Tina Brown: Duchess Meghan had a ‘willful blindness to institutional culture’

I was on Team Maybe Tina Brown Will Really Dish The Royal Dirt, but I was wrong. I admit that fully, I was totally wrong about Tina Brown’s The Palace Papers. I thought she was doing the thing that some royal commentators do, criticizing the royals under the guise of embiggening them. Not so much – The Palace Papers is apparently deeply sourced within Camp Cambridge, meaning it’s a litany of bullsh-t about how everything the Duchess of Sussex did was completely wrong. The WaPo review of the book points out Brown’s clear bias towards the Duchess of Cambridge, and Brown’s blind spot when it comes to how f–king racist the Windsors and the British press were to Meghan. Here are some lowlights from The Palace Papers:

Before Meghan, Harry & William fought about patronages: Intriguingly, she says that the relationship between the two siblings began to decline long before the destabilising arrival of Meghan Markle. ‘Friction between the brothers escalated over their professional alignments,’ Brown writes. ‘William knew he had to be respectful of hierarchy when it came to his father’s ownership of the environmental platform, but he was less willing to accede to his brother.’ For his part, Harry felt William was ‘hogging the best briefs’, a rivalry especially keen over their joint interests in Africa and conservation. Brown claims that Harry wanted the prestigious rhino and elephant charity the Tusk Trust, of which William had been patron since 2005. ‘Harry was a very, very angry man. I think those were absolutely Olympic rows,’ she quotes a friend of the brothers as saying.

William is terrible public speaker: ‘If William makes a speech, everything from “Good evening” onwards has to be typed out and handed to him,’ a charity official tells her. ‘When he came to our dining club one evening, as soon as he got up to speak he froze.’ Harry knew how to work a room like his grandfather Prince Philip, starting with a joke to break the ice.

When Harry Met Meghan: She and the prince became ‘drunk on a shared fantasy of being the instruments of global transformation who, once married, would operate in the celebrity stratosphere once inhabited by Princess Diana’.

Meghan is horrible for being a good public speaker: The world caught a glimpse of this power grab at the unveiling of the so-called ‘Fab Four’, when Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity. ‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation,’ Brown writes. ‘When it was Kate’s moment to speak, she was strikingly less articulate, as well as brief.’

Dusty palace courtiers had no idea how to harness Meghan’s charisma: So far so glamorous, but what Palace insiders saw as Meghan’s ‘wilful blindness to institutional culture’ was a clash with the actress’s world view. ‘In the ranking system of the entertainment world, star power — wattage — equals leverage . . . Alas, she seemed oblivious to the one critical factor that would determine the outcome of her plans for the future: primogeniture.’

Meghan got freebies, oh no: In the book, Brown shines a fascinating and waspish light on Meghan’s life just as she was meeting Harry and how her then blog, The Tig, was a dragnet for luxury freebies. ‘She won a reputation among the marketers of luxury brands of being warmly interested in receiving bags of designer swag.’ A publicist is quoted as saying she had been copied in to a message from a member of Meghan’s team after she became Duchess of Sussex. ‘Make sure [the publicist] knows that she can still send me anything. She’s always been one of the good ones.’

Meghan’s conclusion after the South Pacific Tour: Her view, according to Brown, was that ‘the monarchy likely needed her more than she needed them. ‘She had starred in the equivalent of a blockbuster film and wanted her leading-lady status to be reflected in lights’.

[From The Daily Mail]

Here’s the thing, I’ve never believed that Meghan is a saint who walks on water, but it’s increasingly ridiculous for biographers to continue to lay the blame for everything at Meghan’s feet. Say what you will, but Meghan f–king TRIED. She tried to learn about how to work within the institution. She tried to find ways to follow “the rules” (which kept changing to only apply to her) while still doing good work. And they trashed her, they lied about her, they spread smears about her, they tried to bully her out of the country.

Also: the freebies thing is so bizarre, of course actors get freebies from designers. Meghan had a celebrity profile and an Instagram account and her own blog. Of course companies were sending her things.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar and Backgrid.

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

256 Responses to “Tina Brown: Duchess Meghan had a ‘willful blindness to institutional culture’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Scorpion says:

    What a waste of time and energy this book is!

    • Bettyrose says:

      It’s also oddly critical of the Cambridges if it’s coming from camp Cambridge. Even their inside PR can’t say anything nice about their speaking abilities? 🤣

      • MsIam says:

        Some things are so obvious @Bettyrose even a deranger can’t hide it. But they can keep trying to offer up sub par as good, kind of like Olive Garden. My US peeps will get that one. But some folks love Olive Garden.

      • bettyrose says:

        LMFAO @ comparison to Olive Garden. I haven’t eaten there in decades, but in my twenties it was a staple. You could eat so much food for so little cost. I guess that’s the secondary American dream. Endless cheese and refined carbs for minimal cost. Health be damned if you’re getting a good deal! But yes it’s a similar phenomenon. The Cambridges don’t come at a low cost, but their appeal is similar trick to pretending that bland mass produced food is Italian cuisine.

    • Chicago says:

      I’ll be reading! Sounds like a lot of insides (true? false?) we haven’t heard before. And I enjoyed Brown’s “Diana” biography. Good, entertaining writing.

      • bettyrose says:

        Waiting on reviews before I decide whether to invest. I don’t want to buy a book that’s full of the same sexist, racist drivel we’ve read for years about Meghan, but I’m not planning to return my Tina Brown Diana biography, either. I love that book and reread it periodically.

      • Jais says:

        Nothing in these excerpts suggest anything new. This book seems like a waste of money.

      • booboocita says:

        The reviews in the Washington Post and the NYTimes are not good. They’re not super-negative, but they’re fairly critical. It’s hard to claim that someone is working hard when there’s obviously so little output, and harder to claim that someone else (*cough*Sussexes*cough*) is arrogant and lazy when they’re going from strength to strength and everyone who isn’t part of the RR loves them.

        I’m sure Tina wrote for clicks and cash, though, so I’ll be interested to see if she realizes the fortune she’s obviously hoping for. She’s been on the morning news program, shilling hard for her book. We’ll see.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Agree @Jais. Brown is simply mimicking BM talking points. She’s not offering up anything possibly new except her opinions. A lot of the reviews out there say it looks like she’s just repeating different press accounts and throws in some stories involving herself with people within the periphery of the palace industrial complex. Very similar to the Diana Chronicles. Brown was not a good friend of Diana’s. That was an idea TB sold hard. Just like Levin lying about spending a year and half with Harry. She spent next to no time with him. But a lot of time with press clippings. Brown is just another messy minded monarchist. LOL at Harry being jealous of Will’s patronages. Harry was already planning on going into military service when Will was given the Tusk patronage. I’m not buying Brown’s schlock. Mildly curious if Brown will go into Harry being called home from service because of the lazy one’s bad headlines.

        Brown wasn’t nice about Meghan after the Oprah interview. Didn’t think she would be in her book either.

  2. equality says:

    So basically it is H&M’s fault that they are good at speaking and working with people and W&K are not? She makes it look quite true that Meghan was told to be less and that W&K went after them because they were jealous. Even when these people think they are defending W&K, they aren’t. And the RF gets “freebies” all the time also, which in most cases, are worth FAR more than any designer “swag”. Funny how there were “epic rows” between Harry and Will but ONLY Harry was the “angry” one. News for this writer: talking about “primogeniture” in this century is gross.

    • Chloe says:

      The amount of biographies written about meghan is simply ridiculous. This woman was in the UK for less than 2 years. She’s been out of it longer than she’s been in it. None of their friends speak to any royal reporter. And i know this for a fact because Meghan’s friends aren’t afraid to put their names and faces to their words. These people don’t know her at all (or what went down for that matter) yet they have so much material to write books? Utter nonsense

    • OriginalLaLa says:

      Why is Tina Brown complaining about Meg getting designer swag for free when the BRF’s entire LIFESTYLE is one gigantic freebie?

      • ADS says:

        They always go on about the cost and value of everything Meghan owns. It comes across like it offends them that she has money and enjoys a bit of luxury. So bizarre. 🤔

      • Deering24 says:

        Like Tina Brown and her ilk don’t get unofficial freebies?! Come on…

      • Christine says:

        It truly boggles the mind. Hello, you are propping up the biggest welfare recipients of all time, and trashing the hard workers.

        I was going to buy this book, I already have The Diana Chronicles”, but no fucking way now. I won’t even check it out at the library.

        Lady, it is not Harry or Meghan’s fault that they are charismatic. You are pissed because they won’t give you any access. Period.

      • Sue E Generis says:

        Especially since the royals refused to finance her when she was working on their behalf.

    • SussexWatcher says:

      About the freebies, The Other Brother and Kkkeen literally just returned from a free ski vacation in a “friend’s 5mil mansion” so they can miss me with this criticism. Also, the Midds are known to cash in on their royal-adjacent status or getting free items and then passing them to Kkkeen. Plus (I don’t even believe the narrative she was taking freebies, but) we know now that Meghan was being told there was no money for her clothes and she should keep working to support herself. So the whole thing is just yet another way to criticize Meghan for something other royals did/do.

    • Trimdownmnrchyboring says:

      Im not offended by Meghan liking freebies and having ambitious dreams. The difference with her and kate is she’s a hard worker to achieve her ambitions. Kate’s a social climber who expects credit for no/low work. Harry being the spare of course he had to fight harder for what he wanted, he was the one they we’re being unfair and abusive to. It was like not being the front singer of a music group, you never get first choice on the best outfit.

    • Becks1 says:

      Exactly! This part – “when Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity. ‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation” – definitely tells us what we already knew, that Meghan’s talent and skill and…competence, I guess….were all threats to the Cambridges and they were irritated/angry over it. Also WTF does it mean to speak with “actressy skill”??

      It wasn’t Meghan’s fault that the Cambridges are awful at public speaking.

      • MrsCope says:

        Here’s the thing. If we want to be better at something, we take lessons, we get coaches, we work for it. The charisma may not (does not) come naturally for them, but would be the harm in Wills and Buttons getting a speech coach. I guarantee Meghan had acting lessons! I’m not surprised though the money and ambition are painted as demerits against Meghan’s character, though. Anyone who has watched a Victorian-era series or movie knows that old, inherited money trumps new money and employment every time.

      • Myjobistoprincess says:

        @MrsCope I don’t think Kate even considered taking the time to get better. Not the way she rolls. Not called waity katie for nothing. She waited for her ring, she got it, now she’s waiting for the crown. Nothing to work for in between. wether she workd or not, she’s still getting her crown. Meg fckd up eveyrthing when she got in and showed true work, ethic and real competence with the Spare one. that wasnt in the plan.

        P.S. I keep seeing Cardi B on that picture of Meg!

      • Elizabeth Kerri Mahon says:

        Even Diana hired a speech coach to work with her to get better at her job, but apparently, the Keens don’t feel the need. They’re content to just go on being barely competent at their jobs.

      • AnnaKist says:

        And guess what? H and M are going to go on having dreams and working hard to achieve them. These royal hacks Still can’t stand that Harry and Meghan could walk away and make a good life for themselves elsewhere. When you think about it, it was a huge move and took a lot of courage. Harry and Meghan seem to be thriving now and that is what is sticking in the craw of these royal gossip writers.

      • stagaroni says:

        @Becks, I found it odd/horrible that Brown could not fathom that Meghan could possibly be articulate without assuming she must be acting.

      • Christine says:

        stagaroni, it makes a certain sort of sense, though, from her twisted brain. EVERYTHING about royalty is a performance, she couldn’t recognize a genuine moment if it slapped her in the face.

    • Couch potato says:

      I clearly remember there were writings about money issues between Harry and TOB, as in issues with Harry never getting enough money for his charity work. I think he was 3. or 4. in line at the time, and Willnot, who was higher up in the hierarchy had first dibs . That’s the reason he founded Invictus Games and Sentebal outside the royal sphere.

      • Lorelei says:

        @CouchPotato, the fact that they weren’t giving Harry enough ££ to do anything certainly ended up being a blessing in disguise! I’m so glad Invictus has absolutely zero royal ties.

      • Deering24 says:

        @CouchPotato, looks like Harry wasn’t down for the Almighty Primogenture Rule, neither.

    • Debbie says:

      “When Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity. ‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation,’ Brown writes. ‘When it was Kate’s moment to speak, she was strikingly less articulate, as well as brief.’”

      Are you kidding me?! Her “actressy skill”? How petty these people are? Someone should tell Tina Brown that not all actors or actresses speak articulately. They generally act out dialogue written by others, so some are famously inarticulate. The fact that Meghan spoke well at an unfamiliar event just tends to speak well of her. It suggests that Meghan took the event seriously, that she prepared for it, and that she had a genuine interest in the subject. If W & K’s reaction was to be sullen about that then it says something very small about them, and it also suggests that they don’t think they could have done any better – which is pathetic (but then we already knew that).

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Good points equality. Freebies. Who doesn’t like them? The BRF has been taking them forever. The Queen Mother was quite known to ask/demand them.. Only they hid it under using the word gift.

      “The vaults of Buckingham Palace are groaning with priceless, useless freebies from foreign dignitaries.”. Tina Brown, April 2009 (interesting that the story was updated July 2017)

      • equality says:

        Interesting. I didn’t get the Oprah-Michelle comparison at a time when all the two women had in common was skin tone and being well-known. Was that to say there was only room for one famous black woman in the US? Her thrown-in paragraph about Oprah sounded shady. “You might as well have a little R in a circle next to your name.”? This sentence is confusing also: “to be flogged off on eBay the following week by whoever gets first dibs.” Is she saying palace personnel sell off what is supposed to be public property?

      • Blithe says:

        “Extraterrestrial Giants”?! What a way to “other” the Obamas — while trying to make it appear as though it COULD be a compliment. I wonder how many white people TB has described as being “extraterrestrial “.

        Thanks for the link Agreatreckoning.

  3. KAP says:

    The part about her being able to speak articulately without sounding like an idiot is supposed to be a bad thing for Meghan? All I read was that Kate and William are possibly two of the most ignorant and ill-prepared heir and spouse to the British throne.

    • Lorelei says:

      I really believe that they expected Meghan to observe Kate, and then tailor her behavior accordingly so that she never, under any circumstances, came out looking better than Kate. It’s not Meghan’s fault that every time she opens her mouth she comes across far better than Kate could ever even dream of.

    • Mrs Robinson says:

      I work at a toxic, hierarchical organization, and having talent, aptitude, and a work ethic is absolutely a liability if it makes someone higher up feel threatened.
      And I’m no ingenue coming in trying to disparage those with experience! Have worked many places and have found that toxic and rigidly hierarchical is its own beast.

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        You know, the absolute best VPs I have worked under thrived on hiring and supporting workers with talent, aptitude, and work ethic. The very worst, most toxic bosses always, without fail, felt threatened by such people because their own insecurities were triggered, and they actively worked to push out or fire those workers to the detriment of the company. And, yeah, the folks running things for The Firm demonstrate that kind of toxic behavior constantly.

    • HeatherC says:

      They have no reason to change. As long as there is a monarchy, William will always have a role. All he has to do is draw breath. As long as William stays married to Kate, she’ll always have a role. All she has to do is stay married

      There is no incentive to improve. Or prepare. Or be decent. Because there is no disincentive. That’s just one big problem with hereditary monarchies, there’s no reason for them to improve or do better.

      • Debbie says:

        That thought occurred to me too, but then Diana was married to the heir – and she was much closer to the brass ring than Kate was. So, W & K can’t even use the excuse that they don’t have to try to get the crown or sleep with the crown.

      • HeatherC says:

        William doesn’t have to try to get the crown. If there is a monarchy for him, all he has to do is outlive his father.

        The only work Kate has to do is stay married to William. Even if they lead separate lives, as long as they’re legally married, she’ll be the wife of the king and most likely Queen Consort, as Diana would have been if she and Charles stayed married, as Camilla was always going to be, public opinion be damned.

  4. Oh_Hey says:

    I don’t get why the keep trying to bash Meghan for being good at her job while simultaneously embiggening W&K for things that make them obviously bad at theirs.

    It’s not good to be dumb and inarticulate if your job is to be the face, name, and voice for charities. And you can tell Meghan tried to downplay herself based on how and when she spoke and her wardrobe then vs. now. The woman didn’t even wear colors besides neutrals even on her lips and nails. She doesn’t even do much now except pop up a few times a year, continue to do and be good, and then disappears back into her mansion.

    The complete insanity to be upset at someone for doing well. She was a former actress who studied international relations at college and interned at the UN. The couldn’t have made a better princess in a lab.

    • Chloe says:

      This is right on point with the derangers who keep saying that meghan “hit the ground running” and that things “simply don’t work like that”. And every time they say it I’m like ???? So you want her to do nothing for 10 years?

      • equality says:

        They would have complained about her doing nothing then. I think the main point is there was no way she could win with that system.

      • Blujfly says:

        @choloe, which is hilarious because the narrative on Kate right before the wedding was she was ready to hit the ground running and keen to start and the most prepared and educated Princess ever.

      • Nic919 says:

        The expression “hit the ground running” was what Kate said she would do at the engagement interview but within weeks that was backtracked. Anyone using that as a cudgel against Meghan has no idea of the origin of that phrase.

    • Miranda says:

      The resentment of Meghan for doing well is the problem with the monarchy and aristocracy in a nutshell. It’s nothing but an excuse for a small handful of people to never show an ounce of humility or make an attempt at self-improvement. Like, even if you accept that Meghan should’ve lowered her profile and deferred to Kate, what stopped Kate from noting Meghan’s intelligence and articulateness and maybe try reading up own patronages instead of relying on her aides to tell her what to say, or perhaps asking Meghan for public speaking tips? No no no, it was so much easier to just try and force Meghan to dumb herself down and hide behind a curtain for the rest of her life.

      • equality says:

        Look up “do-gooder derogation”. It’s interesting.

      • Lorrena Elliott says:

        “Do-gooder Derogation” … thx 🙏 Equality, this sums up Meghan and Harry’s problem in a nutshell; same as Diana’s.

  5. Noki says:

    That fab four panel they did you could tell that her charisma and smarts was going to be a problem for them. At that stage i dont think she was aware how much she was suppose to dim her light. And when she spoke Will seemed like he knew his wife was the opposite and he was annoyed but glad at that realisation.

    • Mads says:

      Watching that engagement I knew she would be in trouble. The hierarchical system does not allow for the heirs and, by association their wives, to be overshadowed by lower ranking (I feel absurd even typing that 🙄) members. It doesn’t help that the current heirs are insecure and insular; they’re only concerned with their own PR and not the success of the institution in the long-term.

      • Noki says:

        Yes even their engagement interview when she was so ecxcted to hit the ground running I thought well hopefuly its a new day. I actually thought in a naive way this would be a good thing for the Keens, they can continue with their laziness but it seems they do also want the attention when they see fit.

      • Em says:

        LOL William and Kate’s faces during that event were priceless. Rattled to their CORE every time Meghan spoke!

  6. Amy T says:

    Shame on Tina Brown. I read the WaPo piece on Saturday and was disgusted. She understands the intersection of celebrity and royal family dynamics better than most and made a calculated choice here to embiggen herself at Megan’s expense. The question is to what end. Brown is a lot of things, but stupid isn’t one of them.

    • MoBiMom says:

      My thought about the WaPo review: amazing that Tina Brown of all people seems to be offended by Meghan’s ambition. God forbid a talented woman should want to shine her light! As I recall, Tina’s co-workers called her Blonde Ambition… certainly borne out in her own words in “The Vanity Fair Diaries”.

      • KFG says:

        White women are allowed to be ambitious, smart, cunning, and charismatic. A biracial Black woman marrying into an all white institution to the better brother destroys alot of these racist women’s views on where they believe non-white women belong. It makes her angry that a non-white woman looked at this supposedly “,great” institution and said nope im out, I’m worth more. How dare a black woman not take all the abuse! White women went through some abuse too! That’s her view.

      • Blithe says:

        KFG 👏🏽

    • Merricat says:

      She’s not stupid, but she’s not as smart as she thinks she is.

      • Amy T says:

        Agreed. That said, I had some time to think about and come up with at least one answer to my own question, which is “to sell more books.”

      • Eurydice says:

        Oh, she’s smart, she’s just a hypocrite at the end of her career and looking to cash in on one more book.

      • Osty says:

        @amybee the Meghan the devil to Kate’s angel narrative is so tired I really doubt it will sell more copies that she hopes. At this point a more unbias book will sell thousands of copies more than this ridiculous narrative

      • Jais says:

        @osty- that’s the thing, Tina brown is not unearthing anything new here. She’s retreading evil Meghan storylines that have already been covered by the tabloids over and over. Nothing about this indicates anything special or unique about this book.

      • Deering24 says:

        KFG, yeah, boy, there are too many successful “feminism for me, but _hell_, no, for thee ” faux feminists out there. Lots of talking a good game, but treating everyone they feel is a threat like crap.

    • MissMarirose says:

      Access. All royal reporters live and die by their access to the royal family. The Windsors give it out but the Sussexes no longer do. So, of course, people like Tina Brown are going to take sides against the Sussexes, so she can continue to get access for other royal stories and keep her career going.

    • Susan says:

      I also suspect this is a calculated career move on her part: with H and M running a pretty tight ship and her “beat” being the British royal family, she has more future book opportunity to kiss the BRF butt and keep on with that cottage industry vs not as much material to glean from H and M in USA and part of a very different scene now.

    • LeonsMomma says:

      I worked at Conde Nast when Tina Brown was editor at Vanity Fair, Anna Wintour at Vogue.

      There was an intense rivalry, but very one-sided with Anna always the favorite, which drove Tina batty. At that time, the gossip was that Tina was jealous of Anna’s looks and style. Tina, I remember hearing once, had sort of an ugly duckling image about herself (again, this was the scuttlebutt at the time.) It didn’t help that Tina started copying Anna with the big sunglasses in the office look, among other things.

      Basically, we were told that to make it at Vanity Fair as a woman, you had to dress down and if you are beautiful and any hint of charisma, to hide it because Tina isn’t going to like you. (Unless you happened to be a celeb’s kid, which was useful to her.)

      That all said, knowing all of this about Tina makes her takedowns of Diana and Meghan not surprising to me.

      • Deering24 says:

        @LeonsMomma, ugh, Conde Nast? Props on surviving that scene with your humanity intact. 🙂 And why is it so many of these fashion mavens grew up feeling they were ugly–and go on to try and make the rest of us feel like garbage? 🙄🙄🤮🤮

    • jj says:

      LMAO, that WaPo article does have some particularly hilarious shade though.

      “Middleton, raised in the picturesque village of Bucklebury, springs from what Brown delicately terms “unexalted origins,” which basically means her mother Carole was an air hostess. Kate met William at university, married him 10 years later and spent the decade between in limbo under the watchful eye of Carole, the Kris Jenner of Bucklebury.

      The life of a Windsor is one of such drab constraint — endlessly tedious public appearances, gloomy holidays spent in drafty castles — even Brown can’t figure out why Kate would want it. After years together, William, humiliatingly, once broke up with her on the phone before eventually realizing her quiet forbearance and devotion to duty made her a natural for a life spent opening Tescos in Wales. They married in 2011.”

  7. Southern Fried says:

    Wonder if anything she claims is litigious. I’m trying to wrap my head around the fact that the haters will never shut up. I’d foolishly hoped they’d stop at some point or run out of lies. I’m not reading this garbage, just going to ignore any press about it except here and maybe some more intelligent press.

  8. Harla says:

    I had thought about buying this book, because I liked the Diana Chronicles, but the more snippets I see the less and less I’m compelled to buy it.

    • Snuffles says:

      These reporters and biographers are not making the points they think are making. Only within the UK monarchy and with monarchists people would consider “rights of primogeniture” the final word. Especially when said beneficiaries have done fuck all to even TRY to live up to their unearned position.

      Everyone else outside that ancient institution sees it for the bullshit that it is.

      All I’m getting from this is that they felt both Harry and Meghan didn’t “know their place”. That Harry was fed up with the system LONG before he met Meghan. And that the system tried to crush Meghan’s spirit in order for the Cambridges to maintain their sense of superiority. Because in their world “ rights of primogeniture” trumps everything.

      Oh and

      “ When Harry Met Meghan: She and the prince became ‘drunk on a shared fantasy of being the instruments of global transformation who, once married, would operate in the celebrity stratosphere once inhabited by Princess Diana’.”

      It wasn’t a fantasy. It’s a reality and is what they are accomplishing right now. And why is that treated as a bad thing? Oh right “primogeniture” 🙄

      • Eurydice says:

        Yes, this is what I find interesting – Tina chooses words that twist reality into something negative. If the “institutional culture” is laziness and ineptitude, then why wouldn’t someone try to change that? “Her plans for the future” sounds like “mwa, ha, ha, and then I’ll take over the world” when it’s just “how can I be useful for the rest of my life?”

        And the use of “primogeniture” fascinates me – because that’s a fancy way of saying “William.” Nothing in Meghan’s supposed “plans” include taking over the throne, so “primogeniture” doesn’t mean she didn’t understand the idea of line of succession. Nope, the major obstacle was William, with his jealousy, entitlement, anger, lack of skills and charisma, mediocre wife, not to mention prior feuds with Harry.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, all these things that Meghan supposedly did that were so bad and wrong….its like, she was a good public speaker? She wanted to make a difference? She wanted to use her platform for good? OMG THE HORROR.

        While I find these excerpts to be annoyingly anti-Meghan, I also think the palace/Tina Brown is telling on itself. The problem wasn’t that Meghan didn’t try, or that Meghan thought she was too good for the royals, or whatever else. The problem was that the Firm could not handle a superstar couple like the Sussexes. Even with Charles and Diana…Diana was the superstar. Here you had two hugely popular people who just keep making more people like them with every appearance, who thrive off each other’s success, and they are not the heir and his wife. that was the issue.

      • ciotogista says:

        It’s almost like “service” is just the excuse to maintain their privileges instead of the point of the royal family at this time in history.

      • MsIam says:

        @Snuffles, if Will and Kate could operate in that “celebrity stratosphere” they would love it. And so would the palace. Everything that belongs to Harry and Meghan now would be perfectly acceptable on Will and Kate. They are dying to sit at the “cool kids” table.

      • Debbie says:

        Didn’t someone once say that the most important concern of the royal family was that there should NOT be another Diana? So, I guess from the RF’s point of view it made sense for them to mistreat, try to belittle, and diminish anyone who made W & K look bad by outworking them and being more charismatic than them. Far be it that W & K should have worked harder.

    • goofpuff says:

      Does make you wonder how much of the Diana Chronicles book was palace and tabloid BS as well if this books is so badly researched and produced.

      • Jais says:

        @goofpuff- I think you are asking a very very good question.

        I don’t know much about the Diana years and why the TB Diana book was considered interesting so maybe I’m missing something. This writer did not just become an Angela Levin wannabe out of nowhere. I would highly question and reconsider everything she has written in the past. I’m sure there are a lotta clues if looked at through a different lens and honestly who’s agenda was she pushing back then.

  9. Lizzie says:

    I guess she just read through old df articles then wrote a book. I’ve seen the claim before that Meghan didn’t understand the pecking order, well Bill has been called the heir his whole life so just how would she not understand that?
    Tina Brown knew Diana in a limited professional setting but I don’t believe she knows Harry or Meghan.

    • Tessa says:

      She was not Diana’s friend

    • MsIam says:

      @Lizzie, Hollywood is all about the pecking order. The difference is that with royals you can’t move up unless someone dies and even then, its at the whim of the monarch. Look at Edward and Sophie, the Earl and Countess of Try Hard. They are desperately trying to climb on the platform but nope!

  10. Lili says:

    an obersavation i made about Harry’s speeches at IG was he was no longer using notes, something he remarked on about Meghan, so he learnt how to do it. if W&K are bad why can they not put in the time to do better? they cannot not go on for the rest of their days blaming Meghan and Harry for their inablity to want to do better. This seems to be a window into a major issue, that the royal family dont want to address.

    • ADS says:

      Exactly this! Competitiveness with Harry and Meghan would even have been a good thing if the Cambridges’ had made a point of raising their game and working harder. The charities would only have benefitted. But instead they chose to remain lazy and incompetent and added character assassination to their sh*tty resumes.

    • susan says:

      Watching Harry speak at the IG, especially the closing ceremony, it was clear that he was speaking FROM THE HEART. Full of love, kindness, and empathy. It was inspirational. He made his speech about the participants, and not about himself.

      He’s clearly had a great deal of media training and he uses it very well. Remarkable that the other one can’t be bothered.

  11. Em says:

    It’s hilarious to see all these writers put their eggs in the Cambridge basket. I can’t wait for their eventual cock up.

  12. Ginger says:

    The fact that Tina Brown used Thomas Markle has her source for Meghan should tell you everything. And she goes easy on Thomas and blames Harry and Meghan for how he was treated.

    This book is ALL KP/ Middelton. Kate is described as the most perfect person ever and Meghan is evil. No thanks.

  13. fishface says:

    “Her (Meghan’s) view, according to Brown, was that ‘the monarchy likely needed her more than she needed them.”……
    So what? The BM has been in trouble for years – the only person to come along since the death of Diana with any ability to keep the BM from becoming totally irrelevant has been Meghan. And I’ve no doubt that Harry recognised this, as did Meghan. And as a team they are blindingly brilliant.

    • MoBiMom says:

      Ummmm…. and she turned out to be exactly right!

      • Lorelei says:

        Exactly! She was right! THAT’S why they’re angry. Because it’s now plainly obvious that they needed Meghan far more than she ever needed them.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      The problem with that particular statement is Brown claiming that to be Meghan’s view. Meghan hasn’t intimated that. Harry has. Why is Brown throwing it at Meghan? Though a lot of people(along with credible members of non tabloid/rota media), myself included, see it as being true.

  14. Ginger says:

    I’m curious on how Tina will promote this book in the US. I’m sure she knows she have to go easy on Meghan in the US
    ( just like Robert Lacey did) so she can sell a few books but will bash and berate her in the UK. So pathetic.

    • Amy Bee says:

      She will go on the Today Show to promote it. There’s a willingness to bash Meghan there. Not so much, on ABC or CBS.

      • Lorelei says:

        Hoda is on the Today Show, though, and I don’t think she’d sit silently by through any Sussex-bashing.

      • Ginger says:

        Tina Brown was a royal commentator on CBS Morning Show and would be very snide regarding the Sussex’s and down played the obvious racism. I’m sure she will do an interview with them.

      • Christine says:

        I hope you are right, Ginger. Do you suppose she will deign to be interviewed by Gayle King? This is going to be interesting.

    • Korra says:

      There is always Fox News to entertain her racist, tunnel-visioned view of Meghan.

    • girl_ninja says:

      That lady Emily Giffin will waiting with baited breath to chat this Brown chick.

  15. Che Che says:

    The BM and royals did Meghan a favor. She went to work and they showed us what was behind the royal curtain and what passes for civility in England. Better to know that devil now and to get on with things. The bonus was the life they’ve created on US soil. I say let the dead bury the dead.

    • MsIam says:

      I agree. I don’t get the sense that Harry (and certainly not Meghan) is pining away for that old life anymore. The tabloids are the main ones crying and complaining. I think he wishes he could check on the queen in person more often and that’s about it.

  16. C-Shell says:

    I’ll admit that I also thought the TB book would dish on everyone, maybe most on the married ins (because of the cover), but it seems to be primarily a hit job on the Sussexes and Meghan The Disruptor in particular. I get that Tina Brown is mostly connected to the older generation of royals, but had no idea she was embedded so deeply with the Lamebridges. I’ll save my money.

    • ABritGuest says:

      Of course Meghan isn’t perfect – nobody is. But none of these royal reporters etc have the range or willingness to examine the misogynoir Meghan faced& are vested in propping up the monarchy & it’s heirs. Tina Brown is ex Tatler, CBE, media mogul. She IS the establishment so of course she will be pro Cambridges & will downplay the disgusting press coverage & the palace briefings to blame Meghan for the Sussexes exit. When I saw Camilla Tominey saying it was the first accurate depiction of what happened with M-it I knew what was up. Tina is probably after a damehood.

      I saw a CBS clip from 2019 where Tina said that Kate was perfect for following tradition with the hospital steps thing & always doing what she was told whereas Meghan was defiant. For a woman who had an independent career it’s odd to me that she finds that praise worthy. Also so odd that Tina has a problem with Meghan being well spoken & confident in comparison to Kate but maybe she needs to examine her own bias. I also saw her praise Melania Trump a while ago so maybe that’s the type of woman she admires. Shrug.

      Also I saw a Guardian review that she interviewed Thomas Markle & defends him. That alone makes this complete project tabloid trash to me- you might as well pick up the Sun or Daily Mail. Tina also has vested interest in disparaging Harry especially & Meghan as it affects her royal expert grift if the public can hear from Harry directly via his memoir on how he feels on various topics rather than relying on her expertise etc.

      Yes Meghan got freebies as an actress with a blog where she promoted fashion, beauty brands etc- shock horror. Any comment on the jewellery etc that the royals routinely get?

      I wonder about this idea that Harry was jealous that William got better briefs & more funding for his projects which is a theme I’ve heard a lot. How does that work when William wasn’t even a full time royal until 2017 & William didn’t launch any of his own projects until last year? I do believe Harry was being held back from doing more so he wouldn’t outpace William. I bet Invictus was a proper fight for the firm & they probably only allowed him to do it to keep him in the firm.

      • Snuffles says:

        “ I do believe Harry was being held back from doing more so he wouldn’t outpace William.”

        He absolutely was being held back. It’s a miracle he was able to accomplish what he did while being hamstrung by the system he was forced to work within. He probably fought tooth and nail for EVERYTHING.

        And now that he’s OUT, he’s absolutely SOARING! And he’s just getting started!!

      • equality says:

        I wonder if Harry’s “jealousy” was related to Will trying to take funds he had raised and ear-mark them for Will’s own charities.

      • C-Shell says:

        “ I wonder about this idea that Harry was jealous that William got better briefs & more funding for his projects which is a theme I’ve heard a lot.”

        It IS a theme we’ve heard before, and specifically when Harry and Meghan had to compete with the Lamebridges for £££ from Charles for their endeavors. Money wasted on the Lamebridges could have accomplished a great deal if allocated to the Sussex’s portfolio. The 🐀🐀 use loaded words like “jealous” when they’re actually telling the truth about the Brothers, for obvious reasons, including attributing these emotions to the WRONG brother. Imagining how apoplectic Bulliam is right now over Harry’s global approbation for the IG gives me a lot of pleasure.

      • Lorelei says:

        @ABritGuest, Tina praised Melania Trump? JFC. I didn’t know that, but it tells me everything I need to know about her.

      • Ginger says:

        Harry was definitely being held back. Look at him at Invictus this year. He was everywhere and doing a lot of interviews and promo. He did more work that week than the Cambridge’s have done all year. He was definitely held back.

      • Becks1 says:

        In 2019, Meghan was pregnant and on maternity leave (I mean if Kate gets credit for that then so does Meghan.)

        I don’t know about William, but I can tell you that Kate’s engagement numbers are always puffed up and Meghan’s never were. For example, if you look, Kate frequently counts things like “phone call with Jason Knauf” as a meeting. Meghan guest-edited British Vogue and there wasn’t one meeting about it on the court circular prior to the issue being announced/released. There were very few meetings for Smart Works.

        And there was a period of time when Harry could not count his events for Invictus as royal work (that changed at some point though) and likewise has never been able to count his engagements for Sentebale. That all fits with the idea that Harry was being held back so as not to outshine William.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Brown knows nothing. Harry co-founded Sentebale at 19 with Prince Seisso. William nowhere to be seen and wasn’t invited to be part of it. That wasn’t done with Foundation funds, nor was Invictus. Harry has always had his own conservation interests and work separate from William. As for the Tusk Trust? Harry wouldn’t want that or try to ‘take’ it from William. It is a small operation and less hands-on than what Harry likes. The only reason William is tied to that is his unrequited love for Jecca Craig, not out of a genuine interest in the subject.

      • equality says:

        @Arabella Moxie Meghan wasn’t even a member of the RF until after May of 2018. A more credible comparison would have been Kate’s first year as a royal compared to Meghan’s. Do that one.

      • Debbie says:

        @equality: That’s what I was going to point out before reading your post – that Meghan wasn’t a member of the BRF until she got married, mid-2018. Even then, I read that Meghan was doing events, with or without Harry, like at the radio station w/ Harry and with the ladies of Hubb even she married, but that wasn’t counted or included in the court circular. Of course this poster above wouldn’t include that. It’s pretty sad when the only way Kate can get higher numbers than Meghan is when Meg’s pre-wedding events were not counted, and Meghan was honeymooning, and pregnant in 2018 too.

      • equality says:

        @Debbie I’m sure that is on purpose to keep H&M from passing W&K. Probably every little meeting counted for W&K but H&M only got to count the big stuff.

      • bisynaptic says:

        Interesting how often the word “defiant” comes up to describe women in the British royal family—even the Sovereign Queen. Makes you wonder who the ultimate authority is supposed to be.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @goofpuff, I didn’t see your post before posting above. There are reviews out there that pretty much say the Diana Chronicles book was based on press stories too. It’s like when I read Levin’s Harry/Newsweek “interview” knowing Newsweek wasn’t the magazine it used to be and became an aggregate outlet of sharing external sites articles but not telling readership that’s what was going on. It was all too familiar..deja vuesqe. Found where there were at least 5/6 other original sources of what Levin wrote. Levin copied and pasted, used infor from Peter Hunt’s & Bryony Gordon’s actual interviews with Harry and called it an interview of her own.. In her defense, maybe she had a Harry blow up doll sitting in a chair to make it feel more real to her. We know one thing for sure about the Diana Chronicles. Diana wasn’t around to dispute it.

        ETA: Apologize if this comes up under the wrong post my laptop was going through some things. Gremlins.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        The jealous brother is The Other Brother. Harry was serving 2005-15. In that time he established Sentebale(2006), the Endeavour Fund (2012) and the Invictus Games(2014). Harry was getting things done while serving. Will was using working to get out of royal engagements and royal engagements to get out of his 20 hour work week.

        I’m going to throw some new maths into the Meghan/Kate engagement count. Kate shows up maybe an hour(that’s really pushing it) and it’s counted as an engagement. Meghan does an overnight Royal Train engagement with the Queen(something Kate has never done or, most likely, not been asked to do). That one engagement should be counted as 24 based on Cambridge math.imo

        It all reminds me of Dick Eatin trying to say the Royal Foundation gave the IG 500k. Nope. It’s documented that the 500k(possibly some interest too) was money raised for Harry’s Endeavour Funds. The Endeavour Fund was absorbed into th IG/Invictus Foundation. Thus, that 500k from Endeavour was transferred to the IG. Will & Kate did not give/donate that money to Invictus. It was never their money in the first place.

      • Blithe says:

        ArabellaMoxie, what exactly is an “engagement “? At different points, Meghan worked to develop the cookbook, worked on the project for Vogue, and worked to develop the Smart Works clothing collection. Those are just three projects that must have involved multiple meetings as well as considerable prep-work. Do you have any idea how complex projects like this are counted? And how projects like these get tallied in whatever sources you’ve consulted — compared to things like a meet and greets or a ribbon cutting ceremony? Since you brought up the comparison to Kate’s numbers, I’m interested in knowing more about just what it is that’s being compared here.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @C-shell: According to the two reviews, I’ve read – The Washington Post and the Guardian, she bashes Diana, Harry and Meghan and embiggens Camilla, Kate and William. Tina Brown’s late husband was the editor of the Times of London before Murdoch took it over. She’s embedded in the British establishment. She wrote the Diana Chronicles in the way she did because at that time it was beneficial to side with Diana.

      • C-Shell says:

        All true, and I recognize my naïveté here. It’s not like she’s changed her spots, after all these years. I just wish she didn’t have the clout she’s garnered over the decades to sell this crap.

      • Lorelei says:

        @C-Shell, I’m with you. Really disappointed. I had higher hopes for this book, but clearly I was wrong. (There was someone here who I promised I’d admit this to as we learned more about what was in the book — I think it was Jais? — so here I am, fully admitting I was wrong.)

        It sucks, especially considering I think a truthful book would far outsell this same repetitive bs that Tina seems to be pushing.

        @Snuffles, yeah, so in their eyes, the fact that he had to fight for funding for his projects made Harry “very, very angry” and “difficult.” Instead of someone just trying to do his damn job.

      • kirk says:

        When has Tina Brown ever said anything critical about Camela? Must be the shared homewrecker bond.

  17. Maxine Branch says:

    Brown made a choice of which direction this book would take, she chose the KAREN route. Whatever credibility she once had, she lost it with this hate fest. She took a sledgehammer to the Duchess of Sussex life and time with this family. Brown’s choice will be her regret because the picture she tries to paint does not mirror the life Meghan has lived. Pretty obvious from this book she is a monarchist and believes this cult is best served by remaining WHITE. This book is a bunch of nonsense parroting the talking points of an institution whose single goal is to survive at any cost and will sacrifice and try to destroy anyone who stands in their path to survival. Sadly for them, and her, this ship for survival has passed and the more they contest with her sort of hit pieces, the more desperate they come across.

  18. GR says:

    Meghan got freebies? And the royals don’t? REALLY? Who paid for Will and Kate’s ski chalet just now?

  19. Tessa says:

    I did not like the diana chronicles so I am. Not surprised at this book. Playing up to c and c and to will and kate. And disparaging diana and the sussexes.

  20. Miranda says:

    Not only did Meghan genuinely TRY, she seemed to be largely left to her own devices about matters of protocol (for example, didn’t she say that Fergie had to teach her how or when to curtsy?). And when she slipped up, she was corrected in the rudest, most patronizing ways, if they bothered to do so at all instead of just not-so-discreetly badmouthing her.

    • Snuffles says:

      They did the same to Diana too. Left her to sink or swim. I think they get off on it. It’s their form of hazing the married ins.

  21. Amy Bee says:

    Nobody should be surprised by Tina’s book. She’s part of the British establishment and she was never going to see Meghan’s side of the story. She telegraphed this by her comments on CBS This Morning after Harry and Meghan left.

    • MsIam says:

      Oh yeah, she was definitely in the “Harry is mentally fragile” camp. She’s trash and I apologize to trash for the insult.

  22. MsIam says:

    Tina Brown is a lying B. There I said it. I don’t usually support the Twitter dragging by the Squad but I hope she gets one and its epic. I was reading an article in The Independent that claimed Meghan was yelling at staff before the wedding and the “staff” claimed “No one in the royal family ever talked like that!” But then Jobbo The Hut’s book on William talked about his terrible temper and how he was prone to “explode” at staff, lol. So who is being truthful? Well since Jobbo claims he has met William several times and I bet Tina has never met or spoken to Meghan, I think we know the answer.

    • Amy Bee says:

      The likelihood is that it was William or Kate yelling at staff not Meghan.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        What wedding gown fitting story? Is that a new one? Are you confusing that with Kate making Meghan cry because she was going through some things and eventually apologized with a receipt-I mean note & flowers? The GG’s House in Australia story started from a very questionable rando tweet. Much like Levin retweeting hate accounts. A Buckingham Palace chef had nothing to do with food for THEIR wedding. It’s like the dumba$$ stories from someone in Toronto? saying they worked & served at 3 different restaurants that Meghan happened to be at during their employment at the 3 different restaurants.. Internet sleuths disproved it.

        Are you going to bring up Simon Rex stories next? Because he had some words about that.

      • Che Che says:

        Stories about the Sussexes are neverending but not always the truth. People certainly have agendas that are just lies retold.

      • Nic919 says:

        Stop with the trolling lies. None of the crap you said was even mentioned in tabloids, which would love to print mean stories about Meghan if there was any remote link to actually happening. These are made up deranger talking points.

        Let’s stop feeding this troll everyone. It’s been a few days of this garbage.

      • Becks1 says:

        I know its hard and I get sucked in too but remember to just type “troll” when you see an obvious trolling comment.

        (sometimes its hard for me bc a poster starts out just saying something critical about the Sussexes and then it quickly becomes obvious its trolling.)

  23. Cel2495 says:

    Yawn. This book is a pile of 💩.

    Hating on a woman for being beautiful, kind, eloquent, fabulous, and basically good at her work? Eh. They are mad at her and wished that their own 2 dummies where half as good as Meghan. The obsession they have with her is simply scary. Meghan will continue to live her best life, her kids will grow and we will still see them writing this nonsense about tiaras, bridesmaid dresses and possible bulling investigation that never will be really investigated.

  24. Mslove says:

    I see the Cambridges are still seething with jealousy. Duchess Meghan showed the world what worthless, flawed individuals the Cambridges are, they’ll never get over it, lol.

  25. emmlo says:

    Interesting to see Brown’s choice of words: “drunk on a shared fantasy” of using the public interest in them to do good things. Wtf is wrong with that? It’s the basic premise of ANY celebrity that dislikes intrusive attention but still wants to have a positive effect on the world – M & H did not invent that concept.

    Elsewhere Brown says Meghan saw herself as being the “Angelina Jolie” of the royal family and like… that is also not a bad thing? They can keep trying to twist it into a liability but there is nothing wrong with having ambition and drive to parlay intense public interest into substantive work? It just highlights how horrified the Cambridges are by the idea of doing literally anything besides being keen.

  26. Harper says:

    This book is dripping with derision toward H&M. Brown can’t report the simplest fact about Meghan without slanting it. Which is predictably spineless and gutless. Plus, it doesn’t sound as if Brown has anything new to report about their exit or the machinations that went on in the family. She’s really out of the loop presenting only one side of their departure. Did Brown talk to a single person from the U.S.A. who helped Meghan–Tyler Perry, Hillary Clinton, Janina Gavankar–about what Meghan was going through? Brown certainly had the credentials to get an interview with any of them. Maybe that is in the book and we’ll find out when someone gets their hands on it — or maybe not.

    • MsIam says:

      None of those people would talk to her without the Sussexes permission. And since the Sussexes are not stupid, that would never happen.

  27. AJ says:

    I’ll say it again. For people who supposedly want to live this high exposure celebrity life that all these authors accuse them of…they are very quiet tucked away in Monticeto.

  28. ILady Digby says:

    Once I read this Guardian review I do NOT want to buy or borrow this book from the library. I really would like a balanced and nuanced description of the last 5 years within the Firm. I have no idea how Tina is going to justify her complete trashing of an American woman to an American audience when she promotes her book in the US!

    • Jais says:

      Yep, this review was great. Clearly states that certain people come out of this book smelling like roses, which is suspect and telling. It’s a longer piece of tabloid.

  29. Blujfly says:

    Yet another book that forces one to ask the question – if the spare matters so little, why are we in year 4 of the nonstop media coverage of them?

    If the spare matters so little, why do royalist believe the health of the institution depends on steady coverage of how they pale in comparison to the heir and how the spare is groveling to the heir?

    What a sick system.

    • Lorelei says:

      I think because Harry proved that the whole “spare” myth is nonsense. He is clearly more capable than William is in every way. In the olden days, lol, the palace might have been able to hide this from the public, but not now. Anyone with functioning brain cells can see that Harry would make a better monarch, and going by birth order is bullshit. This is why they lost their collective minds and continue to tantrum constantly.

      • Lulu says:

        Does anyone know if the laws of primogeniture be changed in the UK? And more importantly why hasn’t any monarch tried to do so in the past? I mean plenty of monarchies around the world don’t follow this rule of first born being the hier. In Arab countries for example, the ruling Sheikh decides which of his sons will succeed him based in their suitability for the role and interest in the job. The insistence on the first born taking it all is the source of all of the British monarchy’s problems in my humble opinion.

  30. Osty says:

    So because kate is dumb and Meghan isn’t so that makes Meghan a bad person?

  31. Plums says:

    I saw her promote this book in an interview with Mo Rocca on CBS Sunday Morning, which was very disappointing to me because how dare a Cambridge partisan invade the only TV news program I enjoy. They tried to keep her neutral and uncontroversial by focusing on the Queen, but she was able to get a few digs in to the Sussexes by laughing about the audacity of them thinking they could still collaborate with the Crown in some capacity or on some projects after leaving, like it was the most arrogant thing in the world of them and not an entirely stupid and out of touch missed opportunity on the part of the monarchy to not take them up on it.

    And then CBS made up for booking her with some strategically deployed shade in their go-to-commercial infographic after her interview, which was about how many millions of pounds the royal family costs British taxpayers every year, lol.

  32. Scorpion says:

    She got Thomas Markle as a source that should tell you all, the kind of book she was writing 🙃

  33. Sofia says:

    Yeah I knew as soon as this book was announced it wasn’t going to be the “tea spill” on all sides that people wanted it to be. It’s a game of access with these people. Brown gains nothing by being even neutral to the Sussexes because they’re not going to give her access nor will she get a “better” social circle/opportunities/money like Omid did/does because she’s already there. But if she’s remotely critical to the Cambridges, she could lose access very easily and if she’s too sympathetic towards Meghan, maybe her standing in her English social circles.

    Anyways Meghan showed deference and respect towards the rules and ran everything by Jason and trusted him as shown by her emails in court. So this “wah wah this american showgirl didn’t know the rulezzzzzz!!!!” is a fantasy. I’m sure there were clashes and that was expected but I don’t buy for a second that she was a total diva who demanded everyone bow down to her.

  34. Tessa says:

    She compares kate to the Mona lisa. That says it all.all kate fawning

    • M says:

      Overrated and two dimensional is actually the perfect description of Kate.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      That was pretty funny. In a way, that was maybe a criticism? A very famous painting known for multi layering of glazes & paint to come up with a result. Sounds like botox. A painting over a painting because Da Vinci wasn’t happy with the original version. A painting that entails debate on how long it took to finish(4-16 years) and if he ever actually finished it. Much like Kate growing into her own, developing confidence and learning & listening. It’s been happening forever.

      Still aghast that Brown went there throwing snide at Meghan being articulate like it’s a bad thing. I hope the women that participated in her Women in the World events are side eyeing her. Hypocrisy for the sake of the monarchy.

  35. [insert_catchy_name] says:

    One review of this book I read says:

    “So in The Palace Papers there are the Good Royals – the Queen, Prince Philip and the Cambridges – who are written about in prose worthy of Mills & Boon (“There’s a Mona Lisa quality to Kate,” Brown writes, presumably without throwing up on her own keyboard). Then there are the Bad Royals – Prince Andrew, Sarah Ferguson, the Sussexes – who get a thorough kicking. Prince Charles is neutral, the others non-existent.”

    Which basically tells me all I need to know about it. I mean, the s%$t Prince Philip got up to!

    • Eurydice says:

      Lol at Mills & Boon. And I wish Kate had a Mona Lisa quality – that would mean no more open-mouthed horse laughs.

    • Lorelei says:

      Omg please link to this review, I want to read the whole thing! That’s great.

      • [insert_catchy_name] says:

        It was by Hadley Freeman in The Guardian.

        I am surprised by how many critical articles have come out about the RF lately there- they only used to post once in a blue moon about them, and then very neutral reporting.

  36. Seraphina says:

    Not sure if it’s above, but it’s infuriating to hear how they sugar coat their words. A willful blindness to institutional culture. Wow. The same can be said about MLK. He too had a “willful” blindness to the institutional culture of the US. And thank God he did. As John Lewis said: cause GOOD trouble.

  37. Over it says:

    Tina is Just another bitter dried up Karen who big mad that She stood no chance with Harry. Yes, keep blaming the black woman for your failures. If Kate and William sucked at the job they been doing forever, it’s not Harry and Meghan fault. At some point you need to take responsibility for your own actions and lack of work ethics and charisma. Also shut up Tina.

  38. SunRae says:

    There are two things I don’t understand with these people.

    1. Do they expect us to ignore our own eyes and believe in a version of Meghan that seems to only exist in white supremacists’ fever dreams?
    2. What do they get out of telling an unbelievable, blatantly slighted version of events and not the one readers actually want – something closer to the truth, where all parties are fallible and human?

    That said, Meghan has made a lot of otherwise sane and smart people show their asses and it’s the craziest thing to see.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Sunrae, I have the same questions. It’s baffling to me that no one seems to realize how well an HONEST book would sell; it’s as if every author has to “pick a side” instead of just reporting.

      • Ginger says:

        I wish that would happen but it would be impossible. It needs to be by someone who isn’t connected to the RF and doesn’t care about their access being removed.

    • K says:

      Because racism is a hell of a drug. The need to preserve the concept of superiority cannot allow for a functioning excelling black person at the highest level. And they blame Harry for giving her that opportunity to shine.

  39. aquarius64 says:

    Brown defended Bad Dad. That alone told me not to give my money or my library card to this mess. But the problem for Brown is the internet. People on SM are going to point out inconsistencies and facts left out and bring old articles as receipts. I’ll watch the NY Times best sellers list. The pile went on sale Apr. 12 and so far it has not made it.

  40. Alexandria says:

    Institutional culture of racism, misogyny, rape, pedophilia? Yep how dare Meghan!

  41. phlyfiremama says:

    This is equal parts pathetic and hilarious. These types of things just make the BRF look worse and worse and worse, and HM better & better & better. 😂😂😂

  42. NCWoman says:

    It’s sad how Harry is angry and Meghan is ambitious simply for trying to use their platforms to do real good in the world. Yes, their work made them look good, and it also made the Crown look good by association. But their apparently fatal mistake was to not focus their energies on making William and Kate look good. They wanted to use their platform for actual public service–and they’ve been vilified from day 1 and will apparently continue to be vilified for it until the end of time.

    • SnarcasmQueen says:

      Can you believe Meghan had the nerve to marry into a royal family and then expected to work like a royal?

    • K says:

      This actually explains a lot. And maybe it is what people meant when they talked about Harry not “on boarding” Meghan correctly. In other words he did not tell her about the fact that they could not outshine William and by extension Kate. I honestly think that Harry may have forgotten it in his zeal about Meghan and the potential for their role. He genuinely forgot about who they would really be dealing with.

      • MsIam says:

        How could they not outshine the DoLittles? Was Meghan supposed to dress in ugly clothes and stop wearing make up? Harry should stop being personable, stop caring about anything outside the royal bubble? No more speaking in public for Meghan and just smile and nod? When jealousy is combined with insecurity you make an awful, ugly stew. That’s not the Sussexes responsibility to fix. They did the only thing they could which was to leave.

  43. SnarcasmQueen says:

    So she criticizes William for being a shit public speaker but also criticizes Meghan for being a good one… I’m guessing because white, born and bred royals are supposed to be naturals at stuff like that but when Black commoners are, it’s an affect??

    And if Harry and William really were arguing over patronages, I would bet my entire collection of gel polish and nail glitters it was because William was hoarding the ones Harry was most interested in but not lifting a finger to do any work for them.

  44. Merricat says:

    Tina Brown hasn’t been relevant in the U.S. for years.

  45. Nick G says:

    Count me in as one of the people shocked that Tina Brown has done such a hatchet job on the Sussexes.
    Maybe I’m naive but all these lies coming out of the rotten mouths of media industry figures supposed to be informing us, makes me feel like I’m in the upside down, and have been for 5 years now.

    Given that Meghan is such a crusader for justice and fairness I just can’t imagine what it must feel like to live this reality. I really, really wish them well.

  46. Ellie says:

    In 2019, when pregnant Meghan was being savaged by the press, Tina Brown said royal life was hard for Meghan, because she had to deal with the “hissing, snakey, vipering, gossiping courtiers”. Now it’s because she was wilfully blind to royal structures. You could see Meghan blanding herself out and dimming her light, in a series of dull, frumpy outfits. Even an academic wailed that Meghan wasn’t living up to people’s expectations of her as a change maker. Tina Brown speaks from both sides of her mouth.

  47. L4Frimaire says:

    This book really sounds way worse than anticipated. This is a more bitter version of those who said Meghan tried to change a 1000 year old monarchy. They think this because she has charisma, enthusiasm and a results driven work ethic. Meghan just being there and smiling caused change. Brown more than anything seems incredibly resentful of her impact. I remember a Squaddie saying when Meghan spoke at that Fab Four event that she knew there would be trouble based on Will’s expression and they were so right. Brown, like so many others, willfully ignores the blatant racism, while trying to dismiss her impact or accomplishments as “ actressy “ and swag bags. Brown must have been going nuts over the Invictus Games, seeing both Sussexes, especially Harry, shining unfettered. In someways it completely contradicts what she writes. Meghan wasn’t the star of Invictus and she wasn’t trying to be. She was an amazing ambassador who highlighted what was happening, gave an amazing introductory speech for the founder, and did activities and events that highlighted the athletes and their families. Then she stepped back and Harry was there at center stage every step of the way, meeting every team, being at every event, and greeting tons of dignitaries from the King of the Netherlands, to Cabinet Secretaries to heads of NATO. What I’m not understanding is what exactly is the point of Brown’s book. What is it supposed to do or convey? It seems the voices are getting more shrill and strident as they become more afraid of the principles of the royal family being eclipsed by “ star power”. I think most see this cartoon villainy of Meghan as more and more ridiculous and grounded in deep insecurity. It wasn’t that Meghan disrespected institutional hierarchy, she recognized what good and positive influence the institution could yield, and that made those who benefit directly from it very upset. Brown and her ilk can continue to kick rocks. The Sussexes have no need to follow the bad advice of those with even worse intentions.

    • Che Che says:

      Thank you for stating this framework of truth. The ugly name calling and cattiness never really states any real offense by Meghan. Her talents must be belittled so others can be praised. All the racism and taunts are overlooked because Meghan has done the outrageous act of existing .

  48. Tessa says:

    She believes Tom markle even down to the two heart attacks and he was seen eating fast food at the time.tina apparently seed nothing wrong with Tom trashing his daughter and getting paid for it by the media. Disgusting

    • Nyro says:

      She’s a full on deranger and someone needs to check her computer. I guarantee she’s online all day spreading conspiracy theories about Meghan. Only in the deepest darkest realms of Meghan hatred online is Thomas Markle seen as a poor little victim. She even threw in the line about how Thomas “spent thousands and thousands on Meghan growing up”. Because apparently, white men are doing their mixed daughters a favor when they’re feeding them, clothing them, and sending them to private schools. That, along with elevating Kate to something even beyond sainthood, is a tell tale sign of how deep she is into this stuff. And I’m telling you guys now, do not be surprised if Tina Brown’s deranged ass tries to hint at the Archie birther conspiracy. She’s absolutely insane and radicalized against Meghan.

      • Tessa says:

        I honestly don’t get it. Parents are obligated to put children through school and if they did not they would be taken to court. So does Tina think that children should keep a ledger of the money their parents spent on them to go to school since they were age 5 and then pay them for their “favor” to them to put them through school. Tina makes no sense. Surely she did not pay her parents for her education when she was a child.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I would be surprised if Brown goes down the birther conspiracy road. She’s full of shite-even she should know the ridiculousness of that is. Outside of derangers and Levin, I’m not aware of media people pushing that angle.

  49. Brassy Rebel says:

    Speaking of “institutional culture”, I will never forget Tina Brown’s comment following the birth of the Cambridges’ first child. You probably recall that this baby was slated to become next in line of succession following William, regardless of gender due to change in rule. The next morning after the birth of a baby boy, Brown was on one of the morning shows in the states. She gushed about Kate never putting a foot wrong and being so good as William’s wife that she went ahead and delivered a male heir even though she didn’t have to, strongly implying that this is the way it should be.

    Brown is a royalist and an institutionalist to her core. She is also a misogynist, no matter how many Women In The World summits she hosts. And her erasure in her book of the racism Meghan Markle faced from every institution in Britain, including the monarchy, demonstrates her racism and classism as well. She is, quite simply, gross.

    • Tessa says:

      Yes I recall that so would it be that if the first were a girl, Brown would express Regret. I would not be surprised. Anyway, Kate did not determine the sex, William did, with the Y chromosome instead of the X chromosome. She also apparently approves of Stepford wives.

    • Nivz says:

      Victoria Arbiter did this exact same thing about baby George. Shocking that two people did this.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        Yes, as if Kate had some control over her infant’s sex! I did not know that similar comments were made by others, but I’m not surprised. It’s not talked about at all because the current monarch is female, but British royalty is a very misogynistic institution. Women are expected to be seen and not heard, preferably while wearing extremely expensive designer duds. This was another way that Meghan totally did not fit the mold. She is a strong woman with opinions! Horrors! She caused great discomfort for William and Kate but also for all the hangers-on who consider it their duty to enforce the “institutional culture.”

  50. Nyro says:

    This book isn’t going to do numbers. Tina Brown is irrekevant. She tried this same stuff with he Obamas, particularly Michelle, and fell flat on her face.

    This isn’t 2005. Nobody cares about her dusty Karen rantings. As for being surprised or disappointed that she hates Meghan, she’s an almost 70 year old white British woman who’s a royalist. She 100 percent fits the deranger profile. I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s got a burner account and trolls Meghan online. She sounds no different than Angela Levin. Same crazy, same misogynoir. She had a better career than Angela Levin but that’s about it. She’s a crazy, old, tired ass racist who can’t stand the fact that Meghan made the their royal English roses, whom they see themselves in, look like trash.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      Had no idea she tried this same nonsense with the Obama’s. These people are more than willing to sacrifice their working reputation just to get in some unhinged smears against the Sussexes, particularly Meghan. The Sussexes aren’t going to slow their roll to please these racist malcontents.

      • Nyro says:

        This is nothing new. She wouldn’t be the first person to let the racist tendencies blow up their own reputation.

      • Deering24 says:

        That’s right—Brown was responsible for some incredibly disgusting stuff about the Obamas. One piece was about how Obama didn’t make women voters feel “safe.” 😡😡🤮🤮

  51. TheOriginalMia says:

    So in Tina’s mind, Duchessing while Black was Meghan’s main problem. Being smart, kind, articulate and competent are negatives if they show up the white lazy, incompetent, incurious Cambridges, especially Kate. So glad Meghan pays these people dust.

  52. teehee says:

    Meghan IS willfully turning her back on an institution which has risen on the backs of besieged and enslaved fellow men.
    Why SHOULD she respect it?

    And why WOULD anyone be offended that she represents that “stain” of their own past actions?

    The are just afraid of their own guilt that her existence reminds them of.

  53. MsIam says:

    I think Invictus really blew Tina’s narrative and plans to shill her book out of the water. Yes that nefarious Meghan, such a diva that she handed her cashmere Ralph Lauren coat to a stranger, just so the woman’s baby wouldn’t be cold. And Harry, who does he think he is, someone important who commands respect? Those nobodies! The nerve! Combine that with the Cambridge Tour of Doom and what’s a racist white woman supposed to do to sell her trash book? Gee!

    • L4Frimaire says:

      This right here. We’re seeing in real time the Royals at work with the Sussexes gone. Underwhelming and unimpressive. These colonial tours are a disaster and embarrassing and most of what they do is to either try to embarrass or upstage the Sussexes. The Sussexes mind their business and stay in their lane. Seeing what they’ve done with Invictus, Vax live, The Me You Can’t See just blows Browns narrative out of the water. Again, who is this book supposed to benefit because it’s a hot mess?

  54. Islandgirl says:

    Please let us put this book in perspective.
    It was written before the failed Caribbean tour and the successful Invictus Games.
    The good old days when the BRF and the UK tabloids assumed that everyone was buying what they were selling. Will and Kate are perfect and represent the queen and Harry and Meghan are bad and the queen is upset with them.
    Would Tina Brown write this same book now? I don’t think so. I do believe that even in the UK the hate is not as universal as the media would like us to think. Not that people haven’t been influenced by the negative stories but I believe only some people have.
    The tone and approach of this book are similar to the tabloids. Events have been twisted in a negative way when it comes to Meghan. Is effective public speaking “an actressy” thing?
    Kate spent 10 years waiting and 10 years being a married-in. She should be an effective public speaker by now. She should not be still referred to as growing into the role and coming into her own.

    • Mel says:

      It’s weird, why would you expect an actor/ actress to be good at public speaking and why be mad at them for it? Everyone isn’t cut out for it but if you married into a family where you know it’s a requirement and you’ve had 10yrs to practice, you should be able to deliver a fairly decent speech/ remarks by now.

      • equality says:

        Never mind Kate and her ten years. Why wouldn’t William have been studying things relevant to his future job while at school?

    • Debbie says:

      Anyone who can write that Kate has been “perfect” at the job of Duchessing after she flashed several times on-the-job, then yes, they would write the same book after W & K’s Caribbean Catastrophe. (Hey, if TB can say “actressy” then “duchess” can be used as a verb.)

  55. GrnieWnie says:

    ah, yes, primogeniture. I’m reminded of Thomas Paine, who commented on the absolute absurdity of hereditary rule. This was self evident several hundred years ago, yet here we are, still expected to swallow some garbage line about how birth rank determines importance in this CRITICAL INSTITUTION THAT WE ALL LOVE AND NEED AND WANT. That’s just how it is, so we should all be appalled when someone like Meghan finds this ridiculous.

    It’s like watching a class between 1722 and 2022. Welcome to reality, BRF.

  56. Mel says:

    Re: Freebies

    Well, how dare this Black actress/ royal expect or want to be treated like White actresses/Royals?
    I mean, your worried about someone getting some freebies while people are paying for access? Seriously????

  57. Jaded says:

    I was boiling mad (still am) when The Globe & Mail The Globe and Mail, one of Canada’s preeminent newspapers, ran an excerpt on Meghan. It’s clear Ms. Brown is one of the Cambridge’s most dedicated sycophants and paints Meghan in a VERY unflattering light. It’s also poorly written in so many ways, including some very bad grammatical and spelling errors, that it would be laughable if it wasn’t so unrelentingly mean and bitchy. One sentence hit me really hard, here it is:

    “By 2014, Meghan was famished for prestige, frantic for validation. Stars like Angelina Jolie, Cate Blanchett[e] (sic), and Nicole Kidman were UN goodwill ambassadors, travelling the world in their halos and talking about hunger and refugees. That should be her! The challenge was to break into the celebrity and humanitarian nexus that would spring her from the cable ghetto.”

    Note the word “ghetto”.

    • MsIam says:

      Oh the word “ghetto” is duly noted. I guess Tina is defending the sacrosanct whiteness of royalty from a ghetto dweller like Meghan. Who published this BS? They should be held accountable too for allowing her to put this in print. But I’m guessing publishing is the same bastion of whiteness like the rest of media and they protect and promote their own.

    • Jais says:

      TB using the word ghetto here is a choice. She chose to use that word here and she ain’t no better than Sarah Vine. This person may have moved out of England but apparently you just can’t take the tabloid racist out of her. She is telling on herself left and right.

    • caitlin says:

      Jaded- When I read the excerpt in the Globe, what infuriated me even more than Tina Brown and her attack on Meghan was the comments section. Honestly, it was as though I was reading the Daily Fail, not a credible “national” paper. I was surprised and quite frankly at the number of individuals who unleashed venom towards Meghan (yet fawned over Kate).

      • Samira says:

        @cautlin Unfortunately the type of people that read that drivel tend to already be Meghan haters or just assume what they read is true. These people find the comment sections just to purposefully spew hate.
        I think the best thing for Harry and Meghan is to continue to just do good? I honestly dont know the solution to all this cause even if they played the “media” game and gave access it would be used against them.

        The only people I can think of are the kardashians. They were hated and made fun of early on but they just kept doing their thing and it worked out for them. Obviously Harry and Meghan are not universally hated or publicity hungry like them but eventually the truth will come out about Will/Kate/the palace and these “haters” will be drowned out.

      • Jaded says:

        @caitlin — I firmly believe many of the negative comments were paid for bots, derangers and the Cambridge camp who seem to track all publications for articles on the Sussexes. I always thought the Globe and Mail was above that sort of thing but apparently not.

    • equality says:

      In 2014 Meghan was already working with One Young World and by 2016 with World Vision Canada. Is she seriously slagging somebody for wanting to bring attention to world problems?

      • Jaded says:

        And let’s not forget she volunteered with her mother at soup kitchens as a teenager. I don’t see anything remotely resembling volunteering, charitable work or public service on Tina’s résumé. Lots of back-stabbing though.

  58. Aiglentine says:

    That “shared fantasy” is emerging as a concrete reality. The Invictus Games success was a lot of hard work, not daydreaming.

  59. Julia K says:

    I found out on this site a while back that Kate receives freebies from businesses that funnel products to Carole and Pippa that are meant to be gifted to Kate, as gifts from her family are not reported as freebies.

  60. Busy Bee says:

    The problem with the claim he knows who made the comment about the baby’s skin color and that it was likely a light hearted exchange is that both Harry and Meghan stated it was not just on person who brought it up. My guess is that it was both William and Kate and that they didn’t mean it kindly.

  61. SourcesclosetoKate says:

    The way they treated this women relentlessly because she was biracial and couldn’t fit in is absolutely disgusting. And to do it Infront of the world, like we couldn’t see it, the bm have some nerve. I’m glad it happened because they were cancelled by the Caribbean islands and the world after that. They are cancelled forever by me.

  62. Kelsey says:

    I’m sorry y’all but today I can’t even laugh at these kind of stories. I’m just sad!! After such a amazing week for Harry and Meghan…here come the usual suspects peddling their hate and maybe because it’s been a while since there’s been this much vitriol it feels loud.

    I just can’t imagine what it would be like to be Meghan especially after having some mental health issues due in part to some of these same people and now they continue to profit off her.

    I honestly can only cry and pray for them. I’m sure she doesn’t need my sympathy and she could just be peaceful under a tree not paying attention to any of this but man..there’s no way you don’t feel this stuff.

    When will enough be enough. These people won’t care if she’s long gone because they still do the same with Diana but to a different extent.

    I only hope that Harry and hopefully Meghan’s book and words are very clear so that no one can rewrite their history because history will look kindly on them.
    These two are meant for great things and I will continue to shout it to anyone who listens how great they are lol.

    Anyways if you’re a praying person add them to your list or just continue to send good vibes their way. This kind of sustained attack I haven’t seen on anyone that isn’t a politician.. they are just two people just trying to make a difference.

    Still they win!!! Still they rise!!

    • tamsin says:

      My thoughts exactly. You expressed them so well. Sadly, there is never “enough” to feed these soul destroying people. It’s not just Harry and Meghan, but others too.

    • SourcesclosetoKate says:

      He who laughs last laughs loudest. Don’t worry there will be no history book in the age of the internet, one can’t lie so easily. Meghan and Harry has created a shift in society just by showing up, they will always be part of this new exciting time of change. The energy of society is shifting, and it’s one part thanks to them. Kate and William have never and will never be a part of anything but the end of the monarchy.

  63. Well Wisher says:

    If the author had admitted to her favourable biases towards the Cambridges especially Kate and Camilla: her statements about the people she finds distasteful would seem less offensive.
    What is left is the following question:-
    Can the author’s criticism of Meghan be considered good or bad faith of just an untrustworthy approach filled with biases?
    Understanding that it is about the economy around this subject – there is money and clout in loving or hating Meghan.
    It is sifting through the narrative to see if the observation was made in good faith. Is Meghan trying to sell something to the public?
    Are her actions in good faith?
    She does not seem to be self-loathing and it seems like some people will hate her for not disliking herself.

  64. Tessa says:

    So in other words, Brown thinks that everything Kate says is true and does not believe Meghan. Also, there is no need to buy the book since Brown seems to have taken her stories from the tabs and from negativity on social media. Maybe it would be a good idea to take the cost of the book and apply it to Archwell or Invictus donation instead of buying the book.

  65. Tessa says:

    Once the media starts ignoring Tom Markle, he will not be able to collect $$$ from them. The man in one of his first appearances said he made $32,000. Brown is a sell-out. Big Time.

  66. Tessa says:

    I don’t get it, Kate is lauded for waiting longer for THE future King and putting her life on hold to get the ring. Brown does not factor in the breakups and how William was pursuing other women who gave him the brush off.

  67. JFerber says:

    All of the Karens, trump supporters, Piss Morgan supporters, Quanon, supporters, etc., will buy this book even though it adds nothing new to what they’ve heard before. They just want the repetition of hate to keep them stoked. It’s like chanting or a bonding experience when the KKK has rallies. Say it again and again and again until everyone believes it. A huge percentage of Republicans believe that trump won the last election. You really can’t make this shit up, unfortunately. Say the lie enough and it becomes “fact.” Hate and lies sell.

    • Jais says:

      True, but now that they can get hate and lies for free on Twitter FB and other places, why would they buy the book? Supporters buy things. Maybe haters do too idk? Guess we see.

  68. JFerber says:

    Tessa, so the epithet Waity Katy is really a compliment? But William got so enraged when Meghan repeated it on the Oprah interview. So strange. Okay, so if it’s Kate, it’s always a compliment, but if it’s Meghan, it’s always a dis. So the same thing can be either positive or negative, depending on whether it’s aimed at Kate or Meghan (who have undying valuations of positive and negative). That sounds fair.

  69. Feebee says:

    The Truth and the Turmoil. Whatever. The Cambridges wouldn’t know the truth if it smacked them on the arse.

    The funny thing is there is a backward truth. The bit about Harry and Meghan once married occupying a global space similar to Princess Diana, um, sort of.

    The Ultimate Truth however is that she outshone the Cambridges and that’s all there is. They continue to hate her for it. The Royal obvious blindspot on racism and their own self importance will always reign supreme over an outsider’s problem with the institutional system.

    • SomeChick says:

      the truth IS smacking them on the arse! that’s the beauty of it. and you’re right, they have no idea whatsoever.

  70. Patricia says:

    “ arrogant and lazy “ are dog whistles for POC. How dare she not know her place.Ask for something and you want freebies,get something for free,you’re a freeloader.It’s a no win situation and the Sussex’s knew that.Tina Brown is a racist and fits right in with the royalist crowds.Tina hired Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast,which explains his coverage.