What’s up with the Harry and Meghan Netflix docu series?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Say what you want about Meghan and Harry (and people surely do have some strong opinions!) but she lost me when she told the story about someone at the Lion King premier telling her that South Africans danced in the street like they did when Nelson Mandela was freed when Meghan and Harry got married. I really laughed out loud on that one. She had to have known how that sounded.

Also... their foundation's website. As someone who works in this realm, I've truly never seen a foundation with a website like this - This is the picture you choose to put on your website for Advocating for Equitable and Affordable Access to Childcare (https://archewell.com/news/advocating-equitable-affordable-access-to-childcare/)? This is what you choose for Celebrating the Power of Women (https://archewell.com/news/celebrating-the-power-of-women/)? This one for Investing in Women (https://archewell.com/news/ving-project-grant-1-million-women-in-need/)? The fact of the matter is that when you're putting together the face of your foundation, choosing to focus it on photoshoots of yourself rather than focusing on other people is just bizarre.

Genuine question, do you think Meghan is the one who chooses these pictures? I'm genuinely asking because I don't know myself.

And to the website's credit, there are a lot of those same articles that don't feature either of the couple at all.
https://archewell.com/news/scottys-little-soldiers/
https://archewell.com/news/archewell-foundation-and-harvards-berkman-klein-center-for-internet-society-are-investing-in-our-digital-future/
https://archewell.com/news/relief-for-flooding-in-nigeria/
https://archewell.com/news/supporting-families-forced-to-flee-afghanistan/
https://archewell.com/news/archewell-foundation-kaboom-community-project-uvalde/
https://archewell.com/news/world-mental-health-day/

I guess it stands to reason that for a news site about them, it would make sense that they'd show up in some pictures.

Well, Prince Williams' Earthshot website has pictures of the people nominated for awards and describes the work they are doing. There is a photo of William at the end of the page.

King Charles's "Prince's Trust" website has pictures of recent recipients of funds from the trust and the work that they do. There is no photo of Charles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Right. Mike Tindall literally is on a reality tv show. Can you imagine if Meghan had done the same?

She was on a reality show holding a briefcase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Say what you want about Meghan and Harry (and people surely do have some strong opinions!) but she lost me when she told the story about someone at the Lion King premier telling her that South Africans danced in the street like they did when Nelson Mandela was freed when Meghan and Harry got married. I really laughed out loud on that one. She had to have known how that sounded.

Also... their foundation's website. As someone who works in this realm, I've truly never seen a foundation with a website like this - This is the picture you choose to put on your website for Advocating for Equitable and Affordable Access to Childcare (https://archewell.com/news/advocating-equitable-affordable-access-to-childcare/)? This is what you choose for Celebrating the Power of Women (https://archewell.com/news/celebrating-the-power-of-women/)? This one for Investing in Women (https://archewell.com/news/ving-project-grant-1-million-women-in-need/)? The fact of the matter is that when you're putting together the face of your foundation, choosing to focus it on photoshoots of yourself rather than focusing on other people is just bizarre.

Genuine question, do you think Meghan is the one who chooses these pictures? I'm genuinely asking because I don't know myself.

And to the website's credit, there are a lot of those same articles that don't feature either of the couple at all.
https://archewell.com/news/scottys-little-soldiers/
https://archewell.com/news/archewell-foundation-and-harvards-berkman-klein-center-for-internet-society-are-investing-in-our-digital-future/
https://archewell.com/news/relief-for-flooding-in-nigeria/
https://archewell.com/news/supporting-families-forced-to-flee-afghanistan/
https://archewell.com/news/archewell-foundation-kaboom-community-project-uvalde/
https://archewell.com/news/world-mental-health-day/

I guess it stands to reason that for a news site about them, it would make sense that they'd show up in some pictures.

They're the head of the organization, the buck stops with them. I'm not saying it's a huge moral flaw, it's just WEIRD. It doesn't really matter (to me) what the other photos contain because the ones that I linked are bizarre in and of themselves. It just doesn't make a good impression.

+1 clearly they have a vision fot their foundation and it's fair to assume the overall website feel resonates with what they are going for.

And hence people draw the conclusion that they are mostly interested in promoting themselves.

...Doesn't everyone in the Royal Family promote themselves?

Not the Princess Royal. And she does more work than anyone except the late Prince Philip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spotify seems happy with it. :shrug:

Exactly.

OK but, of course Spotify is going to promote their own podcasts.

Meghan’s latest podcast was at 77. Guess it’s time for her to take another dig at the BRF!

Where are you getting 77? It's sitting at 31 overall and #4 in its category.

And interestingly, it performs better in the UK, where it's 29 overall and #3 in its category! Fancy that.

It's from all the reporters listening to it "so that their readers don't have to." That is the standard line among the royal reporters in the UK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, will there be anything "new" though? Maybe an untold anecdotal story or two, but otherwise it's the same old woe-is-me theme that's been repeated ad nauseum.

Minus a small niche of critics and fans, I feel like there's not a lot of traction (at least in the US) with either H (& M).

You’d be wrong, because his book is already selling insanely well in preorder on Amazon and it doesn’t even come out until almost the end of January.

Amazon is advertising it as half price and the same in the UK. But will it sell well enough to regroup the advances he was paid for three books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, will there be anything "new" though? Maybe an untold anecdotal story or two, but otherwise it's the same old woe-is-me theme that's been repeated ad nauseum.

Minus a small niche of critics and fans, I feel like there's not a lot of traction (at least in the US) with either H (& M).

You’d be wrong, because his book is already selling insanely well in preorder on Amazon and it doesn’t even come out until almost the end of January.

Amazon is advertising it as half price and the same in the UK. But will it sell well enough to regroup the advances he was paid for three books.

amazon does that with block busters

[Anonymous]

What are with all the weirdos on here that are so keen on seeing everything Meghan and Harry do fail?

What a curiously weird, vindictive, jealous group of people you all are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are with all the weirdos on here that are so keen on seeing everything Meghan and Harry do fail?

What a curiously weird, vindictive, jealous group of people you all are.

Meghan and Harry sadly join group that includes Princess Margaret, Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer and David and Wallis Simpson who crossed the British royal family.


In days of old, these people would have been consigned to the Tower of London or simply beheaded. Now they are eviscerated in the press and become chum for the unhappy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spotify seems happy with it. :shrug:

I mean each episode barely breaks the top 30 and drops to 90-100 within 2-3 days. Spotify’s biggest production is a huge flop. What else can Spotify’s execs who made this bad deal say? Have they announced they are renewing it? Nope!

And yet. the fact that there are such dedicated fans like yourself who are constantly monitoring its performance is already a testament to how many eyes and ears the podcast has managed to capture.

It's unequivocally a success.

Success in Spotify is measure by how many people listen to you. Meghan has a small audience despite a large promotion campaign and production budget. Her inability to attract, retain or grow a listener base has nothing to do with me, it has nothing to do with the racist RF, it’s just hard data and a reflection of the product.

??? It's #3 in its category in the UK, #4 in the US. Seems successful to me. And Spotify has been vocal about its success, too.

Overall it is well behind Dax Shepherd. Dax Shepherd for god’s sake, a delightful man whose podcast I have never heard advertised.

Do you even listen to podcasts? His is advertised quite frequently on other podcasts.

Moments like these are how you know these people have a singular obsession with Meghan. Dad Shepard’s podcast is one of the most visible podcasts out there, with tons of cross-promotion and marketing.

Dax Shepard has a successful podcast that he and his partner built and grew organically. Dax Shepard does not have billboards, magazine covers, paid promo in major publications and channels. People who don’t listen to podcast (that’s the majority of the world) have no clue who Dax Shepard is. Meghan on the other hand is the most saturated public figure out there. By choice.

This is really just absurd. Dax and Kristin Bell are prolific oversharers. They are regularly featured in major publications and Dax and Kristin have both regularly been on billboards and on the screen. What is your definition of paid promo because they literally have commercialized their family for actual commercials. It is the same thing. Possibly more embarrassing with them telling the world that their daughter was in pull-ups into elementary school. If you don’t like that in general then that’s fine but the obsession that you have with showing that the Sussexes are somehow uniquely horrible amongst celebs or even Harry’s own family is just bizarre.

You are disingenuous and you know it. Here is a simple test, that has nothing to do with my perception but hard data: go to People magazine and search Dax Shepard, see how many articles with his name come up in the last six month. Next do Meghan. And if you are up for a challenge, do Google News.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah again they are using the term Archetype incorrectly when every example the poor woman gives is a Stereotype ( Spotify is trying to double down with Oprah’s production company to generate more content from them. No one who isn’t a shallow sugar (the widely used term for the sycophants that support Meghan Markle) actually listens to this and enjoys it. It’s drivel and quite terrible.

I have never heard the term "shallow sugar," I think Meghan is fine, I neither support her or don't support her, I think everyone in the royal family is wrong actually, but I have listened to the podcast and enjoyed it. I listened to the Mariah Carey episode and thought it was very good.

I thought her episode with Mindy Kaling was fantastic.

The one with Constance Wu was fascinating.

She’s also a narcissist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are with all the weirdos on here that are so keen on seeing everything Meghan and Harry do fail?

What a curiously weird, vindictive, jealous group of people you all are.

Welcome to the club, curious weirdo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah again they are using the term Archetype incorrectly when every example the poor woman gives is a Stereotype ( Spotify is trying to double down with Oprah’s production company to generate more content from them. No one who isn’t a shallow sugar (the widely used term for the sycophants that support Meghan Markle) actually listens to this and enjoys it. It’s drivel and quite terrible.

I have never heard the term "shallow sugar," I think Meghan is fine, I neither support her or don't support her, I think everyone in the royal family is wrong actually, but I have listened to the podcast and enjoyed it. I listened to the Mariah Carey episode and thought it was very good.

I thought her episode with Mindy Kaling was fantastic.

The one with Constance Wu was fascinating.

She’s also a narcissist.

Who was raped. You people are terrible people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are with all the weirdos on here that are so keen on seeing everything Meghan and Harry do fail?

What a curiously weird, vindictive, jealous group of people you all are.

Because we find their incessant pursuit of the almighty dollar unimpressive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah again they are using the term Archetype incorrectly when every example the poor woman gives is a Stereotype ( Spotify is trying to double down with Oprah’s production company to generate more content from them. No one who isn’t a shallow sugar (the widely used term for the sycophants that support Meghan Markle) actually listens to this and enjoys it. It’s drivel and quite terrible.

I have never heard the term "shallow sugar," I think Meghan is fine, I neither support her or don't support her, I think everyone in the royal family is wrong actually, but I have listened to the podcast and enjoyed it. I listened to the Mariah Carey episode and thought it was very good.

I thought her episode with Mindy Kaling was fantastic.

The one with Constance Wu was fascinating.

She’s also a narcissist.

Who was raped. You people are terrible people.

Doesn’t give her an excuse to mistreat other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spotify seems happy with it. :shrug:

I mean each episode barely breaks the top 30 and drops to 90-100 within 2-3 days. Spotify’s biggest production is a huge flop. What else can Spotify’s execs who made this bad deal say? Have they announced they are renewing it? Nope!

And yet. the fact that there are such dedicated fans like yourself who are constantly monitoring its performance is already a testament to how many eyes and ears the podcast has managed to capture.

It's unequivocally a success.

Success in Spotify is measure by how many people listen to you. Meghan has a small audience despite a large promotion campaign and production budget. Her inability to attract, retain or grow a listener base has nothing to do with me, it has nothing to do with the racist RF, it’s just hard data and a reflection of the product.

??? It's #3 in its category in the UK, #4 in the US. Seems successful to me. And Spotify has been vocal about its success, too.

Overall it is well behind Dax Shepherd. Dax Shepherd for god’s sake, a delightful man whose podcast I have never heard advertised.

Do you even listen to podcasts? His is advertised quite frequently on other podcasts.

Moments like these are how you know these people have a singular obsession with Meghan. Dad Shepard’s podcast is one of the most visible podcasts out there, with tons of cross-promotion and marketing.

Dax Shepard has a successful podcast that he and his partner built and grew organically. Dax Shepard does not have billboards, magazine covers, paid promo in major publications and channels. People who don’t listen to podcast (that’s the majority of the world) have no clue who Dax Shepard is. Meghan on the other hand is the most saturated public figure out there. By choice.

This is really just absurd. Dax and Kristin Bell are prolific oversharers. They are regularly featured in major publications and Dax and Kristin have both regularly been on billboards and on the screen. What is your definition of paid promo because they literally have commercialized their family for actual commercials. It is the same thing. Possibly more embarrassing with them telling the world that their daughter was in pull-ups into elementary school. If you don’t like that in general then that’s fine but the obsession that you have with showing that the Sussexes are somehow uniquely horrible amongst celebs or even Harry’s own family is just bizarre.

You are disingenuous and you know it. Here is a simple test, that has nothing to do with my perception but hard data: go to People magazine and search Dax Shepard, see how many articles with his name come up in the last six month. Next do Meghan. And if you are up for a challenge, do Google News.

DP. So Meghan is responsible for the press having a bizarre and unfair fixation on her? Lol…… OK.