Prince William is incandescent about the BBC’s ‘The Princes and the Press’

Diana's 60th birthday

A BBC journalist named Amol Rajan has made a documentary special which airs this evening in the UK called The Princes And The Press. It’s apparently about how Prince William and Prince Harry were briefing the media against one another back in 2018/2019, although clearly, William is absolutely *still* briefing the press about Harry and Meghan. Robert Lacey didn’t pull his Battle of Brother updates out of thin air, you know? The biggest royal story this month is about how the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge authorized their senior aide, Jason Knauf, to turn over “evidence” to the Mail. So of course William and Kensington Palace are briefing the media against Harry. Now, did Harry & Meghan brief the British media too? Sure. At times. Not anywhere near the extent to which William has waged an unhinged smear campaign though. But apparently, no one is supposed to see behind this particular curtain, because now the Daily Mail claims that the Queen, Charles and William are all very mad about this special:

The palace is big mad: The Queen has united with Prince Charles and Prince William in a threat to boycott the BBC over a documentary alleging vicious briefing wars between members of the Royal Family. The Palace is furious that the Corporation has refused to let it see The Princes And The Press before it airs on BBC2 tomorrow, and says it will refuse to co-operate on future projects unless it is given a right to respond.

They’re mad at a British-Indian journalist: The film is presented by Amol Rajan – a self-declared republican who has described the Monarchy as ‘absurd’. The BBC says the two-part programme will provide ‘context’ for William and Harry’s relationship with the media.

A ‘tri-household’ boycott? Despite a series of meetings between Prince William’s representatives and the Corporation, the source said the BBC was still refusing to show the programme to courtiers before broadcast. A Palace source said: ‘There is upset about it. The households are all united in thinking this is not fair. No one at the Palace has seen it.’

Harry & William briefed against each other: But while Palace insiders say ‘we’ll judge it when we’ve seen it’, sources believe the film will suggest that the brothers – or advisers working for them – ‘briefed against each other’ to the media and want a fair right to reply. The allegation that William and Harry instructed courtiers to plant smears against each other in the media is particularly sensitive for the Princes. They successfully united to block the same allegation from appearing in another documentary earlier this year. While the princes disagreed on many points, they were aligned on the issue of their press operations. It has previously been claimed that each office was briefing the media against the other but they have persistently denied it.

Withhold cooperation: It is understood that unless Monday’s documentary removes these allegations, the three households have threatened to withdraw co-operation for future BBC projects such as interviews or documentaries. Such a move would mark the end of a long relationship between the Royal Family and the BBC, which screened a tribute to the late Prince Philip this year and broadcast Earthshot, a five-part series about climate change which was presented by Prince William.

The BBC is sticking by the special: A senior BBC insider told this newspaper last night that there were ‘always bumps in the road on productions like this’ but managers at the Corporation had agreed that it did not breach any of the BBC’s editorial guidelines on impartiality. The source added: ‘You can’t make a documentary about royal journalism without mentioning briefings. It doesn’t point the finger at any individuals.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“Despite a series of meetings between Prince William’s representatives and the Corporation…” Sounds like William is the only one who is incandescent with rage about this special and he’s using his father and grandmother as cover, like they’re all equally mad. Despite the Daily Mail’s efforts to “both sides” this particular story (as in, both sides did an equal amount of briefing against one another), I would also guess that the documentary special ends up revealing that William and his people were doing the bulk of the “briefing.” William can’t have anyone pulling at those threads, because – as many journalists know – he was actively throwing Meghan to the media wolves as a way to cover up his affair with Rose Hanbury. Remember when Foreign Policy’s deputy editor James Palmer said exactly that? Once people really examine the timeline in context, they’ll not only see that William was behind a huge chunk of the smear campaign against Meghan, but that he was partially briefing against her to hide his own exposure.

james palmer rose hanbury william tweet

The Duke And Duchess Of Cambridge Attend Gala Dinner To Support East Anglia's Children's Hospices' Nook Appeal

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.

Related stories

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

175 Responses to “Prince William is incandescent about the BBC’s ‘The Princes and the Press’”

  1. Nemo says:

    *screams into pillow*

    Not again with this man child!

    Can someone PLEEEZE dump a bucket of ice on his head? He’s bald so he should cool down quickly. 🙄

    • Andrew's Nemesis says:

      Dump ice on a PWT? Wouldn’t that make him MORE potent?!

    • Tour-malin says:

      I always thought that it was Harry, who tipped the press about Rose H. the first place. No, not the affair story, but the first one about the Norfolk fall out, where Kate was exposed as mean girl. And I think now, that this was a response to the Keenbridges for not letting Megan correcting the bridemade fitting sotry. (If you remember the timeline, it fits now.)

      But once the lid was off about Rose, the affair stories followed quickly, until Willilieks stoped them and went absolutely unhinged on poor pregnant Megan.

      • Emily says:

        Nah. By all accounts the gossip went around because random aristos were running their mouths to all their friends.

      • ABritGuest says:

        Nope. That story came from Dan Wootton & he has deep links with KP having gone to university with William’s right hand man Jason Knauf. Most of the British media hate Harry & Meghan especially for their lawsuits so if Harry was anyway involved in leaking that story- they wouldn’t have hesitated to out him.

        This is faux outrage from the palace similar to Finding Freedom which we know the palace comms team liaised with authors about & possibly fact checked even though later it was claimed the palace was anxious about it. And it’s BBC which is practically the royal media communications HQ.

        The palace recently used the BBC to brief that Meghan had radicalised Harry & they hadn’t got Elizabeth’s permission for their newborn’s name. The palace & the royal rota are probably using this to respond to the Oprah interview etc and are using faux outrage/controversy to get people to watch it.

        I guarantee this will be narrative: press used to be bad with physical harassment of Diana, phone hacking etc& both princes didn’t trust press. However press don’t harass royals like they did Diana anymore, better press relationship with palace & William who understands his role as future king & therefore their importance in promoting the monarchy. Meghan was welcomed with open arms, press were not bigoted, the multiple interviews with the Markles was because it was a valid story. Harry & Meghan didn’t understand their roles, tried to manipulate the press, were focused on brand in US & were ‘scrutinised’ because of environmental hypocrisy. The end.

      • Becks1 says:

        @ABritGuest – no, Richard Eden had the story first, then Dan Wootton. then I think Richard Kay had the bizarre denial about how they weren’t even friends but William was still threatening to sue over the story. DW had a version of the story about how William liked to have solo dinners with Rose, but that was after the initial bizarre story from Eden.

        At least that’s how I remember it and how it looks based on the archives here, but its hard to tell because the articles have all been scrubbed from the internet…….

        ETA but it doesn’t really matter because I don’t think harry was the one who leaked it anyway as i said in my comment down below.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Harry leaking the Rose affair is Kate stan fiction. Never happened. Harry doesn’t care what William does with his wandering peen, he wasn’t going up against William to defend Kate. That is all straight from Kate stans, Kate, and Carole. Rose’s drunk brother was revealing it in pubs, it was all around ‘the set’, known around Norfolk and obs known by Kate and Carole.

      • ABritGuest says:

        Thanks for that reminder Becks1. Forgot it was Eden first.

        Only briefing I can think of against William was when Harry & Meghan announced they were stepping back & Bradby had article in the Times that they felt bullied out because of William’s bullying attitude. But we had that KP denial which was allegedly co signed by William & Harry.

        I think other example they might use about briefings is via Finding Freedom which I believe claimed Harry thought William was snobby about Meghan & Meghan thought Kate wasn’t that helpful. Based on what we know though I think that was extremely sanitised view via palace courtiers.

        I maintain this doc is going to be usual W&K good, H&M bad storyline

      • DefiniteSugar says:

        Harry being willing to burn it all down to defend Kate’s honour is directly from the Kate stan fever dream manual. He was never checking for that Karen and they will have to find a way to cope.

      • Nic919 says:

        @becks you are correct. Eden had the bizarre Kate icing out Rose story and Eden had been very negative against Meghan from day one so there is no way Harry would give him anything.
        Richard Kay then got instructions from William to deny the story but he did it in such a way that affair talk started and then it snowballed from there. Kay did not talk about the solo dinners, but that was another article after that.

      • Wadsworth the Butler says:

        I don’t think the Hanbury leaks had anything to do with the Sussexes at all. The original stories weren’t about the affair itself, but about Kate’s seemingly futile attempts to retaliate against Hanbury by “freezing her out” of society. The aristos were sending a message to Kate to back down.

      • The Hench says:

        People from the Norfolk set were talking left, right and centre. I know of one girl who announced it casually in passing on her public podcast. They were not hiding it. As Giles Coren’s original tweet went “Everybody knows about the affair, darling”.

      • Harper says:

        There was a small article at the time quoting Rose’s brother, who had a few drinks at the club and revealed that it all started when Rose would come over for dinner to keep Will company while Kate was away. Apparently, this was too much of a smoking gun, and the article was edited down to something less incriminating pretty quickly. However, as happens, it was screenshot enough to make the rounds.

      • Nic919 says:

        I’m looking forward to the suggestions that Nicole Cliffe invented the rose affair story because I have seen that as a stan talking point as much as I have seen them blame Meghan for starting the story in the first place.

        In spring 2019 Meghan was pregnant with Archie and that was around the same time she was feeling suicidal. Neither she nor Harry gave a shit about William’s affairs because they were busy just trying to survive. It is especially cruel to try to blame with H or M for the Rose Hanbury affair story considering what they were dealing with.

      • MyOpinion says:

        @ ABritGuest, I agree with your synopsis that this BBC documentary will be very favorable to W&K, but not fair to H&M. The BBC has too much to lose if it’s a truth finding, state based documentation but it won’t be. IF it is, I will be very suspicious as to who is pulling the puppets along. As much as the three houses are supposedly coming together in the outrage of this documentary, I find it highly unlikely that BBC would shoot themselves in the foot. As for Baldingham, he needs the BBC more than they need him as no one else is interested in working with him, how awful for him!! I do suspect that the BBC is very loyal to TQ but not so much as Baldingham. I am certain that they, like the rest of Britain, and the world, are tired of his constant incandescent with rage bit!! It’s rather exhausting, isn’t it? I know I am certainly tired of it! 🙄

    • Chica says:

      I’m surprised there wasn’t any cynicism included on this article, which it’s definitely warranted. If you think this documentary isn’t being done as a take down piece for Harry and even Meghan, intentionally done to make them come out looking worse than the royal family, or in this case, William, then I have to ask where have you all been these last 3+ years?

      This is faux outrage of the three palaces being mad is being done in order to get people to watch it in the first place. Drum up PR and protect them from looking like they were against it when we know they’re very much scheduled to benefit from it.

      How can they boycott the BBC with Elizabeth’s annual Christmas speech coming up and her Jubilee? C’mon people! I would hope you all aren’t that gullible into thinking that this is a documentary that you should respect OR watch and give ratings to for that matter. The panelist who are apart if it are some of Meghan and Harry’s harshest critics and defendants of William. Dan Wooten is in it ffs!

      • Lorelei says:

        @Chica I don’t think anyone is “respecting” it before it even airs

      • Chica says:

        @Lorelei you are down several posts from this practically saying you are giving it legitimacy because they’re complaining about it. Like, you want to watch it bc they’re making a huge deal over it. I’m sorry, your opinion is one that I am criticism here bc it’s apparent that you think it’s going to be be critical of them even after knowing who is involved. Bad take.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Chica, we just have different ways of looking at it. It doesn’t mean you’re right and I’m wrong or that I have a “bad take.” We just have different opinions. No way am I giving it legitimacy until we see it…I was only explaining my reasoning for watching it, and lots of other Meghan fans were saying the same thing on Twitter. I wasn’t criticizing or invalidating your opinion, just making sure you knew that if it turns out to be anti-Sussex trash, I would absolutely not respect it. I wouldn’t even finish watching the whole thing if it’s a Sussex bashfest.

      • WithTheAmerican says:

        I’m not buying the article cited at all because number one they conflated having a right to have their say with having a right to watch it, which infers editorial privilege and the BBC couldn’t give that to anyone they cover without losing their entire point as a news organization.

        It is considered good form to be asked about certain allegations if they are made, but no one owes them that and anyway I’m sure the BBC gave it to them.

        What I see here is an article (not Kaiser’s but the one she is citing) conveniently conflating Harry with Bill re leaking. So something might be coming out about Bill’s leaks. Or not. But they want us all to know that: But what about Harry.

  2. Andrew's Nemesis says:

    I bet Ma Middleton and Wiglets are also quivering in their LK Bennets. The amount of nonsense that has been fed by those women to the tabloids is legendary – and don’t tell me that Sad Jason didn’t know about their smear campaigns, especially the ones that ended up in the Times.
    The Palaces are creating another Streisand situation here – it’s doubtful that many would have tuned in to watch two squabbling brothers, particularly the one whose Earthshit debacle tuned viewers out en masse. Slow handclap.

    • Cate says:

      The LK Bennett comment is brilliant!!

      It’s time for them to pay the piper.

    • Lorelei says:

      “Quivering in their LK Bennetts” ☠️

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      I think they are using the Streisand effect to their advantage now. They want people to watch. Rajan’s ‘absurd’ comments about the monarchy go back to an August 2012 article. It’s quite interesting that an over 9 year old article was bumped up to the first one listed on muckrack. Yesterday. Money and power can get a lot of people to change their pov.

      This article by Rajan is from January 2020. Isn’t it nice he gives credit to Wootton getting the Sussexes moving “scoop” as if that was investigative work and not tip a from Knauf/KP. He also mentions the Elton John private jet story. The one thing he says that I agree with: the Sussexes are more interesting. Being charismatic does that.

      • GRUEY says:

        Yeah gotta say this is all setting off the usual alarm bells. Seems like a ham fisted attempt to make this doc seem more disinterested and legitimate, only for it to turn out to be another hit piece on Harry and Meghan. I ain’t watching but I’m sure I’ll get the low-lights here

  3. Noki says:

    This is fantastic ,the tide is turning. Nice backfire for William. Even a year ago i would never have imagined on British tv them discussing that the Keens would have had to sign off on their aide helping the MoS but they are slowly going there. William really must be so restless these days,he should have let H & M be rock stars for a couple of years it would have died down eventualy.

    • MY3CENTS says:

      Maybe the press will realize it’s much more beneficial for them to actually report on what’s going on in the palce instead of getting into bed with them all for the promise of a pic or two of the children once a year.
      Let the skeleton come out!

      • Lemons says:

        I think real reporters are starting to realize that “access” doesn’t mean much when it comes to this family. The “scoops” gotten by royal reporters aren’t that interesting, even to the BRF’s rabid fanbase. So if they’re not getting Sussex scoops, real reporters will likely start reporting on the real tea as their livelihoods don’t depend on sucking up to the Royal Family for access.

      • Lorelei says:

        @My3Cents and @Lemons, EXACTLY. They’re upset about all of the revenue they lost when the Sussexes bounced, and it seems to finally be sinking in that H&M are not coming back, so they need new material.

        But if they started covering William (and Kate) truthfully? That would likely make a lot of that lost money up. It might not be the same obscene amounts that they were seeing during the peak of anti-Meghan bullsh!t, but there would be *enormous* public interest in factual reporting on William’s infidelities, and would make them a ton more £££ than they’re bringing in now. Honestly, I don’t know how or why they waited this long.

        (And if there’s actually more on William than just cheating — for example, some sort of financial wrongdoing by the Cambridges — they would see an even more substantial increase in interest, clicks, etc.)

      • 809Matriarch says:

        My question is why is William getting the kid glove treatment? The tabloids dogged Fred, Gladys AND Diana out during the breakdown of the marriage.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Noki: This is just a storm in a tea cup. The BBC has done this before sparking complaints from BP and they’ve come back to being on the same page. See the BBC documentary “Reinventing the Royals”.

    • lulu brown says:

      You do know that the bbc2 interviewed Dan Wootton, Daily mail, and other Harry and Meghan Haters for this? the tide is not changing. They know if they pretend the Royals houses are not behind this, people will tune in. The Indian guy putting this together is obsessed with the royal family and supposedly named one of his kids after a Royal. This is just to get the ratings and pile on Harry and Meghan. I’m so Happy SSquad, and Twitter put two and two together and is boycotting this “Documentary.

      • The Hench says:

        The guy presenting this is labelled “an avowed anti-monarchist” who has described the monarchy as “absurd”.

        Also I read something this morning that says that what actually comes out is that it is William who has been doing most of the briefing against Harry. No surprise to anyone here.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        ITA @ lulu brown. The BBC is not going to paint H & M in a favorable light or portray Will & Co. negatively-without approval from the palace. I call BS on the palaces not seeing it ahead of time. I’m going to speculate that they will try to highlight any positive BM/rota stories about Harry & Meghan that were ever done. A way to discredt H & M like see, they lied, it wasn’t all bad. If the Sussex Squad has kept a tally of the number of negative(a lot) vs. positive(a lot less) stories by the BM, that might be good data to have in case..

        The BBC is supposed to payout $1 million? to a charity of the RF’s charity of choice following the Panorama investigation. (lol-the RF’s favorite charity is themselves). The BBC is not going to do anything to upset the RF.imo

        Mic Wright isn’t a fan of Amol Rajan. He has a bit in this article about Rajan “breaking” the Wootton going to GB News. Writing that Wootton himself probably called Rajan.

        Curious what stories they’re going to claim Harry briefed the press on regarding William. That sounds more like a lie. The only one I can think of is the Bradby SA interview. This all feels like more evil machinations from the BM/BRF.

    • Alexandria says:

      Be careful. Sussex Squad is on to this and this documentary may be a trap seeing that unhinged Wooten is also part of this. I would read the reviews before giving them one click. Or Kaiser can cover it so that we don’t have to watch it. We all know BBC has never defended HM or pull an intelligent analysis on them, why would they start now.

    • Demi says:

      Weren’t the BBC royal reporters upset recently about the palace not giving them much info on the queen’s health condition Lol they just realized they aren’t getting much from the palace anymore and I think this is their payback :D

    • Harper says:

      The British public does not want to hear the truth about William. What are the chances that a reporter with enough in at the BBC to score a multi-part special about the warring princes is using the opportunity to go rogue and expose Burger King as a cheating, vindictive, jealous party boy out to destroy Meghan by briefing the press against her? Or by pointing out that losing Harry was the collateral damage the family accepted to keep the heir happy? This special is not going to be The Emperor Has No Clothes UK 2021 edition. Not while the Queen is ailing in her castle. No way.

      • Jaded says:

        Exactly. Rajan is also notoriously right-wing which fits in with William’s wheelhouse so he’s basically going to polish a turd and throw Harry and Meghan to the wolves.

    • PrincessK says:

      Spot on Noki! Jealousy is a terrible thing. William should have learned from his grandmother, her sister Princess Margaret in her hey day totally eclipsed the Queen in terms of popularity and glamour but unlike William, she did not banish her sibling from Britain.

  4. booboocita says:

    “… the three households have threatened to withdraw co-operation for future BBC projects such as interviews or documentaries.”

    Well, that’s not gonna happen, at least where Willie is concerned. He can huff, puff, and glower as only he can, but he needs the BBC if he’s to compete with H&M’s projects with Netflix, Spotify and Apple. A YouTube channel just doesn’t cut it. He needs the legitimacy of a major platform like the Beeb to give his feeble little projects some cachet.

    • Jane says:

      Indeed. There is absolutely no way the royal family can stop cooperating with the BBC. It’s the UK’s biggest broadcaster both at home and around the world, BBC News 24 is on live 24 hours a day, and it’s actually incredibly right-wing, referential and positive about the Windsor shitshow. Certainly they could refuse to do sit-down interviews, but all that means is they won’t be able to present themselves in a positive way with tame journalists like Nicholas Witchell (who’ll be engorged with rage himself if he doesn’t get access and make sure that everyone knows it). It would be like attempting to shoot yourself in the foot and shooting yourself in the face.

      • The Hench says:

        To be fair though, attempting to shoot himself in the foot and shooting himself in the face is the most accurate description ever of William’s PR strategy to date.

        The latest eg being all the shrieking about this doc which, as others note above, is having a classic Streisand effect.

    • Alexandria says:

      Yea they’re dumb AF as always. If they don’t go to the BBC then what? The BBC will carry on. Just like tourists will still visit without the royal family ahah!

  5. Osty says:

    He is always incandescent about something. Maybe its time he goes for therapy and stop bothering us with his nonsense

  6. Jan says:

    This is the usual game from the palaces, play up things that are favorable to them, acting like they are offended, when they darn well know it’s a hit piece on Meghan and Harry, how many times can people fall for this crap.
    Boycott the show, don’t give the BBC the ratings, treat it like Earthshit, they will be clips all over the place later.
    They’re so fcuking stupid, claiming Harry joined Cain in stopping some report, like when Cain signed Harry’s name to some letter.
    Cain really needs help, what is his obsession with Harry and his wife, is there any picture of him smiling when he is not with football buddies?

  7. Sofia says:

    It’s the BBC. The BB freaking C. They’re not going to go too hard on the royals, especially the heir. I can see them going “You know what? It was Harry’s fault and he started it and William just retaliated! He was just responding! He didn’t start it! He’s the victim actually!” The fact that after all the discussions, the BBC hasn’t budged tells me two things a) they know it isn’t bad and once the royals see that, they’ll come back to the BBC and all will be forgiven or b) it is that bad but the BBC don’t care (really doubt this one). Or even a third option that the royals aren’t *that* bothered by it except William and he’s the one kicking up the fuss.

    • Ginger says:

      Yup. The BBC will not go there when it comes to William. They will blame Meghan for all of this.

      Also, I don’t believe Harry briefed the press on William. For one, it would have come out A LOT sooner if he did and they would have used that against him. Harry hates the press and I don’t see him using them to go after William. Plus, William hasn’t had bad press lately. Him and Kate are written as saints by the UK media.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Ginger said:
        “I don’t believe Harry briefed the press on William. For one, it would have come out A LOT sooner if he did.”

        Of course. We need to look no further than the South Africa documentary, in which Harry declared to Tom Bradby and to viewers, “I refuse to play the [media] game that killed my mother.” Harry is a man of his word. KP, the rota, and the firm have nothing on Harry. When Harry stated these words to Bradby, he was sending a message. But apparently none on the Salty Isle, and especially no one in the firm ever truly listens to Harry.

        In addition, wasn’t it revealed in the Oprah interview that Harry did not actually sign his name to, nor approve the statement put out by Will and KP in Jan 2020, claiming that both brothers disagreed with reports charging Will with ‘bullying’ Meghan and Harry?

        Do the ratchet fools think everyone has forgotten everything revealed in the Oprah interview? The BBC better be careful about Harry coming after them, more-so than being faux concerned regarding the pretend claims of the palaces being dead-set against this upcoming documentary.

  8. Beloved says:

    This will just be another hit piece on Harry and Meghan.

  9. Lady Digby says:

    MoS article: very funny considering Jason Knauf employed by William is publicly assisting MoS at Court of Appeals against Meghan. Clearly escalation from courtier briefing but BBC won’t want to risk being sued at pointing out the obvious. Public just supposed to believe JK has gone rogue whilst employed by Prince William?!!
    It been obvious since the Divorce Wars of Charles and Diana that never complain never explain was nonsense.
    Spinning ànd leaking is the order of the day and shouting SQUIRREL and blaming everything on Meghan doesn’t convince. Tabloids must think we are fetlock tugging peasants who really believe RF are our our betters when they are simply rich, powerful and privileged. Three of us in the marriage? Yes you, me and the tabloids!

  10. Eurydice says:

    I wasn’t too immersed in the H&M story back in 2018 – in what way did Harry brief against William?

    • Becks1 says:

      If he was briefing against him, the press wasn’t writing stories based on what he was saying.

      the only thing – the ONLY thing I can think of – is the Rose Hanbury story. If harry was really mad bc the palace refused to correct the specific story about Meghan making Kate cry, and he wanted some sort of payback both for Kate making Meghan cry and for lying about it, leaking that Kate was phasing out Rose Hanbury would be good payback, because it furthered Kate’s reputation as a mean girl who can’t play nice in the sandbox with others – he may have just meant it to end there, but then it because THE rosebush story as we all know. and that would also fit if the reason Kate was so touchy and bitchy at the dress fitting had to do with her husband’s cheating (remember Meghan said in the interview that Kate was going through some things at the time.)

      NOW all that said – I really don’t think Harry leaked that, or Meghan, it just feels too petty for him and I don’t think he or Meghan were out to get revenge in the press like that , they just wanted the lies and false narratives about them to stop. So despite the above paragraph, I don’t think it was Harry (plus, would he have known what was happening in social circles in Norfolk at that time?)

      BUT – again with all that said lol – it would explain the panic coming from William about this BBC special, if he’s worried that the Rose rumors are going to be brought up again as an example of “harry’s briefing.”

      But like I said, I don’t think it was Harry and i never really have.

      • Sofia says:

        I agree. The only thing that would make sense would be the Rose story and I don’t think the Sussexes were involved with that. The only other thing I can think of is maybe they provided some quotes for the Catherine the Great article but I very, very much doubt that and to me, it was 100% aristo cooperation (when it came to the less than flattering quotes).

        So again, I don’t think H&M ever got involved in those two stories.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @ Becks: The Rose Hanbury thing came out because Kate tried to freeze her out. It had nothing to do with Harry. Furthermore, many of the journalists are either aristos or have close relationships with them. People knew about the story but kept quiet about it.

      • Nic919 says:

        At the time we speculated the kate freezing out rose story came from the Middletons to show that kate was acquiring power, especially as Meghan was being attacked even more in the press. Harry and Meghan would have been dealing with all the attacks by spring 2019 and Meghan was likely at her lowest while pregnant so Harry wouldn’t be dealing much with the press.

        And the Richard Kay article blew it all up and he was clearly asked by William to try to shut it down but made everything worse because it was only after his article that speculation about an affair came out.

      • Becks1 says:

        @AmyBee – yes, I agree it had nothing to do with Harry, which is why I said a few times in my comment that I doubt it was Harry.

      • Eurydice says:

        Thanks, everybody – it was puzzling to me because Harry hates the press. I guess it’s the difference between “briefing” and “briefing against.” I can see Harry (or his office) briefing the press about something specific he and Meghan were doing or trying to correct something that was said about them or providing some quotes for an article, but I don’t see him going to the press to stab William in the back.

      • notasugarhere says:

        When you think about it, Harry wouldn’t know anything about William and his affairs. These two have not been close since early childhood, if even then. He has never had a close relationship or even casual friendship with Kate, he admitted himself he rarely saw them and then only for work.

        Harry was being sent all over the world, being the Royal go-to for tours, doing Invictus and Sentebale, meeting and courting Meghan from July 2016-Nov 2018. He wasn’t spending time hanging around Norfolk watching William slip off to see Rose.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Should have read ‘July 2016 – Nov 2017′. Harry had no time or interest in the W&K marriage during the Rose affair, he was too busy making his own marriage happen.

      • The Hench says:

        Let’s not forget that for a large part of this year alone we have seen separate PR strategies from William and Kate. Ma Middleton has form on using the press to pull Wills back when he strays – it could well have been Carole who blew open the Rose Hanbury story, angry that it was getting so much gossip. Also, as we speculated on here, Rose was a real threat to Kate. A beautiful, well connected, aristo who is a proper insider, not like parvenu Katie. The affair lasted three years – it wasn’t a flash in the pan.

      • notasugarhere says:

        They’ve always had separate PR camps, from the Willam-bashing, why won’t he marry her, Kate is perfect PR they spun to their connections at the Fail. Since the Rose info hit we’ve been seeing those separate PR camps even more – William vs. Middletons. The Midds were the ones who leaked Jecca’s secret marriage and they (Midds) were thrilled about it. In response, William flew solo to Jecca’s delayed wedding reception. One of many examples through the years.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Becks1 said:
        “If Harry was really mad the palace refused to correct the specific story about Meghan making Kate cry, and he wanted some sort of payback both for Kate making Meghan cry and for lying about it, leaking that Kate was phasing out Rose Hanbury would be good payback…”

        This leaking was done by Turnip Toff aristos, NOT Harry!

        Why are you forgetting that Harry told us he refuses to ‘play games’ with the media? These are the kind of games that killed Diana, per Harry. He said this in the 2019 South Africa documentary.

        The only thing Harry and Meghan did was to strategize to protect themselves, in part by setting a trap in early 2019 for Jason Knauf (surrounding the NYC baby shower). Knauf leaked false details to Emily Andrews which he didn’t know were false! LOL! Thus, M&H gained proof that Jason was leaking on them, which provided them with leverage to demand a complete split from KP household.

    • Ginger says:

      I don’t think he did. William and Kate had amazing press in 2018. They have had amazing press as soon as Meghan dated Harry.

  11. RoyalBlue says:

    Why on earth does a royal family feel it necessary to interfere with freedom of the press. Do they think they control the media. Do they think they are in China or Russia. I am so fed up of the lot of them so consumed with their self importance, the family is rotten to the core. And I am lumping Charles and the Queen together with William as all three want to give off this united front. So they sink or swim together. I hope it’s the former.

    • OriginalLala says:

      My understanding (as a non-Brit, so I may be wrong) is that there is no constitutional guarantee of press freedom in Britain. The BRF has a lot of control over the media.

      • A says:

        Well I mean, it’s hard to have a constitutional guarantee of anything when there is no written constitution, as such. Britain has an unwritten constitution that’s just, as I understand it, an amalgamation of laws and legal precedents and interpretations set by the court. I’d be really careful though, in saying that there is no constitutional guarantee of press freedom in Britain, bc while that is *technically* the truth, its not actually the real truth here.

    • Jane says:

      This is part of a larger issue with the UK at the moment. The Westminster government has gradually been extending its control over the BBC and the media more broadly (most of our media outlets are at the very least right of centre, and some very far right). The BBC is actually very susceptible to pressure because it’s publicly funded through the license fee (everyone with a tv or the ability to watch tv through the internet has to pay upwards of £100 per year to the BBC even if they don’t watch any of it), and the government have been threatening to axe this which would decimate the BBC’s budget. So presumably the royal family can see this, and are attempting to do similarly, and try and ensure positive coverage no matter what.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The BBC learned how little sentiment the general public has about royals with the death of Prince Philip. Within an hour, they were receiving thousands of complaints to shut up about him and put back regular programs. William’s doc was a flop; they ended up moving it to late night time slots and putting popular programs on instead.

    • A says:

      You’re absolutely right. The BRF, particularly William, has been blazing a stunning track record in censoring the press when it comes to unflattering stories about himself or his wife. First with the legal threats against the Sun when they printed the most OBLIQUE reference to some mysterious falling out between the Cambridges and Rose Hanbury and her husband. Then when they successfully got the online version of the Tatler article to scrub several parts of their Catherine the Great article which they objected to (I’m still trying to find an uncensored version of this online). The fact that they got so stinking mad about The Crown’s season 4 last year, and how they’re still mad to the point where apparently they’re considering legal action against Netflix for season 5, before it’s even aired. Their censure of Martin Bashir and the BBC’s assurance that they would never again air the Diana interview again.

      All in all, the extent to which they’re trying to strong arm the press into shutting up, particularly William’s heavy handed eagerness to bully the free f-cking press into retracting ANY story about him that reflects poorly on him, is remarkable. If any left leaning politician or head of state were to engage in such behaviour, the comparisons to the Soviet Union would be freaking endless. But when it comes to the royal family, it’s just business as usual, bc if the royals can’t shut down a free press, then who can?

      This is exactly why all the repeated insistence on the part of the British tabloids that the reason for their nastiness and despicable behaviour is bc they think people in power should be held accountable. But the tabloids are awfully f-cking choosy in precisely which matters on which they feel people in power ought to be held accountable for. That says it all for me really.

  12. Becks1 says:

    Oh no! William won’t let the BBC air Earthshot! That’s going to really upset them because so many people watched and all the networks are fighting over airing it next year!!

    I don’t understand the bit about “the right to respond.” Just watch it like the rest of us and then put out a statement. Does William think that the BBC should give him two hours to rant about the press or whatever?

    Finally – did harry really brief against William, especially after Meghan came on the scene? if he did, the tabloids etc weren’t printing it. that was when the press did a complete turn around and William and Kate became perfect and all the problems of the monarchy could be laid at Meghan’s feet.

    • Nic919 says:

      If Harry was briefing against William I do not see the media keeping that quiet. Not at this point. Harry was correcting the media at most but the tabloids are pretending that it’s the same thing as the smear campaign. This was around the time the Tim Shipman article came out confirming that William was meeting with various heads of press for better coverage. So if anything Harry was likely correcting false stories when they came to him. And it’s hard to even know that because if Knauf was still fielding their media, then he was always working for William from day one and who is to say what he told the press came from Harry.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Nic919 said:
        “This was around the time the Tim Shipman article came out confirming that William was meeting with various heads of press for better coverage. So if anything Harry was likely correcting false stories when they came to him.”

        Meghan & Harry above board gave corrective info and quotes to Omid Scobie, debunking that Will had any say in their decision-making, surrounding the ‘exiling the Sussexes to Africa’ story that Shipman wrote for The Times in April 2019. Scobie followed up with an article for Harper’s Bazaar, in which M&H were directly quoted, clarifying that they only sought advice from Prince Charles and the Queen. Will’s name was not mentioned in the quote, but it was a direct rebuke of William by M&H. As you point out, this is not briefing nor leaking. It is M&H relying on a fair journalist to report the truth, thereby debunking the lies against them.

        FWIW, Shipman, in part, wrote The Times expose, which came out on Easter Sunday 2019, the Queen’s birthday, as a warning to Will. Many people don’t remember or don’t know about the article, or else they missed it because it was later buried and dismissed. But the original story essentially threw Will under the bus in retaliation for Will having sent legal threats to journalists to dissuade them against writing stories about the gossip surrounding his hidden, but well known affair with Rose Hanbury.

    • equality says:

      Is that why he wants to air in US next time? He thinks there will be a bigger audience?

    • Lorelei says:

      @Becks, are you suggesting that Elegant Bill be reduced to watching it with the rest of us peasants?! Surely you jest

    • notasugarhere says:

      Hadn’t he already announced that, with the silly PR attempt of moving EarthSh!t to the USA for the next award?

    • Jay says:

      I recall there have been past programs/ tv specials where the royals had the chance to ask for specific edits, threatening to sue even, before something goes to air. I don’t remember if that was the BBC or not though.

      What’s hilarious is that the disastrous Andrew interview was approved – he thought it went well, remember? So even if the royals were given editorial power, they don’t have much of a sense of what will and won’t work with the public anyway.

      If they did, as you say, William would shut up and not do anything to get this documentary any more attention, but I think he just can’t help himself.

      • Becks1 says:

        There was one specifically very recently, I think it was on iTV, where there was a quote about KP leaking to the press and it got removed before the program aired. I THINK the quote was from Omid but I’m not positive.

        My guess is that’s part of why the royals are so up in arms over this – they haven’t been allowed to see it and certainly have not been allowed to get certain parts removed. So even if everyone on here is right, and it turns out to be anti-Sussex bashfest, or it is just a big nothing burger in general, the royals don’t know that. The fact that William seems to be scrambling just confirms for me that there is so much he is scared of being made public.

  13. GuestWho says:

    The likes of Dan Wooten are included, so I’d give this a huge pass. It will undoubtedly trash M&H.

  14. Amy Bee says:

    When did Harry and Meghan brief against William and Kate? Most of the time they were either under KP and BP and weren’t allowed to respond to stories about them. Remember “Meghan made Kate cry?” How can the Daily Mail even report that KP never briefed against Harry when most of their stories came from William and Jason Knauf? I’ve also noticed that the Royal Family and the Palace are trying to make out like Harry’s upset about this documentary too. How would they know when he doesn’t talk to them?

  15. Jay says:

    So “all three” royal households are in a tizzy, really? It feels like William is the desperate one here.

    The complaint seems to be that the BBC haven’t prescreened the program beforehand and, I guess, given William the chance to make edits? But then why blow it up in this way, drawing more attention to it and making preemptive attacks on Harry?

    It’s ludicrous and stupid, because they are demonstrating the very tactics being alleged by the BBC, and they don’t even know if that will be the focus of this doc because they haven’t seen it!

    They’ve learned exactly nothing after coming out with the “Meghan the bully” nonsense to try to pre-empt the Oprah interview, which ended up driving more people to watch it.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Jay, yeah, something tells me Camilla isn’t shaking in her boots over this. The people who don’t want their poor behavior exposed are the only ones worrying and we know exactly who they are.

      They made this whole thing SO much worse by bitching publicly about it days before it even aired! There are tons of people who wouldn’t have even noticed this damn show was on, but the BRF called attention to it by pitching a fit, so now MORE people are going to tune in to see what it is that they’re so worried about. Imbeciles.

      • Charm says:

        I think bullyboy and his henchman jason the knife, believe that if they make a big stink about it, it will rile up the plebs against the bbc and bbc will cave and submit to a preview by bullyboy who will then suggest mucho edits.

  16. C-Shell says:

    The “Earthsh*t” thing on BBC was a FIVE PART SERIES?!?! Who knew? It really was a flop, wasn’t it?

    I’m skeptical this will be anything close to objective given the cozy, symbiotic relationship between the RF and the BBC. I’m also doubting it will be an outright hit piece on H&M because they’ve demonstrated they will slap down media misrepresentations with a quickness. This Fail article really points the accusing finger at Bulliam for attempting to get a prior viewing. It looks like another instance of him bringing in the other households, especially QE2, for cover of his shenanigans. He’s predictable, if nothing else.

  17. Mslove says:

    I think the daily mail made this up so people will watch. The BRF are a bunch of boring morons.

  18. Cessily says:

    No one has seen this documentary yet so I will reserve my opinion on the reviews it will get before I decide if I will watch it, because all this is to capitalize on the appeal judgement that is coming soon.. the DM and LAN will use anything to drag Duchess Meghans reputation through the muck. It also distract from allegations of raping a trafficked minor by one Prince and illegal financial activities by two Princes.
    PW is really needs anger management because the world really could care less about his incandescent rage.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Cessily, that reminds me— does anyone here know if there’s any way we can watch this in the US?

      • Polo says:

        Don’t waste your time or give them views. It’s another hit piece on Harry and Meghan!

      • Cessily says:

        It is a BBC documentary, but I rather read the reviews than waste my time with any media out of Britain.

      • Lorelei says:

        Thank you, Cessily!

        @Polo, the exact reason I want to watch it is because of how obviously worried they are about it. There must be something in it that they do NOT want aired. If they were endorsing it, I (and many other people) would have absolutely __zero__ interest in it. It’s the fact that they seem to be panicking as much as they are; as if they know they won’t come out unscathed.

        If they hadn’t made such a huge deal over it, I (and millions of other people) probably never even would have known this show even existed, but as usual, the BRF fcked up and ended up giving it priceless PR by losing their minds over it and bringing so much more attention to it.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Lorelei, if you use a VPN with a British IP you can. Get the BBC Player app, put in a British address and you’ll be off to the races. I used to do this for years before Brit Box came out (so I could watch my fave Britcoms 😊 )

      • Lorelei says:

        Thank you, Jan!

  19. mariahlee says:

    Even to casual observers it must seem like the royals are always complaining about something — usually relating to how they’re portrayed in the media. I feel like they used to be less conspicuous about their obsessive need for image control. It’s giving desperation.

  20. lanne says:

    Hear me out folks. I’m going to speak hypothetically for a moment. If a member of a royal family was an abuser, whether it be physical, emotional, or financial, what would the greater RF do? What if the abuser was the Heir? Would the firm go public with this information, and make the abuser go to therapy? Would Parliament get involved? Could a psychopath be removed from the lines of succession,? Sure, it’s bad for business, but wouldn’t a psychopath as a monarch be worse?

    We know what this royal family would do: deny, deny, deny. Obfuscate. Hide. Try to control the media. Find a scapegoat to brief against instead. The victims are likely women, married in women at that. Women and even children can be hidden away, shamed, threatened. There would be no help, no therapy, and even no relief for the victim. Because image. Meghan couldn’t get treatment for the mental health problems she suffered (that they created) because it would look bad (and it was the means by which she would be eliminated).

    What I’m saying is that the royals would behave in exactly the same way in a situation with an abuser for an heir as they are right now. Kates disappearances seem more suspicious in this light. As is her lack of ability or confidence in her job. In light of what’s going on with Charlene, the lack of power and agency for royal married in women is chilling.

    I’m not saying Kate is being abused. There’s truly no way to know. What’s scary to me is how thoroughly any abuse of her (I actually think she’s being emotionally and even financially abused. I bet she has no access to money and her parents money seems to be smoke and mirrors. Meghan having her own money and her refusal to turn over access to her money, or accept their counsel, prevented her own financial abuse) would be denied and covered up.

    I’m not absolving her of her participation in meghans abuse. But all anyone would have to do to keep her in line is say “you think Meghan had it rough? Think what we can do to you.” They can also deny her access to the children.

    When Diana went to war with the royals, she had public popularity on her side. Kate doesn’t have that. She is completely dependent on the royals in a way that Meghan never was. That’s the untold story of the future future king and queen. She is completely at his mercy. That’s a horrible position for any woman to be in (even my mom, a stay at home wife with little education, always told me how important it was for women to have their own money, and she went back to work after we started middle school so she could have her own money—and my dads a sweet and generous guy who was active in child care and did most of the housework).

    Again, the woman being held up for praise has no power, no agency, no voice, and does what she’s told. In 2021 in the UK. This is one of many reasons why Harry and Meghan remain a problem for the royals, and the royals continue to brief against them. Harry and Meghan make William and Kate look bad.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Honestly? FFS. No, Kate is not being abused. She chose to marry a cheater in exchange for status and a title, she willingly made that deal. No she is not cut off from access to her family. No, they could not remove her access to the kids. No matter if they divorce or not, the media is never going to go fully against the white girl and mother of the heir to the heir. Not when they have Meghan to continue to torture.

      Nothing Kate has faced, ever, is anything near what has been done (and that Kate and her mummy have fully participated in) against Meghan for five+ years.

      • lulu brown says:

        +1, white women are always the victim. Even when speculating.

      • Lorelei says:

        @LuLu why do you automatically assume that Lanne is white?

      • lanne says:

        I’m African American. And I was speculating—what would the royals do with an abusive heir? Believe me, I give Kate no more consideration that I do Melania: she’s lying in a bed that she made. She is facing the consequences of her own choices.

        The system is set up to keep abusers in power, though. As I type this, I realize that’s true of all patriarchies. I think Kate has found herself in a situation that a lot of white women find themselves in: trapped by systems that put them on pedestals at the expense of WOC. And then realizing the conditions of remaining on that pedestal are terrible and soul-destroying.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Kate isn’t trapped, this is the gilded cage life she aggressively pursued and maintains for 20 years. ‘soul-destroying’? My opinion of the Midds is there are no souls involved. They are all-in, grasping, cunning, manipulative, truly EVIL people who made sure they know where the bodies are buried. Kate is no victim. Never has been, never will be.

      • A says:

        @lanne, I get what you’re saying, speculatively, about the possibility of an abuser or a psychopath as heir, and you’re really fundamentally getting to the heart of precisely WHY monarchy, even a constitutional monarchy, is entirely flawed as a mode of governance in any scenario.

        By definition, a monarchy centers around the monarch at all costs. Yes, unjust and tyrannical monarchs can be removed from power (in fact, one of the few rights medieval peasants had in their times was the right to resist a bad or oppressive ruler). But we don’t live in absolute monarchial times, which theoretically makes this a lot worse, bc the idea is that a democratically elected govt by the people and for the people represents the interests of the people to the monarch. That leaves the actual people who are the subjects of a constitutional monarch with little to no power to effect changes over the monarchy. Changing the line of succession to the throne requires a law to be passed through parliament, which doesn’t happen if there is no appetite among the politicians for it. On the other hand, politicians can exert undue influence over monarchs that their constituents don’t ask for.

        The only real way to abolish the monarchy in the UK is likely through referendum, but even that has to be effected by the sitting govt, which likely will not happen as long as the Tories are in power. So where does that leave the people who are subject to an unjust or tyrannical monarch? With not a heck of a lot of options.

        This is exactly why constitutional monarchies should not exist in the modern day. There are no checks or balances. In the UK in particular, blithering abt how the Queen’s powers are mostly ceremonial is just contrary to what is the case. They are largely ceremonial due to convention, not bc of any actual law, bc the UK does not have a written constitution to delineate clearly the role of the monarch as head of state. This leaves it up to the various branches of the govt, either the parliament or the judiciary, but even that is not airtight. Given the complete lack of oversight in all of this, you are absolutely right in saying that there are little to zero means to remove an abuser from their position as the monarch or the heir. The only way to do that is for the people to get outraged, and for that to happen, something seriously egregious would have to get into the press.

        As far as Kate goes, I don’t think she is a victim. I’m sure William is not a peach to be married to, and I don’t doubt that Kate lacks self-confidence and a desire to do anything outside of what she has already signed up for. But yes, in the hypothetical scenario that Kate were being abused, she would be incredibly isolated and it would be frighteningly easy for someone in William’s position to abuse her because of how everything is set up to isolate people in that family and environment.

    • Eurydice says:

      I don’t think Kate is being held hostage or being abused. I do think she’s facing the inevitable consequences of having married into an antiquated institution that’s become obsolete. We know there are 9 billion rules she has to follow, we know her primary duty was to have children and we know that there’s no other use for her. If she were interested, she could occupy her time with various projects, but she’s basically a symbol and not a person. Life could be better for her if her husband loved her, but it doesn’t seem like it – and I’m not sure if she loves him, either. But just because I think a life like hers would be a nightmare doesn’t mean she thinks so. She could be perfectly content for all we know.

      • Sofia says:

        +1. I agree. Kate was aware of the life she would have. Maybe not the full, full picture but enough to know. And it’s been repeated for years that Kate’s main goal in life is being Queen and as long as she gets there, she’s probably fine doing very little and living the life that she is living. And if she is unhappy (which people could be wrong about like you said), she probably thinks “it’ll all be worth it when I’m Queen” and that’s enough to keep her going and happy.

      • lanne says:

        She strikes me as someone who thinks no further than the goal. First was the ring. Then the Queen. Like the Bridezillas who want the wedding but give zero thought to the marriage.

      • notasugarhere says:

        We also know she never follows any of the rules and never sees any consequences for it. She chose a marriage of convenience with a serial cheater. This is the life she wants.

    • lulu brown says:

      @Lorelei Where did I assume @lanne was White? Would you please point me to it? Is Kate Middleton not white?

      • Lorelei says:

        @Lulu, because you said that white women are always the victim, even when speculating, directly responding to a post in which Lanne was speculating.

        If I misunderstood you, then I apologize.

      • notasugarhere says:

        lulu brown, I read it as you intended. That Kate, of the famous white woman fake tears, would always be protected against/from Meghan.

      • lulu brown says:

        @natasugarhere thankyou, and Lorelei I accept your apology

      • Lorelei says:

        @Lulu thank you, I reread it and I see what you meant now. Sometimes, I’ll post a reply and by the next time I check back, there are like ten more in between mine and the original post I was responding to so it’s hard to even tell who’s talking to who!

    • ArtHistorian says:

      I actually think that the way that the entire institution is managed by the Windsors is deeply abusive – the whole heir/spare dynamic is just plain emotional abuse. It is no coincidence that this family/institution consistently create profoundly damaged individuals. It goes back centuries! Victoria had an upbringing that was just incredibly fucked-up seen with modern eyes where she was completely isolated and almost every aspect of her life was controlled by her mother (and her mother’s advisor). Victoria herself was a TERRIBLE mother who tried to dominate her children far into their adulthood. George V bullied his sons – and the heir/spare dynamic between Elizabeth and her sister has been debated a lot. Elizabeth herself clearly has a favorite child, Philip bullied Charles and the Queen Mother spoiled Charles solely because he was the heir. The we have Charles being an absent and distant father, which coupled with the trauma of Diana’s death + the way the entire institution once again placed Will and Harry in the abusive heir/spare dynamic.
      It is not the question of an individual abuser because the way the entire institution operates is abusive. Both emotionally and to a degree financially because only the Monarch and the PoW have independent income. The rest depend on the largess of these two people.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Logical end to the cycle, other than throwing out the whole monarchy? Immediately announce only the eldest child will be a working royal. Stop giving the press pics and photo ops of the two younger W&K children, stop using their royal titles. Raise them as private citizens who have to earn a living. They will not be on the royal dole, they will not receive additional titles like Princess Royal or dukedoms upon marriage.

        We know that won’t happen, because the only thing W&K have over the Sussex children is the HRH and prince/princess status for their kids. That and the idea their kids will live in palaces, off the taxpayers, with paid security their entire lives. They want to continue to use ‘Diana’s only *royal* granddaughter’ for PR the rest of their lives.

      • Nic919 says:

        @nota, I would add that no child should have a title and only the direct heir start to use it when they start working as a royal. And the funding should only go to the one doing the work which would be a more than sufficient salary to raise a young family.

      • notasugarhere says:

        that makes sense, Nic919. It is a job, it need to be treated and funded as such. Politicians in Sweden put forward that idea a few years ago. Salary and household income to monarch and heir only, not to anyone else even their spouses.

    • swirlmamad says:

      I get what @lanne is saying here. That marriage is dysfunctional at best and it would not surprise me in the slightest if there is some sort of psychological/emotional abuse going on. That said, this is a classic case of making your bed and now you must lie in it. No one forced Kate to participate in the smear campaign — but she probably did it in part to foster some sort of connection between herself and her asshole husband. Mainly because she’s consumed with jealousy, bigotry and the desire to cut down someone who shows her up at every turn just because she’s the FFQ and she “can”. So I can see how she might be caught in a bad marriage that she’s just surviving at this point, but do I feel sorry for her? No. She still has agency and the ability to make choices, and she’s only made bad ones up to this point.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Or from a different angle, the manipulative and cunning Middletons moved in on vulnerable William when he was 17/18, still reeling from his mother’s death. Everything they have done in this 20 year relationship has been in the Middleton self-interest. From their close relationship with Fail editors, certain paps, getting family photos from the paps, leaking info about Harry for almost 20 years, briefing against William, using William to cover up Uncle Gary scandals, attacking Meghan from the start.

        The only few grams of sympathy I have for William are 1) the loss of his mother and 2) what the Middletons have done to/through/around him for decades. He has always been a nasty piece of work, but he met his mirrors in that evil bunch.

      • Harper says:

        I think Kate has plenty of weapons that she uses when she and William get into it. It’s thought that Louis was the payback for the Dad Dancing publicity. She got the Royal Victorian Order for not leaving when the Rose infidelity hit the papers. Obviously, there is some movement now to get her own home closer to or in Bucklebury (or at the least, officially moved out of Kensington Palace).

        I think Kate and CarolE negotiate some material payment to benefit Kate when she becomes unhappy for some reason or another. Kate seems silent, but I think she and CarolE roar behind the scenes.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If William paid for the Middleton’s new house, I’d see that as one of their financial payoffs as you write Harper.

    • Jan90067 says:

      See, this doesn’t fly for me, because Diana DID get therapy for her eating disorder. It was known she saw a therapist. Harry got therapy as well, WHILE he was Bully’s throw rug as well. I still don’t buy/understand how Meg was “denied” getting help? I mean, why didn’t Harry call HIS therapist for her? Was she literally barred from leaving her door with a guard? Diana was able to drive her own car. We’ve all seen the video of her driving out of pap crowds. Harry has driven his own car. Why did *he* not take her for help?

      We know by H&M’s admission, they talked about leaving the RF BEFORE getting married. Harry always wanted to (esp. since he was forced out of the army), and Meg gave him the confidence to carry it through, esp. since the family and media attacks sky rocketed. So I guess I don’t understand *why* they failed to have the ability to just walk out their front door, get in a car, and drive to a therapist, and anyone who “followed” be damned.

      • swirlmamad says:

        We know that she did ultimately get help, and the scenario you described may indeed might be what happened in the end. But I think initially, they tried to go to the top and plead the powers that be for assistance, in the futile hopes that they might be able to help them do something, anything, to get it all to stop and were denied that then because *reasons*. That entire institution is rotten to its evil core.

      • Shelley says:

        Did you not listen to the Oprah interview? Meghan was told she couldn’t get help #1 She was not a paid employee of the firm. #2 how it would make the firm look. These folks (firm and family) were actively hurting Meghan. They wanted her to commit suicide. They isolated her on palace grounds. Removed her car keys, license, pass port. They also took away H &M’s rental home in the cotwalds by sending the paps there to take intrusive pics and Lord knows what esle!!! This bit FORCED H & M to move to palace grounds permanetly!!! Meghan wanted to get help OFF palace grounds with in person treatment and they said NO!!! Getting away from that toxic place would’ve helped her a lot, as it did when her and Harry escaped to Canada in November of 2019!!!

      • Slippers4life says:

        As a therapist myself, I did not interpret Meghan was just asking to see a therapist from the firm. I heard that she was actively suicidal and asking for an admission to a psychiatric facility and the firm said no. I believe they had to ask the firm because, sadly, most countries do not include most of mental health care in the universal health care programs. I do not know about the UK, but I’d hazard a guess the NHS doesn’t cover what Meghan was looking for and I think it’s more they refused to provide Meghan with the funds she would need to access the support she needed and that is what she meant by they wouldn’t help her, they wouldn’t let her earn her own money and Charles or the firm or whatever, controlled what they were allowed to spend the money on. The firm was fine with all the fashion choices because of what it looks like, but they denied her using the funds to get psychiatric help. To say to someone, “I am a multi billionaire and marrying into this family means, yes you have access to these funds, but we will dictate how much of those funds you are allowed to use and we will dictate what you can and cannot purchase, including your health care and PS there’s no way out of this because you’re not allowed to earn your own money”, is financial abuse outside of the BRF. Imagine Elon Musk said this to his wife? People would be having a fit!

    • Becks1 says:

      So, I see what Lanne is saying and I agree with it to a certain extent – IF there was abuse going on , individual abuse from one spouse to another, or physical abuse from a parent to a child (I’m using those terms specifically bc I do agree with @arthistorian that the Windsor system and “heir and spare” dynamic is toxic and abusive in many ways) we would have no idea at this point in time. If William was abusing Kate – verbally, physically, emotionally – What do we think the Firm would do? What do we think Kate would do? What would her family do?

      They would do exactly what they are doing now – protect William at all costs, keep Kate happy and give her her way when William isn’t abusing her so she stays and doesn’t spill any Windsor family secrets, etc. Kate would be able to hide away for weeks or months at a time bc no one would want to do anything to make her leave (including making her work.)

      anyway, how often do we talk on here about what William must really be like behind closed doors? about how, if his rage is such an accepted character trait or emotion by the RRs, how bad must it be on a daily basis?

      NOW THAT SAID (I’m using all caps so I am not misunderstood lol) – I do not believe William is abusing Kate. i think he is a rage monster, and depending on how that manifests itself, it could be abusive, but I think the reason she does not work or goes on holidays for months at a time or has no friends really etc is because she made a very clear and concise choice 2 decades ago – Willliam or bust. The crown or bust. So she’s staying with this rage monster who cheats on her and they live separate lives and she’s always with her parents etc etc because that’s the choice she made years ago and she’s not changing her mind now. Does the marriage seem miserable? Obviously. Do she and William look happy? Nope. do I feel sorry for her? based on what we know and see, at this point, no I do not.

      • Nic919 says:

        I don’t think anyone doubts that William is generally a jerk and a terrible husband at this point. But Kate is an adult woman who can leave. We always hear about how supportive the Middletons are so if they aren’t helping her leave a terrible situation what does that really say about them?

        And there was precedent set by Diana, who divorced the Prince of Wales and she kept shared custody of her kids so it’s not like kate can even use that as an excuse.

        The reality is that Kate is prepared to put up with a lot to move up the ranks. At some point if she’s okay with keeping her kids in this toxic situation, when there are venues to leave and still be well off, she has to take some share of the blame.

      • lanne says:

        @becks, that was exactly my point! I wasn’t apologizing for or excusing Kate and her garbage behavior. I was stating that the system itself is abusive, and that the system would protect the heir at all costs. @nic919, Kate is okay keeping those kids in that same system. The heir vs spare garbage has been going on for 3 generations with this cast of characters, not to mention the earlier royals. There is no reason to expect things to change. So I anticipate we’ll see the same story play out in another 15 years when the Cambridge kids are pitted against each other.

  21. Sam says:

    Trust when I say this would be a fluff piece for the royals. It’s the freaking BBC and according to the Times,they made a last minute edit to the programme to put in the information that Meghan “lied” to the court so you can see where the documentary is heading. If the Times and their favourite newspapers are not worried, then the royals don’t care. They are “acting” this way to drum up interest for this show to further push the “Sussexes are bad” narrative

  22. Likeyoucare says:

    I dont like this.
    The press wont attack willie, this story goes out just to attract viewers from outside uk.
    Just dont watch it guys.
    Just wait for the report don’t give them views.

  23. Digital Unicorn says:

    They are bricking it as this could be used in Meghan’s case against the DM who has all the skeletons in their closet.

    What they are pissy about is the fact that the BBC, funded by the taxpayer, isn’t bowing down to them and isn’t giving them the chance to edit the sh!t out of the programme. There is no way they will stop working with the BBC, no way. They NEED the Beeb. This is the RF trying to bully the BBC into pulling the doc before they’ve had a chance to sic their lawyers over it.

    Thou saying all that it might turn out to be much ado about nothing.

    • notasugarhere says:

      This. The BBC is a funded by taxpayers and is frequently a pro-royal PR machine. The People are wising up to that. This most recent move by William to control the free press? Not going over well.

  24. Mamasan says:

    And this manboy is to become the monarch of Great Britan as a shining example of grace and dignity?

    Tsk, tsk, tsk. Not good.

  25. Amy Bee says:

    Just remember that the Palace supposedly didn’t know about Finding Freedom and were opposed to the book when it was announced only for the public to find out that the Palace was in favour of the book and were trying to get Harry and Meghan to cooperate with the authors. I think the same thing is happening here.

  26. Polo says:

    I think this is all fake!’ Just like how they were outraged by finding freedom but they actually were briefed on it, just like they were outraged that Harry and Meghan left even though they had been in talks about it for months,’s all the same!!
    This will probably be another hit piece on the Sussexes and make William look like a saint.
    It also includes Dan W and all the usual suspects of the Rota none of which have changed their tune about Harry and Meghan.
    They want ratings and this “fake outrage” from the palace is how they try to pull people in.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Polo you could be right. They were losing their sh!t when they heard that Meghan was going to be on Ellen, assuming it would be a “tell-all” about them. They’re the most self-absorbed people on the planet. And they overreacted about FF for sure. But I’m holding out hope that *maybe* it will contain at least a few things that Bill would rather have been kept quiet.

  27. FC says:

    How much you wanna bet those christening photos are being held until this documentary airs?

    • aftershocks says:

      ^^ @FC, I don’t think there’s a precedent for baby christening photos to be released to the public for little royal family members who are not in the direct line of descent.

      BP never released christening photos for Zara’s other children. Although, I heard Zara & Mike released some photos to Hello magazine for profit.

      I suppose something could be released in view of this unusual double christening, possibly to detract from any publicity about the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. If so, they are unlikely to release photos that include Andrew & Fergie.

  28. KW says:

    My theory here is that if there were any briefing against William and Kate from Harry’s office, it would have been around the time Jason Knauf was working for Harry because he seems like the kind of snake that would be playing both sides to control the narrative without the knowledge of either prince until Meghan came on the scene and realized what he was doing because she’s used to asshole behavior from show business and could spot what was happening, hence he turned to William and Kate and they waged a war against her. With the help of Dan Wootten and I am sure that some of these things will come to light, it always does.

  29. Nic919 says:

    Reading that this documentary has Dan Wootton in it tells me that it is just going to be another hit piece on Harry and Meghan.

  30. A says:

    Who is the head of palace pr at this point ? Fergie…R.Kelly…Bozo the clown? Inquiring minds want to know. You literally just got caught briefing against your sister in law’s court case the other day and now you want to pretend you would do no such thing! Are their people really buying this? I mean now your briefing against the fact that you weren’t briefing ? If I were Harry at this point, I would put out a statement saying you welcome a special such as this, especially if it’s going to look at the blatant sexism and racism within the royal press core, just to make it interesting!

    • Lorelei says:

      I am not even being facetious when I say that I genuinely think even Fergie could do a better job than the current hacks at KP. They fck up literally anything they try to do, ever.

  31. Beach Dreams says:

    If Harry briefed against William, it would’ve long been shouted from the rooftop ad nauseam. Look at how the palace feigned outrage about FF when it turns out that KP was involved the entire time. Moving from that point, I agree with Twitter Squad that this is probably another fake outrage stunt to stir interest in the documentary. The BBC is the same outlet that started the hysteria around Lili’s name. They’re not going to suddenly go hard against the royals.

    Oh, and blaming the Rose Hanbury leak was tried on the Sussexes AND the Squad and both attempts fell flat rather quickly. The palace can thank their FFQ for trying to throw her weight around in a social circle that never has and never will accept her as one of their own. Those people will never let Kate forget that she’s an outsider who doesn’t belong after that attempted “phase out” of Rose.

  32. Over it says:

    Nah, the bbc hates Meghan so I can’t see them doing anything to show her or Harry in a good light. Harry/Meghan bad
    The Windsors all good.

  33. Pinkosaurus says:

    Does this mean the BBC will get frozen out of the wonderful opportunity to televise next year’s Earthshot? Hahahaha. William needs the prestige and reach of the BBC way more than they need sources in the households.

  34. JJ says:

    Did anyone read the Daily Mail article and simply think, karma? William is mad that something will be aired without his approval and with no power to change the message ahead of it airing? Maybe he should ask Meghan how that feels?

  35. Sarah B. says:

    Don’t watch it. It’s trap to get ratings. Just ignore like Earthshot Prize. This going to be another hit piece on Harry and Meghan.

  36. tamsin says:

    I find it hard to believe that Harry ever briefed against William. However, Harry has been “briefed against” almost his entire adult life. This will be at best one of those false equivalency bit of “reporting” or at worst, another hit piece on Harry and Meghan. When the only “reporters” listed are anti-Meghan and briefed by William, there can be no expectation of truth or even critical analysis. Is this all a part of a year long pre-emptive action against Harry’s upcoming memoire? You know, following this is beginning to be bad for the mental health of all of us.

  37. Catherine says:

    The idea that Harry was briefing against William is ridiculous. If he was briefing the press he would have been correcting the stories about Meghan. Instead what we saw was a prolonged smear campaign with no pushback. Also, I think Harry knew that the tabloids would ultimately side with the heir to the throne. I think the doc is going to claim that Harry’s on the record comments to Tom Bradby in the doc, the Oprah interview, his statement to Gayle that talks with his family after the Oprah interview were unproductive and the Sussexes on the record denials count as briefing and put those things in the same category as the collusion that goes on between William and the tabloids. Given the list of RRs who were interviewed. This is going to be an attempt to gaslight people and smear the Sussexes while defending/propping up the Cambridge’s and their actions. I think it has become more and more obvious that William was behind the smear campaign and he is worried that this will confirm it. Also, I don’t think that all three houses are worried about this. Since the original story came out claiming that. The stories have subsequently focused on William being angry. I think KP tried to spin this the royal family including the Queen is upset about this to cover himself. And to put pressure on the BBC. I think what they are hoping is that the Sussexes will be angry, issue a statement and then it will seem like Harry is supporting William. William needs Harry for validation.

  38. Melly says:

    Fake news! This is manufactured outrage and the RF and the rota are in on it. Also someone on Twitter (the tweet was posted on LSA) found a link between the presenter and Tom Parker Bowles.

    This will be another hatchet job on Harry and Meghan.

  39. Lizzie says:

    Easily solved, have the daily fail publish their sources names when they claim to be palace insiders.

  40. L4frimaire says:

    I think some of this faux outrage is to drum up interest in the show. Meghan and Harry to bring in the clicks. As I’ve said before, the further away from the royal family and that life the Sussexes get, the more the BRF and UK press try to continuously hold on to them and keep them linked. When was the last time the Sussexes really mentioned the royal family outside of the Oprah interview or the court case? They are still replying from the Oprah interview, that is all they care about, and think that damaging Meghan is a way to get back whatever admiration or spotlight they think they stole from them. Look at the Ellen episode, they try to make it out or be a way for her to embarrass the royals, or their big NYC trip, they either try to catch some of that shine or gripe about it from the sidelines, saying it’s not a royal tour. Anyway, “ her husband’s family” can keep on with their b*llsh*t, they keep spilling.

  41. Slippers4life says:

    All I think when I read this stuff is “ooh. Now I need to watch this documentary!” Is this just creative marketing?

  42. February-Pisces says:

    Ok I’m gonna watch this documentary, so you all don’t have to. It’s starting now, I’ll keep you posted.

    • Nina says:

      please do, I’m trying to watch from outside uk and it’s impossible

    • February-Pisces says:

      Ok I just finished watching and it was actually pretty good. It was really more about the dynamics between the royals and the media. No one was really thrown under the bus but it did allude to palaces briefing against each other. They started with how the media turned on William (during the air ambulance days) by calling him lazy, mostly in relation that they weren’t getting content from him. The point was to reiterate how easily it is for the press to turn against you if you don’t give them what they want. And the reason they didn’t go for harry at that time was because he was too popular.

      They mentioned phone hacking. Also how Willie plays the game with the media whilst harry has shunned them completely and gone his own way. Camilla to Tominey talked about how she broke the story they were dating, but didn’t reveal her source (like we don’t know).

      When harry released his statement after news broke of the relationship, Robert jobson was saying that you don’t do anything whilst anyone is on tour. At the time Prince Charles was on tour and jobson alluded how Charles was upset by the statement overshadowed him and taking front page news.

      They was talk of tiara gate and how dan Wootton and another royal reporter basically gave two different versions of the same story to the docs presenter, which the presenter said to the camera shows how the same story can be told different ways.

      The rota were saying that during harry and meghans engagement announcement, there was literally a pond between them and the RRs and how they were kept at a distance. It seemed to allude that it was more from harry than Meghan. None of the rota was allowed in the church during the wedding, only one from the associated press.

      Camilla T n Dan rotten tried to claim how the press held back on all the stories on Meghan, but the chatter ‘got too loud to ignore’ lol. It alluded to the royal households being competitive with each other and how Meghan overshadowed them. Also at the end they mentioned how Willie basically hired a whole new team (after harry n meghans wedding), he basically brought in the big guns for himself. Also meghans lawyer was interviewed with meghans permission.

      There is a second part to this documentary, but it was pretty interesting. It didn’t thrown any royals directly under the bus, it didn’t reveal that Kp was behind the smear campaign, but we knew it wouldn’t. But I guess it did dance around it without saying it

      • Denise says:

        Thank you sooooo much February Piesces you’re so good at this

      • Nic919 says:

        I saw a brief clip with Meghan’s lawyer so now I am going to look for this. It also explains why Billy got upset. They aren’t going to slant everything his way and he can’t hack it.

        (Wondering if they will mention any of the affair stuff in the next episode, even as a rumour)

      • equality says:

        Charles was upset? A mouse could sneeze in the throne room and Charles’ tours would be overshadowed.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Thanks for the synopsis, AN. That lawyer interview sounds so interesting and made my ears perk up! I’d be interested to know more about what he said.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Sorry, l meant February Pisces!

      • Becks1 says:

        Thank you FP! Sounds like there was some dancing around the big points but still enough to make it clear if anyone wants to connect the dots. I do like that it sounds like the documentary made it crystal clear that bad press comes as punishment for not cooperating.

    • February-Pisces says:

      Thank you @ Denise. It was a stroke of genius interviewing the ratchet rota because it’s them who are inadvertently confirming that there is an invisible contract.

      For anyone who was on the fence, I’d definitely recommend watching it. But twitter will fill in the gaps.

      • Lorelei says:

        @February-Pisces, thank you so much! Tbh I’d forgotten about it, and this is such a great summary. I didn’t realize there was another episode coming. Thank you!!

      • Sure says:

        It’s on YT (at the moment). I found the interviews with some of the reporters/commentators extraordinary indictments of their personal and professional integrity. Despite being hardened journos they fell into the trap of opening up to one of their own colleagues. DW’s appearance is thankfully short but his arrogance is almost palpable.

  43. jferber says:

    The pic of William with his wife and lover is SO interesting. His eyes are looking down, avoiding direct engagement with either woman. For once, William’s belittling, disdainful, contemptuous expression is nowhere to be found. Could he be a bit abashed that his lover and wife are so courteous to one another and not ripping each other’s (or his) face off? God, I hate this bastard. Is there no one he won’t betray? Wife? yes. Brother? yes. Father? yes (but he deserves it and taught his turd son his own arrogance, coldness and pettiness). Also, the removal/loss of William’s hair has totally devastated his looks (though this point is, of course, irrelevant).

  44. bisynaptic says:

    kaiser, how do we know that 1) harry and meghan also briefed the british media and 2) that, if they did so, they briefed against william and/or kate? harry never had his own press operation. he was either at KP (under william) or BP (under QE2).

  45. jferber says:

    Oh, and William recently betrayed his mother by calling her paranoid, I think? If it serves him to betray his kids, he will do that, too. Just a prediction.

  46. Leah says:

    Just saw about 15 mins of this…Bill was right to be worried, lmao. But the squad been knew….

  47. jferber says:

    February-Pisces, I just watched Part 1 (on YouTube, I think?) and you summarized it very well. Part 2 should be interesting, too.

  48. A says:

    Honestly, what’s ironic to me in ALL of this is that like, the BBC at this point in history could not get more pro-govt, pro-Tory, pro-monarchy, pro-reactionary. All of those things should theoretically align itself completely with where the monarchy and the govt is right now on the political spectrum. The idea of them being some kind of a neutral news agency is such a laughable thing to say bc they are not that any more at all. They abandoned any pretense of that at least a few years ago, and are now going all-in on trying to tow the Tory party line, and even with that, they are still seeing cuts made to their budget, talks of pulling them entirely, taking them off air, etc.

    For the royals to b-tch and moan about a relatively monarchy friendly entity like this is hilarious. It just proves to me, yet again, that William really is a Tory supporter/voter. I can just hear him screeching incoherently about how the BBC is full of bolshie lefties and needs to be shuttered already bc how DARE they breathe a WHIFF of what is the reality abt the royal family’s contract with the media?!?! If they dare question the monarchy it means they’re BIASED towards those COMMIE LEFTIES and they need to close up shop TOMORROW.

    I think it suits William just fine to align himself against the BBC. Just like every other butthurt white man, he can externalize his problems to some outside entity if it means never having to point a finger at himself or the institutions that made him. Isn’t that convenient.

    Speaking of British media, I heard recently that the Fail’s weekly editor got sacked, and is replaced by whoever is helming the Fail on Sunday, and they’re going to be combining the weekly tabloid and the Sunday paper into one 7 day paper. The MoS dude who’s put in charge now is also the one who pushed heavily to continue the fight against Meghan in court. No surprises on why he got the job and why the other guy got pushed out. This person is also alleged to have kept several unflattering stories and pictures of Carrie Symonds off the front pages, went all in on Brexit, and amped up the racism and Islamophobia in the MoS tabloid. It’s awfully interesting, the sorts of people those in power in Britain are likely in an unspoken contract with for good coverage.

  49. jferber says:

    A, very insightful, interesting post.

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 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 Thank you!

Leave a comment