Prince Harry launches new eco-travel program Travalyst in Amsterdam

Prince Harry launches new partnership Photo: Albert Nieboer / Netherlands OUT / Point de Vue OUT

Here are some photos of Prince Harry today in Amsterdam. News of the trip was apparently embargoed for royal reporters, meaning no one could report on the trip ahead of time, but reporters were told about the trip and they were there to cover this event. So what is the event? WELL. Prince Harry is announcing a new partnership between “Booking.com, SkyScanner, CTrip, TripAdvisor and Visa,” which will aim to change the travel industry. The project is called Travalyst and it’s being done under the banner of the SussexRoyal Foundation, although Prince Harry has apparently been working on it for two years, back when he was part of the The Royal Foundation with his brother and sister-in-law. Omid Scobie had the nicer take on the initiative:

Prince Harry is on a mission to transform the travel industry. The Duke of Sussex is in Amsterdam today to officially launch Travalyst—a new program that aims to explore and improve conservation efforts at tourist destinations around the world, tackle climate change, and help local communities grow economically.

“Travel has the unparalleled power to open people’s minds to different cultures, new experiences, and to have a profound appreciation for what our world has to offer,” the prince said in a statement. “As tourism inevitably grows, it is critically important to accelerate the adoption of sustainable practices worldwide and to balance this growth with the needs of the environment and the local population. Bringing companies, consumers, and communities together is our best chance to protect destinations and ecosystems for future generations.”

Travalyst won’t encourage people to travel less, but it will help tourists make environmentally friendly decisions, such as providing tips for offsetting carbon emissions and supporting local communities at tourist destinations. The goal is to give the consumer more eco-conscious travel options when booking trips and educate them on the impact tourism can have on the environment. In the months ahead, Travalyst will launch new industry collaborations and initiatives focusing on different areas of tourism sustainability, including preventing wildlife damage and ways to tackle the growing problem of “over-tourism”—which is literally seeing some of the world’s most beautiful places being loved to death.

“I have learned so much from the experiences I’ve had and the people I’ve met in places like Botswana and the Caribbean, Nepal and New Zealand,” Harry said in a speech at Amsterdam’s A’dam Tower. “What is clear across this vast landscape is our world faces environmental challenges of unprecedented scope and scale.” A source close to the prince tells BAZAAR.com that the royal felt the project was “hugely important, as the number of people traveling is rising rapidly but individuals are not being given enough opportunities to do it in a more sustainable manner. By bringing together these industry heavyweights, they are able to help lead the way in protecting this planet.”

Critics will be quick to point out Harry’s own widely-reported use of private jets to three different destinations in the month of August. During today’s launch, which he flew to on a commercial flight, the prince said, “We can all do better. While no one is perfect, we are all responsible for our own individual impact; the question is what we do to balance it out.”

[From Harper’s Bazaar]

So… is Travalyst a site? Is it a resource for tourists so that people can use more eco-data about where to go and how to travel? It sounds interesting.

The Daily Mail’s Rebecca English – who has been caught out lying about the Sussexes multiple times – did a Twitter thread about the launch and Harry’s comments to the press in the Q&A session. English tweeted thatIn a Q&A session Harry defiantly insists he will continue to travel by private jet ‘to ensure the safety of my family’. Fair play for answering the answer honestly, but I’m not sure it is helpful. Claiming MRF wouldn’t be safe on a commercial plane won’t cut it with many…To put it in context, though, Harry says he spends ‘99 per cent of my life travelling the world by commercial’. When he travels privately, he says, he does offset the carbon emissions.”

All of that being said, did you hear that the Duke of York flew on a private plane from Spain back to England for crisis talks with his team because people keep talking about how he raped sexually trafficked minors given to him by Jeffrey Epstein?

Prince Harry launches new partnership Photo: Albert Nieboer / Netherlands OUT / Point de Vue OUT

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

246 Responses to “Prince Harry launches new eco-travel program Travalyst in Amsterdam”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. pinkberry says:

    Do you think William is trying to ruin Harry’s new project? William or someone from KP set up the private jet drama purely to discredit Harry.

    • aurora says:

      Of course William did. *eyeroll*

      • Megan says:

        Sorry, but this one is on Harry. He knew the launch date for this and still boarded those private jets.

      • Lexa says:

        Yeah, I really don’t think KP or Will had much to do with this criticism, beyond them potentially trying to appear better by comparison in taking the Flybe flight. We can’t always excuse Harry’s missteps by blaming them on a scheming Will. I am very sympathetic to their security concerns, but I also think some part of them should have seen this coming because the press tracks their every move and local reports of sightings were bound to come out. While the press has it in for them, a decent portion of this outrage is down to the timing of it all—coming right after his interview with Jane, talking about the environment at Camp Google (which attracted a ton of general negative press attention), and also his event in February talking about single use plastics, etc. It’s not fair that they’re the only ones under the microscope on this issue right now, especially since this project sounds great, but man, that timing…

        My read on this situation is that the press knew this launch was coming and they seized on the easy hypocrisy narrative to churn up new outrage to drive clicks and therefore revenue. The baby shower trip was big business for them, and they’re looking for a repeat. All you have to do is look at the sheer amount of comments on some of these articles to see why they keep coming up with new ways to stoke the manufactured outrage. I also think, just in general, the press has been actively looking for ways to needle Harry and Meghan in retaliation for the Sussexes not being willing to play ball with the press in granting them more access to Meghan and Archie. (I say that 100% understanding why the Sussexes keep them at arm’s length, btw!)

    • Lucy says:

      Oh please. That’s ridiculous

    • Sarah says:

      William is not clever or committed enough to think about that. Carole Middleton is the smart one in that team BUT there is no way she knew about Harry’s project in advance. Given the tensions between the two brothers, I doubt even William knew it would be launching soon.

      • Elisa says:

        spot on!

      • pinkberry says:

        Well, KP leaked Kate’s Broken Britain project last year two days ago before Meghan’s cookbook project was rolled out. Oh yes, William knew about the new project.

        What happened to the Broken Britain project?

      • Sarah says:

        @pinkberry, I remember but when the cookbook was launched, the Sussexes and the Cambridges still shared an office at KP. It was only natural that William knew about the upcoming project.
        But now? I refuse to believe Harry is dumb and naive enough to have told him. They don’t “work” together anymore and I think their personal relationship is very fraught, at best.
        As for Broken Britain, I hear Catherine is keen on keenly brainstorming the development of a new initiative to be launched blablabla

      • pinkberry says:

        KP said the Broken Britain initiative will be launched in the New Year. Now it’s September. So far: nothing.

      • Lady D says:

        It says right in the article that Harry has been working on this for two years. He was still with the KP foundation two years ago. It’s not unfeasible that William would know about this project.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Let’s hope they started keeping quiet about other ideas once the Broken Britain/Together Cookbook weekend. The Shout, poorly launched with KP trying to grab all credit for W&K was another one.

      • aaa says:

        The “Broken Britain” story that came out last fall was a leaked story, it was not a formal announcement from KP.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Conveniently leaked two days before Meghan’s Together cookbook hit. Meghan’s project done-and-dusted 1) before anyone knew it was happening 2) without a year of “oh so keen to do something about the issue” like Kate’s “initiative”

    • Beli says:

      If not William then it wouldn’t surprise me at all if someone did. All of the royals take private flights so that leaves us with two questions.

      Why were Harry and Meghan singled out for the vitriol. Easy, because it’s always them that are singled out.

      Why that particular timing? I think we’ve just learned the answer to that.

      • Sarah says:

        The plane controversy took center stage when we should have been talking all day long about Pedo Prince and his sex trafficker friend dying by “suicide”. How very convenient. And people think the Cambridges/Kensington Palace were bad.

      • Megan says:

        I fear the Pedo Andy story is dead as long as the political crisis rages. He should send Phillip Lee a gift basket.

    • Catherine says:

      It’s a very elaborate scheme, PW tricked PH into flying private jets. Then tricked PH into speaking about carbon footprints. PW laid out this plan years ago, with the help of Elton John, Google Camp, Vogue and Jane Goodall.

      • lali says:

        cackling

      • StarGreek says:

        LOL

        I don’t think it is that way but I am under the impression all these stories about the BRF are only a distraction from what is happening in the British Parliament at this moment.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Johnson just lost his working majority.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Nota I know it’s not your job to explain this, but as an American who doesn’t understand exactly what that means, is there a short version? I hope this is bad news for Boris (sounds like it is?) but it all seems so complicated and I’m struggling to keep up with the events in the UK.

    • noway says:

      You guys are really silly!! The only thing I’m 100% sure of is none of the royals spend as much time thinking about ways to screw each other or doing it as you think they do. Who would honestly spend the time, especially when William has the upper royal hand just by being born first. They both have lived this all their lives. Even when William had the upper popularity hand as the cute future king it meant very little in their everyday lives as, he saw Charles still won the royal hand as he was first in line for the throne. What was true about the Sussexes and Cambridges breaking up is they both will have very different roles. The Sussexes can be a bit more controversial in their causes if they aren’t attached to the future king who has to stay a bit more milk toasty. Now maybe they both are in the correct roles as William does definitely seem a bit more milk toast than Harry, or maybe they just fell into them as time went on who knows.

      Harry’s response was actually good, and if it wasn’t such a crazy blown up story it should work, but who knows. I do wish he said something about Charles and his influence in his climate change stance. As this started all with Charles, and the environment has been Charles’ issue for a long time, even when most royals tried harder to hide all political agendas. In Charles’ defense climate change used to not be so political. This is a small thing though, and I think it sounds interesting. Good luck to them.

  2. pearlime says:

    I really doubt that 99% of the flights he takes are commercial, even you only count flights for official engagements. I am sure he travels commercial a lot, but that number is unrealistic for someone like him.

    • aaa says:

      That was my reaction as well.

    • Jb says:

      You can only question William and Kate when they make unbelievable statements! Seriously though I prefer not to drink the koolaid from either royal family….they are all selling you something and I’m not buying

    • noway says:

      Agree when you are getting picked at by the media always a danger to give numbers people can find quantifiable arguments against. Small mistake though.

  3. TeddyPicker says:

    This sounds like a great initiative, equipping consumers with the information they need to make climate-conscious decisions while travelling. But having this a Sussex banner issue will open them up to criticism every damn time they travel. So get ready for this story to get trotted out multiple times in the coming years…

    • M. says:

      The problem is that everything they do is criticized. The only thing Harry and Meghan can do to please the critics is to disappear. Silencing the Sussexes is the ultimate goal of the trolls and haters.

      • Sarah says:

        Even disappearing does not actually satisfy the media. It is not lost on me than the smear campaign seems to gain ground when the Sussexes, and especially Meghan, are not doing engagement. Right after the Royal tour, now during Meghan’s maternity leave.

    • Millenial says:

      I agree, if they were going to go for a sustainability initiative — this one is a lose-lose for them. They travel A LOT.

      If I were advising them, I would have told them to choose food sustainability. The Duchess is a bit of a foodie, and I think a “meatless Monday” type initiative would have gone over much better and been popular. If not food sustainability, perhaps they could have done plastics. There’s so many better options than travel, in terms of optics.

      • Jaya says:

        Leisure travel is a billion dollar industry. It needs to target our eco-awareness somehow, and using Booking,com and TripAdvisor sounds exactly right.

      • Megan says:

        This will give a nice boost to hotel chains and tour companies that have been working for years to improve their sustainability.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It isn’t a plan to decrease tourism travel, it is to try to help travelers make choices about where they choose to visit that are more sustainable. It isn’t aimed at eliminating travel, so criticisms like “they should travel less themselves” are missing the point. Not that I’m surprised.

  4. Toot says:

    Since Harry has been working on this for 2 years, it’s becoming clear to me why we’ve had the onslaught of private jet stories from the Brit tabs concerning Meghan/Harry and the Cambs making sure to be pictured flying commercial.

    I think it was to put a stinker on his initiative. KP has known this was coming and are trying to sabotage.

    • Kaiser says:

      I honestly thought about that too but I didn’t say it because I thought it would make me sound like I was wearing a tin-foil hat!!

      • Toot says:

        lol

        All of them fly private on vacation and talk about doing what you can for the environment, but suddenly only Meghan and Harry are hypocrites to the British press.

        Yeah, too obvious to me what’s going on.

      • Snazzy says:

        My tinfoil hat is firmly in place. I may need to add some sparkles as I will be wearing it for a while

      • Nic919 says:

        It’s interesting how the criticism about private jets targeted Harry in the last few weeks and not prior to that. It’s not like it’s the first time Harry ever took a private jet and the push by the tabloids about Harry being a hypocrite on the issue was linked to the vogue interview with Goodall when that was a pretty vague comment made by Jane G. I think it’s less KP and more the reporters who knew about this event but had to keep an embargo but then pushed the hypocrite angle knowing this upcoming initiative. Travel arrangements probably had to be made about a month ago, and that’s about when we saw all these articles.

      • noway says:

        Seriously it’s interesting why it targeted him now. Let’s see he just did an interview with Jane Goodall a noted conservationist edited by his wife where he said we all need to watch our carbon footprint. The issue sold out everywhere it was a big deal in case you missed it. Then he says in same interview he only wants 2 kids max implying cause of our carbon footprint. Granted he didn’t say that, but in that context a logical person would think that. Now limiting how many kids you have due to climate change is a thing now, but to a lot of people who believe in conservation it seems a bit extreme. Then he goes on two private jets within a few days. It’s the combination of the two things back to back which make it seem uber hypocritical you tell everyone to watch your carbon footprint, even taking a pretty extreme view for some limiting kids, and then you fly four private jet flights in a short period of time. Sorry his answer was great, but there is just a part of me that thinks cynically does this mean he can do a few private jet flight if he has a few less kids? I might trade my kid for a private jet flight, but don’t tell her.

    • StarGreek says:

      There is the added issue that this company is in the EU….
      Harry didn’t open one in UK, wait for headlines from the usual rags calling him unpatriotic.

    • jenner says:

      Lainey has an excellent take on all this. I agree with her that this was bad timing on Harry’s part.

      • Dali says:

        @Jenner
        Absolutely agree!! Lainey‘s take on this 👍Also her take on the pics of the Cambridges commercial flight are very smart and plausible. She’s really good

  5. Digital Unicorn says:

    TBF to Harry he answered the criticism over the private jet usage – would William have done that?

    English needs to shut and take all the seats.

  6. Beli says:

    I like the Sussex way of announcing projects at their launch, having already done the work to set it up, rather than trying to build hype months before (Children Of Broken Britain initiative still awaited). This sounds like a good project and much needed

    Is it too cynical of me to wonder whether someone got wind of this… oh I don’t know, about 3 weeks ago, and tried to lay the bad press groundwork in advance?

  7. Elizabeth says:

    I hate it when people throw out random percentages. “I fly commercial 99% of the time.” Really, Harry? You flew private at least 4 times this summer, are you really saying that’s 1% of the flights you take?

    Stop. Digging.

    • Morgana says:

      This. I mean…LOL they really can’t find leas hypocritical initiatives? Like, I truly believe that even if H&M tackled say, world hunger, they would be criticized for eating ever again. I get that. But even I’m like…why drop leaflets about ecotravel from your private jet, man. Just dumb.

      • Elisa says:

        “…why drop leaflets about ecotravel from your private jet, man…” hahahaha, excellent!
        And yes, his 99% statement was not very clever.
        Also, I hope this puts pressure on all BRF members to fly less and if they have to fly, take commercial flights.

    • .chunkyLa says:

      Yeah, this is the same guy that took a private jet to go hunting with his pals in Germany a few years ago. That right there discredits his “I fly commercial 99% of the time” argument. Does he not know that commercial flights go to Germany and he can always drive there as well? He also took a private jet to that Camp Google thing without his wife and child. So much for only using private jets to protect his family!

      • notasugarhere says:

        The William hunting trip where Jecca was along for the ride? Yeah, that one.

      • Amy says:

        Yes, @nota, that one. Do William’s and Jecca’s presence disprove the point?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Pretending it was only Harry on that plane, when it was a brothers trip with Jecca, is disingenuous at best. By all means, call out the use of private jets for that, but stick with facts about who was there.

        That was the time William chose to go hunting with Jecca instead of doing to Mustique with his wife and son. Never fear, he made up for it by going on a second, 10-day kid-free vacation with Kate in The Maldives. Entire resort shut down for them as a freebie.

      • .chunkyLa says:

        @notasugarhere

        No, the one that i’m referring to was just Harry and his pals. But I guess you’ve just proven that Harry has traveled by private jet to go hunting on more than one occasion. Lol thanks for that!

      • Amy says:

        @nota: None of that information has anything to do with the original comment which was in response to Harry’s “99%” remark. The comment also never said (it even said the opposite) that Harry was on the plane alone and thus did “stick with facts”. Glad you got a chance to mention all that again though.

      • .chunkyLa says:

        @Amy

        Very true @nota has a habit of bringing random stuff about W&K up *just* to drag them even though it has nothing to do with the article. I’ve seen it time and time again.

      • Taneesha says:

        Harry DOES fly a lot and flies commercial for the most part. So the 99% is a pretty good estimation. And the outrage for Harry flying private is just eyeroll worthy because Harry is 35 years old and has been flying private jets all his life yet we have never heard any mention of anything. This outrage is blatantly racist as when the white people were flying private jets there were no complaints and it was considered “their norm”. But now that there is a biracial duchess in the couple, suddenly its oh, oh, let’s all wear sack cloth and cover ourselves in ashes and wail for 7 days non stop about Harry and Meghan hypocrisy. 🙄🙄
        Look, critics will always criticize, haters will always hate no matter what the Sussexes do. Their cookbook was linked to terrorism, avocado toast linked to murder and human exploitation, their new PR team is suddenly now linked to Harvey Weinstein and soon the Sussexes will be criticized for supporting a HW🙄🙄, now their beautiful initiative is getting crapped on because “oh they should have chosen something else food related because of the optics…”. Meanwhile, even if the Sussexes had chosen something food related, their detractors would still have found something to whine about in regards to the initiative. It seems like this campaign is to beat the Sussexes into submission and stop them from out working and out shining the lazy unmotivated Cambridges. The Sussexes can’t win regardless of what they do, they might as well just live their lives as they see fit.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Nice try. LOL

      • notasugarhere says:

        Good post, Taneesha.

      • kerwood says:

        Well said, @taneesha. People only started reaching for the smelling salts when the Duchess of Sussex entered the picture. The Windsors were flying private jets all over the place and nobody said a word. So all this new-found concern for the environment is just a load of crap.

        Do all the people who are weeping bitter tears over Harry’s private plane travel realize that the environment has been in trouble for YEARS? Or were all those hurricanes just stormy weather?

  8. Capejob says:

    Harry also said the reason he flies private jets is to protect his family. No one disputes the fact that royals are targets, however we have seen royals take commercial flights plenty of times. We’ve also seen them take public transport occasionally. If they want to fly on private jets that’s on them but the excuse being used here by Harry to justify it is a weak one. One of their pals even said that they can’t fly commercial for “fear of being kidnapped”. Oh please!

    The real reason royals fly private jets is because it affords them the comfort & luxury they are accustomed to, and also to get the privacy they so crave when they want to take a luxurious holiday!

    • Toot says:

      I think he’s serious about the safety issue. There is a lot of vilitrol out there against Meghan and now with Archie I can totally understand why they fly private.

      • Erinn says:

        I mean… I’d be willing to believe this a bit more if it was pre- 9/11 levels of airport security. Let’s not pretend that security hasn’t beefed up a TON since then.

        As it stands I think it’s the want for privacy rather than actual protection and the convenience/comfort of private jets.

      • Nahema says:

        @Erinn – I think you’re right and it highlights the difficulty in tackling climate change in general. We ALL have to make some big changes and those changes don’t come easy. For some it might be getting the bus to work rather than driving and for others it’s swapping private jets for commercial. Either way we are all having to give up conveniences and luxuries. Most people won’t like it and plenty of people will try to find reasons why they should be exempt but if everyone comes up with excuses, nothing will ever change

      • notasugarhere says:

        Tumblr crazies have flown across the ocean with the goal of physically assaulting his wife. The safety of his wife and child in the face of that craziness doesn’t get to be compared to everyday travel for the rest of us. Apples, oranges.

      • Erinn says:

        nota — those people can get into at least some of the public events, too, no? I mean, if we’re going to use that as the sole excuse for the private planes, then I would guess he would only be interested in appearing at private events where everyone has been vetted, but we know that’s not the case.

      • notasugarhere says:

        It isn’t about a private or public event. It is about crazies crossing oceans to try to physically assault his wife. They have damn good reason for being concerned about their safety, when traveling or when working, especially regarding the safety of their child.

    • Myrtle says:

      To me, privacy and protection go hand in hand. I think he’s fine to say this, especially because he didn’t defend it irresponsibly. He admits “we all can do better”, and supports a responsible “if you play you pay” attitude, i.e. carbon offsets (and launching initiatives like Travalyst, maybe? Which could make a real difference in a big way.)

      P.S. How handsome is this man, amirite? *swoon*

    • sandy says:

      Right. Weren’t there threats against George, and he was followed around by paps hiding in car trunks? Anne lived through an attempted kidnapping in a car (she’s a badass). It’s all a little dismissive to his own family history.

      Just be truthful. “We had the opportunity to fly private, which we don’t do often. It’s a wonderful splurge, and we make sure to offset the emissions where do take advantage of this luxury”. Own it, move on.

    • Beli says:

      We don’t know all of the threats they’ve received, but we know they have received them. A white supremacist was jailed recently for threatening to kill Harry for being a race traitor, someone sent them white powder, someone talked openly on social media about attacking Meghan in New York… And those are just the ones we’ve heard about.

      If I were them with a baby in tow, I’d be being as cautious as I could be and I would be doing everything my security team advised.

    • Peg says:

      @Erinn
      Do you know there is someone serving 4 years in jail 2019 for threatening to kill Harry and another one serving months in jail for the same threat.

      • Erinn says:

        Why yes, I do. But I also don’t doubt that other royals get death threats as well. They might not have white supremacists after them, but I don’t doubt for a minute that there are stalkers involved with other royals besides H&M. It’s not like they’re sharing the exact time or date of when he’ll be grabbing a flight for these people to plan to get on the same plane. But again – airports have intense security, and it’s not like anyone is expecting them to travel without their own security detail. Nobody is saying he should forego their assigned security people and just hang out in coach with everyone else.

      • ProfPlum says:

        @Erinn, the level of (racist and xenophobic) vitriol aimed at MM is unparalleled. Given the rise in nationalist rhetoric and outright terrorism (see El Paso, Charleston), I can see why a man whose mother was chased to her death by the media would go to great lengths to ensure his family’s safety.

      • Erinn says:

        @ProfPlum – and I don’t blame him for having the instinct to do that. Like I said – I do understand that they get a whole different group of psychos after them. I do understand that they have to make some real conscious decisions in regards to what activities they participate in. But if they’re still able to go to huge gatherings while traveling for work which would involve a lot more variables than an airport/plane – I don’t think taking a public plane should be that much out of the question. Obviously they’d be in 1st class and traveling with a decent group of security, and perhaps there would need to be an adjustment made to boarding the plane, or things of that nature. And if there was a new, believable threat made just before they were supposed to travel then by all means bring the option of a private flight to the table.

        I’m not saying he’s some kind of monster for traveling private – it’s par for the course with the royals in a lot of ways. But I just think that – like any person would given the choice – they also happen to prefer the comfort of flying private because WHO WOULDN’T!? I just don’t believe it’s ONLY about security issues – but that they’re not monsters for having a preference for the more comfortable option.

      • KK says:

        @profplum, although it’s true Diana was hunted by paparazzi, she also did get in to a vehicle with someone who had been at the bar drinking heavily. A drunk driver killed her. IMO, this is incredibly bad timing to roll out this initiative when the pm is shady, the queen is being blamed for allowing parliament to close and backing a pedophile. His uncle is said pedophile. There are people in Britain who can’t afford to eat, let alone travel. His wife is being tortured by her and his family and he seems tone deaf to it all. Very bad PR.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They have to do their jobs no matter how people choose to spin or attack it. This event would have been planned for a long time, with many others involved. He doesn’t get to cancel doing his job, he has to step up and keep doing it and take the bad PR along with the good.

      • Lady D says:

        Did Diana know she was getting into a vehicle with a drunk driver, or was she aware of the driver’s actions before she got into that car? Everyone wants to blame her for dying because she got into that car. How much did she know? Does anybody know if she was aware?

      • Tourmaline says:

        @Lady D – no all indications are Diana did NOT know, and neither did the two bodyguards working for Dodi al Fayed that night (one of them, Trevor Rees, was in the front seat with the driver and horribly injured although he was the sole survivor), who say they didn’t realize Henri Paul was drinking anything alcoholic and did not notice something amiss with him.

        Not only was Henri Paul intoxicated he was amped up acting crazy and speeding to get away from photographers which was very unsafe, but unfortunately something Dodi was known to encourage in his staff. It’s really tragic Diana did not have her own security staff with her that night because she was at the mercy of idiots that night and IMO the top idiot and the one giving the orders was Dodi.

      • Your Cousin Vinny says:

        I think it has been reported that they were not wearing seatbelts, and that was a major contributing factor to the tragedy.

      • Taneesha says:

        They ALL travel private jets and stuff, none other than Harry and his biracial wife, are being criticized or bring told what they can or can’t do for their safety. Look, no one gets to tell Harry what is or isn’t safe for his family, none of us are living any of their lives. Like it’s been said, ALL them royals get threats on a regular basis. They all take precautions as they see fit, and never get criticized for those decisions, well except Harry. They ALL fly private jets and at the same time attend public functions, all done according to how they perceive certain situations and circumstances. And I see no Harry detractors criticizing or telling off any other royals for making the exact same decisions Harry makes. This is why I conclude all this criticism is rooted into something other than Harry flying private jets. I believe the concern for some is the biracial duchess having the audacity to live a life reserved for white folks. I’m sure if Harry had married Chels or Cressy, we wouldn’t be getting these criticisms because they’d be doing what’s acceptable for white folks.

    • ME says:

      Well they could be kidnapped just walking down the street. Wouldn’t it be harder to kidnap someone on/from a plane?

    • Molly says:

      A quick cruise around the comments section of ANY Daily Mail story about Meghan would drive me to put my wife and child in a bubble. People are crazy in their vitriol about her. Harry gets all the passes from me for wanting to protect them by all means possible.

      • Original Jenns says:

        This absolutely. I honestly think if it’s a trip with Archie, they’re flying private. Any work work related jaunts, they should be flying commercial as much as possible. And I have no problem with this. As a person of color, in this world, I’m not questioning the safety of high profile persons of color and their spouses in trying to stay safe. If it’s work related, I think they should be called out for not flying commercial, although I will relax if Archie is with them. I think they have the means and the motivation to offset their carbon footprint for doing that.

    • ADS says:

      They are by far the most at risk members of the RF. The level of death threats they have faced dwarfs everyone else. They do genuinely require a greater level of protection.

      • sandy says:

        It doesn’t dwarf other threats and the BRF has always been a target.

        Again, Anne literally lived through a kidnapping attempt. They shot her protection officer and chauffeur. A reporter was also shot. It was only a passerby who was a former boxer who disarmed the kidnapper.

        This is not new.

        During the 1981 Trooping the Colour ceremony, six weeks before the wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer, six shots were fired at the Queen from close range as she rode down The Mall on her horse. Months later, in October, the Queen was the subject of another attack while on a visit to Dunedin, New Zealand.

      • notasugarhere says:

        What is happening to Harry, Meghan, and their son is greater than what has been happening to other royals recently. Particularly in the social media age, where their location during private times and the accessibility of their home is being broadcast all over SM.

      • Lexa says:

        Prince George in particular seems to be a target. My guess is that we don’t hear the half of it when it comes to threats against the whole family, including Meghan, Harry, and Archie.

        I was just thinking about the letter KP issued in regards to the pap stalking that was going on with him and Charlotte (https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/ourview/letter-kensington-palace) and how the Cambridges were dragged for it by some people. We obviously had no real concept of how often this was happening until they issued the statement/letter. I have to imagine that the Sussexes will face the same kind of demand for photos of Archie and that it’ll continue to be an ongoing problem for all of them.

      • sandy says:

        Not, you have no idea if that’s true. They are high profile people, affiliated with a government. They are all under threat, all the time.

      • notasugarhere says:

        That was W&K slapping down their old go-to pap, Tanna. The one Kate gave a blanket to when he was photographing her on a Duchy property before the engagement. William got mad, so then she filed a complaint against him. Same fellow who “conveniently” caught the first pictures of them kissing, which hit the front pages right when Uncle Gary’s drug scandal did. The one who got the pap photos of Kate and Carole glammed up and shopping for a Moses basket, and surprise they didn’t file a complaint.

        When’s the last time anyone has been imprisoned for threats against other members of the BRF? Not any time recently, so easy to see the people who are under the most threat right now are the Sussex family.

  9. Myrtle says:

    I’m interested in learning more about Travalyst. The age of widespread commercial air travel, as we know it, always has been destined to pass into history—if for no other reason than the finite availability of fossil fuels. Unless alternatives are developed, regular folks in future generations won’t be able to travel the world as easily as we can. It will be back to sailing ships and (electric) trains!

    • Millenial says:

      I think it’s a great initiative, and I do hope that’s not overshadowed.

    • Dee Kay says:

      I think air travel will go back to the beginning — there will be a big push for solar-powered planes, and at first, it will be only very rich people, or very technically skilled hobbyists, who fly. Then, over time, R&D will go into how to make commercial flights possible with solar power. But I think it will take a long time, and yes, for at least a couple of decades, ordinary folk will have to adjust to traveling by ship and train. When ppl go abroad (across an ocean), I think they will stay a lot longer — no weeklong trips from the U.S. to Europe during this period, since it will take a few days to do the transatlantic voyage. Ppl will plan their holiday or work travel so that they stay in the destination country (or countries) for at least a month.

      • Arpeggi says:

        That could only happen IF (because it’s truly a big if) we manage to turn things around quickly regarding climate change. At the moment, our future is looking quite bleak and I can’t really imagine even the rich of the future being able to travel a lot (because the climate will be too messed up). R&D will be too busy trying to find ways to generate large amounts of drinking water to bother with some trivial stuff like commercial flights…

  10. Cidy says:

    And again, we will never be able to actually legitimately criticize the Suxxess because of the smear campaign. Now would be a great time to talk about the bad optics of them flying private like four time this summer, Harry saying he mostly flies commercial etc. But we cant do that without 1. Sounding like we are part of the smear campaign and not having actual legit criticism. 2. Getting attacked because people dont want to discuss criticism against them because of the way they have been treated. 3. We want them to do good, right? Like I want H&M to be the best they can be, but for them to do that they need to be able to receive their legit criticisms.

    • pinkberry says:

      Nevermind

    • Lady D says:

      Pretty sure they got the message.

    • Anners says:

      I’m with you. I really like Meghan and Harry – they both seem to genuinely like people and seem to have a solid work ethic coupled with a desire to do good.

      That said, I think occasionally they have miss stepped (£56,000 for a dress you will wear once in a time of financial insecurity, taking private planes to talk about fighting climate change, etc.) and deserve to be called out for it. But the unending onslaught of racist, vitriolic abuse they receive makes rational discussion impossible. I sincerely wish them both the best. I also long for a return to nuanced discussion, rather than the current trend of taking a side, digging in one’s heels, and shutting down anyone who disagrees with you. Sigh.

      • ADS says:

        You’ve nailed it right here.

        I would only add that even in the areas where they do miss-step, they are pretty much never the worst examples in the RF (maybe with the exception of the ridiculous cost of one or two of Meghan’s outfit choices) – and that includes the private jet thing.

        But yes, you entirely right, we should be able to have a balanced discussion about them. They are not perfect.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Sussex.

      The level of threat against them, the convictions, the everyday crazies on tumblr crossing oceans to try to attack her in NYC? This is far beyond what any other royal has face, particularly in the social media era.

      • Cidy says:

        NOTASUGARHERE,

        I knew I spelled it wrong. Thank you.

        That having been said, we will never know the full extent to the threats that all of these people have faced, to say that they are the most threatened of all might be generalizing before we have too much information. Also i said nothing regarding the fact that they deserve to be safe- they do. They should be!

        I just hope we can have a nuanced conversation about some of their missteps without falling into the territory of “all criticism is smear campaign criticism” it’s not, some it it is very, very valid. Harry was flying private long before he met M to go on vacations so for him to shoot out that low number was eyebrow raising and we should be able to talk about it.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I don’t remember anyone else being imprisoned for death threats against any other British royal in recent memory. Or any other British royal receiving white powder envelopes. Or people flying across oceans, plotting openly online to physically attack that person. Or showing up outside their home, taking multiple pictures of the windows of their house, and posting online about how close anyone can get without security noticing. Don’t remember the Taliban openly threatening to kidnap and publicly torture any member of the BRF except Harry.

        What these three face, daily, when it comes to vitriol and security, is clearly more than most in that family face.

        If I ever see all of these brand new names on here criticizing W&K for their private plane travel to Mustique, their helicopter flights to see Carole instead of taking the train, Andrew’s global whatever the hell he’s doing, etc.? Then we’ll talk about whether or not the discussion on here are “nuanced”.

      • wisdomheaven says:

        I absolutely agree that right now Harry and Meghan are clearly facing heightened level of threats. For goodness sakes, they had to stop allowing comments on a recent IG post on SR because of the number of extremely violent death threats against Meghan.

        But Prince George was targeted by ISIS not too long ago, and someone did try to break into his school. So Harry and Meg are not the only ones who have faced violent threats in recent times, but certainly of the adult royals they are facing incredible threats.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The person who tried to climb the fence of George’s school was a W&K superfan. I don’t doubt there are threats against George, but I doubt they are anywhere near as frequent or as credible as the threats against the Sussexes.

      • Erinn says:

        An American was charged with threatening to kill Charles and Diana as well as sending a fake bomb to the queen in 1981.

        Between 2013 and 2016 there were over 400 stalker cases opened and being monitored in regards to the royal family. 40% of Britains most dangerous stalkers were supposedly focused on the royals. 11 were arrested between 2014 and 2016 I believe.

        I mean, Anne was kidnapped and 4 people were shot and wounded in that scenario.

        And ISIS supporter got a life term after encouraging attacks on George.

        It’s foolish to say that it doesn’t happen to other Royals because it clearly does (and is not hard to google), however it has definitely become easier in the social media age, and there’s the addition of all the white supremacists when it comes to M&H.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Attempted kidnapping, Anne wasn’t kidnapped. Not saying it hasn’t or doesn’t happen to other royals. I’m pointing out that it is happening more frequently with these three, egged on by 20 or so crazies on SM and the white supremacists.

    • Ignoto says:

      Harry and Meghan don’t exist simply so you can critique every thing they do or say. That’s not their role to be judged on their every move. Do you hold a magnifying glass to Will and Kate looking for something to criticize because there’s lots to criticize. For example, it’s been nearly a year since the announcement but it appears that Keen Kate has forgotten about Broken Britain. Regarding traveling four times by private jet, has it been confirmed that they traveled to any other place other than Nice via private jet? I have yet to see any proof of the Ibiza trip. Didn’t one of those gossip rags report that they were at Balmoral for Meghan’s birthday then the story switched to Ibiza?

      • CoffeeAddict says:

        Omid Scoobie confirmed the Ibiza trip, and pictures of their rental property were also released after their departure. Sussex sources wouldve debunked the ibiza trip theory but no one has. It happened.
        I dont think the sussexs made it to balmoral. TQ has had photo ops with everyone that visited so im guessing h&m did not.

        Literally everyone is laughing and calling them out. How are you going to travel by private jet (multiple trips in a short span) and then preach abt the environment?

        But please, carry on defending them..

  11. Char says:

    Now you can eco-travel to a fox hunt. Yay.

  12. Sarah says:

    I’m not into conspiracy theories but the timing of the private jet conspiracy and the relentlessness of the British media is appearing more and more suspicious. It seems like someone was trying to seriously undermine Harry before the new initiative was launched/announced. But who?
    William might seem like a good suspect, except the Sussexes don’t work with Kensington Palace any more and given their relationship as of late, there is no way he knew when it would launch.
    H&M now depends of Buckingham Palace, right? And BP has been busy trying to protect Pedo Andy at all cost, right?
    My, my… I think the Sussexes might have walked into a nest of vipers way more dangerous than what they were dealing with at KP.

  13. pinkberry says:

    Harry said he will continue to travel by private jet ‘to ensure the safety of my family. I believe he and Meghan receive numerous death threats.

  14. Loretta says:

    This new project sounds great.

  15. LindaS says:

    We keep getting told climate emergency. Emergency means its happening right now so how are carbon offsets helping right now. Maybe they help down the road but throwing money at something doesnt help right now. And no way are 99% of his flights commercial. That was a dumb thing to say.

    • Elisa says:

      +1. Carbon offsets are such a hypocrisy, ugh!
      Instead of saying: I will continue to fly private jets, he should have said: I commit myself to fly less to protect the environment.

    • Arpeggi says:

      Yep! Carbone offset is BS made to make you feel less guilty about destroying the environment. You wanna help? Travel less, that’s it. Go abroad once every 5 years, have staycations or travel to places accessible by train, even by car is better. Saying « ooh! But I’ll plant x trees » is not enough, not even close. Also, notice that all the partners are companies that want you to purchase stuff: it’s the absolute worst for the environment

    • Kitten says:

      Exactly. I would have respected him more if he just said that he’s committed to flying less.

  16. Godwina says:

    Great idea, carbon impact, yes yes yes. Needed. Fingers crossed it makes a dent? But I’m ever-cynical.

    I hope one of their main targets, along with carbon footprint, is overtouristing–not just the environmental impact but the economic one. It’s ironic he launched this in Amsterdam, one of the most overtouristed cities on Earth. The locals have been marching in the streets, begging people to travel elsewhere for pleasure. It’s not just about making housing literally unaffordable for most locals; it’s also about the closure of shops and services locals need due to high rents, replaced by shops and services they don’t need. See: any main street in any old core in Europe. We visitors are destroying the very thing we marvel at, erasing character, and making city centres super choked and unpleasant. Prague 1, for instance, or the heart of Paris.

    I have a simple personal rule: I won’t visit any city where locals are begging visitors to bypass them. This means I will likely never see Barcelona, Amsterdam, Venice, Rome, Dubrovnik, Santorini, Czesky Krumlov, and others. I’m sad, but I don’t want to be selfish, and I flinch now when people tell me they’re heading to those spots as tourists. There are so many incredible places for holidays and sightseeing, let’s spread ourselves out a bit.

    If you know a place is choked and locals are sick of it and suffering the impacts, and you STILL go, heck yeah I’m judging you.

    • Elisa says:

      I’m adding Hallstatt and Salzburg in Austria to your list…

    • Millenial says:

      I think they were very careful to NOT call out over-touristing, and I think it’s really interesting. They basically said that they wanted travel to be open to all – perhaps wisely, realizing that they travel quite a bit.

      My husband and I feel guilty just planning a once-in-a-lifetime trip to the UK (we are US).

    • Who ARE These People? says:

      We’re hoping to go to smaller places too; I can look at pictures of the big ones. Smaller is cheaper, too. Also, train over car, if train is available – and in the places we want to see, it often is!

    • Maria says:

      I think (hope) this can be combated by a difference in perspective. I always think of myself as a traveler- not a tourist. I don’t pay money for anything cruise-related, I try to avoid the gimmicks, and I avoid most places at peak times (I went to the Louvre and stood there for an hour before it opened at 8 am, and it was like I had the place to myself!). The idea is to see things that enlarge the perspective and the mind, not to have an Instagram-worthy trip at all times (not that I don’t post on IG, but not as much and it’s not the focus of my travels). This shift in thinking has led me to a lot of off-the-beaten path places, even in centers with high tourist volume.

      • Godwina says:

        That’s one step, Maria, but it still adds one more body to the streets if we head to center zones. After living in Prague for a year, I feel it comes down to numbers, not just what numbers are doing (and whether or not they are taking photos). The locals can’t use the Charles Bridge, for instance, even in the off-season. It’s an awful place and folks make large detours for sanity. So heading to less popular places overall is key.

        I say this as someone who has been super part of the problem and really has to rethink how to deploy the privilege I have living in EU and being able to jump on a train. Destination matters as much as mode of travel.

    • notasugarhere says:

      That would be the point of launching it in the Netherlands. Those communities and the tourism board have been trying to find solutions that spread the impact while still welcoming millions of visitors to their country.

  17. mint says:

    Honest interest: Is there a reason he needed to fly to Amsterdam to launch this project? Why not London?

    It might be a good project but right now, after the privat jets drama, I dont think he is doing himself or the project any favours in launching it. I think all the royals should rethink their travelling first, before launching projects like this. After the privat jets criticism, they all should have come up with alternatives on their future travelling. It makes them look stupid, tone deaf and out of touch to not deal with your own issues first but rather tell others what to do. First off, no one needs these coloniser tours of them, so no need to always fly that far apart from holiday. And at least be honest about taking privat jets: its an issue of comfort, luxury and privacy.

    • M. says:

      My biggest issue is why do we care about the opinions of royals, celebrities, and influencers? None of these people deserve any of the insane amount of praise or abuse they receive. The royals are unelected people who have been elevated to superhuman status. They should not be worshipped are thought of as role models. I don’t care much about what they do unless it something illegal.

      I am perplexed at these extreme reactions to Harry and Meghan.

    • Cerceau says:

      I agree with mint. Even if the event had to happen in Amsterdam for some reason, he could have given the speech via videolink. There is little reason nowadays, when we are in the middle of a climate emergency, to fly to conferences, meetings and launches.

      • .chunkyLa says:

        I was wondering the same thing. His speech and participation in the Q&A could have easily been done via a video link from the UK. It’s not new technology or anything. I wonder how this will be explained away?

      • wisdomheaven says:

        Omg, we are seriously NOW bitching about work travel? The flight he took, a commercial one, would have taken off whether he was on it or not.

        There is nothing to explain away. Literally no one is asking why he wouldn’t take part via video link besides you all.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, they’re now bitching about work travel. Unless he bicycled to work on wheels made of sustainable plant rubber, he’s apparently not allowed to do his job.

      • Amy says:

        Some of the commenters here need to calm down a bit at any hint of criticism of Harry. The previous comments made by Kaiser about how legitimate criticism of this couple is no longer possible in this atmosphere is 100% correct.

        My point being: Getting the train from London to Amsterdam would have been fantastic optics. Yes, there are planes from the UK to NL. And videolink isn’t great, so I would disagree there. But in this specific case, for this specific cause, how hard would it have been to get the (very fast, far less environmentally unfriendly) train to Amsterdam?

      • Cerceau says:

        @wisdomheaven The question of flying for work is much bigger than this story about Harry. See the recent stories about Greta Thunberg’s journey across the Atlantic to minimise emissions, and discussions among scientists about whether they should video link into conferences instead of flying. There was also the recent hypocrisy at Google Camp and the number of celebrities who flew in on private jets. It wasn’t my intention to single out Harry because I think this issue is something *everyone* who travels for work needs to start considering (myself included).

        I think this was an opportunity for Harry to make a statement here and given the speech via videolink, but, then again, this initiative doesn’t seem to be about reducing the number of flights people take but rather to encourage people to choose supposedly more eco-friendly tourism. Greenwashing, in other words.

      • Elisa says:

        why are you calling it “bitching”? He should walk the talk: you can go by train (Eurostar) from London to A’dam in less than 4 hours. He is just as tone-deaf as the rest of them…

      • Bren says:

        I guess since the Sussexes can’t be criticized for being workshy the next option is to criticize how they work. And yes I know royal work isn’t real work.

      • mint says:

        I dont get why people on here follow the Sussexes like a cult and never question anything they do. They always brand themselves as the good ones, woke ones, different ones, caring ones, changing the world ones of their grifting family. But they are just the kind of stupid like the rest of them. I dont buy what they are selling. Work travel, hopefully, makes up the most of his travelling, so yes it should be questioned, especially, when launching an eco friendly travel project. But this whole launch and timing is so amateur hour, if it werent so sad, I would be laughing.
        But why I questioned Amsterdam in the first place was, that as far as I understood, its a project under their new foundation and I dont see the need in launching it in Amerstdam, when you can do it at home. Or is there a special partnership to it?

      • wisdomheaven says:

        First of all, I have never had any issue calling out the Sussexes for missteps so folks can miss me with the “Cult of Sussex” and “wah mean Sussex fans won’t let us say anything” messages.

        My post was about the ridiculous notion that now even flying for a work trip, on a commercial flight that is going to be flying no matter what, is somehow bad. Could he have taken a train? Sure. He also could have swam too, maybe. Its just needlessly nitpicky because there will always be another option that is “more” green to some.

        They launched in Amsterdam because that is where one of the big partners is HQ’ed.

        And I really admire Greta. She is a rockstar. But her trip across the Atlantic is absolutely not feasible for anyone but an activist making a point. Its a media tactic not an actual solution.

      • notasugarhere says:

        The point of this new initiative is not to eliminate travel, nor is it aimed at decreased flying. It is about making travel decisions that are more sustainable to the local communities and places you’re visiting. So criticisms of “He shouldn’t fly ever again, he shouldn’t have flown” are deliberately missing the point of this new initiative.

      • mint says:

        No one is saying he, or the royal family, should never ever fly again and only walk or ride their bycicle or horse. People travel. Whether its for work or a holiday. But we all know that we have a climate change crisis on our hands. Right now. Not in 50 years. So we all have to do our part. Traveling less or finding alternatives is one aspect of it. Offsetting carbon is not enough and wont cut it. This was a perfect example where he could have used a train. A flight was honestly not needed. It would also have been great optics for the launch.
        Just talking about it, wont help. We all need to cut back. And so should he.

      • notasugarhere says:

        That is not the focus of this initiative, so continuing to act like it is or criticising him for traveling to the event launching it doesn’t make sense. They have jobs to do, much of which has to be done in person within a reasonable travel time frame.

      • Elisa says:

        “…It is about making travel decisions that are more sustainable to the local communities and places you’re visiting…”
        This sounds a lot like greenwashing.

      • mint says:

        Whether its focus of his project does not matter. When he wants to make travel sustainable, then how you get to your destination is a part of the conversation. Thats just sheer logic. And why its so controversial to demand more from the royal family than giving speeches, waving and post on instagram is beyond me.

  18. OriginalLala says:

    I like the idea in theory, not sure if Harry, who takes private jets to go boar hunting with his pals, is the right spokesperson.

    I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt until more is unveiled but I am worried it’s nothing more than “travel eco-washing” (is that a term? it should be!) for companies and people with money, like buying carbon offsets to feel better about flying private.

    • Lenn says:

      I agree. The world is watching, and if this is what he is promoting, he should lead by example. He didn’t need to fly private twice in one summer. It was a choice. I’m with Greta Thunberg when it comes to this issue. The royal family needs to do some selfreflecting.

    • Nic919 says:

      I think with the threats that have been made against him and Meghan that we know of along with the ones we don’t know, it’s fair for him to want as much privacy as possible when travelling with Archie. The press has been relentless with them. When Meghan or Harry travel on their own they should use commercial as much as feasible. This will probably happen more knowing they will be watched. It’s unfortunate that the rest of the royals won’t be watched, especially with the wasteful helicopter use by many of the others for distances that could be handled by car or train, including the Cambridges, but apparently when anyone talks about the environment there needs to be a total purity or else the whole message gets dismissed.

      It’s hard to say what this project is exactly about since the angle is still about the use of jets, but it may be helpful. Doing something is better than doing nothing though and we see daily the harm climate change is causing.

      • Lenn says:

        I’m certainly not dismissing his message but we ALL need to get real, Harry and Meghan included. Sacrifices need to be made and one of them might have to be to stop taking little three day trips to visit friends by private plane. Why is that too much to ask of someone who wants to sell sustainable tourism?

    • notasugarhere says:

      Boar hunting with his brother, along with Jecca Craig.

      • Your Cousin Vinny says:

        @notasugar what does Jecca Craig have to do with this? Just wondering why you have chosen to drag her into this conversation now when the original commenter is simply questioning whether Harry was the best spokesperson.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Including the facts of who all was on that plane, along with the information that William chose to go on that hunt instead of spending the first “Middleton family vacation” with his first child. Always interesting to me.

      • Your Cousin Vinny says:

        Right, so the other occupants of the plane would also be questionable spokespeople for this initiative, is that your point? I guess I’m just confused, random musings about what you find interesting doesn’t seem relevant to this conversation.

    • Deedee says:

      Agreed. He could of traveled privately from uk to Ibiza to nice and back to uk instead of going from uk to Ibiza back to uk then to nice and then to uk given that there were only 2 days between Ibiza flight and then to nice and be able to spend 2 more days on vacay as opposing to all that flying. It really didn’t have t be on on Elton johns Plane andvif john still wanted to pay the tab, he could have. This was all for comfort and their own convience.

  19. Rogue says:

    The royal reporters knew about this project- they said it had been on embargo on twitter today. It’s been worked on for 2 years so KP definitely knew of it.

    Suddenly this project will be focus of press scorn and not Andrew. Piers Morgan and a royal reporter were defending Andrew on TV yesterday but criticising Meghan over her dad. Says it all about royal coverage.

    I do think the jets furore was to sabotage and we will probably see the same with the clothing line. The press moves are predictable.

  20. bread says:

    “[Travalyst is] a new partnership between “Booking.com, SkyScanner, CTrip, TripAdvisor and Visa,” and “Travalyst won’t encourage people to travel less”

    Oh, good – a piece of corporate bullshit with some hypocritical royal sprinkles dusted on top.

    Please don’t majorly change your habits to stop the planet becoming uninhabitable for human beings. Please keep buying whatever we’re selling because now we’ve put a green sticker on the product to make you feel better.

    • OriginalLala says:

      I hope its not, but it does sound like corporate green-washing for travel, doesn’t it?

    • Tpoe says:

      You just hit the nail right on the head

    • Jten says:

      I agree, it’s just money

    • Sarah says:

      The Royal Family has always been all about white-washing, pretending to help charities when they have acquired their wealth through racism, colonialism and white supremacy so this new initiative is very appropriate.

      • s says:

        Yes. That is exactly what it sounds like.

        Perhaps this is just the rollout and it will ultimately be more but when the “PR flack” reporter’s take is even questionable that is not a good sign at all.

    • Arpeggi says:

      Yes!!! I didn’t know how to express it but you nailed it.

      The only way we can truly address climate change is by completely changing our habits, even if it means less comfort and convenience. Greenwashing is useless

  21. Talie says:

    The tea is that there are more photos that will drop of Andrew which will generate more stories. I can already see Royal reporters were salivating to use this venture and the Thomas Markle affair to distract. But the Thomas story is kind played at this point and there’s only so much they can keep saying about private planes.

    If the stories are true that Meg and Harry may spend more time in American instead of being banished to a country in Africa…they may be better off.

    • M. says:

      I don’t understand why Harry and Meghan still want to be attached to the Royal Family. They would have been better off going at it on their own and building their foundation up over a certain period of time. It’s clear that the British press will not report on them fairly. The monarchy is a snobbish and antiquated system, and Harry and Meghan need to move on. Go where you are celebrated!

      • Gingerbread says:

        M. because they LIKE being in the royal family. Yes, they have a ton of crap to deal with, but the perks far outweighs the cons. Can we please stop with the whole fantasy that Harry and Meghan just want to escape the royal family? They do not.

      • Sarah says:

        Because they enjoy the many privileges and perks of being part of the Royal Family? People need to stop projecting revolutionary fantasies into these two.They might no be as pampered and out of touch as others but at the end of the day, they are a couple of great means who has not done anything to earn its wealth (in Harry’s case) except coming out of the right vagina/marying the right person.

  22. Marina says:

    How can anyone take this idiot seriously at this stage? The phrase ‘Do as I say….’ springs to mind.

  23. Tpoe says:

    Good for him and it would be really great if this takes off and inspires people.

    Unfortunately, and I hate to say it but in my experience as a hotel manager for almost 15 years I can say that the vast majority of travellers pay lip service to making environmentally conscious decisions but that’s all they do.

    I am heavily involved in marketing and have dealt with businesses, your operators and consumers all over Europe and I can tell you that while just about everybody talks the talk it’s one in ten thousand who will actually walk the walk and choose a product or destination for sustainability or eco friendly decisions.

    Heck our property has a gold certification for sustainable tourism but when the guests get here they want you to break your own rules and produce more waste and increase consumption unreasonably because when push comes to shove they want to be pampered to the extreme (it’s what they went on holiday) and they don’t want to pay a penny more than they have to (if people were willing to pay the cost to protect the environment the planet wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in today.

    Hopefully this will change in the future but I said that ten years ago and if I had to put money down on it I’d say this venture will either fail or morph into something other that what it is intended to be.

    • Linda says:

      @Tpoe
      Please could you give me tips on how to be more eco conscious in hotels when I travel? I want to do better. Thanks in advance.

  24. Betsy says:

    I’m not inclined to criticize this since both Harry and Meghan get way more than a normal celebrity amount of criticism, but shouldn’t we be talking about people traveling less? Do carbon offsets actually work? I know that people will always travel (because it’s awesome) and that lots of economies have come to rely on tourist dollars, but as with literally every thing shouldn’t we be consuming less?

    Good idea though and I hope it takes off in the hopes that more people begin to examine their travel consumption. More examination is always good.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      @betsy I think we can travel less for business to some extent. We use Skype for business and join me and in this global world a lot of business travel is reduced because various means of communication. I participate in webinars and training without having to travel on site. But even in attempts to reduce business travel I have noticed that marketing and sales are the main ones who travel as well as staff attending conferences and awards presentation. In large multinational corporations senior management and staff travel between companies/firms all the time.

      I just don’t see vacation travel slowing down anytime soon. Telling people to just not travel by air can work for someone living in the US but not someone who lives on a small island. There are many many benefits of tourism travel including the contribution to the jobs and economy and broadening understanding and appreciation of other cultures. When you dive deep this is not a simple matter and I applaud Prince Harry for tackling this controversial issue. Someone has to.

      • Betsy says:

        But that’s my point – lots and lots and lots of travel isn’t necessary. It’s at the point that some people are just ping-ponging around because they can. Do we or do we not have an environmental crisis? At what point should people like my friend “Marlys” not fly to the Caribbean and northern Canada and internationally twice, all in the same month, all for pleasure? Most people don’t live on islands that require air travel. I’m not saying we need to shut down all air travel but at some point, those of us just on perpetual selfish mode need to make some changes, too.

      • Arpeggi says:

        It depends on the small island… From London, you can be in Paris in less than 3 hours using an electric train, in less than 8, you’re in Amsterdam. It’s actually easier to avoid flying if you’re in Europe than in the US or Canada because there is an efficient, fast alternative. It’s mindblowing that our railroads aren’t electrified and that we don’t have fast trains in North America. There shouldn’t be a reason to fly from Toronto to Boston or DC or from SF to LA.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        I agree for business we can reduce travel by at least 50%. When it comes to holiday travel, Without enforcing rules on travel like a communist country would, how will we get people to travel less. Travel bloggers and influencers are a huuuge thing now and they encourage people to get out there and see the world. Traveling is actually one of my hobbies and I love it! Which is why this is a complicated topic. He is saying you can visit different countries and cultures just think of the carbon footprint we leave behind and do something to reduce it. I would love to know more about the choices we can take to help and this awareness that he is promoting has got me asking these exact types of questions.

      • Cate says:

        @RoyalBlue, if carbon taxes became a thing, there would be a LOT less air travel. Would you fly as much if every round trip flight cost an extra $500? For many people, the answer is no. I’m guessing even Harry might find he needed to trim a flight or two from his schedule.

        Ultimately yes, people will need to travel less and travel less by air in particular. I am really pretty horrified by some friends who claim to be super concerned about the climate crisis but then have flown probably a dozen times this year already. The only thing that’s going to get them to cut back is a sharp cost increase (aka, carbon tax).

        As far as what you can do for hobby travel instead, just find out more about what is close to home for you! If you live in the US pretty much every state has SOMETHING beautiful and interesting and different. I am spoiled living in California but even when I have lived in more ho-hum places there have always been lovely state parks, cute historic downtowns, museums of varying sizes, etc. Do whatever you would do if your friend from across the globe was visiting! Help that local tourism industry as they won’t be getting so many out of state/international visitors if carbon taxes are enacted.

        Regarding offsets, things like planting trees are helpful but there is not enough space to plant trees to offset all the travel emissions. It’s a feel good thing but I don’t think it does as much good as some people think it does (I have a PhD in environmental science and have colleagues who spend quite a bit of time studying this). There are early stage carbon capture technologies out there but whether they can scale and how far down they can get the cost per ton is still a big unknown. I was reading an article about one recently and at the moment to offset a US-EU flight would cost $700. Currently you can get a US-EU flight for <$700 (depending on the combination of cities and time of year), so adding that in would obviously be a HUGE change to the travel industry. Ask Harry how much his offsets cost him, I doubt that's what he is paying.

        If you read any of the UN IPCC reports on what kind of carbon taxes are required to curb emissions significantly, you'll quickly see that flying needs to be a LOT more expensive than it currently is.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        @cate that’s a really well thought out response but the huge part you need to consider is that many countries rely on tourism dollars. In fact the structure of many economies depend on it. It creates jobs in particular for cooks, cleaners, waiters, hospitality workers, taxi drivers, creative tour guides, foreign exchange etc. I agree with promoting domestic tourism but it is extremely impractical not to mention dictatorial to impose. I would gladly have paid to offset the carbon footprint for my trip to Iceland this summer rather than just never ever visiting that beautiful country and only watching pictures and videos of the glaciers and volcanoes. Arriving at the offset needs to be justified based on fact and not just some random punitive figure pulled out of a hat. Apparently the figure is not that large when calculate using some of the models out there. There is a site out there where someone who traveled 179 thousand miles in 2017 calculated a personal carbon footprint of 21.5 tons that cost $279 to offset. That is not a prohibitive amount but the methodology is logical and it’s better than doing nothing.

  25. Toot says:

    Saw this tweet from the UK Ambassador to Morroco. About this initiative.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/TSAReilly/status/1168872864306618368

    This is great. I can see this happening on a larger scale with Sussex Royals new initiative.

    • notasugarhere says:

      TSAReilly is a fan for sure. Did you see his tweets when he was preparing for their trip to Morocco?

  26. Citresse says:

    Why don’t the British royals start their own eco friendly airline???
    That way, they could fly “private” on ferry flights no problem and at the same time lure some disgruntled BA pilots lol

    • blue36 says:

      That’s a good idea! Lol. If I were Harry and Meghan, I would be looking into groups who are researching or innovating green flight travel (if that’s even possible anyway)

  27. Marie says:

    I just have to say, I hate when people try to insult Harry’s intelligence. He struggled in school and didn’t go to University ( and instead joined the military ) but he isn’t stupid. He is doing more with his role than the future future heir. He may have said 99% he flies commercial but he clearly meant he flies more commercial than private. I got it. I’m glad he is doing this and isn’t sitting on his butt and do nothing.

  28. RoyalBlue says:

    Thank you Prince Harry for your philanthropy. The travel industry is very different to what it was 80 or 50 years ago with no signs for slowing down. Whereas 80 years ago travel was for the wealthy and famous now its more common than ever. When I was a child I remember my parents dressing up to travel but now people travel like they are going for a walk in the park. I would have preferred he worked with research companies trying to create more environmentally conscious ways to travel. However I give him points for taking on a shorter term project that plans on making consumers eco conscious. We can’t do everything but we can do something. Knowing the sheer scale of transport now I know the answer is not to say travel less but to travel better.

  29. notasugarhere says:

    Did I miss the post about W&K being pub loving, local church going Normals? Carole’s working overtime but the story didn’t get much attention.

    • Lady D says:

      Did you catch the bit about how Kate loves to play in the garden with the kids while at the pub? Yeah right. She’s out there at the pub chasing her kids around and laughing with them in front of everybody. Nope, not buying it.

    • Mumbles says:

      Lol I read this and laughed at the naked attempt to one-up “Harry and Meghan went to their local for Sunday roast” story. I mean, come on. So obvious.

      As much as I shake my head at Harry scoring own goals on himself with this private plane stuff, I realize how awful it must be for your brother to be constantly trying to undermine you and throw you under the bus. I was skeptical for a while but the “The Cambridges fly budget” bs confirmed that that’s what’s going on here. Appalling. The Charles/Anne/Andrew/Edward generation never seemed very close but they never did this to each other.

      • intheknow says:

        @mumbles, they did. They just didn’t have social media for everyone to know/learn about it. As much as I’ve come to like Charles, he is a very very petty man especially to his siblings. Where do you think William got those personality traits from?

  30. Annie says:

    This just highlights the problem with the royal family and their initiatives: It’s all virtue signalling and never addresses the core issues.

    You can’t preach environmentalism without addressing economic inequality. As long as the 1% continue to consume as much as they do and own as much as they do, there will be no change. The biggest problem isn’t the average British family in a semi-detached house who travel to Mallorca once every two years. The problem is the massively wealthy people who travel by plane or private jet all the time, and who own businesses that make the owners richer and richer while polluting and damaging the ecosystem, letting the poor and often brown people deal with the consequences.

    The hoarding of resources, class inequality and historical colonialism which the royal family personifies is destroying our planet. A lot of the plastic in the oceans come from poor and previously colonized countries without proper waste management. The royal family will never talk about these issues, because that will fundamentally undercut their own reason for existing. Without the class system, colonialism and inequality, they will lose their position, and they know it.

  31. lali says:

    LOL someone gotta hustle to get that eco-friendly image back.

  32. EbonyS says:

    So both him and William claim to travel commercial 99% of the time. Oh Windsors. So “normal”.

  33. Maxie says:

    Celebrities/royals are the worst spokespersons for eco-friendly causes. They probably cause more damage within a year than the average person will do during his/her entire life.

  34. MeghanNotMarkle says:

    So much distraction from the Pedo Prince.

  35. intheknow says:

    Air travelling is stressful enough. I personally don’t want any ‘uber celebs or royalty on my flights. It would piss me off to be delayed due to them, or being bumped or losing my seats to accommodate their entourage. They can keep going private, I simply don’t want the preaching and telling me what to do why they continue to consume 99% of everything and telling the the rest of the world to reduce what little 1% they have/are consuming.

    I will continue to make the choices I have based on my morals/or lack there of/my boundaries.

    If these people want to make a change, get the actual EDUCATED experts to talk about it. No offence to the un-educated, but seriously, Harry is what I’d call a functional illiterate. He seems like a nice guy. But this isn’t not someone who is used to logic and critical thinking-his tone deaf behaviours (amongst other things) make it obvious.

    • Blue36 says:

      Probably this was planned well in advance and they couldn’t push the launch to a later date. I’m pretty sure they knew they were going to get attacked for this after all the headlines, they have to go through it unfortunately. The media’s goal was to attack them through their work which sucks cause this is how they’ll treat all their future work, they want to reduce them to ribbon cutting royals. The criticism is legitimate but they went after them like they committed a crime.

  36. sassafras says:

    I highly doubt the Cambridges would ever throw the Sussexes under the bus for private plane usage. For one, that’s going to come back and slap them next time they go to Switzerland or Mustique.

    Quite frankly, I don’t begrudge them this, for the safety reasons. I think unrecognizable millionaires who take private planes should pay through the carbon tax nose, though.

    This announcement does explain why the Official Famous Sussex Friends like Sir Elton went on the offense/defense.

  37. intheknow says:

    **firmly putting on my tin foil hat**

    All this environmental talk, paranoia, carbon tax etc..I am seeing Social Engineering at work here. They are preparing us all to start paying more ‘carbon tax’ to travel (whether for pleasure or work) and all that ‘tax’ is going to end up in the pockets of a few chosen individuals. It has happened before in various forms.

    I am not saying the environment is not in trouble. It is. I see it all around me. But greedy people will always look to find ways to get more money and stay in power and control. I am becoming weary of it all. And so much social engineering is taking place and people aren’t noticing.

    • Fanny says:

      **firmly putting on MY MUCH BIGGER tin foil hat**
      The environment is done, they know it and we kinda know it. Now, according to another thin foil hat wearing individual , cough cough my father: ” Why are they looking for water in all the planet that they are discovering?
      You guys better wake up before these Rich people leave US here and embark on their Noah’s arc.
      If you believe that these logical people in power are destroying this environment without having a plan B, you are a fool.

      • intheknow says:

        @fanny haha! Your dad is great! Something is happening or is about to happen. I am feeling pretty depressed today but would love to see your tin foil hat and raise you an even bigger tin foil hat one of these days.
        I work in tech and some things I see are amazing from an engineering perspective but some things are so shocking and I can’t see any point of them except for ‘evil’.

        read about ‘the best computer’ in Brussels. Also, I believe it is is Brussels where they keep seeds for every crop, plants, trees etc on earth. I mean I think that is great. But I don’ think they are in storage ‘just because’.

  38. Tink says:

    Daily fail comment section re this topic. Over 10000 comments, almost entirely negative. Never seen anything like it. Actually feel sorry for Harry.

    • intheknow says:

      @tink, I am trying to work out if Harry and Meghan has very very bad advisors and PR people or are they not listening to their advisors and PR people.

      I am trying to remember if Harry did this much ‘preaching’ before he and Meghan hooked up. (nope, not interested in hearing anything about me pinning this on Meghan). I remember had Invictus which seemed well thought out and well executed. he has that charity thing he does with Prince Seeiso, again, well done and good coverage.

      Now he seems to have veered into one ill thought out move after the other. I know he’s not college educated but surely he can’t be that daft to figure how some of this looks and or why he may need to rethink a few things. I am not saying abandon the environment platform, but as it stands now, it is all a disaster. They’ve gone from looking preachy and arrogant to looking downright stupid (imo).

      • Sticks says:

        @INTHEKNOW – 💯

      • Sam says:

        @intheknow no need to wonder,theres google available for you and if you bothered or cared to do your research,you would know Harry has been this way before Meghan(i give zero fcks if you dont want to hear you are pining it on Meghan) He started this while they were still dating,i wonder if he hadnt married her who you would have blamed? How about blaming the man for HIS ideas,not the woman who has never even talked or mentioned anything to do with the environment

        Harry might not have gone to university but hes definitely not stupid.He has a platform, hes doing something with it.It might work,it might not work.Thats the whole point of trying and good on him for doing so.

    • M. says:

      It’s the Daily Mail. Every article about Harry and Meghan is negative with thousands of negative comments. I don’t think Harry and Meghan care about Daily Mail readers or anyone else for that matter. All of their projects and tours within the past year have been very successful, so why should they listen negativity?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Royals should always pay attention to constructive criticism, which automatically eliminates anything written in the Daily Fail or in the DF comments section.

      • intheknow says:

        @sam, take your meds dear and something to help with your comprehension problem. I am not interested in your rage and zero fuks to give.

        I am only interested in debating(even heatedly) the issue. You can speak to me intelligently or don’t speak to me at all.

        Take your zero fuks and add my many many fuks to give and debate. Your misguided rage wont stop me from asking questions or questioning decisions. I refuse to start any criticism of H&M with ” I support H&M but..” so satisfy rage-o-holics like yourself.
        Consider yourself personally cancelled. I expect you will use various user names to argue with me. No issues there, your rage and illogic will give you away.

  39. Tink says:

    Nearly 12000 now

    • Ohdear says:

      @Tink and? It always negative on daily mail, why you are feigning the surprise? I am seeing so many trolls here. You should go back to the daily mail because you Will be in much good company. Eye roll

  40. Marie says:

    Harry has been working on this for 2 years now. Should he have abandoned this whole project , that large corruptions have contributed too because the media threw a fit over him using a private jet? This is HIS project and he has a right to present it. He DOES care about the environment and he isn’t telling anyone HOW to travel he is presenting an option on how to travel better.

  41. Marie says:

    Harry has been working on this for 2 years now. Should he have abandoned this whole project , that large corruptions have contributed too because the media threw a fit over him using a private jet? This is HIS project and he has a right to present it. He DOES care about the environment and he isn’t telling anyone HOW to travel he is presenting an option on how to travel better.

  42. Marie says:

    And he HAS been preachy about the environment before Meghan. There are plenty of videos of him talking about it. And he may not have a college degree but he is not stupid. You make it out to be that Meghan’s has to dress him because he can’t function like an adult. He has done incredible things before Meghan and now.

    • intheknow says:

      Where did I or anyone say Meghan has to dress him?? He may not be stupid, but he wont get into mensa…OK that’s harsh. There is a difference between a college educated person vs a person who is not, critical thinking being one of them. I am not seeing any critical thinking here with these blunders especially since most of them are completely avoidable.

      • blue36 says:

        A college education doesn’t necessarily mean a person without one cannot think critically and logically. I have met PLENTY of college educated people with questionable critical thinking skills and met many non college educated people who are beyond intelligent. It’s very insulting to degrade someone’s intelligence just because someone hasn’t gotten a post secondary education. Harry might not be the most intelligent person, but I do think he’s more intelligent than the current college educated president of the US – Donald Trump.

  43. Islandgirl says:

    My two cents……reporter said that it had been kept under wraps. This means that the media may have been aware. The decision therefore was what would be the preferred narrative. “Harry and Meghan postponed a major project because of the private jet controversy”or Harry has launched this project which has allowed him to essentially own up to his mistake and move on. “We all have to do better” The usual response from the BRF would have prevented any ownership or accountability. This way you can sort of address the matter and move on.

  44. Molly says:

    I don’t look at the Royal Family and the British people through a favorable lens anymore.

  45. Rogue says:

    Timing of launch is unfortunate but it was a 2 year project with big business partners that can’t reschedule because press made holidays a national scandal. Not sure Harry could have predicted the level of the furore about Vogue (given press lied about his quote and he said wanted 2 kids months ago without much comment)& the jet trips especially given how many royals travel with private jets (including Charles who has been advocating on the environment/conservation since the late 60s).

    Fact is this is about Harry’s mixed race wife being on private jet too&they aren’t playing press game so anything they do will attract hyper criticism. Whilst scrutiny is warranted it wouldn’t have been this bad pre Meghan. After all royals such as Philip, Charles, William& Harry (long before Meghan) have all advocated on environment issues before going off on private jets, helicopters, super yachts for work&private time or on conservation& anti poaching whilst being into hunting and haven’t been labelled hypocritical for weeks on end.

    Harry needs to learn he can’t get away with normal white royal stuff now he’s got a mixed wife& be hyper alert to that.

    I definitely think if you advocate on an issue you should try to practice what you preach& I’d be pleased if this controversy actually forced all royals to travel more green where security allows or use technology more if facetime isn’t essential. But what will happen is other royals will carry on as before and only the Sussexes will get called out on how they travel whilst there is strained press relationship so I can’t take press outrage seriously.

    As long as you aren’t raising loads of money for children hospitals whilst being a serial abuser like Jimmy Saville, I don’t think double standards warrants such vitriol.

    Speaking of who does warrant more hyper scrutiny- Washington Examiner has article disputing Andrew’s statement about length of relationship with Epstein. It provides that after her first visit, Epstein declined to host Fergie again if she didn’t bring her daughters along… gross! And a John Doe is applying to have details on Epstein interactions permanently sealed…Also Andrew has had public engagement in Northern Ireland cancelled.

    • notasugarhere says:

      He’s scheduled to appear at a WWII commemoration in Belgium this weekend. The Belgian royals should quietly request a different royal attend in his place.

  46. Well-Wisher says:

    Since the faux outrage about the Sussexes use of private jets there was a question of why the English tabloids and The Times were so bat shit crazy about their holidays.

    Some one point to a comment the Woonton person, editor of the Sun made earlier. He was commenting on the climate activist Greta with a complaint that they cannot afford to address climate control. She was included in the September Vogue that the Duchess edited. So that explains their hateful rhetoric. The richer f&^kers do not want to pay the necessary taxes to slow the climate change so they instruct the newspapers runts to attack.

    Prince William may have booked commercial after seeing the vignette of the Duchess at the fashion shoot and got pissed.

  47. Ravine says:

    “Travalyst won’t encourage people to travel less, …”

    Oh, so this corporate-led initiative isn’t serious about reducing carbon emissions or over-tourism. What a shock.

  48. Isnotafanofanything says:

    This whole “carbon offset” is just a way to make rich people feel good about their usage of natural resources. What a crock.

    • Ravine says:

      It’s not a crock; it does have some impact. But people should definitely be reducing their carbon emissions first and foremost. Unfortunately, people now feel entitled to travel as much as they please, despite that being completely unsustainable, and the travel industry encourages that entitlement.

  49. blunt talker says:

    I truly believe Meghan and Harry want to do the right things with their charitable endeavors, they may need to keep a lower profile for a while. Meaning doing their events that require their presence because they are the patrons of that charity. Talk less try not make controversial statements. Just do the work they are responsible for and things will die down very soon. The British press will follow them to try and embellish stories about them-don’t give them any ammunition. Make it as plain and boring as you can. Try and to have meetings in private to discuss plans for the patronages . Try using press releases for causes they are working on that are near and dear to their hearts. I like reading and looking at the pictures on their Instagram. A brief press release with some of their work would be beneficial.

    • Rogue says:

      @blunttalker I hear what you are saying about not giving press ammunition but where there’s prejudice, adjusting behaviour doesn’t make a difference. It’s also assuming the press are playing fair and they aren’t. Eg the neighbour rules story was a spoof& denied by BP but it was still front page of newspapers and used denigrate and to call Meghan alone “uppity”. commentators and royal reporters are defending Andrew & giving him benefit of doubt whilst blasting Meghan for relationship with her dad despite what he’s done.

      Even before Vogue came out there were stories of Meghan daily during her maternity leave so low profile won’t make a difference. This is about money& press are getting clicks from those who both love and hate Meghan.

      Uk tabloids etc are using Fox News playbook with Obamas- create an outage with everything they do. Remember how they complained about Michelle Obama baring her arms and yet when Melania was at that rally when it was raining and she was braless, nothing was said.

      This compilation is great example of difference in coverage between Michelle and Melania by Fox and it applies to royal coverage- hypercriticism for royal who is mixed race
      https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1154087096124002304?s=21

      • Mego says:

        I agree with you and spot on with the Fox news/Obamas comparison. That is exactly what is going on here. Harry and Meghan should continue working on their terms.

  50. Rogue says:

    Remember when Prince Harry had to cut short his Amsterdam trip because Prince Charles&Prince William had engagements the same day& there was drama about royal diaries not coordinating? Now I wonder if event he was meant to go to was related to Travalyst.

    The press definitely knew about this project as they’ve said launch was under embargo so jet-gate was manufactured to sabotage the launch.

  51. Myra says:

    Brits are Unhinged about Harry…meanwhile they happily pay for Andrew. The hypocrisy.

  52. Marie says:

    @Intheknow It is everyone that thinks Harry can’t function without W&K and now Meghan. They think he isn’t very intelligent because he didn’t go to University. If Harry had straight A’s he still would have went to the military instead. Everyone that has worked with him on projects in the past talk about how intelligent he is and how he always comes prepared. Whether he launched this now or 5 years from now doesn’t matter. The press would still talk about how he used to take a private jet. He will never win with the press.

    • GIA says:

      Except that Harry alone hasn’t launched this. Have you forgotten Meghan is the other half of the equation here? Both their approval rating in the U.K. is pretty low, but Harry is the primary royal — and the companies who have signed on to this socially conscious venture, want HIM to be the mouthpiece for now. Slowly their ratings will rise – if not their wallets. In time Meghan will be the one out front.

  53. Karmak says:

    I watched a documentary about how tourism is great for the economy for many countries……… But the more tourist come to a popular destination it leaves the location littered in trash (lots of plastic bottles). The natural environment is being distorted. The animals are eating plastic straws and wrapers. Tourists are creating new trails and paths through forest, jungles, and natural formations in wilderness areas. The animals are being forced to leave their homes to find other places to live.

    I believe this project is way for many companies in the tourist industry to help keep the damage to a medium. Airlines are offering more flights and deals for more people to travel. It will only benefit everyone involved in the tourist industry to keep beautiful places natural as possible. So people can continue to enjoy them. If these destinations get ruined who will want to see them. No one will make money. So why not get everyone together create solutions for the problem.

  54. Sarah says:

    Except the press is not doing a lot of muckracking on anyone. Only Andrew – which is more than deserved given that he was BFF with a convicted sex offender – and the Sussexes who deserve criticism for their hypocrisy but not on the same level at Pedo Prince.
    And if the argument is hypocrisy. Charles have been talking about climate change and the necessity to protect the environment for decade. Decades during which he also took many private jets. I don’t remember the press coming from him with the same appetite and relentlessness.

  55. noway says:

    The reason Andrew gets less press is he I think the British people are just done with him. I think Brits are a bit more pragmatic and don’t think Andrew will be punished, but can we just vote him off the island and never hear from him again. They are so sick of him as am I. Brits still really like Harry and Meghan and this is partially why the coverage is so much more for them. They are young, different, ground breaking, and trying to do something different with the monarchy. The young normal Meghan trying to fit into the crazy upper aristocracy of the royal family. People love to build people up and then knock them down and the knocking down part is what is happening now. Charles other than with Diana is kind of boring. Plus no one expects Charles to be anything but royal, which means hypocritical things like private jets and climate change activist aren’t as big of a deal. People think Harry is more Diana’s child and wouldn’t do that. He’s been called the people’s prince they expected a bit different and it must be Meghan’s influence that changed him. It’s a bad old story.