Harry and Meghan - OP updated with Threadbanned Users 4/5/21

For some reason, I can’t link to the original Bloomberg site, but here’s a copy and paste of part of it

It must be odd to live in that alternative universe.

H&M did not do the Oprah interview to defend themselves. They did the Oprah interview to launch an attack on the RF. And to get their income stream plans rolling.

They didn't need to do an interview to launch their income stream. Their Netflix documentary & Book would have done as well if not better without doing the Oprah interview.

The attack was a rebuttal of all the lies that the British tabloids printed about them and the Royal Family or as they said ''The Firm'' did absolutely nothing about defending them. They were told to put up with the racism and lies to protect the rest of the RF. Sacrificial lambs.

No, the Oprah interview was an attack on the RF. Simple as that. Come on, what do we tell children when another chlid is annoying them? "Ignore them and they will soon lose interest". H&M intentionally poked the hornets nest. They thought they could control the beast though.

I didnt watch the doc, but what was the book but another attack on the RF.

Sacrificial Lambs generally dont go and climb on the alter themselves.

They did the Oprah interview because they were angry. If they’d gotten their half in/out deal, if they got their security paid for, if their kids got their titles, if they got an income/expenses every year, if they got whatever it was they wanted then I fully reckon that the interview wouldn’t have happened at all because all those perks put in place for them could/would have been taken away. They are entitled and they were peeved that they had to, shock horror, make their own way like adults, that there were consequences financially for breaking away. They knew they couldn’t just go on Oprah and say the British Press were toxic and aggressive because, well, tell us something we don't know already. They had to pick something to give Oprah a scoop and the racism angle provided that scoop.

Put yourself in Spotifys position. You’re going on an exuberent spending spree looking to sign up famous names/established podcasts. You bag Harry and Meghan and their agents negotiate a $20 million deal over three years. A couple of million signing bonus. Might get exclusive access to the family as a bonus or at a minimum a scoop into what went on surrounding Megxit etc. Then a few months later your new client is on telly saying he only signed a deal with you because his security was pulled and he needed to pay for it himself. You watch as they spill the tea, tea which you’d hoped could have been podcast on your platform. You also watch as they burn bridges with the family and that bonus exclusivity goes up in smoke and then when seeking to come up with content he wants Trump, Putin and even The Pope. I’d say once those three years were up they couldn’t wait to dump them.

As if Mary Robinson would even be on their radar. More like climate change warrior and private jet user extraordinare Leonardo DiCaprio. I doubt he would want to be associated with them though.

Harry seems to have forgotten he no longer has access to world leaders and prominent people. No more seats at state dinners for him. I suppose after a lifetime of getting what he wants and everyone pandering to him, that might take a while to sink in.

Behind a paywall unfortunately. An interesting read, though. From the WSJ, no less

I'm suprised Harry didnt also expect Mahatma Gandhi and Benito Mussolini to appear on his podcast.

Murdock's publication! What do you expect them to say bearing in mind that Prince Harry could bankrupt News Corp with his various court cases.

You are wrong actually. Meghan Markle and Mary Robinson are definately in the same orbit. One Young World summit in Manchester last year. Mary Robinson was in the front seats for Meghan's keynote speech.

It's called "sarcasm". It may be the lowest form of wit, but it suits the context that Harry thinks he could get an illuminating insight into Donald Trump and his difficult childhood, especially when Donald has previously suggested Harry is “whipped” by Meghan and called for the Queen to remove the couple’s royal titles

Well, as you are an ardent monarchist I wouldn't expect you to think anything else and be completely anti-republican and anti anyone who doesnt think that the British Royal family are a cut about overone else just because of an accident of birth.

Appears I touched a nerve😂

I most certainly am not an ardent monarchist and couldn't care less if they disappeared tomorrow.

I did read the original article. I'd venture to suggest that the "such as" references came from Harry, rather than be conjured out of thin air in the same way your reference to Boris Johnson has been. Boris wouldn't be an exemplar as a father figure, anyway. Hopefully, H&M will find the privacy they want - sooner rather than later.