Meghan Markle and Prince Harry News and Updates

[Anonymous]

Why people idolize these elites is beyond me.

Pathetic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why people idolize these elites is beyond me.

Pathetic

+1 they want to be them, I suppose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess my question is why does she need random reporters to ask if she’s okay? She has so many resources at her disposal. If she’s overwhelmed with Archie or depressed about her miscarriage she can hire a chef, nanny, therapist, housekeeper, etc. to unburden some of her tasks. She doesn’t have a 9-5 job so she can take the time she needs. She’s so lucky compared to almost everyone else on the planet. Use your resources, don’t try to garner pity during a pandemic of all times.

When she made that statement, it was not during a pandemic. Why I understand that she was tone deaf at the time she made that comment, I also try to give new and first time moms some leeway. We all were on a different mental level with our first newborn, including the mother’s with nannies and housekeepers. It is a totally different chemical going on in both your body, mind and spirit. You would think that a board d full of mommies would know that.

Ah I was reading your post and then the shade had to come in the last sentence. She did, however, write her ‘are you OK?’ schtick into this essay written on November 25. So can we still claim pregnancy hormones and chemicals 18 months post birth? Any more excuses we can make for her tone deaf essay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this in the news, Prince Harry talking about climate change:

Prince Harry has urged people to be more 'like raindrops'

So from the sublime to the ridiculous now. hahaha.

And I bet he write that from his staffed 16 bedroom mansion. These two are clueless twits.

Not bad. I wish I had those kinds of resources. BTW his father is a champion of the environment. Neither of them have to be. They can sit back and be lazy privileged asses but they don't. My hat's off to both Harry and Prince Charles.

If only they’d put their money where there mouths are. They lecture us on environmental issues while jumping on private jets that create more greenhouse gasses than the average person creates in a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this in the news, Prince Harry talking about climate change:

Prince Harry has urged people to be more 'like raindrops'

So from the sublime to the ridiculous now. hahaha.

And I bet he write that from his staffed 16 bedroom mansion. These two are clueless twits.

Not bad. I wish I had those kinds of resources. BTW his father is a champion of the environment. Neither of them have to be. They can sit back and be lazy privileged asses but they don't. My hat's off to both Harry and Prince Charles.

If only they’d put their money where there mouths are. They lecture us on environmental issues while jumping on private jets that create more greenhouse gasses than the average person creates in a year.

It’s pretty hypocritical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has any problem with Meghan being royal. Or with her being a commoner.

The problem is when she takes the advantages of being a royal and tries to garner sympathy as a commoner.

This is perceived when,for example, she wants people to ask if she is okay -as if she is just a regular person that no one pays attention to.

It would be fine if she said "even rich and privileged people like me sometimes want to be asked if we're okay".

But there's no such acknowledgment. It comes across as very oblivious to the struggles of regular people.

Let me tell you something. I have a special child, just had a difficult pregnancy and I have a newborn. No one except my husband and my best friend and 2 neighbors has asked me if I'm okay. In fact, most of the time my husband is so overwhelmed he doesn't either.

This is what real normal life is like. Most people don't have journalists and friends regularly checking in on how they're doing.

For Meghan to complain about no one asking if she's okay -when she has so many resources I don't -comes across as very narcissistic.

#off my soapbox

Seems like you and Meghan are saying exactly the same thing.

No, it's not relatable for her to complain about people not asking if she's okay .

Like Bill Gates complaining about having trouble finding exact change to pay his grocery bill.

Or Jeff Bezos complaining his packaged don't come on time. You can hire someone for that, we don't need to hear about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

based on what evidence? if there are instances of multiple overlaps, it is indeed plagiarism. I cannot be bothered to educate you however, you sound singularly bovine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

based on what evidence? if there are instances of multiple overlaps, it is indeed plagiarism. I cannot be bothered to educate you however, you sound singularly bovine.

Not PP. Overlaps=/= plagiarism. Plagiarism is intentionally copying someone else’s work without attribution. Literally in the definition of the word. You have no evidence that she intentionally copied anything you just are repeating there are portions that are similar but PP is trying to explain to you that the items being similar is not the same thing as establishing that she copied something. Also, I’m pretty sure that there is editorial staff who review her work before hitting publish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

based on what evidence? if there are instances of multiple overlaps, it is indeed plagiarism. I cannot be bothered to educate you however, you sound singularly bovine.

Not PP. Overlaps=/= plagiarism. Plagiarism is intentionally copying someone else’s work without attribution. Literally in the definition of the word. You have no evidence that she intentionally copied anything you just are repeating there are portions that are similar but PP is trying to explain to you that the items being similar is not the same thing as establishing that she copied something. Also, I’m pretty sure that there is editorial staff who review her work before hitting publish.

Plagiarism does not have to be intentional to still be considered plagiarism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

based on what evidence? if there are instances of multiple overlaps, it is indeed plagiarism. I cannot be bothered to educate you however, you sound singularly bovine.

Not PP. Overlaps=/= plagiarism. Plagiarism is intentionally copying someone else’s work without attribution. Literally in the definition of the word. You have no evidence that she intentionally copied anything you just are repeating there are portions that are similar but PP is trying to explain to you that the items being similar is not the same thing as establishing that she copied something. Also, I’m pretty sure that there is editorial staff who review her work before hitting publish.

Plagiarism does not have to be intentional to still be considered plagiarism.

I'm pretty sure it does have to be intentional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this in the news, Prince Harry talking about climate change:

Prince Harry has urged people to be more 'like raindrops'

So from the sublime to the ridiculous now. hahaha.

And I bet he write that from his staffed 16 bedroom mansion. These two are clueless twits.

Not bad. I wish I had those kinds of resources. BTW his father is a champion of the environment. Neither of them have to be. They can sit back and be lazy privileged asses but they don't. My hat's off to both Harry and Prince Charles.

If only they’d put their money where there mouths are. They lecture us on environmental issues while jumping on private jets that create more greenhouse gasses than the average person creates in a year.

It’s pretty hypocritical.

Almost all celebs are like this, lecturing others while living in grand mansions and gallivanting around on yachts and private planes. I just laugh at them.

[Anonymous]

Dumb and Dumber.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

based on what evidence? if there are instances of multiple overlaps, it is indeed plagiarism. I cannot be bothered to educate you however, you sound singularly bovine.

Not PP. Overlaps=/= plagiarism. Plagiarism is intentionally copying someone else’s work without attribution. Literally in the definition of the word. You have no evidence that she intentionally copied anything you just are repeating there are portions that are similar but PP is trying to explain to you that the items being similar is not the same thing as establishing that she copied something. Also, I’m pretty sure that there is editorial staff who review her work before hitting publish.

Plagiarism does not have to be intentional to still be considered plagiarism.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarize

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ That's why it sounded so hackneyed and false.

They were not her own words.

Plagiarism. Add that to her list of recent triumphs! Wow.

Will it need to get worse before it gets better?

There’s a difference between plagiarism and bad and unoriginal writing. I’ve never heard of that book and doubt Meghan has as well. I think it’s just the most obvious, overwrought, and unimaginative imagery anyone could come up with.

I was a literary agent for many years, I know exactly the differences between bad writing and plagiarism. Unfortunately this is a case of both things. The original writing is hallmark card like in its saccharine wording and her own rendition, far too close to the original not to qualify as plagiarism.

This is not right. Whether or not you were a literary agent. To be plagiarism, it has to be actually copied. Being similar is evidence of plagiarism, but it's not enough to "qualify" as plagiarism; for that, there has to be actual exposure to the underlying source material. This is one short passage of stereotypical hackneyed writing that two people could ABSOLUTELY have come up with on their own. I don't actually believe for a second that Megan read this random book at all, much less copied it.

based on what evidence? if there are instances of multiple overlaps, it is indeed plagiarism. I cannot be bothered to educate you however, you sound singularly bovine.

Not PP. Overlaps=/= plagiarism. Plagiarism is intentionally copying someone else’s work without attribution. Literally in the definition of the word. You have no evidence that she intentionally copied anything you just are repeating there are portions that are similar but PP is trying to explain to you that the items being similar is not the same thing as establishing that she copied something. Also, I’m pretty sure that there is editorial staff who review her work before hitting publish.

Plagiarism does not have to be intentional to still be considered plagiarism.

çe

You can be sued for unintentional plagiarism. Do you think it's ok to just say "well I didn't mean it, wasn't intentional, oopsies!" That's not going to get you off the hook.