The Sussexes ‘were not interviewed & did not contribute’ to Finding Freedom

HRH Sussexes Visit -  Tuesday 7 January  -  Canada House, London

As we discuss Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand’s Finding Freedom, the British media will attempt to make the book into a referendum on whether the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were interviewed, on or off the record, for the book. There will also be a referendum on whether Harry and Meghan “authorized” their friends and aides to speak to Scobie and Durand. There will be many people hired by the Daily Mail, the Sun, and other outlets to theatrically perform their angst and anger at the Sussexes for this gauche melodrama, because it’s “simply not royal” to authorize a book or to give off-the-record interviews. Those people will be lying their asses off. The Duchess of Cambridge and the Middleton family have authorized many books and articles, and they’ve done so with implicit or explicit palace approval. Charles quietly authorizes books about himself and his family and he frequently authorizes articles too. Same with William, Anne, Sophie and everybody else.

The issue at the heart of Finding Freedom is not “did they authorize or participate in it?” But a lot of people will try to make that the issue. Which is why the Sussexes have tried to get ahead of that conversation, that performative outrage:

A spokesperson for the couple said in a statement, “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to Finding Freedom. This book is based on the authors’ own experiences as members of the royal press corps and their own independent reporting.”

[From People]

I mean… if the Sussexes didn’t take part in it and didn’t authorize anything, how do they know what the book is based on and what’s being reported? But whatever, this is how it’s gotta happen. It’s that way with the Duchess of Sussex’s lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday – MoS has turned the coverage into the lawsuit into a referendum on whether Meghan authorized her friends to speak to People Magazine. Meghan had to claim, on the record, as part of the legal proceedings, that she did not authorize anyone to do sh-t. Again, this is not the actual conversation, and it would not have been “wrong” or even unconventional for a royal figure to authorize their own narrative through media or a book.

The Daily Mail already has one “historian” on the record claiming Harry and Meghan “clearly” spoke to Scobie and Durand. Historian Kate Williams (THAT NAME!) told the Mail:

“Harry and Meghan have denied any involvement with the book, but it is clear that the authors of the book, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, have spoken to people who are close to Harry and Meghan because there are lots of reports about how Harry feels and some of them are really moving. A lot of this backs up what is already said, we know they were upset that’s why we had them leaving the Royal Family in January… So I think with this book, we don’t know exactly how much Harry and Meghan spoke with them or didn’t, but certainly it does seem that friends who are close to them did give them words.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Yeah, and how. Just from the first excerpts released, we can see that Scobie and Durand have spoken to many people with an encyclopedic knowledge of what happened in many private meetings, private conversations and how Harry and Meghan were feeling in exact moments of crisis. It is what it is. Again, the conversation the British media *wants* to have is a process story about whether H&M lowkey authorized a book, which is something literally EVERY royal has done. And the fact that those other royals are now authorizing reaction-articles to the Finding Freedom excerpts is kind of hilarious too.

British Royals are seen at the Wimbledon Championships Day 12

Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red and Backgrid.

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

95 Responses to “The Sussexes ‘were not interviewed & did not contribute’ to Finding Freedom”

  1. Anna says:

    Frankly, I don’t get this move from The Sussexes. Wasn’t this bok supposed to ’set the record straight’ by showing their side of story… ?

    • Pink says:

      I don’t get it either. I’ve only read about this book on this site and everyone seemed to be saying it was H&M’s story when they’re saying they had nothing to do with it. Either that or they authorised others to speak to Scobie but this site made it seem like they’d never allow that. Could this book just be borderline fan fiction?

      • Beach Dreams says:

        Who is ”everyone”? If you didn’t accept that this was simply another royal biography then that’s on you. I don’t know how many times it was made clear by Scobie that this did not involve Harry and Meghan. A book that was originally driven by his co-author Carolyn no less.

      • Silver Charm says:

        @Beach Dreams Let’s not gaslight Pink here. Several entertainment sites (including the very one you are commenting on) have said this FF will be H&M’s side of events, even saying the other upcoming biographies will be “massively inconsequential” (see Battle of the Brothers article from June). This is the way the book has been framed since its announcement by many outlets (you’re nitpicking over the word “everyone”). The press release announcing the book said they had access to and participation from those closest to H&M.

      • A says:

        In fairness, the statement that Meghan and Harry have put out is carefully worded. They “were not interviewed and did not contribute.” The implication here is that they did not contribute their own words and time, but they very well could have directed people to speak to the authors and cleared, ahead of time, what was acceptable to say in these interviews and what wasn’t. This is essentially a semi-authorized book from them. They’re keeping their hands clear, but their fingerprints are still there from the interviews and such.

    • Lyn says:

      Who told you it was supposed to be their side of the story? Did the Sussexes say it? Omid Scobie? Carolyn Durand? If none of them said it then it could not have been their side of the story.

      I believe when Meghan or Harry need to say anything about what happened to them they dont need third party biographers or press or courtiers, they say it from their own mouths in documentaries or legal documents.

      As it is this seems to be a book written by interviewing a lot of others who were around the events and I guess they wanted the truth out. Omid said he got two different sources for everything. Probably why no one is calling in the lawyers just trying to gaslight by their media arms.

      • BeanieBean says:

        I think the two sources is standard in journalism, meaning Omid is an actual reporter unlike the charlatans working at the Daily Mail, who write fiction.

      • Silver Charm says:

        The press release announcing the book said they had the cooperation from those closest to H&M. That this is “their side of the story” has been the narrative for months.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      A little louder for those in the back. IT’S NOT THEIR BOOK!

    • Beach Dreams says:

      Can people not understand that this was never sanctioned by the Sussexes? How many times and ways does this have to be said before you get it?

    • Edna says:

      The authors of this book sold it as “setting the facts straight” about the Sussexes leaving the Royal Family. At no time have the Sussexes put forth this book “as telling their side of the story.” Omid and Carolyn, unlike the rest of the British media and Royal rota, have been balanced and fair in their coverage of the Sussexes. Which is why this book has everyone spooked because it’s designed to be fair and balanced and not unhinged and one sided like the rest of the abusive dribble written about Meg and Harry.

      • Tealie says:

        When you know someone looking at what you did balanced makes you look bad, one can only imagine how ducking bad the reality was. The fact that they are screaming over a man who has not once written a thing about any of the members of the family because he refuses to get down to their level of nasty sensationalism to boost the royal PR campaign, that says alot.

      • MA says:

        It’s funny because while Durand was never a Meghan basher she’s actually more pro-Royal family than Meghan. I don’t think she even wrote supportive articles, she just didn’t bash her. I remember she would call Kate “Princess Kate” but refer to Meghan as “Meghan Markle” which left a bad taste in my mouth.

    • Priscila says:

      I dont think there is any move from the Sussexes, They were friendly with Omid because he was among the only ones who actually treated them fairly and was rewarded with more access. An authorized biography is one where the subjects are in agreement with, and usually, the subjects do sit down for an interview. It is different than an autobiography, where the subjects write it with the help of a writer, or a memoir, which does not need to necessarily be tied down to dates, fact-checking etc.

      Kaiser do believe Meghan had previous knowledge of the People article and she does believe the Sussexes help in any capacity with this- she does not know it. It is her opinion.

      I think it is perfectly plausible the Suessexes were told they would be doing the book based on the material they already had on them- previous interviews included- and were fine with it. That is why they use this expression the book is based on the reports Omid had done during the time he worked as a royal correspondandt and his observations.

    • Ohok says:

      IMO, this move is saying, we know about it , the things that are in the book are accurate , however, I’m not one to gossip so you didn’t hear it from me! 😂

    • BeanieBean says:

      Anna–Did you read the article, or even the headline?

      • Anna says:

        Yes, I did. I also read articles in VF and HB early promoting the book. Speare yourself this kind of passive-aggressive comments

    • ola says:

      I agree. I thought/hoped that it would be THEIR side of the story, with lots of dirt swept from under the carpet. And what we get is again she said / he said / “friends of the family” said / “source close to the couple” said. If it’s just Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand’s reporting of the events we will get months long covering of setting the facts straight, articles about details that are not factual, investigations to who was in the room and who spilled the beans. More and more of inaccuracies, misinformation and finger-pointing. And more suits.
      I feel kind of disappointed. Though,I must say the cover should be revealing, it’s such a generic picture of them, nothing special.

    • Krystina says:

      How do you not realize yet that this is a biography, not an autobiography?

      • Silver Charm says:

        @Krystina Since the book’s announcement this has been framed as having the cooperation from House Sussex. This isn’t being pulled from no where so spare your fellow commenters the condescending b.s.

      • blue36 says:

        They’ve also talked to palace courtiers and some people close to W&K. Does that mean they also authorized this book? It’s been framed as cooperation from H&M by the tabloids and we know how fair they’ve been right? All the recent books about the rift (like princes at war) had only one side of the story – which painted W&K as saints and H&M as the villains. Some of these books also had sources within the palace and they also promote it as having information from the inside, does that mean KP cooperated with them to trash H&M?

      • Silver Charm says:

        I don’t know because the press release only mentioned the cooperation from those closest to House Sussex. This wasn’t a tabloid, it was the publisher who said this.

    • Lizzie says:

      Agree, you do not understand. This is not the Sussex book. They have said, the authors have said.

  2. Pearl Grey says:

    It doesn’t matter how many times it is said, people are hellbent on believing Harry and Meghan all but co-wrote this book themselves and the only thing that would change their minds is if it was full of negative stories about them. They can’t stand that a balanced reporter who has covered Harry and Meghan (and all the other royals) fairly without trashing them on an hourly basis is the author of this book and the level of fear the palace and RR’s seem to have about what could come out in it is highly amusing. It surely will not be anything like the “tell-all” they’re all quacking in their boots over. Maybe the palace should take notes, so next time they attempt to collude with the media, it won’t flop in spectacular fashion *cough* Pizza Express *cough* Top CEO *cough*…

    • Mac says:

      Well intimate details came from somewhere. I don’t believe H+M’s friends and former employees would have blabbed to the authors without consent, but I also don’t care. The BRF are the bad actors here and deserve to be exposed.

      • Silver Charm says:

        Exactly. The announcement said they had cooperation from those closest to H&M. I don’t understand the sudden pearl clutching that they participated, especially since other royals have done the same.

    • Nic919 says:

      This is 100% accurate.

  3. February-Pisces says:

    I wouldn’t care if they wrote the book themselves, read the audiobook with their own voices and did a book signing at Waterstones, cos they deserve their right to reply. They were slandered everyday for three years with no one defending them. Every single corner of the British media was bought off by KP. As soon as excerpts from the book were released the DM headlines said ‘we rolled out the red carpet for them’ as a defence for William and Kate. This only proved just how tight knit the relationship is between KP and the daily mail. If any press dare say anything negative about the Keenbridges they are threaten with ‘we will take away access’. The funny thing is everyone at this point knows William and Kate are behind it. Their fans love to deny it the same way racists say ‘we dont see any racism’ because they want to enable it and support their hate campaign.

    • Anna says:

      Gurl, I was hoping they will spill EVERYTHING. But this last-minute statement seems wired to me. Why on earth they didn’t decide to burn all bridges to the ground?

  4. JAGirl says:

    Sometimes they over explain. The first sentence in their statement is enough in my opinion.

    • taylor says:

      They often over-explain lol it’s like they’re still compensating for all the time they were unable to release their own statements.

  5. Noki says:

    I think they really want to get their own story out but cant do or admit to doing that directly until the one year review is up, and i think if they are not satisfied they will probably even do a sit down interview.

    • ola says:

      Maybe it’s just too early for a book like that? Give it a couple of years, let them settle in to the new situation, let the achieve something on their own. That way the book would not be just a bitter reckoning but a kind of a triumph, a celebration of their freedom. For now, even the title is misleading. The Sussexes are living in someone else’s house, not working, not earning money, not achieving their dreams, how is that finding freedom?

      • SomeChick says:

        So, like, there’s this thing called the coronavirus? And it is, like, preventing many of us from working, earning money, and achieving dreams. Getting out from the whole toxic stew is finding freedom.

        What they will do next, we don’t know… but it looks a lot like they will contiunue to work to do good in the world. As they have been doing.

        Both Harry and Meghan have already achieved a lot on their own. Harry was in the military, for reals. Meghan was quite accomplished when they met. (Speaking at the UN, for starters.)

        Soooo… this book is not their autobio nor is it the end of their story.

      • notasugarhere says:

        W&K are living in someone else’s house too. In fact, most of the royals are because they live in homes owned by taxpayers.

        Harry and Meghan have at least 40 million in the bank. If they never work again, they’ll be fine.

  6. Nancy says:

    If anyone thinks they have nothing to do with this book, I have a bridge to sell them!

    • Priscila says:

      Well, then they already won,because people are so caught up with this!

      I mean, there is a huge difference between being told a book is gonna happen based on previous interviews and acquired knowledge from two journalists and being okay with it AND actively asking journalists to write you a good story.

    • Snappyfish says:

      @Nancy, Exactly this. Diana did this w/Morton & eventually copped to it & no one (except BP) cared

      I completely believe they will stay in the US until Charles is King. Then they will return. It’s why they still have their HRHs (Harry will always have his unless he renounced which he did not) if he truly wanted freedom he would have. Edward did for Wallis & his brother, the new King, bequeathed the title HRH Duke of Windsor on him alone. It was the reason that Wallis was never accorded the title. The Sussexes will be back as will SussexRoyal. I hope they enjoy the time they have doing what they wish. All this fighting over books & photos seems sad to me

      • OK says:

        @Snappyfish. That whole HRH thing is a barrel of slippery eels.

        HRH is a courtesy style (not title) given by the Queen she could take it away entirely if she wanted to, legally Harry is one of those eligible to receive the HRH but that doesn’t mean he is entitled to it. “The Queen, as fountain of all honour, can remove the style of Royal Highness. The issuing of Letters Patent or a Royal Warrant could strip both Harry and Meghan of the rank, style and title of HRH” That said I do not believe the Queen would revoke it as she would have to do the same to Andrew to appear fair.

        I did believe that once Harry had the Dukedom it was glued to him for life like all other Dukedoms and could only be removed by an act of parliament , however an expert form the College of Arms said as the Sussex Dukedom is a ‘Royal Dukedom’ given by the Monarch and not inherited it can be removed by the issue of new letters patent by the Monarch. Apparently through some legal quirk The Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel titles are not regarded as ‘royal’ and may not have the same rules and those two titles could well be his for life regardless of what the Queen desired.

        Also once anyone is striped of a title the holder can never receive that title back or be given another equal title (i.e Dukedom). I assume her thinking is that if Harry does return to the UK as a working royal at some point she would want him to still be a Duke.

        It also so pointless really and I don’t know why they seem so upset about losing the use of HRH. It’s basically the very epitome of white privledged and they should very publicly discard it entirely. All bridges are pretty much burned now , if they wanted to slap the face of the Queen and RF that’s the way to really do it.

    • Microsoft says:

      If you dont think cambriges are racist and involved in smear campaign of Sussex then I will sell you my Buckingham palace.

    • Lizzie says:

      Nope. Why should they? That is the dolittles style.

  7. Harper says:

    Obviously their close friends, and possibly even Doria, were the sources. But I don’t think this book is going to help Harry and Meghan in the UK. There’s already an article in the Fail with the headline that they are praying that Harry should come back but for Meghan there is no return. So, not even hiding it anymore.

    • Edna says:

      Seriously, there’s an article on the Daily Fail with that headline? I don’t visit the Fail so have no idea what they write. With a headline like that they’ve assured Harry never returning.

      • Calibration says:

        Yep from Charles’ biographer. Unlikely Charles didn’t sanction it. Praying Harry (thin skinned, emotional etc) will return but for meghan there is no return. And of course everyone thinks they actually typed the book with their own hands. The comments are gross. I haven’t looked at the Fail in a couple of months, it’s worse than ever. That was the only article I clicked on

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      @Harper Ugh, I just read it; the Heil makes me feel desperately unclean. Didn’t go near the comments. The last line – ‘for Meghan, I fear, there is no return’ – why the hell would she want to return to that poisonous, unpleasant, insular, patriarchal and Anglo-Saxon world? Why do Heilites act as if marrying into a family of self-regarding, inbred snobs who exist only as camera- and tabloid-fodder is ‘the dream’?
      -I saw that there were six or more articles on this week’s excerpts. Well done, Heil. You’re still making money off Meghan, any way you can.

    • ola says:

      My friends in UK (who generally couldn’t care less about the RF) think so too. The common belief is that Harry will come back with his tail between his legs, which was expected from the very beginning – that’s why the one year review was set up. Meghan has never seemed to be interested in the United Kingdom, so she will stay in Hollywood. I’m Team Archie anyway. Whatever happens I hope he’s alright.

      • ABritGuest says:

        Meghan was never interested in the U.K. that’s why she was out on U.K. wide engagements from moment engagement was announced, had a project benefiting Grenfell community within months of marriage, was on the ground learning about the U.K. charity scene from moment she moved, was doing tours representing the U.K. at 7 months pregnant? The revisionism.

      • SomeChick says:

        So you wish for Archie’s parents to split up, @ola? Doesn’t sound much like “Team Archie” to me.

        LA is not “Hollywood.” LA contains thousands of cultures and subcultures.

        Harry & Meghan have been doing on the ground actual charity work already, despite the pandemic.

        I’m sure your friends who DGAF about the BRF have the inside scoop tho.

        Ciao, ola.

      • Sofia says:

        troll

      • Feeshalori says:

        Ola, you can’t say you’re on Team Archie if you wish for the breakup of Harry and Meghan’s marriage. That’s pretty reprehensible. And I doubt Harry is going anywhere with his tail between his legs either, even though I’m sure you’d very much like to see that happen.

      • Lizzie says:

        Those are the people who said Meghan planned for them to go to LA from the beginning. It was all fan fiction

      • Silver Charm says:

        Ola never said they wished for Archie’s parents to break up, only that no matter what happens they hope he is okay.

  8. S808 says:

    I think if the Sussexes had a hand in this book we would’ve gotten new details. This just seems to be a rehash of everything we already know plus some context so I’m inclined to believe the Sussexes were not involved.

    Harry said: “if you knew what I knew”…..Harry, we’d love to know everything you can (legally) tell us!

  9. Gm says:

    Who really cares? Only if u are using it to bash H&M , if so then you will find her use of avocados which lead to murder and mayhem a personal indictment of her evilness- who needs whether she cooperated with a complaint book. Otherwise anyone who is over 20 knows the BRF is always doing this kind of thing, especially Charles and Diana….

    • Andrew’s Nemesis says:

      @GM Ditto; don’t care in the slightest. Wish Meghan would say she was intimately connected with the book, to validate her side of the story (the truth) vs the mountains of shit spewed out by the tabloids. Don’t forget that she was trying to poison the children by adding lily of the valley to their coronals. And goshdarn it all to heck, she once opened her car door all by herself! The inhumanity!!!

  10. Priscila says:

    I really dont see any problem but the fact people are even speaking on it goes to show that the Sussexes cannot do what others can do without being eviscerated by.

    I do believe they are okay with the book and that, as they explained, it is based on the coverage that Omid has already done, previous contacts with them included. This means, to me, they recognize the Press is free, there is nothing they can do to prevent this book coming out and they are actually fine with it because Omid has always been fair to them and was rewarded with more access- but what people do believe is that they actually came up with the idea, pointed Omid in the right direction and are speaking to him all the time…

    At this point, I think they are so fed up that just the effort to come up with all these strategies is too much. If they are going on the record so many times and are even suing a paper, I really do not think they are out there lying to the world.

  11. taylor says:

    The authors obviously had access to “sources close to the Sussexes”, but the only reason that’s an issue is bc the RF can’t completely control the narrative. Any reporting that fails to paint Meghan as a big evil meanie, Harry as an emotional simp, and the RF as all-knowing saints, simple will not do for The Firm. Never mind that those narratives have still been present in the excerpts! It just shares other perspectives, god forbid.

  12. ABritGuest says:

    They said since book was announced they weren’t working with the authors on it. I think it was promoted as telling their side& authors spoke to friends& aides of various royals which is why so far it seems to present both sides. I would think if it was ‘their book’ it would be less pro palace. I think the hysteria is just because it’s not 100% one sided which is what the media narrative has been so far.

    So far seems to be very favourable to the top royals (the take on how the rift started is what’s been out there for ages& isn’t really believable so royals are being protected) & mainly throws the grey men in suits under the bus. Apparently the palace is relieved as it could have been much worse which is telling.

    A lot of what I’ve seen so far seems to just be rehash of previous articles/ tabloid stories& filling in blanks. Some details any of us could have written just from the court documents.

    I did say weeks ago whilst the authors were on the royal beat& whilst legal cases are ongoing this book would never be a juicy tell all.

  13. Microsoft says:

    I know some Sussex fan pissed at omid for not spelling any new tea. But omid is genuine at trolling the cambriges with this fair report. Anyone who doesnt follow the royal and can read this book and see how stupid brf and cambriges are to sussex. I think the author done this beautifully because if the book is to praise sussex alone it will trash. The author has cleverly laid down the stories and its upto the reader to decide which is good. That’s why this book does more harm to cambriges and brf more damage in long term. This the same way as that New York article about cambriges buying followers. Its upto the reader to decide the outcome. The clever ones and rational one see how petty cambriges and Kate is from this. This might be old stories for the ppl who follow royals but new one to non royal watcher. This constant gaslighting from rr and brf is making more damage to themselves.

  14. Becks1 says:

    I don’t think the Sussexes were directly involved with this book, like someone said above, if they were, we would have more new information, and so far in the excerpts I’ve read, it’s a rehash of things that hardcore royal/Sussex followers (like us, lol) already know.

    I do think that if Omid approached some of their friends or employees, they probably checked with the Sussexes first and then talked to him. So the Sussexes approved of their friend’s involvement but didn’t have direct involvement themselves.

    Also, though, a good reporter is going to know a lot of this stuff outside of a book. If Omid is that involved with royal coverage on a regular basis (which he is), then he’s going to have a lot of these details already because he’s going to have been given them in a more piecemeal fashion over the years. It’s not necessarily that one person sat down and talked to him for two hours, but he may have gathered various quotes from that same person over two years.

    • windyriver says:

      Close friends of Harry and Meghan have been so loyal and circumspect, it’s hard to imagine they’d talk to Omid without first getting their take on doing so.

      But I believe based on their experience with him that H&M trust Omid to be fair. I recall the statement they made (paraphrasing loosely here), essentially, that they didn’t hold themselves to be above criticism, but wanted the discussion to be fair. I think this was in the context of why they wanted to opt out of obligation to the Royal Rota, which means it would have been around the time they put out their initial website with the information about no longer being full time working royals; but someone else may remember more specifically where they said this.

  15. Marivic says:

    The fact that those other royals are now authorizing reaction-articles to the Finding Freedom excerpts is kind of hilarious too.”

    This.

    I just read in Vanity Fair that, according to Mail on Sunday, friends of the Cambridges defend them by saying that the Cambridges did all they could to make Meghan feel welcome to the extent that Kate personally cooked vegan meals for Meghan in one of her visits to Anmer Hall. It also said that Kate offered Meghan flowers as peace offering but it still wasn’t enough for Meghan.

    No matter how much the British media stick to their narrative, portraying the Cambridges as saints wouldn’t cut it. The world knows they were the bullies and they bullied the Sussexes out of the U.K.— they and the their media cohorts.

    • Microsoft says:

      Exactly. That’s why this book is goldmine. If this book is authorized by Sussex then it is not good. But this book does not praise or criticize Sussex or cambriges. They just given inside details and its upto the reader to decide which is why it makes cambriges and brf looks very bad. Because they go on length to protect Kate from tatler story and Andy. This shows to non royal watchers how racist they were. This again shows Kate was being mean to Meghan and that fake tears over the dress fitting.

    • Lizzie says:

      Why word on why would Kate do that when Meghan is not vegan.

    • Elizabeth says:

      Vegan meals and flowers, but they couldn’t do anything to shield or protect her from racist press? Oof they really did the least.

  16. Bibi says:

    If it’s plausible that Harry and Meghan had nothing to do with Lady colin’s book then apply the same logic to this one. They’ve already told us that no one speaks for them yet we persist in doubting them and gaslighting with non issues.

  17. Lizzie says:

    Why would they participate in this book? If they want to tell their story they can do it themselves and get a record breaking book deal. They do not need to hide behind this book.

  18. nicegirl says:

    Hmmmmmm, I’ll likely skip the book if they’ve not had any real and directed input. But I will keep up on it via my gal Kaiser!! Thank you much

  19. Mtec says:

    “ I mean… if the Sussexes didn’t take part in it and didn’t authorize anything, how do they know what the book is based on and what’s being reported? ”

    —Maybe because Omid himself has been vocal about that on Twitter, so even I knew what the book was based on his and Carolyn’s own experiences as royal reporters (and their sources), before this statement by the Sussexes was even made.

    Perhaps, like many reporters do, they even went to the Sussexes to see if they would provide a quote or be involved in some way, and had to explain to them what and how it would be written, but H&M could have turned them down after hearing the book proposal. It doesn’t have to be some conspiracy theory. If H&M say they didn’t authorize nor contribute to it, then I believe them.

  20. TheOriginalMia says:

    Omid has had access to royal reporters and Grey men, who all have had a hand in banishing the Sussexes. What more could Harry & Meghan say that’s not already out there. The reason we’re seeing all this uproar about it is that it confirms that the BRF aren’t a normal family unit and that early on that KP and the couriers we’re actively undermining Harry & Meghan with the help of the media.

  21. bunny says:

    I’m not a PR strategist but if they were to be transparent and detailed about their contribution and involvement in the book, rather than a blanket denial of ANY participation in providing information used in interviews (which is what seems most likely to me…Meghan and Harry were interviewed by a third party on behalf of the authors) it would give their lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday a lot more credibility. With this, it will be manipulated in the press that they have a pattern of authorizing people to present their position then denying it.

  22. Kris Jong Un says:

    Ok but the royal book I really want to see is an investigative expose of “Prince” Andrew’s relationship with Epstein and Maxwell, and how the royal family has shielded Andrew from any real world consequences.

  23. AMM says:

    Omid didn’t need to talk to Harry Or Meghan about what happened. There’s been witnesses about all these tiffs this whole time and he’s filling in the blanks.

    I’ve complained about this before, but all the tabloid coverage of the William and Harry rift is: What William said (calm, rational) and how Harry reacted (upset, emotional). At no point do get words from Harry. Because if they reveal what Harry said to William or any specifics about his emotions, the reader might understand why Harry was upset and take his side. So in the Royal Rota it’s always “William advises him to slow down and Harry has a tantrum”. Omid gives them both a voice “William said to slow down with this girl and Harry understood from his tone that William was being condescending and called him a snob”. It’s the same story, same witnesses, it’s just gives both sides.

  24. aquarius64 says:

    I am enjoying the meltdown in the British press. When the royal reporters are deployed for pushback you know the BRF took a hit. This book is going to sell.

    • Nic919 says:

      I never buy any of these books but I will buy this one to support Omid. In an interview he discusses the racism he has dealt with from the courtiers e.g. “I didn’t expect you to sound this way”. So it’s also likely that Omid has motivation to expose the racism in the BRF and courtier system and he sympathizes with what Meghan in particular has faced from them.

      The crazy response shows that even a more even handed book is scaring the fuck out of the establishment.

  25. BnLurkN4eva says:

    What a world this is. Two people who have been brutalized for years in the media coming and going MUST not, CAN not be seen to have had even an inkling of a hand in setting the record straight. We expect victims of abuse to be SILENT! Silence is the only acceptable response to being abused according to so many in today’s world. I haven’t even given a second of thought to whether H/M had a hand in any part of the creation of this book because to me it doesn’t matter. They are allowed to speak or not speak, their call and we’ve heard from the institution and the BM for 3 years and still hearing from those sectors. I hope this book allows some kind of voice to H/M side of the story. Abusers shouldn’t be the only ones who get to set the narrative in this world. Shame on everyone/anyone who continues to make it about whether H/M had a part in this, that’s just another way of teaming up with the bullies against the victim. If people spent as much time directing their ire at the bullies the way they scold the victims perhaps bullies would, you know quit bullying. But time and again we see that the energy is reserved for silencing the victims.

    • Bibi says:

      @BN
      Thanks for this comment. It’s inconceivable that people are harping on this because all it does is pile even more abuse onto the victims. And to be clear Meghan IS the victim, so everyone speculating about who authorised what should put a sock in it. These are people’s lives we’re playing with. Diana died because no one stood up for her and that tragedy must never happen again

    • Anna says:

      Thank you!

  26. MA says:

    It seems pretty clear that the Sussexes didn’t authorize or speak to the authors about it but also that at least one person close to the Sussex camp spoke to Scobie. But why does it matter SO much? This is another British media tactic to get people whipped up faux outrage about the wrong thing. The excerpts so far are pretty even handed, it’s not painting the Sussexes as angels and the royals as Nazis. If anything it’s taking pains not to call the royals racist. Again the Sussexes didn’t not directly authorize or contribute to the book but even if they had, I don’t see what could be so controversial about their involvement as Kaiser pointed out all other royals have done so.

  27. Elizabeth says:

    I love Harry & Meghan but of there’s no way they didn’t authorize this book. It has direct quotes from Meghan while she’s in a bathtub! I remember when Diana said she didn’t authorize the Morton book then it turned out she gave taped interviews for it. I do understand they have to deny it but this is THEIR book. I also think they should drop the DM lawsuit because it just makes them a bigger target.

    • Still_Sarah says:

      @ Elizabeth : I agree on both points. I believe the book has their approval but of course they can’t say so. Other royals have done this too. As for the DM, they are so scummy, I don’t think there is way to win against them.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Charles wasn’t forced to drop his copyright lawsuit. W&K weren’t forced to drop their lawsuit against the France photos.

      But you’ll insist Harry and Meghan have to drop their lawsuit against an abusive tabloid.

      Right. If they drop the Fail lawsuit, the Fail will turn around and be nice to them. Sure, Jan.

      If they drop the Fail lawsuit, they will be attacked unendingly by the Fail. If they win that lawsuit, like their one against the illegal drone photos, it *may* stop some of the abuse.

  28. ABritGuest says:

    I don’t know -like that quote about William not being able to put his arm around Harry was said to a Times editor but in FF excerpt, as in previous Times article from January, is presented as being said to a ‘friend‘.

    I feel like a Fail journalist or tv presenter said few months ago about how Meghan said to her she was looking for a nice English man the summer she met Harry, which coincidentally is set out as a conversation with a ‘friend’ in a book excerpt. Another excerpt from the first date talks about Harry saying he needs to “up his game” which he said in the engagement interview.

    Some of the conversations and texts etc with her father in run up to the wedding were already laid out in the court filings months ago. Most of what I’ve seen so far is rehash from previous articles etc. The tea seems cold.

  29. Thirtynine says:

    Not sure why Kate Williams is called a “historian”? She is a well known historian at Reading University, does lots of writing on women in history, and has been a consistent and vocal defender of H& M on her Twitter, along with support for BLM and feminist issues. Her twitter is worth a read.

  30. L4frimaire says:

    I wrote a v. long post that didn’t make it but basically, there was no need for the Sussexes to sit down or authorize this book. I think they decided not to stand in the way of any friends the authors contacted to clarify and give their side of things. A lot of what’s in this book has been out there in the press for a very long time. Meghan was the most written about person in the Royal family, literally thousands of articles. Other Royals friends and family talk about her. Omid and Carolyn have been to practically every event or tour the Sussexes were on and hear the chatter and behind the scenes talk, and see things we don’t. I’m sure people have leaked stuff to them, both pro and con. They don’t need a sit down w/ the couple. They just dug a little deeper and are able to shed light on the couples perspective, debunk some articles, and reveal their feelings and struggles behind the scenes. A lot of reporters are telling on themselves and royals by lashing out at this book, which is fairly tame.Also, court documents confirm a lot. I hope there is a bit more analysis and placing things in cultural/political context, but it’s not like there is a lot of new stuff in here. As noted when the book was announced, they were aware of the book. Unless they subpoena the authors, that’s all we’re getting on that.

  31. Jayna says:

    Of course, they contributed to this book. They want their side out. It’s ludicrous to believe they didn’t, however it was done, and gave approval for the book by allowing their friends to give info.

    • L4frimaire says:

      They don’t need to be directly interviewed to get their side out. So much of the treatment was obvious to anyone paying attention who wasn’t buying the Royal party line. They did interview some of their friends, and I bet people behind the scenes who didn’t like what they saw also spoke to the writers. Even a lot of people who didn’t like the couple were talking a lot. Don’t forget that court documents, Tom Bradbury interview, and the writers own observations. If you think a direct interview is the only way to see their perspective and what they went through, you haven’t been paying much attention to the past few years. They had sources beyond the Sussexes themselves.

  32. WatchThisSpace says:

    @Jayna, they said they did not. Why is it so difficult here to actually believe the victims of this abuse?

  33. A says:

    I mean, I said this in another comment, but I’ll say it again. The statement carefully spells out what they didn’t do, doesn’t it? The Sussexes were not interviewed, and they did not contribute. The fact that their friends spoke to Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand about their side of the situation, well, that’s completely different. Their friends were the ones who spoke to them, their friends were the ones who contributed. Not Meghan and Harry themselves.

    To the rest of us, and the people who are aware of how these books are written, we can see these things for what they are. Scobie and Durand spoke to authorized sources from H&M’s side of things, and those sources spoke on behalf of H&M. So they might as well have sat with the authors themselves. But the distinction in the statement still bears up, even if this is the case. And it’s carefully and intentionally made.

Commenting Guidelines

Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment