Wootton: Prince Harry needs to resign from Netflix because of the Diana musical!

Prince Harry of Belair? Prince Harry gets interviewed by James Corden on Tourist bus in Los Angeles

Netflix is currently streaming Diana: The Musical, a “film” version of the stage musical. I remember reading about the musical a while ago and it sounded like a giant mess, and I still have no idea why anyone even bothered with any of it. And why did Netflix even care? Netflix spends real money on The Crown and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s content deal, why even go for this tacky, budget tragedy? Well, I guess I might have to defend the musical because now Dan Wootton has his panties in a twist about it. Some highlights from Wootton’s column:

If Prince Harry isn’t writing his resignation letter to Netflix at this very moment after the international release of the revolting Diana musical then he is a man devoid of morals. For years the Duke of Sussex has waged war against any media organisation which, in his eyes, demeans the memory of his late mother or exploits and misinterprets her life for commercial gain.

Over the weekend his new US paymasters did exactly that in the most outrageous fashion. Diana: The Musical is the most offensive and degrading portrayal of the late Princess of Wales in fiction since her death in 1997 – and in terms of accuracy it makes that other historically-derided Netflix series The Crown look like a royal encyclopaedia of truth.

The lies about Di’s life are egregious – from suggesting she used HIV patients for publicity to attacking Margaret Thatcher for her politics. But at least she isn’t around to see such nonsense broadcast to millions around the world. Unlike Prince Harry’s grandmother the Queen, whom Netflix choose to portray as a heartless and nasty battleaxe who even suggests it would be easier to cut off Diana’s head at the height of her messy split from Prince Charles.

… Netflix is now streamer-by-appointment to Prince Harry. If he fails to speak out against such a horrendous depiction of his mother, then he is tacitly endorsing it.

[From The Daily Mail]

The funny thing is, I read gossip, movie reviews and royal tea all day, every day, and I’ve only seen a handful of pieces about Diana: The Musical before now. Someone tweeted a video of the James Hewitt entrance, and there are a few terrible (Cats-level) reviews. My point is that if they goal is to get people to avoid something abhorrent, perhaps Wootton shouldn’t detail every little twist and turn for maximum effect? Wootton IS the Streisand Effect, and always has been. Anyway, my guess is that Harry thinks the musical is tacky as hell, but he also thinks Wootton and the cottage industry of royal commentary is pretty f–king tacky too. Harry is probably still appalled that his brother made a speech calling their mother paranoid and delusional too, but what do I know.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

126 Responses to “Wootton: Prince Harry needs to resign from Netflix because of the Diana musical!”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ModeratelyWealthy says:

    “historically-derided Netflix series The Crown”

    Wooton, your devious cat- there you are, re writing History !How quaint!

    Maybe it is time to, you know, come down from your Cambridges high and start reconnecting with reality?

    Just worried about you, pal!

    • Merricat says:

      As if the critical opinion of a KP lackey and known hack can change the truth. He’s a laughingstock.

      • Elizabeth Regina says:

        Desperate Dan is showing his arse. Now that the leaks have dried up and he has lost a lot of his unhinged fa base, will he be desperate enough to team up with sperm donor and turn on his handlers? A boy needs to make a living after all.

    • Mac says:

      The only Netflix content Harry is responsible for is the content he produces.

      • pottymouth pup says:

        does Wooten think that Harry is an employee of Netflix that he can resign? They have a production/content creation contract, Harry can’t unilaterally void it because the RR don’t like some of the content on Netflix. As you note, the only content he has control over is the stuff he produces

      • Still_Sarah says:

        @ Mac : Agreed. Netflix is a massive company and while Harry might not like what was done with “Diana The Musical”, I don’t see that it’s up to him to stop it or disassociate from the company. The Netflix contract is very important for H&M’s future and the work they hope to do (profit and non-profit). It gives them a great platform to communicate to the world.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      I love the PR and marketing they constantly give to Netflix and the Sussexes. The penny will drop one day 🙂

  2. goofpuff says:

    Wow they really are very jealous over there at Kensington Palace aren’t they. Not even trying to hide the envy. “Harry please give up all your money so you can be poor and crawl back to us?”

    • Dee says:

      This is the real and only reason for these reactions. These deals gave Harry and Meghan agency away from the royal family, since they were no longer beholden financially. You see this all the time in abusive relationships, limiting access to money or the ability to make money for greater control. They want them to lose deals, so that they have no choice but to be back under the yoke of Charles and eventually William.

      • GraceB says:

        I mean some small part of me can see a point to all of this. Netflix has H&M. They can continue to release whatever they want, even if H&M don’t like it. At the same time, what exactly does Wooten think Harry is going to do? Just hand back all the money? Money which is most likely now tied up in their property and other ventures. That’s not going to happen.

        In some ways I think they might have shot themselves in the foot a bit by becoming tied to such an extent with a giant like Netflix, who do have some questionable content (Royal related stuff aside), but they also needed to make money. As far as scandals go, I think there are much bigger ones out there.

      • Dee says:

        @GraceB True, but you can say that about literally every large corporation, and a lot of small ones. Once you get to having employee counts in the thousands, there are a lot of decisions made that everyone won’t or can’t agree with. I can’t imagine not working for Universal because I don’t like the director of a movie they produced. It’s just needless nitpicking to explain away the real reason, Harry and Meghan now have money which means they don’t have to tap dance to our tune (RF and BM).

      • Sofia says:

        @Dee: I agree completely. The other streaming giants have their own big issues that aren’t content related but the way they treat employees, how the company is run etc etc. Had H&M gone to, let’s say, Amazon, they would be branded terrible people for working with a company that is known to treat their employees horrifically. And Disney and Apple don’t exactly score high marks when it comes to employee satisfaction either.

      • ABritGuest says:

        There really isn’t a point given how Harry’s ancestors acquired their wealth through pillage& brutal exploitation. And whilst the royal family align with bullying, bigoted tabloids like the Fail& the Scum- people like Dan have no room to talk about companies that Harry works with.

        After all these tabloids were pretty disgusting to Diana during her life & after she died but there are no demands for William to stop working with them just like nobody is making a fuss about William working with the BBC on earthshot shortly after blaming them for his mother’s paranoia& for the breakdown of his parents marriage etc when the panorama report was published.

      • GraceB says:

        @Dee, I’m not disagreeing with that. I just think that at certain levels you have more of a voice. There is a difference between being a lower level employee and signing a big contract to provide content. I don’t want to argue it too much because it just comes across as H&M bashing, and ultimately they couldn’t see into the future. Did they know that a couple of years ahead they would have Diana The Musical? I doubt it. And who knows what they’ll have in another couple of years. All I’m saying is that now the deal is done, their hands are pretty much tied.

      • Dee says:

        @GraceB- Oh no, I understood, I don’t think it was bashing at all! It’s just a hindsight thing. It’s inevitable with them partnering with so many corporations that something at some point down the line is going to ruffle feathers. And there definitely is a difference between someone who has the cache to meet with the CEO, and someone working the 9-5 in a cubicle, but I think it just becomes an is it worth issue. Plus, I think it would just open another can of worms for them, because then it becomes, H&M using their influence to squash things they don’t like. They will never win with the BM

      • Sid says:

        The BRF happily consorts with dictators, wife abusers, pedophiles, and other members of the lowest of the low. One of their sex offender princes is currently being financially supported in his legal case to the tune of millions by his mummy. That is just the tip of the iceberg with that sleazy family. Having a production deal with a company that is airing a goofy Diana musical pales in comparison to that. There is very little Netflix could do that would be any worse than what the BRF has done and continues to do.

      • Eleonora says:

        Good point @abritguest.

        Newspapers that was horrid to Diana now taking the moral highground about Diana?

    • Bev says:

      @GraceB, after he’s spent his whole life being forced to work with the reporters who vilified his mother and the paparazzi who chased her down to her death and stood over her clicking instead off offering aid, and the newspapers and tv stations that happily dragged her name through the mud for 40+ years now, I imagine Netflix is a true breath of fresh air to Harry.

      • Debbie says:

        These reporters never cease to amaze me. The way they examine Prince Harry’s finances from across the Atlantic while casting a blind eye to the sources of income of those right under their eye, in their own country. Remarkable. Even if DW wanted to overlook the royal family’s despicable history of exploitation (as Wooten seems to be doing), how does he write the above article while ignoring other royal family members who have tried unsuccessfully to get their own deals with Netflix or other companies with checkered histories?

      • GraceB says:

        Have they though? I’m not saying that other Royals don’t have shady sources of income because we know they do. I’ve just never heard of them trying and failing to get deals with streaming services. I’m sure that if they wanted to, they could, providing they were willing to provide the right kind of content.

        This is something I mentioned in a comment the a few days back. That even if the monarchy ceased to exist, they would still be in an extremely privileged position, with plenty of deals coming their way. They will never be without money or opportunities, or face the same struggles as most people.

  3. Irene says:

    Hasn’t Charles released a documentary on Netflix?

    Isn’t William due to release a documentary on The BBC?

    The hypocrisy stinks.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Irene: No, Charles has a deal with Amazon Prime.

      • Irene says:

        This is what I was thinking of.

        Prince Charles: Inside the Duchy of Cornwall

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Irene: That’s not Charles. This an ITV documentary that was released about 2 years ago.

      • Concern Fae says:

        Just went to get the link to the documentary about Charles’ other mistress, Dale, Lady Tyron, AKA Kanga, and her sad, sad life and tragic death, but it has been taken down. Didn’t watch the most recent season of The Crown, but did they deal with that?

      • terra says:

        @Concern Fae: No, they flat out have Anne say that Charles’ only mistress is Camilla, which was such a bold-faced lie I almost noped out of the rest of the season entirely.

        I always wonder who his current mistress is now that he’s made a previous favorite his bonafide – and how many others there have been in the time since managing that feat.

  4. Amy Bee says:

    Dan Wootton is grasping at straws if this is all he could talk about. He’d be better off leaving his ammunition for when Crown Season 5 comes out. I can’t wait for that meltdown. One thing I don’t get is why the press keep calling for Harry to give up his Netflix deal?

    • Merricat says:

      Because they don’t like it that other (U.S.) media get to deal directly with Harry.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Merricat: Is that it? I’m not sure. I get that Harry is not poor and destitute as they wished but if he didn’t have the Netflix deal he’d have some other deal. I’d love to know the reasons for the anger from the press.

      • L84Tea says:

        And because they want H&M to be broke. It’s killing them that they went to the US and made themselves rich and successful. To them, that is not how it was supposed to happen.

      • Merricat says:

        Amy Bee, I really do think that they’re angry because of their own lost income. Being denied access to the best members of the rf and then seeing that access bestowed on the U.S. press must be maddening for the rota, especially because of their “special relationship” with the rf.

      • Izzy says:

        @AmyBee, if the deal was with a company other than Netflix, they’d be pissed at that company instead. It’s about Netflix having a deal with the Sussexes, not necessarily Netflix itself. The fact that they also have The Crown and this musical is just the fuel to thee bonfire of crazy that is the Rota Rats (and Dan Rotten in particular).

      • Sid says:

        Merricat has it right. These people have lost a ton of potential money now that they have no access. When Meghan joined the family it was a financial windfall for a lot of them. People who had never even covered the BRF before were able to magically become royal experts, give interviews, write blogs and articles, etc. Even the lunatics who attack on social media Meghan were making money. One of the ringleaders apparently was able to quit her regular job and even bought a new house! The royal reporters and photographers could have had a decade or so of it raining money on them because of the Sussexes, but they decided to bet on the wrong horse. Oh well. Suffer.

      • iconoclast59 says:

        @Merricat, why not both? The BM is p*ssed because the Sussexes are enjoying the good life AND they’ve iced out the tabloids.

    • Millennial says:

      Because they wanted him to fail. That’s what sad little people they are. Desperate to watch someone they don’t even know IRL fail… it tells you a lot about how they feel about themselves, more than anything.

    • Zapp Brannigan says:

      Because Harry was supposed to fail, he was supposed to be the dumbf#ck bumbling drunk out of nightclubs that did not work for the crown yet spent freely, all to make the FFK look good in comparison. Instead her Majesty ended up with a grandson who is eager to work, thoughtful, empathetic to others suffering and uses his advantages in life to help others and they can’t cope with that, they are throwing their toys out of the pram because they have a man that any family would be proud of.

      • Christine says:

        Seriously, well said. I totally agree, pretty much any other family (except for the terrible ones, obviously) on the planet would be so proud of Harry. I really hope he and Meghan know that, in their bones.

      • Virginia says:

        @Zapp Brannigan Bravo! You just read my mind! Who wouldn’t be proud of a son in law like Harry.

    • Becks1 says:

      I think the Netflix deal enrages them because that was Harry and Meghan’s key to independence. That was when they bought their house, paid for their own security, etc.

      I also think that DW etc try to use it as a way to cheapen H&M – William’s documentary is with BBC, but Harry and Meghan are with the tacky and cheap (in style) Netflix (never mind that Netflix has quality programming.) And of course you are supposed to forget that William tried to get a deal with Netflix.

      Finally I think it really ticks them off that they don’t know the details of the deal – how much it was, etc. We’ve seen them try desperately to learn from Netflix and Spotify how much H&M are getting paid and I think it drives them crazy that they don’t have access to that information.

    • Ginger says:

      His articles are more manic and desperate. He has nothing now and he is definitely scrambling.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Yeah. I think his inside contacts have dried up. Harry and Meghan left and cut off access of the Palace. And Wooten’s original ace, the one he used to pressure KP (the rural rivals/affair story) is no longer usable because William got his lawyers involved and he was successful in getting a press ban on the story. So DW hasn’t got any scoops anymore and he is reduced to write increasingly unhinged screeches about trivial and tenuously royal adjacent things.

      • Sofia says:

        I agree. We’ve been assuming that Wootton’s articles are him speaking for KP, but they’re becoming very very bizarre (even for him). So my opinion is since he’s got absolutely nothing (because KP have nothing to give), he’s lashing out as a result.

      • Becks1 says:

        You all could be right. ArtHistorian has a good point about the affair story no longer being leverage, because the lawyers have stepped in. And maybe William thinks he paid his debt to Wootton in that regard, by leaking Sussexit to him. So in William’s mind the contract is fulfilled and Wootton doesn’t have anything else on him, and even if he did it doesn’t matter bc William doesn’t have any inside info on the Sussexes anymore.

        So now Wootton is scrambling and desperate and that could explain why there’s a hint of anger and instability in some of these articles, where it sounds like over the top praise but there’s a lot of shade in there as well (like his article about Kate taking after Meghan and becoming glamorous, that ticked off a LOT of Kate stans apparently).

        Its like he knows his better bet for the long haul is to keep on the Cambridges good side (as much as possible) but he also wants to be the one with the inside scoop and to break the big stories, and he can’t do that right now, so he’s stuck in this gray area where he still has to kiss up to William and Kate but is bitter about it.

      • lanne says:

        He seems really unhinged. What’s the over/under that this dude just snaps on William at some point? He’s not getting the access he thinks he’s owed. He has some serious boundary issues where it comes to the royals–this all feels bizarrely personal for him to the point that he’s showing visible anger. He’s not earning the money he expected to be earning. What does he gain from towing the party line? He can’t snap at the Sussexes–he doesn’t have any inside info on them. But he does have inside info on William. It seems like there are a lot of people in the UK walking around with off the record info on William. How long will the line of protection hold? Media exists to make money, and it doesn’t seem like loyalty to William will pay out over the long term.

        Maybe the calculation goes something like this: the 1st person to report on William will likely be silenced, shamed, and derided. (How could you make up such lies about our Glorious Future Future King? The poor Queen!). But the second, or better yet the third who reports with a big scoop will likely make big bucks. Talk show appearances and books galore. Andrew Morton made his living off Diana’s book. Is that Mean Gal Tominey gunning to write “Kate, Her True Story?” Is it that no one wants to be the first to report on William but everyone wants to be second or third?

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Wooten has def entered Piers Morgan and Angela Levin territory where it seems that he’s invested in certain royals in a weird and obviously unhealthy manner.

      • Sofia says:

        @lanne: I think a lot of it is that no reporter (even if they’re second, third etc etc) wants to be known in establishment and press circles as giving the “poor” queen “grief” during her final years by blowing the lid on another heir and his wife’s marriage not being great. Plus I doubt anyone also wants to fight KP/William’s lawyers because of time, effort and not having the money to do so. It’s too much to “lose” right now than gaining anything. They could escape to the US and all, but they’ll still be a pariah in their home country and I don’t think anyone wants that without, again, gaining something significant.

      • Liz version 700 says:

        Absolutely, Wooten sounds like a stalker on “Criminal Minds”

      • Harper says:

        Is William even using Wooten anymore as his go-to? I’ve had the impression that Burger King is trying to appear more kingly by going to The Times to conduct his reign of terror. Certainly after the Oprah interview he spoke first with Roya Nikkhah, and the Times also gave us The Other Brother article not too long afterward. I think Wooten is trying to win Willie back with his outrageous attacks on Harry & Meghan. I look forward to the day Wooten loses his patience with The Times getting all the scoops and retaliates.

    • Lolo says:

      Sometimes it just comes down to the dude needs to write an article. It’s really that simple. Has he gone a week without writing something about that Sussexes?
      He has due dates and what can get him “traction” or reactions in his mind is this kinda stuff. Nevermind that William had a viewing for a Netflix show, or nevermind William working with the BBC after the Diana interview stuff or Charles working with Amazon. None of that gains traction because no one cares but anything Harry and Meghan will get him the attention he so desperately wants.

  5. Merricat says:

    Harry’s “tacit approval” of a pretty bad musical versus Wootton’s explicit support of racism is no contest. Wootton is an idiot. He’s probably flagellating himself while reading his past garbage on Willy at this very moment.

  6. Lorelei says:

    When I saw that last night…I don’t even know— what’s left to even say about these people anymore? They’re determined to make sure Harry and Meghan never have a day of peace. Not one day. Wooten’s profile has risen over the past year or so, and the deal that Piers Morgan got was so discouraging to hear about.

    BUT I just keep reminding myself that their audience is very, very small, and shrinking by the day— while Harry and Meghan continue to be out there, doing great things and being treated as the rockstars they are, gaining even MORE supporters everywhere they show up, and simply ignoring the petty, pasty little pr!cks who use the tabloids to attack them.

    Time will not be kind to the Windsors, as the rest of the world moves on and they continue stagnating, with Kate as their last hope. Thoughts and prayers to them.

    • Snuffles says:

      To quote Meghan “Peaceful under a tree is me everyday.” I don’t think they are paying attention to any of the RRs anymore. I think they have people monitoring for anything actionable and won’t hear about it unless it’s particularly egregious.

  7. Zapp Brannigan says:

    Andrew is still roaming about and having his legal fees paid by the Queen (ie: taxpayer) maybe save some energy for that Wootton.

  8. Jillian says:

    I love how Wooten speaks as though the Sussexes are solely beholden to Netflix (“paymasters”? Please, these people are very rich) and that they should also quit their supposed only income stream to appease a bunch of bitches they quit months ago (who would do that?). Full crazy, past the point of comedy now

    • Lady Digby says:

      Woowoo is very upset because they are so successful and he is talking to nobody via GB news!
      Both he and W and K are Kermit green with jealousy!

  9. Becks1 says:

    So last night while I was waiting at soccer for my oldest, I thought, why not, let’s give it a go.

    I lasted….5 minutes. and I love musicals, and I am not afraid of cheese. The only interesting part in those 5 minutes was how the staff/courtiers act as the chorus and kind of seem to be injecting the reality/commentary into the musical, and when I say that was “interesting” I mean……not very interesting at all, it was just the “only” semi interesting part of the musical.

    So I watched 5 minutes, we met Camilla, the Queen said that Charles not getting married was the equivalent of matricide, Diana refused to be underestimated, and Charles and the Queen decided Diana Spencer was perfect because she would be discreet and obedient and of course she would want to be the perfect princess of England.

    So it was a little heavy-handed with the themes, lets just say.

    ANYWAY – all that to say, if Dan Wootton just kept his mouth shut, I bet most people wouldn’t even realize this was on netflix and it would just die a streaming death.

    • Rapunzel says:

      IDK about most people not noticing. It was prominent on my Netflix homepage and I have never Netflixed anything remotely royal related.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yes but how many of them are going to actually watch it? I only started bc I saw a tweet about how the musical HAD to be a comedy, because it was so bad, and I thought “I can make it through if I look at it like that.” and yet….5 minutes, lol. I just think it would fade away into the Netflix underworld but the more people keep talking about it, the more people are going to watch it.

      • Rapunzel says:

        Becks- I see your point, but the Netflux algorithms know how to tempt folks, and it might conceivably get a good amount of views. Finished watches, maybe not.

        That being said, Wooty the Blowfish is definitely Streisand effecting the thing.

      • Becks1 says:

        True, it definitely got me to turn it on, which is all Netflix cares about. Five minutes though like I said. It was BAD lol.

      • Nic919 says:

        I normally will watch musicals, but the trailer was so bad that there is no way I can watch it.

    • Jais says:

      @becks1- I think DW secretly just really wanted to watch this musical for his own enjoyment and then used it to write an article. Like even he probably struggles to come up with his next unhinged royals topic.

    • s says:

      I got through “technically” but I could not tell you one song I heard… it was just really, really bad and my attention kept drifting and I didn’t care enough to go back and see what I missed.

  10. Roserose says:

    DW calling anyone in the world “devoid of morals” is funny as hell. Hector Projector strikes again!

  11. Sofia says:

    So if I follow and apply Wootton’s “logic”, shouldn’t William be made to stop doing documentaries with the BBC? The network that conducted the Diana interview? The same interview William demanded of the BBC to never air again? The same network he accused of making his mother paranoid?

    • Jais says:

      Exactly @sofia. It’s tiring that everything they throw at Harry and Meghan can also be thrown at the Cambridges but never is. I guess if they don’t say it, it never happened.

  12. TeamAwesome says:

    I made it through the first almost hour. It’s intensely cheesy. all! the! songs! are so loud and high strung. I disagree with a lot of musical choices, like Prince Charles would never be a tenor. But honey, if it’s something for these nutters to complain about I will gladly stream it on repeat and on mute.

  13. TabithaD says:

    Wootton has completely lost the plot. He’s deranged!

  14. Jan says:

    It sure will get more viewers than the TV station Wootie is on, jealousy will get him no where.
    He sure loves Harry. Buy a hint Wootie, he is not reading or listening to your histrionics

  15. Ginger says:

    Harry and Meghan have a 5 year (I think) deal with Netflix. They are under contract. They can’t just pull out because Netflix is airing a cheesy Diana musical. KP and the British press are so jealous and can’t hide it.

    • Charm says:

      “Multi-year.” No one involved in the deal and no other reputable person ever said how many years the deal was. Anything being said to that effect is unadulterated shitmedia lies.

  16. Over it says:

    Harry doesn’t own Netflix Dan, you snowflake,
    William endorses the sun by attending their awards and bbc by working with them , so yeah . What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander.

  17. Catherine says:

    This is Wooten trying to make up for that the Kate is stepped up her game because of Meghan article that backfired so spectacularly. They’ve already trotted out this narrative when the crown came out except it was Pierd Morgan calling for Harry to give up his contract. The carnival’s capacity for hypocrisy is astounding. I will say this though. It is a crass move on Netflix’s part. They clearly thought they could capitalize on the popularity of the crown and draw in an audience even though by all accounts the musical was absolutely dreadful. But not all Netflix content is quality. The Sussexes are not responsible for that. And of course the carnival continues to completely ignored the fact that William has entered into a business relationship with the BBC. A company he claims contributed to his mother’s paranoia and death.

  18. Louise177 says:

    None of this makes sense. When you have a contract you can’t just resign. Charles and William work with the BBC and Netflix and nobody is saying they shouldn’t. Working with the BBC should be more disgraceful since it’s a news organization that lied to and took advantage of Diana as apposed to a tacky work of fiction. Wootten is pathetic.

    • PinkBerry says:

      Charles works with Amazon, not Netflix.

      • Becks1 says:

        And yet there are no complaints about the environmental impact of Amazon and its shipping practices or employment practices or space travel and how Charles is a hypocrite for partnering with them.

        That’s why it doesn’t matter who H&M work with – Netflix, Disney plus, HBO, Amazon Prime – the British press would find a way to tear them down for it .

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Becks1, as well as calling them to the task of being personally offended and to take a stand with whichever company that they work with. Suddenly, it’s the responsibility of Harry and Meghan to fight all of those that are disrespectful of The Monarchy OR the Royal Family. Yet, you don’t see TOBB making a stink as a Royal, and future FFK who has much more power as part of The Monarchy than a private citizen! As long as it doesn’t make TOBB look bad, we hear crickets!

        Give it up CrayCrayWoo! Your dog just won’t hunt!

  19. L84Tea says:

    Are these RR’s ever going to get the memo that they do not get to dictate how H&M run their lives?

    • Merricat says:

      Lol, it’s weird that they’re still in denial. So weird.

      • L84Tea says:

        I can’t figure out if they really are in denial or if they do get it and are simply bound and determined to, like another poster said somewhere above, not allow H&M a single day of peace. I really can’t.

      • Merricat says:

        Sooner or later, it’s going to stop paying. Harry and Meghan don’t react to them anymore, and you can only rehash old stories for so long–people need fresh stories to stir them up, and the rota no longer has access to fresh news about them. Plus, I think people eventually get sick of a steady diet of hate.

      • lanne says:

        Harry and Meghan are gray rocking them to hell. Starve the abuser of attention. Don’t respond. Disengage disengage disengage. Leave the abusers talking to the wind. That’s the way to respond to all stalkers and abusers. It destroys any power they think they have over you. Meghan and Harry have plenty of peace. They are half a planet away, living their lives, giving these idiots the attention they deserve. None. This is the equivalent of the stalker or abusing sending 50 texts in 1 day and the victim ignoring them all (take screenshots for documentation but no response).

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Meghan and Harry’s refusal to play the game with the tabloid press – and said press’ reaction really illustrates HOW abusive the MO of the British tabloid press is. Their reactions to everything Harry and Meghan do comes very close to being textbook strategies of abusers. Their coverage of the Sussexes is pretty much intense emotional abuse on a global level, which is pretty horrific when you think about it.

        Furthermore, the abusive way that the British tabloids operates isn’t just confined to Harry and Meghan – but to a lot of other, less prominent people who don’t have the resources to fight back or to protect themselves. There are so many stories where people have had their livelihoods and lives ruined by this kind of abusive coverage, even to the point of at least one suicide. This really out to raise some major red flags but it seems as if it doesn’t. The fact that various British tabloid publications regularly engage in criminal methods to get their stories is horrific and the fact that it seems very difficult to get them to stop (even after Levenson) is absolutely bonkers.

      • Jais says:

        Thank you for bringing this up @arthistorian. It’s really horrifying. A lot of peoples’ lives are irrevocably hurt by these tabloids and most don’t have the means to fight back. It’s criminal and yet never really challenged, like shrug, it’s just a part of life. Interestingly, the apathy towards it is similar to the apathy toward the monarchy.

    • Lolo says:

      They don’t care. It’s all about writing an article. I said below that they have deadlines. What gets them a response? Harry and Meghan article. He’s written 2 or 3 other articles like this. One for P&G, the prince and I think Netflix. This is what he does. I’m sure Meghan and Harry aren’t paying attention. I didn’t even know about the articles except seeing this on here and i refuse to click on them. Also at some point even the Harry and Meghan haters will get tired of the same type of article from Dan.

  20. Harper says:

    Wooten: For years the Duke of Sussex has waged war against any media organisation which, in his eyes, demeans the memory of his late mother or exploits and misinterprets her life for commercial gain.”

    I mean, sure, Harry wants his mom’s memory to be respected but this supposed war Harry has waged was made up just so Wooten can say Harry is now making an exception for Netflix for monetary gain and as a result, look at how immoral and money-grubbing Harry is. Strip his titles!

    Anyway, I watched some of the musical — it’s campy and not fine art. But, big deal. If Wooten cares so much about Diana’s legacy then he should rage at the producers and writers and financial backers who brought it to the stage.

    • one of the Marys says:

      @Harper, I wondered about that war too. I would have said he’s at war with the British media to protect his wife and family. But I guess if Wooten frames it that way it damns the tabloid media and identifies one of the real reasons they left

  21. Lucylee says:

    The dirty little secret is Camilla does not look good in the show. She is not a likable character.

  22. Snuffles says:

    We’re watching a mental breakdown in real time, y’all!

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      How many breakdowns does that make for DW this year alone? I can’t count that high.lol

      The Guardian review was a fun read –

      Snarling tabloid hacks – love that
      “It’s a saucer-eyed retelling of the life of Diana, Princess of Wales, with bobbing chorus lines of footmen and flunkies who with a costume change morph into step-in-time phalanxes of snarling tabloid hacks, while Diana solemnly warbles downstage about her loneliness and determination in a pool of follow spotlight.”

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Agreatreckoning, his review is delightful!! The description of the peasants costumes and the lyrics! It makes me tempted to watch it, as I adore musicals but I don’t know if I could survive through its entirety!

      • Debbie says:

        Hm, Agreatreckoning: The only thing that paragraph tells me is that the British media is able to use the correct title for someone who has left the royal family when they want to, even if they left by way of a divorce. So, when they don’t use it it’s because they want to send a message.

  23. MsIam says:

    So its fine for William and Kate to cooperate with the same tabloids that hounded Diana to death but Harry somehow can’t work with Netflix? Because Dan says so? Wow, they are really desperate not to talk about Andrew and who he was/is doing business with aren’t they? Lol!

  24. Layla says:

    It’s official. Alphabett Spaghetti has officially lost his marbles

  25. @poppedbubble says:

    “…and in terms of accuracy it makes that other historically-derided Netflix series The Crown look like a royal encyclopaedia of truth.”

    Ah. So he admits The Crown has truths in it, huh? I thought he screamed it was pure fiction?

  26. Seraphina says:

    All I have to say is: I watched the trailer and it’s like driving by an accident- you want to look away but you just can’t help but look.

  27. Jennifer says:

    I watched it. It’s very tabloid version, with so many terrible lines that I may have to watch it all again to write them down. It was stuff like, “the thrilla in Manila with Diana and Camilla.” The James Hewitt entrance in particular….shirtless on a mechanical bull, introduced by Barbara Cartland. Seems to be going for deliberate bad for lulz.

    • Eurydice says:

      See, I was going to avoid this, but you said Barbara Cartland…

      • Liz version 700 says:

        Hahahaha I wonder if Barbara introduced him with one of her terribly campy lines like “ Oh James! How can you be so so wonderful?” Snort. Barbara might be a deal maker haha I might have to see it too

      • Eurydice says:

        @Liz – When I was feeling especially downtrodden by the Wall Street dudes in my office, I used to spend evenings soothing myself with Barbara Cartland. I think I’ve read all 189,756 of her “novels.”

        There are really only 5 plots – I love the trope where the heroine’s father has gambled away the family fortune ( or something) and she has to become the secret chef (or something) to Lord Vulcan (or somebody), and she’s petite and blond, with huge violet-colored eyes and a tiny pointed chin to match her tiny pointed head. She gets Lord Vulcan to stop drinking and the story ends with him kissing the hem of her skirt and chanting, “I love you, I love you, I love you.”

        Amazon has a boxed set of Barbara Cartland movies made in the 80’s. I’m so tempted. There’s one with Helena Bonham Carter and Diana Rigg as the evil Lady Vulcan – it’s priceless.

      • Liz version 700 says:

        Eurydice! You nailed it!!! That was my favorite plot too. I read these in College and I so remember the violet eyes and pointy chins lol!!!! There was also a lot of riding on giant horses if I recall!!!!

    • Deering24 says:

      What?!? Bwhahahahahah…🤣🤣 Yeah, nobody behind this was serious at all…

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Eurydice, as I read your comments, I am brought back to the time of her books heavily plastered on every end cap in the grocery store. All you could see were enormous preppy breasts, ivory skin, deep cleavage that has a broad, muscular arm wrapped around the heroines tiny waste as she is pushed up against him “member”!! They are both portrayed as lust filled sex machines!! It’s funny that their features remained the same except for their clothing or backdrop. She was everywhere!!

  28. Lexistential says:

    Dan must be desperate if he’s milking this to write a column. This is comical.

  29. Bev says:

    As far as I can tell, it was a Diana friendly tale, I think she would have seen the humor in all that campy cheesyness. It’s the palace that has to worry that their perfidy is once again in front street. No one care.

  30. janinedm says:

    I won’t be watching Diana the Musical , but I WILL watch Trixie and Katya watch it.

  31. Emma says:

    The queen as a “heartless and nasty battleaxe”? Yeah, she is, and DW just can’t stop telling the truth he most fears.

  32. aquarius64 says:

    @Elizabeth Regina – I think Dan Rotten will not use Bad Dad and his demon spawn anytime soon or none at all. TT blew up that Australian interview where he spilled he colluded with a specific media member to stop the wedding. (That interview was yanked from all platforms, but some did get screen shots and copies of the interview.) Notice that not one Markle was deployed during the Sussex NYC tour? That slip of the lip has made the Markles loose cannons that could bring down the lot of them.

  33. MMadison says:

    Let’s be clear: If Harry/Meghan had purchased a farm in Idaho and completely cut themselves off from society….Wootton would still be posting columns in the Daily Fail demanding that Harry come out of hiding and defend Diana from Netflix by cancelling his membership (or something equally stupid).

  34. L4frimaire says:

    This guy really is on a bit of a tear and really suffering from verbal diarrhea. This musical first came out in 2019 and had a limited run on Broadway. It’s been out there and hasn’t had much traction. Wasn’t it planned for Netflix for a while? In case he hadn’t noticed, Princess Diana is having a cultural moment again. There is Pablo Larain’s film Spencer, CNN has a new series on her, new season of the Crown, and Diana’s old memoirists Tina Brown and Andrew Morton putting out new books on the royals with focus on the Sussexes. So of course raggedy b*t h Wooten has to come out with this latest screed because apparently, they are still upset about Harry’s Netflix deal and want him to get rid of it. Never mind that Diana’s other son basically got a 5 part series as a payoff from the BBC for Diana’s panorama interview from 25? years ago. Is he criticizing that as well? This sounds like someone is getting more and more angry as they think too much on the last couple weeks. Maybe he should focus on the royals he’s paid to fluff up, instead of Netflix’s programming or the fact that, while Archewell has a production deal with Netflix, Harry is not in charge of all their programming and, as a royal, he himself has gotten a lot of fictional portrayals of him that are less than flattering. Again hoping to goad a response from the Sussexes and they will continue to ignore his nonsense. Mic Wright on Twitter basically said about it“ Would hate to be the intern who has to empty Dan Wootton’s nappy today; he’s dropped a humungous pile even by his standards.” Pretty much sums it up. The anger about Harry’s Netflix deal is anger about the financial independence it represents. That’s what it comes down to.

  35. Mina_Esq says:

    Harry should do a Diana documentary as part of their Netflix deal. That would really set them off lol This is ridiculous. They resent him for achieving financial independence and basically being given a huge platform from which to communicate his views. I think they fear the future H&M Netflix content. This guy reaches maybe a few hundred thousand readers but H&M can potentially reach millions of viewers with their content.

  36. Robin Samuels says:

    Commenters say Charles works with Prime and not Netflix as though one is better than the other. Charles works with whoever pays. You can always count on Dan Wooten to produce the coverup story. Last week Charles was on the hot-seat for selling ambassadorships, medals, etc., to foreign dignitaries. When Meghan edited the British Vogue, Dan Wooten was the first to proclaim, ” Royals don’t edit magazines.” A landslide of receipts posted on social media took care of that falsehood. Dan is known for regularly speaking before thinking. He has a close relationship with Jason Knauf and serves as the KP liaison to the tabloid press. Diana, the Musical on Netflix, is the least of their problems.

  37. Vera says:

    ‘Diana: The Musical is the most offensive and degrading portrayal of the late Princess of Wales in fiction since her death in 1997 ‘
    They need some editors at that cat litter masquerading as newspaper. This reads like the previous ‘most offensive and degrading portrayal of the late Princess of Wales in fiction’ before Diana: The Musical was her DEATH.

  38. SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

    Watch this ‘musical’ if you get the chance, it’s gloriously batshit. Laughed my arse off at James Hewitt’s entrance. Barbara Cartland is there as mad fairy godmother character. The whole thing’s insane in the best kind of way, but can’t tell if it’s accidental or intentional comedy.

  39. phlyfiremama says:

    I find this quote exactly and unfortunately defines how the royal family treated Diana before her death: “Diana: The Musical is the most offensive and degrading portrayal of the late Princess of Wales in fiction since her death in 1997”. Before her death, the most vicious portrayals of Dianna came FROM the BRF. Salty Isle trying to whitewash history right there!! They were so vicious to Diana: where is the condemnation of THOSE behaviors??

  40. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    Isn’t Charles a patron of the British Film Institute? Does that mean he’ll step down because there have been unflattering portrayals of royalty in movies? (And if so, isn’t that a form of censorship?)

  41. 2cents says:

    On another note, will prince Charles call the British minister of culture to urge Netflix to warn viewers that his ex-wife’s musical is based on fiction and should not be taken seriously? If not, why did he complain about Netflix’s the Crown?

  42. Charm says:

    So I wanted to say: this diatribe by woo-woo-boy is nothing because it doesnt top the love letter he wrote to billy-boy recently. But I didnt rmbr the date of the letter. I knew that a subsequent event had pushed woobottom’s public confession of his feelings for budgetVoldemort from the collective consciousness as it had just died suddenly. I couldnt recall the date of Phillip’s death to ascertain if the letter died as a result of that big news event so I did a google search: “dan wooten love letter to william.”
    And voila! The. Very. First. Item.

    April 8, 2021. The Letter.
    News of Phillip’s death hit the news cycle: April 9, 2021.

    So danny woo-woo-boy has to try harder with his hit pieces against H&M if he wants to top his Love Letter to Bullyiam.

  43. Well Wisher says:

    It is simple really, when Wooten gains editorial powers at the Fail and news station, then he make public suggestions to the Duke of Sussex in regards to his contract with Netflix. The description of the musical fits that of a satire, ergo, it in not a true depiction. It is unlike a speech describing one’s mother as paranoid in public.
    It is easy to assume, the NPD wants his supply, a Duke with limited funds have to toe the stupid line, unlike a self sufficent individual who can choose to not be abused.

  44. Marie says:

    I hate watched it. I like when Diana stage dove into the servant dancers.

  45. Tessa says:

    And where is the outrage when William used the word Paranoid in Reference to his mother’s interview with Bashir. DIana was not paranoid for one thing and she was not forced to do the interview, she would have done one Bashir or no Bashir. I notice the media did not criticize William for this.