WTAF is up with Sentebale's latest lawsuit against Prince Harry?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

Oh please. You sound like a really sad and desperate person.

News photographers took these pictures, because Meghan and Harry didn't seem to take their own photographers with them. I'm not on Meghan's socials, but I'd be willing to bet she didn't post these on her own social media (feel free to prove me wrong).

All of which is in complete contrast to Kate having her own official photographers take the pictures of Liz Hatton and then posting them on KP's royal Instagram.

Another thing. The last time Meghan was photographed with children, people like you sent the parents hate tweets and hate mail. So I'm willing to bet the parents of these children signed documents agreeing to it. At least I would hope so. But then again, these pics seem to be from Australian media, and it seems like maybe the Sussexes had no official control, so who knows how that played out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

The press corps took these pictures, not the Sussexes, who didn't bring their own photogs. Again, the Sussexes had no control over what pictures were taken, where they were posted, or if consent was obtained.

You people are nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

For those of you who are new to this, there's a whole campaign among the haters that Meghan and Harry are duty-bound to show us their childrens' faces. So they can persecute the children, and feed their conspiracy theories about whether these are actually the Sussexes' children (yes, Meghan's fake pregnancy "moonbump" is a real thing among some haters).

It's absolutely disgusting. Good for Meghan and Harry for never giving in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

The press corps took these pictures, not the Sussexes, who didn't bring their own photogs. Again, the Sussexes had no control over what pictures were taken, where they were posted, or if consent was obtained.

You people are nuts.

The only person here who sounds unhinged is you. I'm not "nuts" for calling out hypocrisy. And you would lose your bet that Meghan didn't put the sick kids on her socials. Both Instagram & sussex.com, probably more.

They purposely went to the hospital to get publicity. I'm willing to bet if they had got there and there were no British press, M&H would have delayed the meet and greet while they called the DM, Sun, Post, all the press.

And - she just started a new grift this week literally marketing every item of clothing she wore to the hospital and elsewhere.

She NEEDED to be in photos in order to sell her fashion choices. She wasn't going to waste a visit to kids with cancer and not be able to profit off selling copies of the clothes she wore!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And there it is. It's often said that the Venn diagram of MAGA and royalists/Sussex haters is a circle.

That's ridiculous. I'm the opposite of MAGA - I curse the MAGAs I see and can't wait to see them out of power. I canvassed door-to-door for Harris.

I also think H&M are big grifters who didn't think twice about using those poor cancer kids FACES for H&M's publicity, yet refuse to show their own children's faces on social media. Such hypocrites. So much for them claiming they want privacy - they want the complete opposite!

You can call me a Sussex hater if you want (just because I notice obvious grifting) but please don't call me MAGA!

Hit a nerve? Sure, we all know lots of racist liberals who blame immigration for the US' problems.

Not.

I didn't care for Meghan's show. But liars like you make me feel sorry for her. The photo showed the back of the cancer kid's head, so you could only see Meghan's face (and derangers like you tried to turn Meghan's face into an evil, calculating look, but whatever). You're forgetting that Kate was the one who used a cancer kid's actual face last year. And the Sussexes never said they want privacy--that's a lie and you can't find a source for that--they said they wanted boundaries and for the press to stop tapping their phones. Learn the difference.

New poster to this thread, feel free to shriek otherwise. I agree with the poster you’re attacking. They are correct, and I am also far more liberal than the Sussexes, with a voting record and views that squares with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

The press corps took these pictures, not the Sussexes, who didn't bring their own photogs. Again, the Sussexes had no control over what pictures were taken, where they were posted, or if consent was obtained.

You people are nuts.

The only person here who sounds unhinged is you. I'm not "nuts" for calling out hypocrisy. And you would lose your bet that Meghan didn't put the sick kids on her socials. Both Instagram & sussex.com, probably more.

They purposely went to the hospital to get publicity. I'm willing to bet if they had got there and there were no British press, M&H would have delayed the meet and greet while they called the DM, Sun, Post, all the press.

And - she just started a new grift this week literally marketing every item of clothing she wore to the hospital and elsewhere.

She NEEDED to be in photos in order to sell her fashion choices. She wasn't going to waste a visit to kids with cancer and not be able to profit off selling copies of the clothes she wore!

Again, where's the hypocrisy? Meghan didn't have her people take the photos, and she didn't post them. I just went to Sussex.com and didn't see any pics. I'm not scrolling through Instagram, so if you want to prove your case, you need to post the link.

Your nonsense about delaying an event while they call the press makes you look ridiculous. Reread your post and ask yourself if you think you sound sane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And there it is. It's often said that the Venn diagram of MAGA and royalists/Sussex haters is a circle.

That's ridiculous. I'm the opposite of MAGA - I curse the MAGAs I see and can't wait to see them out of power. I canvassed door-to-door for Harris.

I also think H&M are big grifters who didn't think twice about using those poor cancer kids FACES for H&M's publicity, yet refuse to show their own children's faces on social media. Such hypocrites. So much for them claiming they want privacy - they want the complete opposite!

You can call me a Sussex hater if you want (just because I notice obvious grifting) but please don't call me MAGA!

Hit a nerve? Sure, we all know lots of racist liberals who blame immigration for the US' problems.

Not.

I didn't care for Meghan's show. But liars like you make me feel sorry for her. The photo showed the back of the cancer kid's head, so you could only see Meghan's face (and derangers like you tried to turn Meghan's face into an evil, calculating look, but whatever). You're forgetting that Kate was the one who used a cancer kid's actual face last year. And the Sussexes never said they want privacy--that's a lie and you can't find a source for that--they said they wanted boundaries and for the press to stop tapping their phones. Learn the difference.

New poster to this thread, feel free to shriek otherwise. I agree with the poster you’re attacking. They are correct, and I am also far more liberal than the Sussexes, with a voting record and views that squares with that.

The post at the top of this discussion deliberately cut off the posts that preceded it. But you can go back to 8:43 and 8:57 and read things like this: "England imported a ton of poverty, culture clashes and dependency over the past decade. That is a political issue, not a royal family issue."

And this: "Maybe the government can do something about it like curbing rampant immigration. King Charles is king in name only."

I'm liberal and I fell asleep during Meghan's show. But I recognize MAGA and racism when I see it, including on DCUM. And that's what drives a lot of the Meghan hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

The press corps took these pictures, not the Sussexes, who didn't bring their own photogs. Again, the Sussexes had no control over what pictures were taken, where they were posted, or if consent was obtained.

You people are nuts.

They took their own photographer etc to be able to control what was published. So they absolutely had control over what pics were snapped, who it was distributed to, etc.
“And far from 'not much media', the couple are taking a reporter and photographer from the Press Association (which files to all national and international media) to provide ample coverage of their four days in three cities (Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney).”
https://www.womanandhome.com/life/royal-news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-australia-visit/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

For those of you who are new to this, there's a whole campaign among the haters that Meghan and Harry are duty-bound to show us their childrens' faces. So they can persecute the children, and feed their conspiracy theories about whether these are actually the Sussexes' children (yes, Meghan's fake pregnancy "moonbump" is a real thing among some haters).

It's absolutely disgusting. Good for Meghan and Harry for never giving in.

This is really important. The so-called liberals here just walk right past the horrific behavior directed against Meghan, Harry, and their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

The press corps took these pictures, not the Sussexes, who didn't bring their own photogs. Again, the Sussexes had no control over what pictures were taken, where they were posted, or if consent was obtained.

You people are nuts.

The only person here who sounds unhinged is you. I'm not "nuts" for calling out hypocrisy. And you would lose your bet that Meghan didn't put the sick kids on her socials. Both Instagram & sussex.com, probably more.

They purposely went to the hospital to get publicity. I'm willing to bet if they had got there and there were no British press, M&H would have delayed the meet and greet while they called the DM, Sun, Post, all the press.

And - she just started a new grift this week literally marketing every item of clothing she wore to the hospital and elsewhere.

She NEEDED to be in photos in order to sell her fashion choices. She wasn't going to waste a visit to kids with cancer and not be able to profit off selling copies of the clothes she wore!

Again, where's the hypocrisy? Meghan didn't have her people take the photos, and she didn't post them. I just went to Sussex.com and didn't see any pics. I'm not scrolling through Instagram, so if you want to prove your case, you need to post the link.

Your nonsense about delaying an event while they call the press makes you look ridiculous. Reread your post and ask yourself if you think you sound sane.

Apparently they had their photographer (which they handpicked and traveled with and then decided which pics to distribute to press) post them to Sussex royal account, which is weird. They aren’t supposed to use that since it’s linked from HRH account. I’m not checking because I don’t want to ruin my lunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And there it is. It's often said that the Venn diagram of MAGA and royalists/Sussex haters is a circle.

That's ridiculous. I'm the opposite of MAGA - I curse the MAGAs I see and can't wait to see them out of power. I canvassed door-to-door for Harris.

I also think H&M are big grifters who didn't think twice about using those poor cancer kids FACES for H&M's publicity, yet refuse to show their own children's faces on social media. Such hypocrites. So much for them claiming they want privacy - they want the complete opposite!

You can call me a Sussex hater if you want (just because I notice obvious grifting) but please don't call me MAGA!

Hit a nerve? Sure, we all know lots of racist liberals who blame immigration for the US' problems.

Not.

I didn't care for Meghan's show. But liars like you make me feel sorry for her. The photo showed the back of the cancer kid's head, so you could only see Meghan's face (and derangers like you tried to turn Meghan's face into an evil, calculating look, but whatever). You're forgetting that Kate was the one who used a cancer kid's actual face last year. And the Sussexes never said they want privacy--that's a lie and you can't find a source for that--they said they wanted boundaries and for the press to stop tapping their phones. Learn the difference.

New poster to this thread, feel free to shriek otherwise. I agree with the poster you’re attacking. They are correct, and I am also far more liberal than the Sussexes, with a voting record and views that squares with that.

The post at the top of this discussion deliberately cut off the posts that preceded it. But you can go back to 8:43 and 8:57 and read things like this: "England imported a ton of poverty, culture clashes and dependency over the past decade. That is a political issue, not a royal family issue."

And this: "Maybe the government can do something about it like curbing rampant immigration. King Charles is king in name only."

I'm liberal and I fell asleep during Meghan's show. But I recognize MAGA and racism when I see it, including on DCUM. And that's what drives a lot of the Meghan hate.

It seems you could be wrong. It may drive a bit of the hate (?) but overwhelmingly, it seems their behavior is what drives the negative opinions. Not racism or maga. Sorry to disappoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

+100

That being said, I hope they secured consent from the children and parents prior to the event. It sounds like they did not.

The press corps took these pictures, not the Sussexes, who didn't bring their own photogs. Again, the Sussexes had no control over what pictures were taken, where they were posted, or if consent was obtained.

You people are nuts.

They took their own photographer etc to be able to control what was published. So they absolutely had control over what pics were snapped, who it was distributed to, etc.
“And far from 'not much media', the couple are taking a reporter and photographer from the Press Association (which files to all national and international media) to provide ample coverage of their four days in three cities (Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney).”
https://www.womanandhome.com/life/royal-news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-australia-visit/

Wow, you spend a lot of time on this. If you want to prove your point, have you got any pictures of the cancer children that came from this Press Association person as opposed to Aussie media? You clearly have time to spend on this.

And ONCE AGAIN: how is this any different from Kate posing with child cancer victim Liz Hatton in front of her official royal photographer? It's not.

You whining about "hypocrisy" bombs, because Meghan is completely within her rights to shield her children from the craziness of the moon bump theorists. And there's no hypocrisy about earning passive income from what she wears, because the Sandringham Agreement was quite clear that the Sussexes are free to do both charity AND earn their own income. I can hear it now, "but, but, she posted something she wore while hugging children." And?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not about posing with kids or not.

It's about the *hypocrisy* of getting paid to make speeches about the danger of kids being online and being shown online, about making a big point of hiding your own kid's faces in *your* photos, and then showing *other* people's kid's faces for your own publicity.

Kate posed with a cancer patient - but she also allows her own kids to be photographed and shown to the British public. So she is a not a hypocrite.

I'm calling M&H out for being hypocrites, not debating the merits of whether or not kids should be photographed.

Oh please. You sound like a really sad and desperate person.

News photographers took these pictures, because Meghan and Harry didn't seem to take their own photographers with them. I'm not on Meghan's socials, but I'd be willing to bet she didn't post these on her own social media (feel free to prove me wrong).

All of which is in complete contrast to Kate having her own official photographers take the pictures of Liz Hatton and then posting them on KP's royal Instagram.

Another thing. The last time Meghan was photographed with children, people like you sent the parents hate tweets and hate mail. So I'm willing to bet the parents of these children signed documents agreeing to it. At least I would hope so. But then again, these pics seem to be from Australian media, and it seems like maybe the Sussexes had no official control, so who knows how that played out.

NP- If you look at her official Instagram, her latest video is full of children they met while in Australia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And there it is. It's often said that the Venn diagram of MAGA and royalists/Sussex haters is a circle.

That's ridiculous. I'm the opposite of MAGA - I curse the MAGAs I see and can't wait to see them out of power. I canvassed door-to-door for Harris.

I also think H&M are big grifters who didn't think twice about using those poor cancer kids FACES for H&M's publicity, yet refuse to show their own children's faces on social media. Such hypocrites. So much for them claiming they want privacy - they want the complete opposite!

You can call me a Sussex hater if you want (just because I notice obvious grifting) but please don't call me MAGA!

Hit a nerve? Sure, we all know lots of racist liberals who blame immigration for the US' problems.

Not.

I didn't care for Meghan's show. But liars like you make me feel sorry for her. The photo showed the back of the cancer kid's head, so you could only see Meghan's face (and derangers like you tried to turn Meghan's face into an evil, calculating look, but whatever). You're forgetting that Kate was the one who used a cancer kid's actual face last year. And the Sussexes never said they want privacy--that's a lie and you can't find a source for that--they said they wanted boundaries and for the press to stop tapping their phones. Learn the difference.

New poster to this thread, feel free to shriek otherwise. I agree with the poster you’re attacking. They are correct, and I am also far more liberal than the Sussexes, with a voting record and views that squares with that.

The post at the top of this discussion deliberately cut off the posts that preceded it. But you can go back to 8:43 and 8:57 and read things like this: "England imported a ton of poverty, culture clashes and dependency over the past decade. That is a political issue, not a royal family issue."

And this: "Maybe the government can do something about it like curbing rampant immigration. King Charles is king in name only."

I'm liberal and I fell asleep during Meghan's show. But I recognize MAGA and racism when I see it, including on DCUM. And that's what drives a lot of the Meghan hate.

It seems you could be wrong. It may drive a bit of the hate (?) but overwhelmingly, it seems their behavior is what drives the negative opinions. Not racism or maga. Sorry to disappoint.

Stats? Are you the person who thinks they can do math? You can't just make stats up. Please provide a link.

Because it overwhelmingly DOES seem like a lot of the hate comes from conservatives who frequent the Mail comments, and on Twitter.

And there's solid evidence that at least one of the two (three?) haters here on DCUM is anti-immigration. Which is ... not a liberal stance.