BBC executive: We never would have produced the ‘Harry & Meghan’ docuseries

In 2021, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex ended up hiring Liz Garbus to direct their docu-series, Harry & Meghan. Garbus already had a profile as a documentarian, and I thought she did a good job with their story. While H&M produced the series, Meghan made it clear that it was Garbus’s vision for how they told their story. While many in the British media tried to make that sound like Garbus was at odds with the Sussexes or the Sussexes were at odds with Netflix, at the end of the day, everyone involved seemed happy with the finished product, which is still one of the most-watched docuseries on the streamer. Well, Deadline published this exclusive: “BBC Docs Boss Says She Would Never Have Greenlit ‘Harry & Meghan’: ‘As A Public Broadcaster We Cannot Relinquish Editorial Control’.” Behold, Deadline desperately trying to make this completely random comment very scandalous:

Netflix’s Harry & Meghan would never have found a home at the BBC, the woman tasked with overseeing the corporation’s documentary programing has said. According to Clare Sillery, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s approach to the Netflix smash series would be unacceptable for a public broadcaster that “cannot relinquish editorial control.”

Speaking on the eve of Sheffield Doc Fest, Sillery said doc commissioning is a “question of trust and what audiences expect from us,” while she acknowledged that “in the online world people can have complete control of their own narratives.”

“But the question for the viewer is what you are paying your license fee for,” she said. “[The viewer] expects us to maintain the editorial standards that we have.”

Much has been made of the editorial control exerted by the subjects in last year’s doc series, which was co-produced by the ex-royal duo’s Archewell Productions via a multi-million dollar Netflix deal. Speaking to Deadline in April, Ian Rumsey, who oversaw the separate Prince Harry ITV interview, said Harry & Meghan had been “slightly overshadowed” by the debates thrown up around the royal couple’s involvement with the project, while a group of doc-makers at the Berlinale TV Series described Harry & Meghan as “almost a different genre.”

And it isn’t only Harry & Meghan that opted for the approach. Pamela Anderson’s Netflix feature Pamela: A Love Story, for example, counts the model’s son Brandon Thomas Lee as producer.

As she unveiled a packed Sheffield Doc Fest slate, Sillery said public broadcasters can set themselves apart from the streamers through docs that focus on telling stories in the present tense. “We’ve got very comfortable in the past tense and this has partly been dictated by the streamers’ appetite and also because we went through Covid,” she added.

[From Deadline]

“Netflix’s Harry & Meghan would never have found a home at the BBC” – well, good thing that the BBC was never in the running to air one of the most discussed docu-series in the past three years. I mean, this woman’s larger point is that different companies have different editorial standards, which… no sh-t. PBS would not have produced or aired the Sussexes’ docuseries either. Which, again, is why I’m so happy that Netflix did pay them for that content. Gasp, a streamer was willing to pay big bucks for a huge exclusive series with H&M, and that streamer gave H&M a lot of control over how they told their story. *clutches pearls* Why is this even news?

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

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

41 Responses to “BBC executive: We never would have produced the ‘Harry & Meghan’ docuseries”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. equality says:

    This suck-up could have used any other example to make her point. Good for her that H&M didn’t ask their opinion or their services.

  2. Its news because they have nothing else to put out there. They left salt isle and now the tabloids got nothing but this and other made up crap. Be careful what you wish for is so true for the tabloids and family.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Susan Collins – You are soooo correct! The British Tabloid Media has nothing new to write about concerning the Sussexes. The BTM is grasping at straws.

  3. SarahCS says:

    But yet the BBC will air royal coverage that the Royals get to decide what’s shown and ‘own’ afterwards I believe???

    • Elizabeth says:

      Correct, which is why any glimpses of Rose Hanbury have allegedly been scrubbed from the final product.

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      Exactly

    • Jais says:

      Exactly this times a thousand. My god, to say this with a straight face when the RF literally has the bbc editing the funeral to take out parts they don’t like. When they’ll no longer play the panorama interview and they edited amol rajan’s the princes and the press after RF complaints. What is this editorial standard that they speak of?

    • ML says:

      Exactly, Sarah!
      Either the royals somehow own the content (Jubbly, Chubbly, dead queen stuff), or they seem to be able to control that which they dislike, such as: https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a38321242/royals-boycott-bbc-princes-and-the-press/

    • BeanieBean says:

      That was my first thought. What about the Queen’s funeral? Didn’t they allow Charles to make some editorial changes? And that was supposedly news! Not a documentary!

    • Agreatreckoningqcelticwind410@yahoo.com says:

      LOFL. What about Philip’s funeral? Where is ?Red Snapper Funeral Truther? I saw it, like others. The BBC cut footage of an odd/awkward exchange between the Cambridge’s. If you look back at the video, the cut is obvious. Way back then, I mentioned how my ATT guy said, if you want a true copy of something happening live, record it on a removable device. Then it’s not dependent on the original source who can then edit it.

      This BBC person is full of shite. They’ve already acquiesced about Diana’s Panorama interview. Pfft. They are not under control. l/s

  4. girl_ninja says:

    They absolutely would have jumped the chance to do produce a Harry and Meghan docuseries. But why would they want to work with the likes of the BBC? The Brits keep showing their asses.

  5. WiththeAmericann says:

    Right but this wasn’t that kind of expose documentary. It was their story from their point of view, because that was the one never heard.

    We got the “other point of view” constantly and still do.

    As for the idea that they’re bad for wanting to tell their story and control it, that is the entire reason they are telling it. They’ve never claimed otherwise. Harry’s book isn’t about how the royal family feels, it’s about how he feels and how he experienced his own life. Ffs. These people.

  6. MsIam says:

    Wasn’t the BBC the one who let the Unroyals have a say in what footage was kept of the Queen’s funeral? How is that in the “public’s interest”. That was a historical event. Didn’t the Unroyals get some footage deleted from that Prince and the Press special (or whatever it was called). Wasn’t that on BBC? Didn’t the palace get them to never air that Diana interview again? Yeah ok, anything to try and knock Meghan and Harry.

    • Jais says:

      Should’ve scrolled down before I wrote my comment @msiam. And yeah the bbc did all that so this they do not live in some rarified editorial high ground.

  7. ThatsNotOkay says:

    Is this the BBC trying to suggest it has any integrity left? They’re having a laugh saying that, no doubt. They all kiss Royal azz all the time in exchange for access. ITV, Sky, everyone. Get back k to me when you’ve recommitted yourselves to maintaining the public trust and not selling out to the highest bidder.

  8. Mary Pester says:

    What an absolute Croc. Harry would NEVER of let the British Bullshit Corporation within an ocean of their story
    Maybe this idiot thinks Harry and the sane members of the public have forgotten what Bashir did to Diana. Well we haven’t and Harry definitely hasn’t. So maybe these idiots should just shut the fk of and stop trying to make a story where there isn’t and never was inr

  9. Lizzie says:

    Sure Jan. BBC would give anything to produce Harry and Meghan and have the huge viewership, but they work for the rf so too bad. Remind me of all the records it broke? I think Netflix went down for a minute because so many people watched it the minute it was released. BBC is every runner up who said they really didn’t want to win.

  10. Feebee says:

    Go home BBC, you’re drunk.

  11. MSTJ says:

    BBC barely has any footing to stand on. The RF intervenes when it is feels BBC will air something it doesn’t like and BBC acquiesces (Queen’s funeral, King’s coronation, Reinventing the Royals documentary) by pulling content or not airing documentary at all. So Netflix was a most appropriate platform for the Sussexes and Liz Garbus to partner for the H&M documentary. Its global reach far outpaced BBC. They needed to secure the bag to be financially independent of the monarchy. Security is not cheap. Way to go Sussexes.

  12. Beff says:

    It’s news bc Wills is pitching the BBC to do a docuseries on his family.

  13. Amy Bee says:

    The BBC gives up editorial control to the Royal Family all the time. Has she forgotten what happened with the Princes and the press and the Queen’s funeral? Furthermore the BBC would have lost their cozy relationship with the Royal Family if they had aired Harry and Meghan docuseries.

  14. Eurydice says:

    I smell sour grapes.

    And “We’ve got very comfortable in the past tense…” Yeah, sure Covid is what’s made them old, fusty and obsolete.

  15. Shawna says:

    It’s a shame because it would be super interesting to hear from other people in the documentary world talking without bias about this one. But as it stands, it sounds like sour grapes.

  16. Over it says:

    Probably because bbc is too busy giving Chucky and his clan all the power and control over what parts of Betty funeral and Chucky and cameltoe hat party they are allowed to show. But sureee, you have all the control over there .

  17. Lili says:

    people in Glass houses and all that erm cough “the peinces and the press ” anyone remember that. they had to go back and re edit it to suit a princes’s narrative or the other one on ITV, these guys should just go about their business and leave Harry and Meghan alone

  18. tamsin says:

    I used to respect and trust the BBC. I thought it adhered to a good standard of accuracy and fairness. No more. I lost respect when they started quoting the tabloids as reliable sources and ceding control of royal footage to the palace, thereby making it a propaganda tool. I will view any documentary of the royal family as a device serving this purpose only. It seems criminal means and leaks are the only way the BM gathers its news.

  19. Izzy says:

    “I’m not interested in dating you.”

    “Oh yeah?! Well, I would never go out with you anyway.”

    “Cool, cool. I never even asked…”

  20. Cel2495 says:

    Lol, this is beyond sad now. Who cares what the BBC could, should’ve, wouldn’t or would have done? They were never in the running to produce anything Sussex 😂 . They just obsessed with this couple.

    It’s like me saying , I would never have produced their context ! Lol, I never been in the running , have no capacity , vision or experience to do so.::same with the BBC. Neflix is a major deal.. BBC ? Not much

  21. Laura D says:

    Is this the same BBC who didn’t question the editor of the Sun about the Clarkson article when it was receiving criticism across the globe? Laura Kuenssberg had the editor on her Sunday programme when it all blew up. Instead of grilling her about the article, Kuenssberg allowed the editor to go on about the one article where she was actually nice about Meghan.

    I’m not buying this crape! If the senior management at the Beeb had the opportunity to film H&M they would have jumped at it. They would then have followed the palace narrative and edited the programme to favour Charles, William, Kate and Camilla. I’ve no doubts in my mind that H&M would have been portrayed as unreasonable at best or shelved because it was deemed “unsuitable” at worse.

    H&M did the right thing by giving their story to Netflix. THEIR royal experience is out there for the world to judge (warts and all). I strongly doubt the BBC would have been allowed to be as impartial as Netflix if they’d got their grubby mitts on H&M’s documentary.

  22. Julianna says:

    The same BBC that Wank threw a temper tantrum and had the documentary about him and Prince Harry edited and parts axed to suit Wanks narrative? The same BBC that literally allows the royals to edit and get rid of footage for funerals and coronations (that is literally NEWS – not even a documentary)???? The same BBC that has silenced Princess Diana because of Bashir (and Wank)??? The same BBC that does these documentaries on the trash royals that just so happen to be heavily controlled by these trash royals??? The same BBC that quotes and re-quotes tabloid lies about H&M to keep up the skew the narrative for the trash royals?? The same BBC that kept their mouth shut about Clarkson. What a joke. The BBC lost all my respect a long time ago when I realized how ridiculous the whole charade of it is and their agreement with the trash royals. Also, H&M would NEVER have agreed to do a documentary with them. And they are certainly lying when they say they wouldnt have 😂. I can’t believe they can say any of that with a straight face when the trash royals control every aspect of the content that goes out on them.

  23. LadyBreenie says:

    The BBC would’ve jumped at the chance, but they act like they were in the running or had a say. Please, they are as biased as the rest of the British media here. The documentary would not have happened with the BBC as the RF would’ve tried to get their dirty paws on it, and add some negative spin.

  24. j.ferber says:

    Let’s face it, BBC. You would jump through hoops, kiss ass, beg, and offer millions of pounds to get Prince Harry and Princess Meghan to work with you. But they won’t. Not ever. So gather up your bitter grapes and start throwing them at Charles, Camilla, Will and Kate.

  25. Well Wisher says:

    “Netflix’s Harry & Meghan would never have found a home at the BBC” should read
    “Due to fear of the loud right-wing media – Netflix’s Harry & Meghan would never have found a home at the BBC”.

    For clarity purposes…..

  26. Sondra Jackson says:

    They would have never ever ever ever approached you, Sooo? This is such a Non*Story, where do they get this BS from.

  27. ales says:

    Forget Harry and Meghan. The BBC could do a docuseries on the invasion of the BRF by the grifter midd family. How to train a stalker with very limited social skills to install herself into the BRF, could become the bible for mean girls everywhere..

  28. Nic919 says:

    The BBC is state funded media and it would never air anything that would displease the head of state so BBC was never going to get offered the docu series.

    Instead they air propaganda style documentaries pretending to be newsworthy but instead they serve to prop the establishment agenda.

    If the BBC had any news chops they would be working on a docu series about the Middleton grift.

  29. blunt talker says:

    Their head bosses the royal family would be allowed to see and make changes whether Harry and Meghan liked it or not-any criticism of the firm would not be allowed

  30. Ash says:

    Good thing the Sussexes never went to BBC. Do they even have $100 million to pay the Sussexes? I’m gonna guess NO, so why are they commenting? BBC is all royal propaganda, nobody cares.