or blame.
The forgiveness or criticism that people direct at Charles, William, or Harry often depends on individual perspectives, values, and how we choose to interpret past actions. Some see Charles as a victim of his upbringing, while others focus on the consequences of his choices. Similarly, people are divided on whether Harry’s decision to speak out and share his story is justified or not.
It’s interesting to see how the royal family is viewed differently depending on context and individual bias. While some actions are forgiven, others are harshly criticized, often without considering the complexities behind them. Ultimately, what it comes down to is a matter of perspective, and people may forgive or blame based on their personal beliefs or experiences.
LRB, With all due respect, the internal dynamics of the Markle family seem to be unrelated to the topic at hand.
DeleteIf you look it up on the net, you can find explanations such as ….
Delete'whiter than white' is thought to have originated from a Shakespeare poem published in 1593 and is sometimes used to describe a person or organisation whose actions are not always honest and moral.
Thank you, deadeggs, for the explanation of "whiter"!
DeleteYou can watch the promotion clip on the Daily Mail.
ReplyDeleteI think I see a woman, behaving very unnatural, exaggerated and fake, and so much so that it nearly is ridiculous and tragic .
Totally agree! Ellen
DeleteOf course you do 😂🤣
DeleteRegarding fashion here, I wonder what Meghan would look like with her hair natural and without the extensions. I’d love to see her this way. And for her to find meaningful work to apply her intelligence to, away from self-aggrandisation, without leaning heavily on the title she married into then pulled away from. I think she could be successful that way. But producing Netflix series about herself is not leading that direction and unfortunately draws immense criticism; as does going on pseudo-royal overseas tours. There must be more for her out there where she can do the good she has spoken of.
ReplyDeleteMeghan's Netflix series, I believe, is a continuation of her former lifestyle blog, The Tig. She began The Tig well before meeting Harry, and she had 3M followers. She wasn't that well known at the time, yet had success with the blog. She is not stepping into something new, only resurrecting a part of her life she retired when becoming engaged. It seems to be a natural fit for her, if you consider her past.
DeleteI wish her luck and success. Can’t be easy trying to succeed with so much criticism. Being famous doesn’t really sound like much fun - and trying to make a living from mining the fame doesn’t either. I hope she finds her way.
ReplyDelete@Anon 15:37: "Can’t be easy trying to succeed with so much criticism." I think it is the other way round: It could be very easy for her to succeed with convincing projects: with projects centered around topics she talked so that much about. Using a royal title coming from a family she more than once attacked in a shameful way in order to make a cooking show that already in the trailer shows a shocking lack of originality, to say the least, and praising things her preferences and way of life does not back ("invite everybody")... she is simply not credible and her pathetic ridiculousness originates in her actions, not in the critics.
DeleteThe amount of people that claim not to not like or care about Meghan but take time out of their life (time that can be spent with loved ones) and give that time to Meghan is just hilarious. Living free in someone else's mind is the clearest sign of who is winning!!! Good job Meghan!
ReplyDeleteSo true. My time is too valuable to spend so much time ruminating on the lives of people I don't like and don't know. Our time and energy should be spent with family and friends that enrich our lives.
Delete@21:07 It seems to me a lot of comments come from only a few people. The style of writing and the points that are made are almost exactly the same. And that goes for both the 'lovers' and the 'haters'. This could easily be no more than 2 or 3 people blowing up the comment section, and everyone else just keeps responding... It's almost hilarious ;-)
Delete22:41 you are right though it might be just one person writing a lot of commentaries with opposite views
Delete(lover - haters) waiting for some bloggers to take the bait and engage in a conversation with her.
Fighting with someone and spread discord is all this troll is looking for.
Half hilarious and insane and half sad.
@22:41
DeleteFunny you should say that. I’ve noticed it also.
Writing styles, expressions etc, seem to be the same.
If it is the same commentator, what is their aim?
Or is it part of their online writing course for non professional writers??
The commentator seems to be focusing only on negative comments and offering diplomatic responses, could be trying to manage the tone of the discussion, maintain civility. By providing thoughtful, elevated responses, also might be attempting to guide the conversation in a more constructive direction and set a higher standard for engagement. After all it is blog we all enjoy coming back to between meetings, calls etc 😉
Delete11.13 With the way some of these comments are phrased and the frequency of responses, it could be a bot. Bots can be programmed to mimic both sides of a debate, drawing people into fruitless conversations.
Delete20:42 I do not think that positive and negative comments on this blog are generated by bots
DeleteThere's a blatant will and intention in using a hundred fake accounts and writing nasty or benevolent commentaries.
This troll seems to select a restricted topic range and is obsessed with women's beauty, wealth and social stand.
The frequency of responses could be explained by the huge loads of time to waste this troll has at hand.
She seems she has found a purpose in her life by investing all of her energies in writing baseless and fruitless pamphlets so that people can take the bait somewhere.
This troll aims at fighting no matter with whom and about what.
It is most likely all she can do in her life.
This happens every time a new post about any royal member is featured on this platform.
20:15 So you agree about just a commentator writing this sort of posts.
The focus is not only on negative comments and no civility (?) or diplomacy can be spotted in any of the troll's comments.
She only plays the victim when she is outed and led to come to terms with herself.
She asks for mutual respect but she can't show any to other people.
Can bots do all that?
Of course not.
Hmm perhaps I am overlooking something. Could you clarify which of the comments in this blogpost are attributed to the troll you mentioned? I have observed several comments that are particularly focused on Mary, Letizia, and others (while Meghan has her own ”group” of commentators); however, these tend to be brief, negative, and judgmental in nature. Upon further reflection, I wouldn't be surprised if it were the work of a single commentator. However, I fail to understand why one would return on a regular basis if they are unable to tolerate the content.
DeleteHello, people aren't bots just because they don't agree with you. The debate you create here is not necessary. But since you started, if people don't like a person, why leave nasty comments? Scroll by. You don't
Deletehave to read. Let the people who want to read, read. Go read about your heroes, Mary, Letizia, or Kate on the pedestal instead. The way we see some royals, Meghan and Harry, especially is treated is disgusting. So someone, and I am one of them, try to give another viewpoint because I am a person who think everyone should be treated the same. And no, I haven't written all the comments, and not at least I suggest grown ups starts to behave as adults, not the big bully in the schoolyard. If we just sit back and accept nastiness and hate, we are a part of the problem. You are sadly here falling into your own trap.
It's important to engage in conversations thoughtfully, without resorting to negativity or personal attacks. Everyone deserves to be treated with respect, regardless of their position or opinions. Disagreement is natural, but it should be handled with maturity and empathy, not hostility. Let's focus on fostering better understanding and kindness, even when we see things differently.
Delete@11:13 & @deadeggs
ReplyDeleteI have no idea if its just one person like 11:13 said, or a handful of people like I initially thought. There might not really be a clear aim, mostly a fan very motivated to defend their idol for the pro-Meghan comments / or a 'hater' very motivated to get on the fans nerves when it's the ant-Meghan comments ;-) This thing happens on social media as well, or on youtube for example. The comment section gets bombed with reactions (positive and/or negative depending on their stance). And then it passes.
What I tink the issue here is, is that the 'normal' or 'regular' commenters fall for the bait and get all worked up and start replying and replying and... etc.
I'm not a supporter of "don't comment unless you like the clothes or person this post is about" - but in cases like this I would say "don't reply on comments that are clearly made for controversy". Just let it slide.
What a waste of time and space, igniting once again the old adage of good and evil, it always comes back to bite you in the butt at some point in life. Their combined 'efforts' to raise obscene amounts of money and pretend they are important have caused both sides of their family a great deal of heart ache, pain, and permanent distrust, plus all their 'projects fail'. karma.
ReplyDeleteMeghan é spetaculare ...non c'é un post cosi commentato in questo blog da mesi .... hahaha
ReplyDeletePost a Comment
(We will not publish anonymous comments that were posted without stating a name or nickname)