Prince Harry’s Time Mag comments were ‘not in reference’ to any political party

The Duke And Duchess Of Sussex Attend A Commonwealth Day Youth Event At Canada House

I’m not going to excerpt any of Piers Morgan’s column in the Daily Mail this week. If I can avoid it, I never want to quote from him. Piers’ panties are in a twist because of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Time Magazine video, where they encourage Americans to vote. Prince Harry said: “This election, I’m not going to be able to vote here in the U.S. But many of you may not know that I haven’t been able to vote in the U.K. my entire life. As we approach this November, it’s vital that we reject hate speech, misinformation, and online negativity.” That’s it. He didn’t say “vote for Biden-Harris.” Because he didn’t have to. The idea of “rejecting hate” is pretty simple: there’s only one f–king Nazi on the ticket. Reject him.

I’m not even going to say that Harry used clever wording or whatever. That’s what pisses off Piers Morgan – Harry said something so basic and so simple, it can’t be twisted into some huge political thing. So, Morgan wrote this unhinged piece about how everyone KNOWS what Harry meant because Trump is so clearly the candidate of hate. Like, that’s Piers’ whole argument. Trump is a hateful buffoon and no one in the royal family is allowed to say that, and Harry came dangerously close to saying it, therefore he needs to give up his ducal title! That’s it.

Meanwhile, someone went to Harper’s Bazaar to clarify the point Harry was making:

When Prince Harry urged people in the U.S. to “reject hate speech” as the country approaches the next presidential election, it didn’t take long for commentary in the U.K. to center around concerns over supposed diplomatic rows that could follow. After all, his appearance on the September 23 TIME 100 broadcast was the first time the Duke of Sussex had joined Duchess Meghan in her ongoing efforts to encourage more people to vote this November.

However, despite cries of royal protocol breaches (members of the British Royal Family must remain apolitical at all times), a source close to the Sussexes tells that Harry’s words around November were “not in reference to any specific political party or candidates, but is instead a call for decency in how we engage with each other, interact, and consume information—especially online.”

[From Harper’s Bazaar]

I’ll be honest: I defend the Sussexes so much because I like them and I want them to succeed, but I’m sometimes concerned that they’re playing with fire with all of their little word games and who said what to whom and what was really meant, you know? All of us perfectly understood what Harry said. We got the message. Harry and Meghan can do and say whatever they want (they’re free!!), but they probably would have been better served by simply letting the video and their words speak for themselves. Why run to Harper’s Bazaar and say “oh no it was just about decency, that’s apolitical”? It would have been a bigger flex to just let the video speak for itself.


Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

52 Responses to “Prince Harry’s Time Mag comments were ‘not in reference’ to any political party”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Harla says:

    When calling for the end of hate speech and the spread of misinformation makes one immediately think of the President, then we have bigger issues than an English guy urging people to vote.

  2. Darla says:

    Maybe. I can see that. But, OTOH, maybe Harry is taking some pleasure from pointing out he only came out for decency, and everyone took that as a slam on Trump. It is funny, as far as it goes. Nothing else about this is at all funny, but you really have to spend a moment being amazed at this. How low are we, the United States? Well, when someone says people should be decent to each other, it’s considered an attack on our President.

    • Becks1 says:

      I’m seeing the humor in it too. Don’t look at it as Harry trying to emphasize that he’s not political, look at it as kind of “who, me?” sort of thing. “All I said was that people should be decent…..I didn’t say anything about Trump…….why would you think that was aimed at him?”

    • GR says:

      @darla – Right! And “please don’t spread a deadly disease” and “murdering people is bad” are considered fighting words.

  3. RoyalBlue says:

    One of the things they wanted most of all when they left the royal family, was the ability and freedom to defend themselves. I think they value that freedom and will submit their defense as they see fit.

  4. Myra says:

    I thought it was the newspapers/magazines calling them up and not the other way around. The same statements were given out to several newspapers by the spokesperson. I think Harry and Meghan need their own anger translators because simple, basic statements are still confusing some people.

  5. Amy Bee says:

    People need to stop viewing Harry and Meghan as representatives of the Queen. They’re not and I have no doubt that their so-called pledge to maintain the values of the Queen or whatever it was, like the one year review, was a dictate by the palace. It is clear that they do not share the same values as the Queen, if they had they would still be working royals. Harry and Meghan are now free to say whatever they want and if they want give an explanation they are free to do that too. I have no problem with what their spokesman said. For years they were unable to defend themselves now they have that freedom, so let them have it.

    • Becks1 says:

      Exactly. If they still wanted to be representatives of the queen, they would still be working royals. They have different priorities than the Queen and we are seeing that.

    • MsIam says:

      Well I would hope the queen and Charles would be against hate speech and misinformation and also think people should use their right to vote. If they don’t feel that way then that should be a big problem. So I don’t see any true conflict here.

      • Amy Bee says:

        The Queen and Charles have been known to use misinformation to their own benefit in the past and they uphold a white supremacist system so I’m not willing to ascribe such noble virtues to them. If they were allowed they would be members of the Conservative Party and most definitely be Brexiteers.

    • swirlmamad says:

      Agree with this wholeheartedly.

  6. MsIam says:

    Welp, they said what they said. Get over it Piers/ RR/ whoever else is mad.

  7. Onomo says:

    I agree with Kaiser! Just let the statement stand on its own. People who want to give you the benefit of the doubt will do so.

    Honestly -calling yourself apolitical these days seems impossible. We are reminded of how it’s a privilege to be so, to not need health coverage, to not fear the police, to not worry for your loved ones due to racism or sexism or the pandemic. I am too poor not to be political.

    While I am voting for joe, let’s also remember things were also bad for Black people pre this election – super predator rhetoric anyone?? Dakota pipeline? American racism is a whole mess of coded hate speech every election, with its talk of law and order to refer to keeping Black people and Indigenous in their place instead of protesting for their rights.

    • Amy Bee says:

      The Royal Family is not even apolitical. Just look at who they hire to work for them. So this farce needs to end. In fact I think it would be better if on the eve of elections and when major social events occur that the Queen does say something but she doesn’t. She had to be forced to say something about COVID and that speech uplifting, as may it have been for some, didn’t address some of the serious issues surrounding the disease. She just compared it to the war which was inappropriate and was following a line of thinking that came from the Government spin doctors and rightwing media.

  8. Miranda says:

    I mean, I get that he had to play nice and all, but fuck anyone who would’ve taken issue if Harry had flat-out said, “Don’t vote for the piece of shit who thinks my wife is subhuman and believes that my baby son’s very existence is a threat to White America.”

  9. Snap Happy says:

    This election is too important. I agree with what they are saying, but I think it should have come solely from Meghan. Having Harry in the video takes the focus from the message and lets people like Piers create controversy even if it is not warranted.
    Harry in not an American citizen, a member of the royal family, a millionaire with a mansion, etc. I DO NOT hold these things against him, but there are members of the. US population who will hold that against him and think he is being hypocritical with his message.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Did you even listen to what he actually said? I have my doubts.

    • Sofia says:

      Piers also created controversy when Meghan alone said we need to vote. He’ll make controversy no matter what. As for Harry, he’s not a citizen but he lives in the country, has a wife and son who are citizens, pays taxes to said country and the policies of the president will affect him as a resident of the country.

      PS: Meghan lives in the same mansion as Harry and is also rich.

    • MsIam says:

      And yet some citizens are happy to vote for a billionaire with a gold plated bathroom because “he’s one of us”. Trust me, having lots of money in the US has never been an issue, only when it’s not “your guy/gal”.

    • Miranda says:

      The Americans who would hold those things against Harry aren’t going to want to hear from Meghan, either. At this point, they’ve made it quite clear that they believe the “Americanness” of any PoC is questionable.

    • swirlmamad says:

      I don’t understand why just because Harry is a prince and wealthy, he should not be allowed to voice his opinion in support/tandem with his wife. He’s a human being who was just taught a majorly big lesson on racism and how it actually works and affects lives. He has the clarity to “get it” now. I’m an American who doesn’t have one iota of a problem with what he said. What I have a much bigger issue with, as many here have said, is the fact that they are voicing the need for decency in our society and that concept is so far removed from who we have in the White House that it is considered a faux pas.

    • Nyro says:

      This is a non issue in America, so no. No one over here has got their panties in a bunch because Prince Harry got on tv and said we need to reject hate and misinformation this election. No one. We have our issues but Americans ain’t that sensitive. That’s a British thing. They’re the ones losing their minds over a simple and very standard celebrity “get out the vote” PSA. I’ve never in my life seen an American cry and whine and holler about “playing politics” because someone said to vote and be mindful of misinformation. Americans have our own issues but whining and crying about something that’s such a standard part of our election “culture”, if you will, is not it.

    • Snap Happy says:

      I heard what he said, but he is just dancing around the issue. He hates Trump. Everyone saw how he gave the cold shoulder to him in the UK. It is just my opinion that I can see him annoying any undecided voters. I can’t believe anyone can be undecided at this point, but I’m sure they are out there. I would also guess they are either Republicans or ex-Bernie bros. Bernie bros won’t care what he has to say, as opposed to Meghan. I think they would be curious what she has to say. The undecided republican will probably be turned off because republicans like to wrap themselves in the flag and act like that are the only ones who are proud to be Americans and he isn’t American.

  10. Talie says:

    It’s clear the new goal post is getting their titles removed or at least bullying them into dropping them somehow. Then there was that weird comment from Jobson yesterday about removing Harry & Archie from the line of succession which made me raise an eyebrow.

    • Amy Bee says:

      It didn’t for me. Archie is not pure white, for some he sullies the “purity” of the Royal Family so removing Harry (the race traitor) and Archie is a logical conclusion for people like Jobson.

    • Harla says:

      If they want to remove them from the line of succession then they will need to have a serious discussion about Andrew place in that line as well. There are lots and lots of people who are in line of succession and I don’t imagine that Parliament will want to address the worthiness of each and every one of them, which they would need to do if they want to take H&A out.

      • Amy Bee says:

        The British establishment doesn’t believe that Andrew did anything wrong. If they did he would be out of there a long time ago. Plus, he’s Queen’s son, so he’s never going to be removed from the line of succession.

      • Sofia says:

        @Amy that’s true but if Andrew isn’t going to be removed because he’s the monarch’s son then technically Harry shouldn’t be either because he’s the 1st in line’s (hence future monarch) son.

    • Sofia says:

      It’s been said for a while here that removing titles and people from the line of succession is a massive legal and parliamentary task. For titles, I doubt the peerage wants to set a precedent for removing titles for no real reason or for having commercial deals – some of whom put their houses on display so that they can earn money to maintain them. And it can also lead to let’s get rid of Andrew’s titles, Bea’s and Eugenies.

      And as for the line of succession, the CW need to be involved. The UK PM needs their permission or at least discussion for it to happen. IIRC, the PM when Edward VIII wanted to abdicate had to jump through a few hoops to get said permission and he was a King who was abdicating his throne – not the 6th in line with a Netflix deal and telling people to reject hate.

      Edit: even if they took his dukedom away, he would still remain HRH Prince Henry of Wales as that his birthright given title.

      • Becks1 says:

        Agree with your points, but also want to add that no way is Charles going to go along with removing his son’s title or his place in the line of succession. As the future king (who is going to be king sooner rather than later), he would view that as an insult and its not going to happen.

      • Sofia says:

        That is a very good point Becks. Charles will probably take it personally if his son gets his titles and line of succession place removed.

        BUT this is a comment from Jobson (Charles’ biographer) so who knows. But Angela Levin wrote a Harry biography and she’s batsh*t insane so, again, who knows.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      Talie, I couldn’t believe that Jobson said that so brazenly. They are not even trying to hide their racism, they are emboldened by the support they have received.

      • MsIam says:

        Is Jobson the one who put “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets” out there? If so then I’m not surprised he is showing his whole A-hole card about the line of succession.

  11. NotSoSimpleTaylor says:

    I agree that Team Sussex needs to know when to let go rather than be defensive all the time. I understand that is more reflexive but whoever is advising them needs to tell them when to shut up. But I also think this is Harry’s way of daring the UK to remove his titles and not really caring if it happens. It’ll be a gigantic shit show across Europe if/when it happens.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Oh, I truly believe Harry wants to be stripped of his titles. Then the family and the press will have absolutely no claim to him.

  12. LaraK says:

    You gotta love republicans! Someone says “Nazis are bad” and they are like “Look, he’s talking about us!”
    Are they even aware how they sound?

  13. tee says:

    I’m so intrigued by M&H’s moves over the last few months. They’ve really seized this moment of heightened public interest in a way I don’t think anyone expected. It’s almost like they’re purposely antagonizing their detractors within the media and the family by simply refusing to go away and be quiet. Of course the BM isn’t actually mad, they love it, but I just know the some RF members are pissed lol. From “winning” coronavirus to basically irrelevance in a few short months.

    • Harla says:

      While I don’t think they are “purposely antagonizing their detractors…”, they just don’t operate that way, I do agree that they have really seized this moment. As Harry said some time ago, they need to strike while the irons hot because he felt that once the Cambridge kids got older more attention would be paid to them, their dating lives, etc. I am thrilled that such great opportunities have come the Sussex’s way and that they are in the position to grab each and every one of them.

    • Nyro says:

      I don’t think they’re purposely antagonizing them but I do think they operate in a way that reveals their haters to be a bunch clueless unhinged obsessive pieces of crap who have no idea what they’re talking about. Everything since the Santa Barbara house reveal has made the BM and the BRF look utterly ridiculous. I believe they leaked the house purchase, which came right after weeks and weeks of constant mocking about them being broke ass couch surfers. And then the Netflix reveal came right after weeks of stories about them being turned away or humiliated by Hollywood power players, able to get a meeting because of their royal status but then being laughed out of the room. They operate so that any into the reveal also pretty much ruins the “credibility” of their media tormentors.

  14. Harper says:

    Will someone tell Piers Morgan that Harry is not the Queen? Morgan has a word count to hit for his pieces, he slaps a “strip them of their titles” headline on there and then commits half of his words to yammer on about the Queen’s duty/life/blah blah blah. Morgan knows he doesn’t have enough heft to his complaints to carry his articles so he shifts into expositional history about Petty Betty. But at least there was no mention of Tyler Perry.

  15. Vera says:

    Piers Morgan will attack them no matter what. He is on this vendetta since he didnt get an invite to the wedding. A lot of people do know this and he gets called out on twitter regularly about this.
    he is unhinged and should be prosecuted for stalking and harassment.

  16. BnLurkN4eva says:

    @Kaiser, I have to disagree with you here – it happens but rarely, but in this case I do think it was a good thing to clarify. You have to remember that we are following closely, most people are not and they won’t even necessary go look at what H/M actually said, they will read/hear the blather from the British media and think, oh no, Prince Harry xyz. This way when this situation is written about by anyone, there will sometimes be the add on of H/M camp clarified saying xyz. I and you didn’t need H/M xyz, but others who are more casual consumers of this stuff may need it. It’s the same reason that FF was good to put out there for the casual non royal watchers. Nothing in it was new to me, but it certainly put a different spin on things for those not paying close attention.

    • RideSallyRide says:

      Agree 100%, @BnLurkN4eva!

      These two have spent the last four years being slandered, libeled, abused and battered, publicly, worldwide, by foe and fam. They were not even allowed a no-comment comment in their own justified defense. Freedom has got to taste mighty good right now. I hope they are enjoying every minute. Fly high freebirds.

  17. bloemheks says:

    There’s only one candidate who constantly whines about fake news and not being treated fairly by the media. Ironic it’s his supporters who take issue with H&M coming out against misinformation and negativity.

  18. windyriver says:

    Meanwhile, the PO just handed me my official election ballot (I have a box; they were filing today’s mail while I was removing previous letters). I’m in NJ. The process begins.

    Didn’t expect the ballot for another week. Feel like I need to do something significant around it, possibly involving prayer of some kind…that’s how almost sacred it seems just holding it in my hand.

    Does anyone else remember that 18 year olds weren’t able to vote until 1971? You could send an 18 year old to fight in Vietnam, but they had no official voice in the political process sending them there until age 21. That was the year I turned 18, and because I remember how significant it was, I’ve voted (at the very least) in every presidential election since then.

    Google is telling me that the 26th amendment was passed unanimously by the Senate, almost unanimously by the House, and was ratified by the necessary number of states in about two months, quicker than any previous amendment. I know I Iived through it, but that seems almost unimaginable given how things are today.

  19. kerwood says:

    I think people have forgotten what Trump said about Prince Harry’s mother, not to mention Harry’s wife. If he felt like getting a dig in to that monster, I say ‘go Harry’.

  20. Mariane says:

    Well done to team sussex for shutting down that idiot. I disagree with you about their statement, the whole point of them leaving is because they had to take the abuse in silence. Now free, they can and should respond especially to media lies either with legal threats like the keenbridges or by releasing a statement destroying the gossipers.Notice how DM lies and hate articles no longer spread to American publications.

  21. Mignionette says:

    All these comments tell me one thing. People are too concerned about what the UK sh*t-stream media think of Harry and Meghan.

    Whereas Harry and Meghan DGAF what they think of them. This is why they are saying what they want (as they should do) and living their lives.

    And to those saying they should give up their titles, that’s like saying that your average person should give up their Mr, Mrs or Ms title.

    Harry and Meghan are ushering a new era of non-working Royals. Let Piers rant, because with each successive rant people will lose interest. In the same way Piers built his transatlantic infamy on Meghan’s back, he is also about to lose it focusing so much on her.

    Waiting for his old friend Murdoch to drop him when he has milked this well dry….