Tag:

Mail

bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan didn’t wear a poppy because they’re not widely available!
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan didn’t wear a poppy because they’re not widely available!

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Over the weekend, the photos of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex attending Kris Jenner’s 70th birthday party went viral in a big way. You could see, in real time, as the deranged community tested out talking points. Harry and Meghan were “bad” no matter what, obviously, but why were they bad in this particular instance? Something about “how dare they go to a party on the night before Remembrance Sunday.” An abundance of angst about the Sussexes hobnobbing with Kardashians, A-listers and billionaires. A general unhappiness that Harry and Meghan were outside, when they should have their schedules overseen by the palace! Finally, there seemed to be a consensus talking point: Meghan is wrong – “bad” even – for NOT wearing a poppy for Remembrance. There was a sudden uptick on “the missing poppy” on social media and the British tabloids. First off, poppy-wearing isn’t really a thing here in America. And as many have pointed out, when Meghan wore a poppy in a November video last year, she was criticized for that too. It’s almost as if they’re just mad that Meghan exists, and the reasons why are just fill-in-the-blank. In any case, the Daily Mail had a hilarious exclusive about why Meghan didn’t wear a poppy.

Meghan Markle did not wear a poppy to Kris Jenner’s 70th birthday party because they are not widely available in America, sources close to the Duchess have told the Daily Mail.

Meghan attended the glitzy James Bond-themed party at Jeff Bezos’s $165million mansion on Remembrance weekend with the commemorative symbol noticeably missing from her glamorous outfit.

Harry, meanwhile, had one pinned to his tuxedo, which he obtained after donating to the appeal during his recent visit to Canada, where he met with some of the country’s oldest veterans.

Sources have told the Daily Mail Meghan was unable to visibly honour the war dead as poppies are not widely available in the States, unlike in Commonwealth countries.

The mother-of-two, 44, has previously been pictured wearing a poppy during Remembrance alongside her veteran husband Harry, who served two Army tours in Afghanistan. Last year, the Sussexes both wore poppies fastened to their lapels as they published a joint video about online violence against children. While in 2023 the Duchess wore a poppy brooch as she and Harry visited United States Navy SEALs in San Diego.

People across the globe can purchase a poppy from the Royal British Legion’s website, but would have to pay £28 for postage to get it sent to Montecito.

[From The Daily Mail]

While it’s true that most American stores don’t have poppies on demand, it’s easy enough to just order one or a dozen online. Amazon literally had hundreds of options, and poppy pins are also for sale on eBay and Etsy. Apparently the American Legion sells them too. My point? Availability wasn’t the issue. Meghan just chose not to wear a poppy, probably because she understands at this point that she’s damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t. Imagine the headlines if she had worn a poppy to Kris Jenner’s birthday party – they would be raging about “how dare she wear a poppy to such a superficial event!” Anyway, at least I get to repost the party photos again! They looked great!

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Prince William’s volleyball photos were ‘sexy & hot’, we swear
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Prince William’s volleyball photos were ‘sexy & hot’, we swear

by jummy84
written by jummy84

The British media is absolutely dying to use these photos of Prince William playing beach volleyball in Rio. They already tried to just publish them with straight reporting – “prince plays volleyball” – and barely any commentary. Now, as the days pass, the photos are being reused and repurposed. The Daily Mail and other outlets absolutely know that William looked ridiculous and the photos show William’s current state of anti-rizz, but they can’t say that outright. Instead, they’re running faux-fawning pieces about how William “got so hot at 43” (he looks like a hard 55) and how his recent extreme weight loss is due to “cutting down on sugar.” Really? Because it looks… um, like there should be different explanations in the mix. From the Mail:

Adoring female fans couldn’t get enough of Prince William in Brazil this week, as social media was full of praise for the ‘sexy’ royal’s athletic physique following a ‘sweaty’ game of volleyball on Copacabana beach.

Tanned and sporting a trimmed beard, the father-of-three was also notably looking to be in great shape as he whizzed around the sandy terrain to get the ball over the net – proving that being in his forties hasn’t slowed him down one bit. It’s perhaps of no surprise, given the heir to the throne comes from a history of rigorous military training and a myriad of activities, including rowing, swimming and polo. And the legacy of sporty skills all throughout his youth seems to be serving him well to this day.

While not much is known about his current regime, as recently as 2019 British rapper Stormzy revealed that he had bumped into William at his gym.

‘Yeah, I was just walking up the stairs and someone was like, “Stormzy!”,’ he told the Jonathan Ross show. ‘And I was like, “Whoa. What’s going on Prince?” I swear down, I just bumped into him.’

It was at the time reported the gym in question was Chelsea Harbour Club, a luxurious fitness hub with swimming pools, tennis courts, a spa and ‘bespoke’ exercises. Reports claim the joining fee alone is some £1,880.

Elsewhere, the royal opened up about his diet in 2022. During a trip to Cornwall’s Newquay Orchard, he explained he has a healthy start to the day by eating two eggs and wholemeal toast with butter – adding that he enjoyed apple juice and a cup of tea with milk and sugar alongside it. Admitting he was ‘trying to cut down on sugar’, William then revealed that he had had a ‘rubbish’ sandwich for lunch that day, while enjoying fish and mushrooms for dinner. He said he ‘doesn’t drink coffee’ so drinks ‘two or three cups of tea’ a day, as well as enjoying snacks like bananas and chocolate biscuits or brownies. Meanwhile, the royal added he might have a glass of red wine each day.

[From The Daily Mail]

What’s more pitiful, the fact that the media is playing along with this ludicrous fantasy or that Kensington Palace has ordered their press allies to write these pieces? Tom Sykes got the same call, and is now referring to Scooter King as “Hunk William.” Scooter King looks like a greasy piece of toast that fell on the floor and is now covered in dog hair. These volleyball photos are not “hunky” nor are Brazilians swooning for this deeply awkward man. Think about this as well – if Harry had been caught in public looking even one tenth as ridiculous as William, what would the British press have said and done? They write a million f–king stories in which they try to convince everyone that Harry looks unhappy, grumpy and angry every single time he smiles at his wife and grabs her ass in public.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan has a ‘secret plan’ to use Sussex as her surname!!
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan has a ‘secret plan’ to use Sussex as her surname!!

by jummy84
written by jummy84

This was a top royal story at the Daily Mail last weekend: “I think I’ve discovered Meghan’s secret plan for if – or when – William strips away the Sussexes’ royal titles.” Columnist Sharon Hunt is on the case! So what is the Duchess of Sussex’s “secret plan” for when Scooter King William throws a hissy fit about the Sussex ducal title? Well, as Hunt brilliantly deduces given the wealth of personal statements made by Meghan just this year, Meghan plans to continue to use “Sussex” as a surname. Gasp, horror, brand new information!

The historic move [to remove Prince Andrew’s titles] underscores the Royal Family’s readiness to safeguard its reputation by stripping titles when necessary. It also brought to mind a recent report by Tom Sykes, the well-connected royal correspondent for The Daily Beast, who believes that Prince William, when he becomes king, will formally revoke Meghan and Harry’s dukedoms. To be clear, the Sussexes’ conduct since stepping back from their royal roles bears no comparison to the gravity of the allegations against Andrew. Not even close.

Yet this week’s developments reveal a modernised Royal Family unwilling to sidestep controversy – and prepared to act decisively when titles become untenable. Recent reports indicate that William had a firm hand in the removal of Andrew’s titles. Inevitably, the unfolding drama has reignited long-standing whispers about the future king’s intentions for Harry and Meghan’s titles. Such talk has simmered for years, with royal insiders and commentators hinting it’s only a matter of time once William takes the crown.

But perhaps a subtle clue was overlooked: the Sussexes may have already laid the groundwork for this eventuality – with a strategy to preserve their brand, even if their titles are no more. Let’s revisit a viral moment from season one of Netflix’s With Love, Meghan. One of the show’s standout scenes – now widely shared online – appears in episode two, where Meghan is joined by celebrity guest Mindy Kaling. While cooking together in a Montecito kitchen, a particular exchange caught viewers’ attention. It began with Mindy joking about Meghan’s teenage fondness for a popular American fast-food chain.

‘I don’t think anyone knows Meghan Markle has eaten Jack in the Box – and loves it,’ Mindy quipped. But rather than letting the joke land, Meghan interjected with a correction.

‘It’s so funny too, that you keep saying “Meghan Markle” – you know I’m Sussex now,’ Meghan said. ‘When you have kids and you go, “No, I share my name with my children.” And that feels so… I didn’t know how meaningful it would be to me, but it just means so much to go, “This is our family name, our little family name.”‘

Yes, our first instinct may have been to cringe at the terse dressing-down. But in doing so, did we overlook a telling clue about the Sussexes’ long-term strategy to safeguard their royal brand?

As Meghan and Harry continue forging their path in the US, their connection to the core Royal Family grows increasingly tenuous. A time may come when King Charles – or more likely his successor – finds cause to formally revoke their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex. In anticipation of such a shift, have the couple – Meghan in particular – made the strategic move to adopt ‘Sussex’ as a de facto family surname? If so, it’s a shrewd piece of forward planning. Repurposing a royal title as a family name ensures the regal association endures – even if the formal honours are one day withdrawn.

To our knowledge, nothing prevents the former senior working royal from legally adopting ‘Meghan Sussex’ as her name in California. Their days as part of the ‘Fab Four’ may be behind them, but what has consistently underpinned their ventures in America – especially the lucrative ones – is that prized, intangible link to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex title. If my suspicions are correct, Meghan has quietly executed a masterstroke here. By transforming a royal designation that can be taken away into a family identity for her and Harry, she is securing her own dynasty. It means that whatever Prince William’s future plans, there will always be a Sussex stronghold in California. Bravo, Meghan.

[From The Daily Mail]

Months later, it’s still so telling that they refer to that With Love, Meghan scene as a “dressing down” or something about how Meghan was “frosty” or “furious.” Meghan stated a preference without even having to say “please don’t refer to me by my maiden name.” The commentary on that moment was fascinating, because it became a window into what it was like for Meghan in that dreadful place, with people accusing her of bullying for simply correcting someone or stating a preference. Anyway, yeah, breaking news, they use Sussex as a surname. They’ve used Sussex as their surname since 2023, when Charles dithered about their titles. It’s not some kind of PR masterstroke, it’s simply Meghan and Harry wanting a family name for themselves and their children, and for that name to reflect their marriage. It’s not a coincidence that all of this talk about title-stripping would effectively stop Meghan from using her married name, her title.

Photos courtesy of Meghan’s Instagram and Beyonce’s site.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Prince William has cleared the way to remove the Sussexes’ titles
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Prince William has cleared the way to remove the Sussexes’ titles

by jummy84
written by jummy84

From where I sit, there was a tipping point on the Prince Andrew/Mountbatten Windsor situation this month which was years in the making. The Windsors misread the public mood, King Charles dithered and Prince William raged from his tenth vacation of the year. The tipping point on Andrew involved a decades-long cover-up, years of lies and abuse, and one of Andrew’s victims speaking from beyond the grave. The situation is simply not comparable to anything involving the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who were bullied and abused by the institution and press, so much so that they simply… left the country almost six full years ago. If Prince Harry’s September trip to the UK was any indication, the British public still loves him and supports him. Andrew, meanwhile, was heckled and called a “nonce” at his mother’s 2022 funeral. My point? It’s bizarre to see so many Sussex supporters and haters alike use the Andrew situation to talk about Harry and Meghan. The Daily Mail’s Maurren Callahan basically had a psychotic episode about the Sussexes in her column published after the Andrew Mountbatten Windsor announcement.

It is now a question of when. Not if. The bombshell announcement out of Buckingham Palace that Andrew has been stripped of his status as a prince immediately, that he will henceforth be known as ‘Mr. Mountbatten Windsor’, and that he has been forced to surrender the lease to Royal Lodge leaves no doubt in my mind: Harry and Meghan are next. The sun begins to set over Montecito — permanently.

And Prince William, as we posited earlier this week, emerges as the apparent force behind these most welcome reforms — despite the official statement having come from the King. This is William’s monarchy now. In that light, Andrew feels more like a pawn removed by William to clear the way for his real target: Harry.

If the late Queen’s favorite son can be coldly ejected and stripped of his birthright — if William can have convinced the infamously conflict-averse Charles to renounce his own brother — well, Harry’s days as prince and Duke of Sussex are surely numbered. As for Meghan? Like Fergie, she would just be collateral damage. An afterthought. Flotsam in search of a shore – perhaps QVC’s Pennsylvania headquarters and where she might shill As Ever overstock on deep discount.

To know that Meghan and Harry may now be consigned to the dustbin of Royal history, perseverating over the remains of the day from the cheap seats, is perhaps the most tantalizing and satisfying finale of the modern age. Sayonara, Sussexes!

Kate, though silent, is doubtless among William’s prime motives in dispatching first with his uncle, and perhaps next his brother. It was Harry who reprinted Kate’s private text messages with Meghan in Spare. It was Harry and Meghan’s cheerleader, their glorified biographer Omid Scobie, who named Kate and Charles as the so-called ‘royal racists.’ If William is just getting started, he surely knows the world is cheering him on, that any further attacks from his brother and sister-in-law, those epic dramatists, would be laughed off and dismissed.

A former royal aide at Kensington Palace, William and Kate’s London residence, told the Daily Mail that ‘now that they’re picking away at the edges [of the family]’ — that would be Andrew — ‘a bigger unravelling is coming.’

That bigger unravelling is, to my mind, Harry and Meghan’s royal titles, status and honors.

‘The role William has — to try to forge something sustainable — is now in stark relief. And no, Charles isn’t up to that job,’ the former aide continued. ‘Once Andrew stops being the convenient cover, then where will people look next?’

[From The Daily Mail]

So… those quotes from a former royal aide are… not about Harry and Meghan, right? “A bigger unravelling is coming” – for the monarchy itself, because this Andrew situation was and is a larger reflection of the monarchy’s corruption and abuses. “Once Andrew stops being the convenient cover, then where will people look next?” Literally, they’ll look to the remaining royals, none of whom are ready for primetime. They’ll look at a dying king, his unhinged, illiterate, workshy heir, and a collection of senior citizens who stagger through their busywork. If and when William “takes away Harry and Meghan’s titles,” it won’t actually mean a thing to Harry and Meghan. They live in California. They own a beautiful mansion. They are free from all of this bullsh-t. Let me say this as well: once the Sussexes stop being the convenient cover, then where will people look next?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Sarah Ferguson ‘has nowhere to go and no one to go with’
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Sarah Ferguson ‘has nowhere to go and no one to go with’

by jummy84
written by jummy84

I’m not surprised that Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson seem willing to move into separate homes. After their divorce, they continued to reside in the same home(s) off-and-on for decades. Sarah moved into Royal Lodge a few years after Andrew took on the lease, and they reportedly live in separate wings of the mansion, but maintain some kind of close relationship/friendship. But it’s a lot, and I can totally see why Fergie and Andrew are currently negotiating separate residences for themselves. Reportedly, Andrew now wants Frogmore Cottage, while Fergie wants to move into Adelaide Cottage, both homes on the Windsor estate and both homes in the “ring of steel” security perimeter around the castle. Well, now Becky English at the Daily Mail has a sympathetic story about how Fergie is begging for mercy from King Charles:

Sarah Ferguson ‘has nowhere to go – or anyone else to go with’, friends said last night as negotiations rumble on over her and Prince Andrew’s future. The former Duchess of York is said to be ‘on the edge’ as it is claimed she and her ex-husband have demanded royal officials provide two homes at Windsor – one for each of them – if they are to move out of Royal Lodge, the mansion they have shared since 2008.

In the latest twist to the saga it has been suggested that they may finally go their separate ways – with Andrew taking Harry and Meghan’s old home Frogmore Cottage, while his ex-wife is demanding Adelaide Cottage, currently being vacated by the Prince and Princess of Wales. Sources close to the couple, who have been divorced for almost 20 years, have reacted angrily, however, to such a suggestion, insisting the offer is ‘misrepresentative of the truth’ and it has, in fact, ‘been on the table for months’.

‘It was an option put forward by the “other side” and at an early stage [in negotiations],’ they claimed. ‘Whether it is still on the table, I don’t know. But the suggestion that they have been demanding a new home each is misrepresentative of the truth. No demands have been made. People have been trying to come up with solutions.’

While Buckingham Palace declined to comment on the claims, insiders say they simply ‘do not recognise’ this version of events, however.

Now it has been claimed that Andrew and his ex-wife may finally be willing to go their separate ways, albeit in houses barely a few miles’ drive from each other. That has sparked surprise among some in royal circles who point out that the King has no legal responsibility whatsoever towards Sarah, who has, in effect, been a ‘lodger’ at her former husband’s home for almost two decades. Others, however, point out that the monarch may consider it prudent to keep Sarah ‘in the fold’, rather than her consider another tell-all book. She has already brought out a memoir in 1996, the year she divorced Andrew, and then an autobiography in 2011.

The King has also treated his former sister-in-law kindly in recent years given her personal battles after being diagnosed with both breast and skin cancers. Sources with knowledge of Sarah’s situation have described her as ‘absolutely bereft’ and ‘completely on the edge’. She is said to be hugely ’embarrassed’ by the scandal which has also come home to roost for her personally after the publication of a ‘cringeworthy’ email she wrote to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, apologising profusely for disassociating herself from him publicly following his child sex conviction in 2008.

‘She is contrite and embarrassed but also fears the scandal has fatally damaged her own business interests, including a number of new fictional books that are due to come out,’ a source said. ‘People don’t want to be associated with her any more.’ The friend added: ‘The honest truth is that she has nowhere to go and no one to go with [if Andrew loses Royal Lodge]. Her future is hanging in the balance.’ Another source added: ‘The King is a kind man but his patience has been pushed to the limit. However, the last thing he also wants is another “Spare” [the vitriolic memoir brought out by his own son, Prince Harry, in 2023].’

Five-bedroom Frogmore Cottage, although ‘lovely’, according to one who has visited it, will be considered a step down by Andrew from Royal Lodge, which has been described as ‘terribly grand’.

[From The Daily Mail]

This reads like… Buckingham Palace has completely bungled these negotiations and misread the situation at every level. It was clear that BP leaked the story about Andrew and Fergie “demanding” two homes, but I actually believe English’s York-sources who insist that these weren’t Andrew and Fergie’s demands, that they were actually offered these two homes at some point. I also think Fergie just expected to move in with Andrew again, wherever he lands next – if they ended up in Frogmore, she would have expected to take up a room there too. Which is weird, right? Fergie’s Calamity Jane act is typical – she has absolutely no backup plan, and she’s earned and lost a dozen fortunes already. She should have plenty of money to set herself up in a nice home away from all of this, but apparently she does not. She literally just sold a Belgravia townhouse at a loss – where is that money?

I also wonder why everyone involved is so insistent on “Andrew and Fergie must stay in Windsor.” Apparently, that’s what Andrew wants, but it’s such a dumb idea. It would be so much easier to hide Fergie and Andrew away in Sandringham, and there would be less outcry because Sandringham isn’t operated by the Crown Estates.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, cover courtesy of The Sun.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Is Queen Elizabeth to blame for how Prince Andrew turned out?
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Is Queen Elizabeth to blame for how Prince Andrew turned out?

by jummy84
written by jummy84

The big Prince Andrew “news” breaking last night is that Windsor Castle removed Andrew’s banner – a banner with his coat of arms – from the display in St. George’s Chapel. The removal of a royal banner is apparently “typically only removed in cases of high treason or rebellions against the Crown.” This is very similar to Andrew “relinquishing” his honors, like Order of the Garter. Royalists insist that these demotions mean something huge because Andrew loves this kind of flummery. When really, the Windsors decided to remove a banner rather than remove a sexual predator.

Speaking of, after days of mainstream political outcry about Andrew, everything is now being quietly taken care of behind the scenes. The Starmer government has shut down a debate about Andrew, his finances, his Royal Lodge lease and his crimes. Hilariously, these are not the only machinations from Buckingham Palace. The palace has decided to throw Queen Elizabeth II right under the bus. Blame Andrew on QEII, she was the one who indulged him! I mean, they’re not wrong?? From Jan Moir’s Mail column:

Is the late Queen Elizabeth to blame for the horror of Prince Andrew? Did she spoil him so much that he grew up convinced of his own specialness, marinated in arrogance, unable to navigate his cushioned world of privilege with even a shred of humility, decency or common sense? Many mothers have blind spots when it comes to their favourite sons, sparing the rod and spoiling the child to such an extent that they unwittingly raise a monster.

Did that happen here? I’m only asking because there must be some explanation for Prince Andrew’s unique loathsomeness; some way of groping through his thicket of thick, his unremitting, clotted arrogance to understand his character and motivation. Given his elevated position in society, Andrew could have become friends with anyone, but he chose to move in a dark world of seedy billionaires, sex offenders, Chinese spies, wicked paedophiles, she-pimps and God knows who else.

Down in the murk at this unsavoury end of an immoral universe his playmates were powerful, clever and wily people who encouraged this pompous dolt to believe he was powerful and clever, too. The reality is that he was only ever a useful idiot to them; a man who was used and abused – and who went on to use and abuse others for his own pleasure.

I am legally obligated at this point to say that Prince Andrew denies the allegations that Virginia Giuffre made against him in her posthumous autobiography and elsewhere. Yet the grand old Duke of York, as we now don’t know him, has demonstrably lied and lied about so many things that who could possibly believe him now? Perhaps not even his own mother.

Survey after survey reveals that people want Andrew officially stripped of his titles by Parliament and booted out of his grace-and-favour Royal Lodge, along with his ridiculous Freebiana of a wife. Day by day Andrew is slipping away from public view, sunk beneath the weight of his disgrace, now facing a police investigation and possible further humiliation.

Yet how did we get here? Even by the blackest standards of the monarchy’s black history, while trotting out on the black meadows of royal blackness, do black sheep come any blacker than Andrew?

They may have their faults, but neither his two brothers nor his sister come anywhere close to Prince Andrew on the royal ghastly-o-meter. Searching for his good qualities is like panning for gold in a sewer – try as you might, you are only ever going to end up with dung in your sieve. Surely part of the problem must be that no matter what he did, Queen Elizabeth could see no wrong in her beloved Andrew. Most mothers have a favourite son, and he was undoubtedly hers – then, now and forevermore.

[From The Daily Mail]

Moir keeps going and going, but you get the idea. While I don’t think QEII is solely responsible for Andrew’s depravity, I absolutely blame her for indulging him, protecting him and covering up his crimes. QEII and her courtiers used every tool at their disposal to ensure that mummy’s favorite never had to face consequences or even a check on his behavior. This is all because Andrew never actually broke the Windsor omerta, he didn’t break any of the rules which really matter to them. Which should be a larger conversation too: why weren’t Andrew’s crimes a bigger deal within the institution and within his family?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images and Instar.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan’s publicist quit, this is the royal scandal of the week!
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan’s publicist quit, this is the royal scandal of the week!

by jummy84
written by jummy84

It seems the British media is done talking about Prince Andrew’s depravity and all of the crimes he’s committed. They’ve successfully deflected everything to “should Andrew be kicked out of Royal Lodge” and “look, the Windsors are doing another dumb half-measure to punish Andrew.” Another key part of Operation Deflect From Andrew is the British press’s favorite standard: attacking the Duke and Duchess of Sussex no matter what. Throughout this week, Mail columnists have been trying to keep up the attacks, even as it became abundantly clear that the monarchy has done the most to protect a serial sexual predator for decades. “But Meghan went to Paris,” they cried. “But Meghan’s business is struggling, we swear!”

Well, the Mail’s Alison Boshoff has a new exclusive: Meghan lost another staffer! Back in June, the Sussexes did a major housecleaning on their comms team, letting go of some of their comms people and hiring Emily Robinson, who used to work for Netflix (and did publicity for The Crown). I said at the time that Meredith Maines – the comms guru who was hired in February – was probably behind all of the June streamlining. Well, now it looks like Emily Robinson has left the Sussexes’ employ!

The Duchess of Sussex has parted company with her tenth publicist in just five years after a big name she poached from Netflix quit after just three months. Emily Robinson joined Harry and Meghan’s team as director of communications in June, but she has already jumped ship.

Ms Robinson was always a controversial hire as she had worked on The Crown for years – a show which aired a number of damaging narratives about the Royal Family. The final series included scenes in which the ‘ghost’ of Princess Diana appeared to speak to The Queen and Prince Charles, which many found insensitive.

One friend of LA-based Robinson, who built up a reputation as a ‘tough cookie’ at Netflix, said: ‘It was her decision. She left a few weeks ago. She’s not a quitter, so things must have been pretty horrible for her to go.’

Ms Robinson’s LinkedIn profile does not currently include any reference to having worked with the couple, but other roles which she has held are listed.

Ms Robinson is at least the tenth publicist to leave the employ of Meghan and Harry since they left the UK for California five years ago (although two former publicists, James Holt and Miranda Barbot, have been promoted into non-PR roles). Remaining on their team are Liam Maguire, director of communications in Europe, and Meredith Maines, their chief communications officer. They met the King’s press secretary, Tobyn Andreae, this summer – which is thought to have paved the way for Prince Harry to briefly see his father last month.

The couple have suffered numerous PR disasters, most recently the duchess’s surprise trip to Paris Fashion Week.

[From The Daily Mail]

“…Most recently the duchess’s surprise trip to Paris Fashion Week…” Ah yes, the publicity disaster of “Meghan drawing global headlines for looking amazing at the Balenciaga show.” Obviously, that’s why Emily left! She was like, no, I cannot have my client getting so much attention at Paris Fashion Week! It’s far more likely that Robinson left for a better job, or maybe there’s another restructure happening within Archewell, especially with Meghan focusing so much on As Ever. I’m defending the Sussexes’ comms team FINALLY because this year, they’ve really turned things around. Some of us had begged them for years to be more responsive, and to not allow these evil f–king narratives to fester unchallenged. And this year, we saw those changes. I believe it’s because of Maines as well.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan is getting a Harper’s Bazaar cover, not a Vogue cover
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Duchess Meghan is getting a Harper’s Bazaar cover, not a Vogue cover

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Last Friday, there was a steady drumbeat of bad headline after bad headline about Prince Andrew, all leading up to his big move of announcing that he was giving up his ducal title and his honors. Since then, a million stories have been published about Andrew and the House of York. I bring up the timeline because it’s astonishing to see how many stories were also published about the Duchess of Sussex in the hours and days after Andrew’s big announcement. Almost as if the same old rancid courtiers, royalists and editors decided to run the exact same play they’ve been running for six-plus years: whenever Andrew is in trouble, attack the Sussexes, particularly Meghan. Well, the Mail’s Alison Boshoff had a particularly unhinged story about Meghan’s “maneuvers” this month, from Meghan’s Paris Fashion Week appearance to her Q&A session with Fortune, to her meeting with Vogue’s new editor-in-chief. They are desperate to put the most negative spin on all of this.

It was obvious from her appearance in Paris during this month’s Fashion Week that Meghan was planning to place a dainty, size-six foot in the fashion world. For while the Duchess of Sussex may have accumulated many baubles, one long-held dream still eludes her: being awarded the cover of a high-end fashion magazine.Her Paris jaunt led to much speculation she was soon to announce she had made the cover of Vogue.

Indeed Meghan, a bold networker, shared hugs and air kisses with all-powerful global Vogue boss Anna Wintour and with American Vogue’s new editor, Chloe Malle, at the Balenciaga show in Paris. She also met with Malle when she was in New York on Friday last week. The two women were seen sharing what appeared to be cocktails in a booth at the Whitby hotel.

But while I’ve been told the Duchess is intent on building up her relationship with the venerable Conde Nast magazine, and does have a fashion magazine cover in the pipeline, it is not with Vogue. Rather, my sources exclusively tell me, Meghan has made a deal to appear on the cover of Harper’s Bazaar, published by media giant Hearst.

This cover will be a first for Meghan – who made the cover of Vanity Fair while dating Prince Harry – as she has yet to land the attentions of a high-fashion magazine. (While she guest edited the September 2019 edition of Vogue, she didn’t put her own face on the cover.)

Her meetings with Vogue supremos Wintour and Malle are, I can reveal, better viewed as Meghan trying to ‘reset’ relations. Because, as we shall see, there was a falling-out between her and the then UK Vogue Editor Edward Enninful three years ago, after the Duchess made high-handed demands of him – and it did her few favours with Anna Wintour.

While there was much talk of Meghan being pictured with Wintour, few remarked on her appearance at the Balenciaga show with Samir Nasr, the editor in chief of Harpers Bazaar. But it is Harper’s which has secured the Meghan ‘scoop’.

So is Meghan ‘on manoeuvres’ –and is this magazine cover step one of a comprehensive relaunch? Meghan 3.0, if you will? Well-placed insiders tell me the sudden burst of activity – which included an appearance at the Fortune Most Powerful Women event in Washington this week – doesn’t quite indicate anything so thought-through. The source said: ‘Her PR team are just putting her out there in a hopeful way without a plan. They aren’t being discerning and protecting her from herself. It seems they think every media opportunity is a good one and that’s insane.’

The source adds: ‘There is no strategy here. It is thoughtless and directionless. One day she is in Paris at the fashion show, positioning herself in that world, and then she shows up in Washington with Fortune magazine and wants to be regarded as a female founder. But she’s got nothing to launch, nothing to announce and nothing to say. It’s a mess. The Sussexes seem to be spiralling. They are throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. I don’t understand why she would do a magazine cover when she has nothing coming out. It is evident that either she isn’t being advised properly or else she isn’t listening. Honestly, whoever is in charge shouldn’t even be putting this stuff in front of her, to protect her from herself.’

[From The Daily Mail]

You have to understand the “magical thinking” that goes alongside these stories. What could have been a simple exclusive (which may or may not be true) about Meghan appearing on the cover of Harper’s Bazaar has to be twisted into “Meghan is desperate for a fashion cover, she has nothing to announce except for all of her projects, Anna Wintour hates her, believe us!!” Anna Wintour doesn’t hate her, and I strongly suspect that Meghan has been offered the cover of American Vogue before and turned it down. I also suspect that Meghan has turned down other fashion covers before. Just because the Mail’s lunatic-asylum sources claim that Meghan’s strategy is a “mess” does not make it so. These people are too stupid to understand how a woman could appear at a fashion show AND be a female founder.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, screencaps courtesy of Fortune’s YouTube video.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Prince Harry looked ‘sad, anxious & tired’ at last week’s PHM gala
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Prince Harry looked ‘sad, anxious & tired’ at last week’s PHM gala

by jummy84
written by jummy84

It’s been over a week and Abandonment Issues Isle is still big mad about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Humanitarians of the Year Award from Project Healthy Minds. The British press is so mad, they still can’t even decide which attack line to use, which gives the (correct) impression that they’re simply grim, hateful and bitter about every single thing. A sample of the attacks they’ve churned through in the past week: the Sussexes don’t deserve a humanitarian award; Meghan wore expensive clothes; Meghan owns multiple pairs of shoes; Meghan is out of touch for owning shoes and clothes; the Sussexes’ unhappy marriage caused them to do separate events in New York; they obviously can’t wait to return to the UK; Harry looked mad and depressed because we said so, don’t believe your lying eyes! That last one has been aggressively pushed by the British tabloids, who ignored all of the photos of Harry smiling and all of the videos of Harry groping Meghan’s ass. Well, now the Mail has spoken to a mystery “royal watcher” who was in the audience at the Project Healthy Minds events, and would you believe, this royal watcher has talking points which appealed perfectly to the Daily Mail.

Prince Harry appeared ‘sad, anxious and tired’ during their pseudo-royal tour of New York after he and Meghan Markle collected their ‘Humanitarians of the Year’ Award. The Sussexes’ were also described as ‘very businesslike’ together by someone who said they were watching from the audience of the World Mental Health Festival the couple supported last week.

The royal watcher suggested that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may have been affected by a lack of crowds to greet them at Friday’s event run by Project Healthy Mind, describing the festival as ‘bleak’.

She said of Harry: ‘You got the impression his life had taken a wrong turn’, adding: ‘Harry just looked sad, anxious and tired. He obviously hates speaking in front of a crowd’.

The Sussexes’ Archewell Foundation sponsored three panels at the festival, focusing specifically on their passion projects: the mental health crisis amongst young people and online safety.

The anonymous audience member said: ‘I had hoped that they would be on the panel but each got up and read a speech from a teleprompter to kick off a session each’.

Following three panels of discussion, Meghan and Harry got up together, hugged some people who took part in the festival and left together to have lunch with Serena Williams at Soho House. The woman watching in the crowd claimed: ‘It felt so bleak. No crowds to greet them. And was very businesslike between the two of them. Was so interesting to see them in person’, the account on a royal-related Substack claimed.

[From The Daily Mail]

“It felt so bleak” – the subject matter involved the perils of social media and some of the people in the audience had lost children to suicide. It wasn’t supposed to feel like a super-sixteen party. It “was very businesslike between the two of them.” I mean, during the day event on World Mental Health Day, the atmosphere was supposed to be businesslike. There was actual work being done, awareness being raised and important issues being discussed. Granted, at the PHM gala on Thursday night, there was a lighter atmosphere, and that’s when Harry was all smiles because his hand was cupping his favorite peach. All of this just goes to show that the Mail and other British outlets really just twist, misrepresent and outright lie to get a certain narrative out there. They’re doing all of this to convince people that, what? Harry is unhappy with Meghan, soon he’ll divorce her and come back to the UK! And on the other side of the Atlantic, the Mail is constantly doing clean-up on the years of really obvious estrangement and visible unhappiness from the other couple. Projection, thy name is Daily Fail.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
bitchy | Mail: Prince Harry hated Meghan’s Paris trip & their marriage is struggling!
Celebrity News

bitchy | Mail: Prince Harry hated Meghan’s Paris trip & their marriage is struggling!

by jummy84
written by jummy84

Prince Harry’s lawsuit against the Daily Mail will go to trial early next year in the UK. Harry is not the sole plaintiff, but you wouldn’t know that from the coverage of the pretrial motions and hearings. You wouldn’t know it from the way the Mail has been waging an unhinged hate campaign against Harry and Meghan as well. Over the weekend, the Mail Plus published a particularly psychotic piece from Alison Boshoff, all about how Harry is totally baffled as to why his wife would have gone to the Balenciaga show in Paris, and how Meghan’s trip caused deep fissures in their marriage. The whole piece is wildly offensive and full of lies, but the part which aggravated me the most is that almost all of the quotes are attributed to “friends of Harry” or “friends of the couple,” and the quotes are completely trashing Meghan. Like… if the Mail feels it necessary to smear the Sussexes this wildly, so be it, but just admit that the quotes are coming from royalists, palace courtiers and friends/associates of the left-behind royals. Some lowlights from this bullsh-t exclusive:

Sussex friends are agog! A week on from that surprise appearance at Paris Fashion Week, and sources close to Meghan and Prince Harry remain agog. The British friends of the Prince characterise her appearance at the event as ‘beyond belief’, the Californian end are more expressive and say things such as: ‘This was f***ing wild!’

Meghan & Harry are totally miserable!? More disquietingly, though, sources close to the Duke and Duchess have indicated to me that Meghan’s choice of the French capital for her latest ‘relaunch’ has caused them deep concern. Certainly, their appearance on Thursday night in New York, where they were named ‘Humanitarians of the Year’ at the Project Healthy Minds gala will not have helped. They arrived hand in hand, with Meghan in an Armani power suit. But although the former actress shot a number of soupy glances in her husband’s direction, he looked largely furious, and his occasional smiles were tight little grimaces. Granted, when on stage they were talking about their ‘crusade’ against online harm to children, but both looked utterly miserable.

Meghan posted an IG Story a mile away from l’Alma: Extraordinarily, this was a parallel journey to that made by Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, who died in the tunnel of the same Pont de l’Alma bridge, on her final night in August 1997. Some have told me of their shock at the seeming tactlessness of using this route for the Duchess’s publicity purposes. Because Paris, to put it mildly, is not a neutral location for Harry. One perfectly placed source says they are ‘so astonished’ at all this because both Meghan and Harry have turned down numerous invitations to attend events in Paris over recent years. The reason given, I’m told, is always the same – that city’s association with the tragic death of Diana, Princess of Wales. A source told me there was always a hard line from him – a total, blanket ‘No’. Harry, they said, would consistently make it clear that he would not go to Paris, because of his mother. I’m told by the same source: ‘Meghan would explain when asked: ‘I cannot go to Paris because of H’s mom.’

Meghan knew what she was doing! When it comes to Meghan, say a number of former friends, nothing happens by accident. One friend of Harry’s told me: ‘She’s driving around in that city where his mother died. She knows exactly what she is doing!’ Their view is that the visit said much about Meghan’s ‘need’ for attention, and they wonder what’s going on with her and Harry. One said: ‘Harry must have been sick from trauma and worry. I simply cannot understand it.’

Why would Harry join Meghan at Fortune’s Most Powerful Women Summit? It remains to be seen if Harry puts in an appearance on Tuesday next week, when Meghan is due to speak at Fortune magazine’s Most Powerful Women event in Washington, DC. One suspects not. One associate said: ‘They want different things and there are times when it is really not great. I mean, really not great at all.’

Meghan’s interviews: A source tells me: ‘The Bloomberg interview [in August] was odd because it felt as if Meghan had no idea what she was talking about. She said that everyone associates her with fashion, and that’s not the case. She has given quite a few print interviews in her career and more often than not they are a disaster. It’s not her best medium, she doesn’t tend to come across very well.’ Despite this, a well placed source says the word is she is currently involved in putting together a cover for a glossy magazine, maybe Vogue. An obvious explanation, then, would be that the Paris trip was necessary for that media commitment. Perhaps the cover story is ‘Meghan takes Paris’ – and the idea of that kind of prestigious media hit was simply too tempting for her to overthink Harry’s feelings.

As Ever is struggling too, lolz: But away from her marriage, where does the Duchess’s Paris sojourn leave her main business concern, As Ever? According to one friend: ‘At the moment she is literally lost because the whole jam making business did not work out in the way she thought it would. Nobody has seen any figures, but I don’t think they are that good. I know they just released a Sauvignon Blanc, but it’s not going to make her lots of money because Netflix owns the business.’ I understand that mid-range retail stores Target, Bristol Farms and Williams Sonoma have been discussed already.

Meghan wants to be financially support her family, how ghastly: A friend reveals: ‘She just wants to make money, she wants to be a billionaire. The trouble is, she doesn’t know how.’ And you have to wonder – is her husband Harry on the same page?

[From The Daily Mail]

Do you see what I’m saying about the attribution on the quotes? This piece was likely commissioned by Kensington Palace. It’s William and his courtiers, not Harry, who are salty about Meghan’s trip to Paris and Meghan’s business success and Meghan’s possible Vogue cover (which I really hope is the one true thing in this piece). The part about “she is literally lost because the whole jam making business did not work out in the way she thought it would” tells you everything you need to know about the lack of accuracy in this piece – As Ever’s first three product drops sold out immediately. She’s had to vastly increase her inventory, and she could literally just do jam and wine and she would be able to support her family financially for the rest of her life.

As for all of the hand-wringing about Paris and the Sussexes’ appearance in NYC… just… lmao. The desperation to convince people to not believe their eyes. No, really, Harry was grumpy, he doesn’t want to be around Meghan! Meanwhile, Harry was groping her ass to the point where she was like, babe, stop, we’re in public. I also don’t buy that Harry thinks Paris is off-limits for himself or his wife. He was almost definitely fine with Meghan making the trip.

Their marriage is struggling, the British media swears!!!

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Cover Images.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts