Prince Harry made failed podcast pitches about childhood trauma, fatherhood

While Michael Bloomberg has gone all-in with the Windsors, does it follow that his media empire also tows the Windsors’ line? I’m starting to wonder. Bloomberg’s tech columnist/reporter Ashley Carman has an exclusive about (what else) the end of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Spotify deal. Carman wondered the same thing I wondered: why didn’t Prince Harry ever produce a podcast? People have been screeching all week about how terrible it was that Meghan “only” produced one season of an incredibly successful podcast, all while ignoring the fact that Harry didn’t do anything except for that one Christmas pod. We also heard through industry sources that Harry and Meghan had pitched various ideas, only for Spotify to turn them down. Spotify executive Bill Simmons also called them “f–king grifters” and said that he had a call or meeting with Harry which went poorly. So, Bloomberg’s Ashley Carman tried to get to the bottom of what Harry pitched:

This got me wondering, while there’s been all this talk of Markle’s podcast and what she did or didn’t produce, what happened to a potential Harry show? I spoke to people with knowledge of the situation about what ideas the prince floated and why none of them ever came to fruition. They requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak about his work. Spotify declined to comment, as did Archewell Audio.

Harry spoke with multiple producers and production houses, these people said, to discuss possible shows. Along the way, Harry listened to various ideas from others but mostly stuck by his own — including one about childhood trauma. The concept: Harry would interview a procession of controversial guests, such as Vladimir Putin, Mark Zuckerberg and Donald Trump, about their early formative years and how those experiences resulted in the adults they are today.

Harry also had an idea, the people said, for a show centered on fatherhood. Another one would have tackled major societal conversations episode by episode, ranging from climate change to religion. For the latter, Harry hoped to have Pope Francis on as a guest.

The practicality of these ideas struck some people in the Harry-podcast cosmos as questionable at best, given that people like Putin and Zuckerberg rarely give wide-ranging interviews about the topics they’re passionate about — let alone about their upbringings and personal childhood traumas. In any case, no podcast from Harry ever materialized.

The difficulty of nailing down a workable idea and actually recording a show — over nearly three years of a production deal — speaks to the broader reckoning around celebrity-driven content.

The pandemic reduced work for movie stars and others who typically fly around the world from project to project. Instead, they were all stuck at home with plenty of time of time on their hands. Which is why, for a while, so many celebrities were signing podcast deals — even if they didn’t necessarily have a concrete, workable idea that could get made into a show, let alone become a hit. (There were, of course, exceptions like the SmartLess crew, whose podcast tour is now a special on Max.) These stars also maintained expectations for the kind of jumbo paychecks that were once reserved for movies, commercials and Las Vegas club appearances — and were not, in any way, typical of the podcast economy.

[From Bloomberg]

The thing about a pitch meeting is that you’re throwing out big names to get people excited about the overall concept. Like, I think a podcast in which Harry interviews men about childhood trauma sounds interesting, unique and possibly groundbreaking. I would also imagine it would be a hard sell, which is why Harry or “someone” started throwing out potential names of high-profile men. If Harry actually wanted to interview Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin, I will eat my f–king hat. Please. After what Trump said about Harry’s wife, I doubt Harry wanted any part of Trump. And a podcast about fatherhood would have been lovely, as would a pod with each episode devoted to “big issues.” It sounds like Harry needed to work on his pitches, honestly. So, that’s why Harry never produced a pod, according to Bloomberg’s sources – he wanted to do pods about trauma, fatherhood, environmentalism and religion? GASP!!

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

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

135 Responses to “Prince Harry made failed podcast pitches about childhood trauma, fatherhood”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Eurydice says:

    This makes sense (not the Trump and Putin part) – Harry is an issues guy, not an entertainment guy.

    • CrazyHeCallsMe says:

      Yeah, no way in hell Harry suggested interviewing Putin or Trump. That’s made up crap. The podcast ideas Harry suggested actually make sense and would have been interesting.

      • Barb Mill says:

        I agree. That may be what unauthorized source said but no way did Harry suggest Putin or Trump.

      • Tacky says:

        And he certainly didn’t suggest the pope.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        Agreed. If that conversation really took place, it’s more likely Harry said something like “how about a podcast about how people go from being an average kid to being a dictator? What happened to that kid that resulted in their quest for power and maybe even destruction? Kind of like Putin or Trump or Zuckerberg.”

      • Mary Pester says:

        Could these idiots sound any more deranged!, there is not a hope in hells chance that Harry ever mentioned the name trump, and Putin, 😂😂😂yeah a decorated war veteran who did two tours in Afghanistan is going to interview one of the biggest risks to the western world, or put himself in immeasurable danger what a Croc. YES A. Podcast on childhood trauma,, linked to mental health problems would have been great, and, after listening to Harry talk about mental health to veterans I know it WOULD have been fantastic so it’s their loss

      • Caribbean says:

        So no one is saying how unethical this is ? So it was not a private meeting?

        I hate to speculate on this, which is what they want, but it would actually be brilliant idea to interview those men. Interview, not a fluff priieces catering to their egos, and truly ask them what trauma contributed to make each THIS person

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        This sounds more like it came from The Onion than a credible news source. Or, ‘ol Rupert called up is buddy Michael Bloomberg and asked for a favor. B*llSh*t Simmons did the setup..with his supposed “Zoom call” story. Then this story follows. With anonymous sources who can’t speak on record. Why not speak on record at this point if it’s a credible source and true?

        I’m more inclined to believe that Harry pitched a story about interviewing famous people with problematic fathers. We’ve discussed here about how amazing a conversation between Meghan & Angelina Jolie would be. A conversation between Harry & Angelina would be epic. A conversation between Woody Harrelson and Harry would have high draw. One’s father was actually a hitman and the other’s let him be a media scapegoat. Another huge draw would be, a podcast between Eminem & Harry. Discussing all sorts of shit. Like stans. I would totally listen to a podcast between Charles Barkley & Harry too. This article smells like teen spirit. Stinky, juvenile and falsities.

        So, a big NO, that Harry wanted to interview Trump or Putin (if Harry wanted to know anything about Putin he would simply ask Prince Michael of Kent).

    • slippers4life says:

      Exactly! And also, Harry IS entertaining. We know he would have added that something special to these topics that keeps us engaged and informed. Whatever, this deal they made in survival mode. Now that they’re thriving they can shop around.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Yes @slippers4life! Harry IS entertaining. I’ll admit I’ve watched Harry & Colbert’s interview multiple times. I’d watch the two of them on a regular basis. That was a great appearance. I would also watch a Michael Strahan/Harry football practice drills vs. Polo drills. Harry has comedic timing. (unlike a certain TOB)

        Good stuff! Hard to decide my fave. This or the epic obstacle course video to the tune of September. But, sure, try to convince me Harry doesn’t have creative]

    • Snoozer says:

      Yes; but these are terrible ideas. Sorry, not sorry.

      The hot topics one has already been done a million times (and better than he could ever pull off).

      The childhood trauma one is just a terrible idea. He would not get those kinds of people and even a highly skilled journalist / interviewer would struggle to interview people like that and get anything meaningful out of them that wasn’t propaganda / spin. Harry doesn’t have the chops.

      Also, that would fall dangerously close to excusing the terrible acts of men because of their childhoods. No thanks!

      The fatherhood one is the only one that is interesting but it would need to be more fleshed out. Like Kate & Oliver Hudson’s sibling podcast. (Which, honestly, has a great concept and fantastic guests but suffers from them being bad interviewers and, frankly, their extreme lifelong privilege.)

      I’m surprised he didn’t do something that tapped into his military service. For example: amazing things ex-military people have gone on to do. Or going into some of the greatest rescues of all time. Extreme survival stories. Etc etc. That seems like a more natural fit for him.

      Or, how about something about life swaps? People who have walked away from their old life and completely flipped the script to do something new. Topical, relatable, a bit cheeky.

      Or how about interviews with the great humanitarians of the world? Shining a light on their work but also some kind of lighter aspect – like you interview them about their guilty pleasures to help them unwind from their work. Maybe he goes and gets a head massage with one and a mani-pedi with another, and an ice bath with this person and a great meal of x with another? That would tap into his natural charm and sense of humour and leven heavier material.

      Honestly, there were loads of options. It sounds like they didn’t have the right team around them and that he was being a bit stubborn and Spotify was also being stubborn. I’m sorry Hazza; but it has to be entertaining and realistic.

      Also, it drives me a bit crazy that the constant pile-on on these two means it’s so hard to critique them on their genuine errors. The collapse of this deal is worthy of some critique! And I don’t think this article was ordered from on high. The journalist has been reporting on podcasting for a long time and this is a fair piece.

  2. girl_ninja says:

    I knew he wanted to do podcasts that mattered and edified. I bet Simmons wanted to gossip about the royal family and how many women Harry had been with. Bill is such a gossip. I’m glad Harry and Meg are free from that nonsense.

    • viv says:

      I think a Dad’s talking about Dad issues would be an amazing podcast.

      • SquiddusMaximus says:

        I work in a super-masculine industry, and so many of my co-workers LOVE talking about their dads and childhoods and such. I think the interest is there if you give them a forum.

      • Tacky says:

        There are already dozens of dad podcasts.

      • Taytanish says:

        @Tacky, yes, we all know there are already dozens of dad podcasts. That’s no indication that Harry’s podcast wouldn’t have got any listeners because of the already existing dad podcasts. Besides, I know some people like to live in denial, but none of those podcasts are made by Prince Harry, and a podcast by him would be special and would actually pull in a big audience. Consider the me you can’t see and how successful that was. But do you have any idea how many people have put out podcasts etc about mental illness?

    • Ginger says:

      That’s what I think. He wanted Harry to do a podcast on the RF and Harry said no. The source of this article is probably Simmons and he threw those names out there to get Harry dragged. The Pope doesn’t speak English and has been in poor health for a few years. This article is ridiculous. It’s pretty obvious how upset Spotify is for losing H&M.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        I 100% believe this is what happened.

      • Christina says:

        Agreed, Ginger. Simmons wanted a podcast along the lines of what the tabloids wanted: spicy content about the royals, who he dated, more dirt. Men diapering their children and dealing with their emotions aren’t what Simmons wanted from Harry. Simmons wanted something that guaranteed big, splashy media coverage. Harry is down to earth, but he is a serious person. The idea of trashing it up to make money isn’t Harry’s thing.

        I’m so glad I don’t have Spotify. I did listen to the free version to hear Archtypes, and it was brilliant! I LOVED the one she did with Paris Hilton. I know a young woman who was at the same camp Paris went to, and her stories are so sad. Then the podcast came out, and it made me feel for Paris, and, growing up in Los Angeles myself, the trope of the “bimbo” is important in Hollywood culture, which is disgusting.

        In short, Harry likely wanted to do a show with the quality of Meghan’s show. The Simmons of the world aren’t looking for human development. They want controversy, insulting banter, and cash.

    • mosshearted says:

      A dad podcast would have been really cool. It’s a shame they couldn’t make that happen.

    • Nic919 says:

      Simmons was likely jealous that Harry could get bigger names than him. And Simmons himself has a parents corner tacked on to his sports blog so it’s not like Harry isn’t suggesting something Simmons doesn’t talk about himself. It’s only that Bill discusses his issues with Cousin Sal.

    • Cara says:

      Joe Rogan is the golden dong over at Spotify and that company wants/expects everyone to be pretty much just like him. Spotify isn’t interested in intelligent content/programming. Harry and Meghan (and the Obamas) clearly never belonged at Spotify. It must have been horrible for them when they realized what a huge mistake they had made signing up with this trash.

    • Caribbean says:

      Other than all that, whatever H pitched or not…THIS is just another way to use H&M. To generate clicks for the author of the story and take focus away from the mess that Spotify is right now.

  3. Amy Bee says:

    Yeah, someone’s just throwing names for effect. I doubt that Harry would want to interview Trump. But you have to question why Spotify was just signing a bunch of people without a plan for their actual podcast.

    • Dee(2) says:

      I figured a long time ago that the grifter comment was because Harry wanted to do content like the above, and Spotify wanted to do a celeb podcast basically in the vein of what the Royal reporters are doing now but with an insider perspective. I don’t understand why they thought that either one of them would be down for that though it seems like just wishful thinking maybe on Spotify’s behalf? Because nothing about how they present themselves would lead me to believe that they would do something salacious. I expected Spare to be Spare and I expected the Harry and Meghan docu series to look the way it did. That’s definitely more of their wheelhouse. Harry may need to refine his pitch, but it’s also the duty of the company that’s throwing around money to have a good idea of what that money is for.

    • Christina says:

      I think Harry would have interviewed Trump. And that pod would have been interesting because you’d have Trump’s way juxtaposed with Harry’s way, and then there would be analysis. It would be a way to blow open the way that many men hide behind bravado. Trump would want to do it. I WANT to hear Harry ask Trump about Fred and Mary, with Fred hating his wife and mom going nuts in their mansion, and then have a professional unpack the ways that toxic masculinity hurts the culture. Harry would gently but firmly challenge a difficult guest, and Trump’s dumb ass woulda jumped at the chance.

      • kirk says:

        Anonymous source says Harry threw out Trump! Pope! – maybe, maybe not; if it did it sounds like Harry getting frustrated trying to get a bite on SOMETHING other than conflict with BRFCo, which sounds like what Spotify really wanted: a) conflict! b) royals! c) underdog Harry, d) spilled secrets.

        Rest of the article is more revealing about Spotify strategy now they’ve stopped trying to realize their podcasting vision. And it may also fail – “planning to launch a new, more expensive premium tier called “Supremium” later this year… expected to include high-fidelity audio and expanded audiobook access.”

      • Amy Bee says:

        Nah, Trump’s in the same category as the British tabloids. He insulted both Harry’s wife and mother. He’s not going to sit down with somebody like that.

  4. ThatsNotOkay says:

    I believe Harry wanted to explore childhood trauma with the worst among us and did offer up those names. I believe he thought they’d be interested in talking with him because of his status, and that maybe working to resolve some childhood issues with them on his podcast might ultimately help them become better people. I truly believe Harry was that hopeful (and maybe naive) about it, and that’s why those in that sphere make offhanded comments about him being in his own bubble. I think he is a dreamer, and that’s a lovely thing. We need more dreamers. We need to ground them in reality at times too. Only empathetic people know how to do that, even if it’s a stubborn dreamer. Certain people should not be managers of dreamers. Simmons among them.

    • Fineskylark says:

      Yeah, I buy that too.

    • Louise177 says:

      I seriously doubt Harry wanted to or thought he could get an interview with Putin or Trump. That makes zero sense. The ideas sounded good but it seems nobody at Spotify had interest in trying to develop it.

      • Becks1 says:

        There is no way Harry wanted to interview Trump, not in 2020/2021, after he made comments about Meghan, after the insurrection, etc. No way. Remember how he dodged him at the state dinner in 2019? And that was still as a working royal.

      • Ginger says:

        If anyone believes Harry wanted to interview these people, I have a bridge to sell you. This source said these names to get Harry dragged. And it’s working.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Ya have to laugh. PH has zero interest in what Agent Orange has to say about anything.

    • SAS says:

      I don’t entirely believe he wanted to *interview* them but I could easily imagine a pitch about examining the factors that lead to someone who experienced childhood trauma or neglect growing into a Trump/Putin figure vs a Prince Harry/Tyler Perry figure.

    • Tacky says:

      Harry isn’t a mental health professional and isn’t qualified to help people resolve their childhood trauma. Exploring his own journey would have been interesting and inspiring since he’s clearly dealt with so many issues and become much stronger as a result.

      • equality says:

        Where did it say he was going to “resolve their childhood trauma”? And how do you know the pitch didn’t include (probably did) mental health professionals?

      • Taytanish says:

        @Tacky, where are you getting all this from? You honestly beginning to sound like a UK tabloid person. Like, no one has said or even implied any of the things you wrote up there in your post!! No one ever said Harry is a mental health expert, no one said Harry is going to help people resolve their childhood trauma, like….nobody.

      • Jaded says:

        @Tacky — Talking with someone who has struggled with childhood-based mental health problems, which they have managed to resolve, is very therapeutic. Through Harry’s therapy and self-examination, he’s now at a place where his experiences can at least encourage others to consider therapy and understand the circumstances that led to their difficulties. This isn’t *resolving* others’ childhood issues and traumas, it is opening a door for people who may otherwise be avoiding treatment due to the stigma associated with it. Your negative anti-Sussex bias is showing again.

      • Plantagenet says:

        Tacky seems to be responding to ThatsNotOkay’s comment: “maybe working to resolve some childhood issues with them on his podcast might ultimately help them become better people.”

    • Christina says:

      @thatsnorokay, I agree 💯!

  5. Shawna says:

    The idea about interviewing famous men about trauma, sounds very much like a gendered complement to Archetypes. It would involve some of the same level of all-star guests, but it might be a little bit more difficult to get men to talk about the sensitive issues. I get the feeling that as a society, we still expect women to be able to open up more than men. So it’s a shame they didn’t let Harry at least produce a pilot episode or something because even though this project sounds difficult, if they found a way to make it work, it would be spectacular.

    • SquiddusMaximus says:

      I suspect Harry, living alongside a lot of men on the Narcissistic Personality Disorder spectrum, realizes that there is a way to leech these stories out of them. At the end of the day, narcissists understand they have been through trauma and are proud of themselves for all their successes. I really believe this could work.

      • Shawna says:

        Good point. They don’t even understand why what they’re saying is a problem.

      • Christina says:

        Exactly, Squiddismaximus.

      • Christine says:


        Honestly, I would let Harry do any podcast he wanted, thus far his life is a success story about getting what you want for your life. Why not? What’s the worst that could have happened, no one listened? He’s Harry.

    • Jaded says:

      @Shawna — This is spot on. I had a couple of boyfriends back in the day who had terrible relationships with their fathers growing up. Both fathers were cold, mocking and uncaring while the mothers tried to do the best for their boys. Needless to say, both boyfriends were very messed up — angry, sarcastic, deceitful, unfaithful — and I ended both relationships. But neither of them would discuss their issues with me even though it was painfully obvious that they were still struggling with the after-affects of an unhealthy childhood environment. Men typically don’t like to talk about these things, rather they become alpha-males as a way of overcoming low self-esteem. This could have been a great opportunity for Harry to bring these issues some much-needed attention but it seems Spotify caters only to meatheads like Joe Rogan.

  6. ShazBot says:

    I agree – well done podcasts about childhood trauma and fatherhood – especially deconstructing toxic masculinity around fatherhood – could be excellent. He’s obviously not going to get those names to open up about childhood trauma, though they are good examples of how badly it impacts your adult self! Maybe Bill Simmons should have some of those discussions…

  7. Miranda says:

    My guess is that Harry’s actual pitch was something more like, “wouldn’t you love to know what the hell happened to people like Trump or Putin as kids, that turned them into the monsters they are today?” and he absolutely never intended to even approach them to be guests, much less actually interview them himself. But peoples’ brains seem to shut down when it comes to Harry and Meghan and everything they say MUST be taken at face value (for example, NYC ‘s traffic would make a high speed pursuit impossible, so they were “obviously” lying about the whole thing).

    • Eurydice says:

      Monsters don’t think they’re monsters.

    • Dee(2) says:

      That sounds eminently more likely, although Donald Trump absolutely would have sat down with him because he’s a fame whore. It’s the parsing of everything that they do down to the minutest detail so that they can say See !! They’re Lying! that gets me.

      • Ginger says:

        He absolutely would and if he didnt come off looking amazing he would drag Harry (and Meghan)

      • Miranda says:

        Oh, Trump definitely would. And I think he’s a big enough piece of shit that he wouldn’t be able to make it through the interview without talking about how he TOTALLY had a shot at banging Harry’s mom. (For anyone who doesn’t remember, Trump seriously said as much almost immediately following Diana’s death. Like, I don’t know if she was even in the ground yet.)

  8. pearlime says:

    Dave Grohl’s mum Virgina did something similar for a book, interviewing the mothers of famous musicians. Its a good read.

  9. Jais says:

    Sure, maybe his pitches needed work…but idk this sounds like a real cool podcast. Prince Harry talking about fatherhood. Hell yeah. So it equally if not even more so suggests to me a lack of vision on the Spotify side. Like they missed the bus.

    • Salto says:

      They missed the bus by thinking interviewing Putin was a terrible idea?

      • Ginger says:

        A company that has Joe Rogan talk about conspiracy theories and is heavily anti vax wouldn’t love an interview with Putin? Really? And the Pope? ( who has never been on a podcast before and has been in poor health for years) They would jump at the chance.

        I HIGHLY doubt Harry even wanted to interview them, this is just a rumor to get Harry dragged.

      • Jais says:

        My comment specifically focused on the fatherhood part of the pitch and not Putin. And yeah, I maintain that Spotify and Harry could have made that into a cool podcast. Seems like a missed opportunity.

      • Nic919 says:

        Hillary Clinton was on pod save America and she told a story that Putin had recounted to her about his childhood and his mother. It helped to explain a bit of what he’s like today. Obviously in the current climate Harry wouldn’t be speaking to Putin, but pre invasion, it is possible that Putin might speak to someone like Harry.

  10. Virginfangirl says:

    These ideas seem very interesting to me. Although his guest list is a little wild to imagine.

    I guess podcast that fly in the face of all logic and scientific beliefs are more what Spotify is looking for.

  11. MSTJ says:

    Of the hundreds of podcast partners this company has worked with so far, their experience with Harry and Meghan is the only one that seems newsworthy enough to give the media and the clout chasers involved several days of articles to increase their relevance. Otherwise, they’d all be known only in their narrow circles instead of globally. It never ends. Clout chasing is a thing now that we have social media to elevate conversations and “news” generated by these publications. 🤷‍♀️

    I personally doubt Harry would consider interviewing Trump and Putin. Those are names others pitched IMO, but tag Harry to them and the story is big. 🤦‍♀️

    I wonder how much longer we’ll hear about Spotify and the Sussexes. Will this be the topic of discussion in the media for the entire summer?

    Harry is challenging the tabloids in the UK and many of these media houses are connected like a spider web with connections to owners, journalists, commentators, reporters globally within the industry (newspapers, television, movies). It’s an entire network of colleagues that move around and work in one shop or the other in the UK, US, European, Commonwealth. They are gunning for him because what he is doing in court is epic.

  12. Julie says:

    but why are we thinking that this source is real? Honestly when i first saw that, i thought it was satire, even more crap from South Park.

    No way Harry was thinking this was a good idea, there are plenty of other big names one could throw around that isn’t Putin. In what world would that even be possible ? How could anyone be dumb enough to think that Putin would have a sit down chat about childhood trauma on a freaking podcast. I dont even understand how that could work as a pitch idea to Spotify, because it’s a plausible pitching a seance session with Hitler himself podcasting back from the dead.

    This is just part of the take down the Sussexes movement that is going on at the moment.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      This exactly 👆. Unless Harry has lost his mind which I doubt, this is mostly 🐴💩.

      Putin, Zuckerberg, and Trump. Yikes!

    • Ginger says:

      I’m baffled that some are even entertaining this as possibly true. The Pope?! Come on..

  13. equality says:

    He probably could get Putin through family connections with Russia. SmartLess is that popular? Never listened but its concept sounded boring to me.

  14. Anna says:

    I think a podcast centered on the childhood traumas/mental health issues of men would have been interesting, and as @Shawna said, a great complement to Archetypes. Harry seems well versed in discussing and making space for issues like that given his talk with Dr Gabor Mate and Dax Shepard, along with his work with vets which I imagine has some cross over. A pod discussing actual masculinity in society to combat the Alpha Crap being put out would have been necessary and needed in the climate tbh but I doubt would be welcomed given Spotify wanted to die on the Joe Rogan hill.

    Don’t know how much I believe that those were the names he threw out to be interviewed seems whoever wrote the article went for the most ridiculous chooses for the Worst impact. Trump? Putin? Please. Harry’s worked soft diplomacy before, let’s give him a little more credit

    • Lara (The Other) says:

      I can imagine those names came up in a situation where he was asked who would be most interessting to interview, without considering if those people would agree. We sometimes do this at work whenwe discuss new ideas, th open dreams question. What would be your perfect project, your perfect client etc… And then try to find the optimal solution between status quo and dream.
      I know it will never happen, but an interview with putin or trump with a good interviewer who does not accept their lies? I would listen to it/ watch it….

      • MsIam says:

        That’s what I’m thinking. It was a pitch meeting so Harry was throwing out ideas. That’s why the article says people SUCH AS Putin, etc. More like “what if?” The thing is, Harry was incredibly busy during this time , with Invictus, the memoir, the documentary, working with VaxLive, playing polo, starting a company, working with better up etc. Not to mention new baby, home and country. He must have woken up every morning to hear a line of people asking “What about this?”
        I imagine this was an on the fly conversation and needed to be fleshed out more. Maybe Spotify was frustrated about not being able to nail down Harry. But the things Simmons said were incredibly boorish and unprofessional.

  15. SquiddusMaximus says:

    Hold up. The idea of interviewing powerful, poorly socialized men is FASCINATING — and absolutely groundbreaking from a socio-psychological perspective. The more we learned about personality disorders, the more relevant/interesting this becomes to an audience.

    And I’d argue a lot if these figures WANT to talk about their challenges, especially to a luminary like Harry. Because all other issues aside, they’re proud of themselves and the traumas they’ve “overcome.” And they want to be associated with royalty…

    Also – did anyone catch Hilary Clinton’s anecdote on Pod Save the World about Putin telling her a story about his parents after the Battle of Stalingrad? This stuff is important, and it can be done. Understanding motivations helps us so much in our interactions.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      But that’s not a story about childhood trauma. It’s a story about how Putin was fated to be born and become a great leader and bring back Russian empire. Harry could probably get HRC for a podcast. That would probably be more interesting than the three men named since she definitely understands Putin and always has which is why Putin worked so hard to make sure she never became president.

      She could probably do a pretty spot on analysis of Zuckerberg and Trump too. She pretty much has their numbers as well.

    • Ming says:

      Love THIS!! Take @SQIDDUS
      There is an audience for this!!

  16. Becks1 says:

    I don’t think for a minute Harry mentioned interviewing Trump. no way. he is not going to do anything to humanize that man or seem to be giving him a platform, not after his comments about Meghan, and not after his actions during COVID, the insurrection, etc.

    The general ideas though I think he might have pitched – they sound like things he would have pitched – and things that could have been successful. I mean The Me You Cant See was a success, and while he did talk about the royals in that, it was in the context of his trauma and mental health. But like we’ve all been saying for the past week now, it sounds like Spotify wanted podcasts about William being an ahole, and what Kate is really like behind the scenes, and Harry wanted to talk about fatherhood, childhood trauma, and major issues like climate change. There is a big divide there.

    • windyriver says:

      I seriously doubt the childhood trauma podcast idea is real (and he wouldn’t want to give Putin a platform either). Between TMYCS and Spare, Harry spent plenty of time exploring his own trauma, and I expect he’s moving on from that subject, just as he and Meghan are moving on from making the focus of their work their time with the RF. They’re about doing things that make a difference, and exploring how monsters like Trump or Putin came to be is pointless and irrelevant. Harry would be more likely to discuss trauma associated with veteran’s experiences, which I’d find interesting and is more timely.

      Easy to imagine someone making up this Trump/Putin thing, taking the idea from what Harry already did with notable people on TMYCS, including Lady Gaga and Glenn Close. The fatherhood idea sounds like something that could be real, but it could just as easily all be BS.

      The Spotify (and Netflix) contracts came up just a few months after Harry and Meghan pulled away from the RF, and Spotify grabbed them quickly, probably in the hope of being the ones to get exclusive insider info on the royals. I can’t imagine either Harry or Meghan promising that, so likely Spotify took a chance that didn’t work out the way they hoped, especially with the other changes going on in the podcast space the last few years.

  17. Flower says:

    I am going to guess that Spotify wanted the content that Meghan & Harry gave to Netflix, but H&M said no.

    This seems to corroborate unofficial recent reports that H&M were done talking about the family etc.

    Also this has Chuck & Camilla’s sticky mitts all over it.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      I think they really are done with the family thing but don’t think this story has anything to do with Charles, just sour grapes from some at Spotify. I think a lot of people were caught unaware by the end of the deal and how it was negotiated for them to leave. Suspect with WME involved, not everyone at a Spotify was happy. Even before Archetypes was released there was grousing about the slow pace of the Sussexes with the platform, and part of that is probably other projects like the docuseries and Spare and Invictus were a bigger priority.

  18. Ana says:

    These sound like early throw out ideas? Let’s be honest – most podcasts are just men in a room talking to one another so let’s not pretend they sound amazing as a pitch or revolutionary.

    But all this does is further disprove the idiotic uk narrative that they left with some Machiavellian scheme to make money. They said in the Oprah interview- they didn’t have a plan, they needed to make some money, someone suggested streaming, so they reached out and gave it a try and Spotify threw money at them without even asking for their pitches first.

  19. MsIam says:

    Harry was too good for Spotify. They’d rather have podcasts about how often people bathe or wash their hair or dangerous conspiracy theories. I hope they go down in flames.

  20. Allegra says:

    This is BS. There’s no way at all Harry said he wanted to talk to Putin or Trump.

    • Who in their right minds would ever work for an outfit this untrustworthy, this unprofessional, this amateurish, this indiscreet? We are witnessing the slow disintegration of Spotify. H & M are well shot of them.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        Between this, the layoffs and Joe Rogan starting up the anti-vax thing again, with no pushback at all from Spotify, it definitely shows that division is in flux to put it mildly.

  21. Ming says:

    I actually like All these ideas – we now live in a world where those three figures are in the extreme NO column, yes because of what they did BUT to
    bring them back to the centre and humanity – not so extreme – this could spur own inner reflections- I know – la la land thinking BUT it shows a focus on issues that have received the least softening or humanity….even about Dads – imagine hearing about Dad struggles and humanising Dads?
    Love them All Harry!

  22. Moi Ra says:

    It’s utter BS but I kinda like this idea! It’d be amazing if he actually did this with another podcast provider like Amazon or Apple but I don’t think Harry is into content making. I think Meghan signing with WME is our clue that only she is going to be doing podcasting. I expect to see Harry doing speaking gigs, working with other organizations(advisor, ambassador..) like with BetterUp and he and Meghan also going to be producing/financing projects independently through Archwell

    • Ginger says:

      WME also represents Archewell Productions so Harry could very well do a podcast. I think he would produce a great podcast and he seemed to have great ideas. I hope he will put one out.

  23. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    I would love for Harry to partner with Armed Services Radio to produce podcasts about military service, culture and mental health, I think that it would be a great partnership!

  24. Ameerah M says:

    LOL. They ACTUALLY want us to believe that Harry wanted to sit down and have a convo with a man who called his wife “nasty” and started an insurrection to overthrow the US government?? Sure, Jan. Do I believe there is some truth to the IDEAS he pitched? Sure. But him wanting to interview Putin and Trump. Give me break…

  25. AntiqueBlue says:

    Tbh, I think some of these pitches sound interesting. Interviewing is a skill tho so starting out with a subject driven pod versus a specific person would be easier for a newbie.
    Speaking in a male space about religion (do you have it? Where does it fit in layout life?) makes sense. It is highly relatable and everyone has a take on it. Same for formative experiences. Everyone has them and, especially, successful people or those that turned their lives around would be good.
    No on the childhood trauma. Harry has talked about his own experiences and, according to what I’ve read, he doesn’t want to make that his brand which I agree with. Besides? His childhood is so unique that it isn’t relatable and, in interviewing as a newbie, having common experiences helps.

  26. Jessica says:

    Hi, can you please edit this comment so that it doesn’t include my full name? It was autofilled by my browser. Not that I’m embarrassed by anything I said! Thank you.

  27. Jessica says:

    I have a feeling there is more to this story. I truly hope Harry didn’t pitch a podcast where he’d interview Putin or Trump. Not only because they’re horrible people, but obviously neither one would ever do it. I mean…you’d have to be delusional to think Putin would take part in that, or treat it sincerely. I think/hope someone is spicing up this story to make him sound like an ass. If it was him, it’s a big misfire and no wonder nothing got off the ground. I have a feeling this is someone being malicious to make him sound as idiotic as possible though.

    • MsIam says:

      News orgs interview controversial figures all of the time. Why is Harry doing it considered out of the box? Especially from the perspective of “what made you like this?” Not sure how that makes him an “idiot”. It seems like people always want the Sussexes to be a one trick pony and then turn around and complain about how they are one trick ponies.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      I don’t think he wants to interview them per se, but a podcast on what went into making someone into a Putin or a Trump, or Nixon, especially if there is a news angle to it may actually be interesting, the factors that went into that. Sort of like a villain or hero origin story. Not sure if that’s already been done and frankly people like that aren’t always that interesting beyond their ego and destructive behavior.

  28. yogaddicted says:

    I think Harry should have discussed the extension of the “King’s two bodies” cause the most meaningful action in his life was to show the dichotomy between the public and the private person in an institution like british royalty. There are several topics on this realm that would be fitting for him and instead of honey-tramping with power names and his personal trauma, he should have gone with the theorists, social scientists, the people that establishes the ideas of power in the public opinion. If he cannot overcome himself, only will be a poster child of a public person overbear by his own private persona

  29. MrsCope says:

    I agree with whoever said he probably pitched it dropping names like Trump and Putin for emphasis on the type of psyches he wanted to tap into. World leaders, changes agents, etc. And the thing is, the podcast universe is full of some WILD shows. Very niche. Very nuanced. I listen to one about social media trends and churches! The ideas sound interesting. Simmons made it sound like he wanted to do a show on what your favorite food says about you or something — and guess what! There would be an audience for that! Now would it have been a $20 million idea? No, but guess what, that’s Spotify’s bag to hold. Their flawed business model. As an H+M supporter, I’m glad they got these deals because it got them out of Dodge. For Spotify: You did bad business, man. They delivered you an award-winning podcast that dominated the news and listening share of your network every week that it came out. But their values and your expectations were not aligned. Take the W for the content you got and the L for your overall flawed model and go home.

  30. LeaTheFrench says:

    The names for the first podcast 🫣

    I would have loved a podcast from Harry on philanthropy. Some philanthropies have budgets that are bigger than the budget of smaller countries, they can do so much and have so much impact. And he would have been able to really leverage his previous life as a Royal for that, in a way that could not be framed as “he’s only interested in settling scores with his family.”

  31. L4Frimaire says:

    I don’t think Harry really wanted to do a podcast that much. Doesn’t sound like he had anything he really wanted to focus on. I think you can get a sense of what he’s like from when he was on Dax Shepherd’s Armchair Expert podcast. That might have been what Spotify wanted from him. The topics he pitched are so far from royal gossip, so serious and maybe requires more expertise than his layman’s experience. There’s more to podcasting than interviewing others, which seems to be what Spotify wants those they sign to do. That doesn’t seem to be Harry’s thing, hence the bad pitches. Part of me thinks these proposals were just offhand remarks and spitballing during more detailed meetings. I’m surprised he wasn’t interested in anything to do with his charity work like press and social media misinformation or what he does with BetterUp. Whenever he’s interviewed he likes to cover broad areas, has a wide ranging style, not honed in on one topic. Meghan did great with Archetypes but Harry didn’t really seem to be into it.

    • Bee says:

      You are presuming all of this is true.

      It’s very believable that Harry might want to do pods about fatherhood or mental health. But most of this story is ridiculous. The whole thing is probably made up.

      Also, Harry was great in The Me You Can’t See. It’s in his wheelhouse.

      I’m presuming all of this is made up. Simmons trying to save face for his earlier asinine comment.

  32. Bloomberg’s tech reporter Ashley Carman has anonymous sources who are not authorized to speak about the project. I think these are all Carman’s delusions. All his sources have no accountability. They all just want to undermine Harry, the people’s Prince.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      That’s the thing, we’re only getting snippets from the Spotify people without a clear picture. We don’t know what was actually in development, what were serious proposals, what were offhand remarks or BS jokes. Look how they twisted that Meghan didn’t do interviews when we clearly knew she did. Andy Cohen shooting that down as crazy finally doused that flame. As mentioned before Spotify is being incredibly unprofessional,especially since that have had other big names leave their platform or not renew, some before all expected content was made.

    • Nic919 says:

      The source is Simmons who realized that he said too much with his own names attached.

      • Jais says:

        Yeah, I can totally see that. Simmons being the source without his name attached. Or if not, someone close to him. Either way, I just feel like this is a pitch meeting. It’s okay to throw out ideas. Some work some don’t. Spotify signed Harry knowing he’d never done a podcast and it’s Spotify’s job to nurture a creative environment where ideas thrive. Some are discarded, kept or edited, regardless of whether the talent is on point or not. Not even saying Harry wasn’t on point bc there’s no way of knowing from these leaks from insiders that want to look like they’re not at fault. Harry is high interest and that’s why we’re getting leaks into a pitch meeting but it just feels like a way to shame Harry and the Sussexes, per usual. Shaming talent over ideas in a meeting seems petty and unprofessional on Spotify’s part. But I guess we’re supposed to care bc we need to be able to fairly critique Harry. Sure, but that’s not wholly what’s happening here. Leaks from corporate insiders that want to look good and blame it on harry. Maybe it’s the truth, the partial truth, or not true at all but it’s all coming from the company.

  33. HuffnPuff says:

    What I want Harry to do is a Netflix series about the castles. He would need to get back on C’s good side to film inside the castles but his descriptions in Spare were amazing. He could give stories about his time in each one. It would probably spur actual tourism interest instead of the family thinking that showing up here and there for a few minutes is boosting interest in the UK. It would also give H&M’s kids a chance to see where their dad grew up.

    • equality says:

      Better yet explore places in Canada, the US and Lesotho. Countries where he was made welcome. The RF would take credit for any boost in UK tourism.

    • Patti says:

      As someone from a family of veterans, the BEST thing Harry and Meghan can do with their lives now that “Spare” has been published and smart people see the post-queen royals as jokes, is focus 100 percent on veterans’ issues. Vets in the U.S. and around the world need way more attention; there’s too much lip service and not enough great causes like the Invictus Games. Spending the rest of their lives focused on vet advocacy is the best thing both of them can do; Harry because it’s his main passion; Meghan because she would help hugely in drawing attention and awareness to veterans. I think of how little attention the PTSD of Iraq and Afghanistan vets get; he could start there. But both of them need to get away from the Montecito celeb stuff; it’s just bringing bad press over the canceled Spotify deals and such at this point.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Patti, what Montecito celeb stuff? Seriously, we seldom see the two of them. Harry has always played polo for Sentabale. That’s the only thing that I can think of that MIGHT be considered ‘celeb’.

      • equality says:

        They still have to make money to pay their bills.

      • Agreateckoning says:

        Uhhmmm, that does not sound like a good long term plan for the Sussexes @Patti.

        I have veterans in my family. As do other people posting here. There are also veterans posting here. How is solely focusing/advocating on/for veterans is in their best interest? As @equality said, they still have to make money.

        Advocating for veterans and still earning money elsewhere is not a new thing.
        Why do you want them to limit themselves?

        I’m interested in what Montecito celeb stuff you’re talking about too like Saucy&Sassy queried. Are they not ALLOWED to go out to dinner or attend their friend’s parties? Curious. It’s almost as if people don’t like the idea that they are not being shunned by other famous names.

        Your suggestion, imo, is not a good business plan.

        I would love a podcast on the secret lives of royal rota members/experts. Without naming names of course. An investigative podcast. I’m there for that.

  34. Green Apple says:

    I was a subcontractor for a Spotify podcaster two years ago. The talent was a young woman of color, who, incidentally was also talking about breaking archetypes and limitations. She had a lot of professional success and a pretty good media presence, and the announcement for her pod garnered a lot of positive press. It should have been at least a decently successful podcast. But Spotify is absolutely horrible to work for. We’d record great episodes only for the Spotify team to tear it to shreds and reduce it to the most boring, bland shit imaginable. Absolutely impossible to produce content with. They ended up firing the talent’s independent team (the one I was on) after the first season and replacing it with Spotify people. Haven’t seen any new episodes this year and I’m pretty sure it was cancelled. All this to say it sounds pretty familiar to what is being reported about how Spotify treated the Sussex deal. Every week we were pitching content and ideas, only to be completely stonewalled.

    • Deering24 says:

      Ah, the old racist-Jedi mind-trick: “We’re a diverse inclusive platform/organization who love unique, innovative ideas …until people not like us come up with 1) things we don’t want to hear 2) ideas that couldn’t possibly work unless someone like us invented it.”

  35. Saucy&Sassy says:

    This is a ridiculous story. When they can NAME a source, I’ll believe them. I will never believe that Putin, Trum and Zuckerburg were ever people that Harry would want to be in the same room with let alone hold a conversation.

    The bm has a long reach–let’s remember that Bloomberg is a Fails person. This is absurd.

  36. hangonamin says:

    good for harry for wanting to do podcasts that appeal to issues he cares about. i wonder if it’ll be helpful for him to do some interviews of people to show that he would be able to get these renowned guests for his podcast shows. my understanding from this take is now that the pandemic is over, celebs and people don’t have as much time to make to do podcasts and you need a greater pull to get guests. if harry does successful interviews for his charities, and it’s widely viewed, might be easier for him to pitch for future podcasts. thus far, at least from what i’ve seen, he’s been interviewed or on a panel and not the interviewer.

  37. Mavsmom31 says:

    As others have said, while I don’t believe the Trump or Putin piece, I think Harry has the juice to pull in big names for intimate conversations on topics. Even though the podcast wouldn’t have focused on the RF, it would have been impossible for him not to talk about his children, life and experiences when talking with his guests, just as we saw with Meghan. (Did they not see how big the fire in South Africa and Meghan has Nigerian roots story went??) Also, the BM and others would have made sure any podcast was international news….with expected poor fact checking.

    • Call_Me_AL says:

      I lol’d when I read that Harry would want to interview Putin!!!! As if! It would be the wet dream of the likes of Putin, Trump, and Zuckerberg to be interviewed in a serious manner by Harry, a decorated combat veteran and international superstar philanthropist! LMFAO!
      I am sure Harry could pull in big names with whom he could actually stand to be in the same room: Obama, Biden, Canadian PM, high-ranking vets, and A-list celebs.

  38. Lark says:

    I think the entire “podcast ideas” story is completely manufactured. Here’s what I think is happening.

    1. The Royal Media is heartbroken at the possibility of no future Prince Harry podcast to get content from. They’re pitching him ideas.

    2. They want specifically Tr*mp to respond so they can write crazy headlines for weeks.

    • L4Frimaire says:

      I don’t think for one minute Harry wanted to interview Trump. We’ve all seen how Trump lies and goes off the rails in interviews, Mr. Disinformation personified. Look at what Harry’s done with Better Up, the conversation with Gabor Maté, his many interviews promoting Spare. That’s Harry’s interview style and what he’s want to do if he decided on a podcast. He’s met so many interesting people in so many spheres, he has a lot of content if he chose to develop something. However, not sure if that’s what Spotify wanted from him.

  39. Lionel says:

    I’d listen the h*LL out of Harry interviewing Trump or Putin!

    But whether or not he wanted to get/could have gotten those two isn’t really the point. It’s that Harry has enough clout to pull some big names, enough charisma and EQ to get good content out of them, and enough passion to take a conversation into previously unexplored territory.

    Anderson Cooper’s successful podcast about grief is a good example of what could have been.

    • Jennifer says:

      I think Harry might have a good amount of clout, but not PUTIN level of clout.

      • equality says:

        Why not? Some of his extended family members are very much in Russian circles.

      • hangonamin says:

        lol…agreed. putin doesn’t agreed to be interviewed by basically any western journalist/media now. i’m not sure a royal prince would be able to convince him to do a podcast…nor do i think harry should bc i dont think many would feel a need to hear about any childhood trauma putin may have as a means to paint him in any ways in a sympathetic light.

      • Just me says:

        If anybody could pull such interviewees it would be the likes of a major royal figure like Harry or ex-presidents/first ladies like the Obamas or the Clintons (but the ex-presidents/first ladies probably wouldn’t because of perception of interference in international affairs).

        However, I think it would be amazing for Harry to do some sort of project on fatherhood and/or how our upbringing shapes us.

  40. Lee says:

    I think we can agree that outside his royal life/ army experiences which have been well documented in his book, there’s not much else the public want to hear from him, he has time to focus on other meaningful work and build so much from his platform, he shouldn’t bother with these podcasts and celebrity stuff, he will be unfairly criticised and he’s not an entertainer so…..

    • equality says:

      Invictus Games, Travalyst, Sentebale, Well Child, African Parks–all ongoing initiatives that I would be interested in. And, he said there were at least 400 more pages worth of content left out of the book. And a good deal of the public would love to have the same sort of pictures and stories about Archie and Lili that they get about the Wales’ children. (Not that I want them to do that to A&L.)

  41. AC says:

    I think someone above said it perfectly. Simmons and Spotify are just sour grapes. Considering if you look at data, Apple is eating up their share and in reality more people in the US download Apple’s content . Google podcasts are also growing in their share as well. Hence the restructuring of Spotify’s podcast business. Leave it to the British Press to leave important details out as they just want HM to fail 🙄. The BP thinks one failure is a failure for life. It doesn’t work that way esp here in the US, if one opportunity doesn’t work out doesn’t mean the doors are shut out for life. We don’t have the Negativity that they seem to thrive on. Eventually, there will be another opportunity that fits better. In Harry’s case, Spotify definitely was not a fit(and in hindsight, prob for the best) . But other platforms might see it as an opportunity. Look at all the many successful entrepreneurs who didn’t succeed with their pitch in the beginning and where they are now. And I’m sure many of us have these same experiences in our own lives.

  42. Patti says:

    Was saying in another comment: I would LOVE to see them get away from the podcast/Hollywood stuff and move on to focusing 100% on veterans’ issues. That to me is their “brand” (ugh to personal brands, but anyway); Harry has been so wonderful to veterans and in the U.S. in particular, Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are still dealing with PTSD and a host of other issues and not getting anywhere near enough attention.

    • Bex says:

      I disagree with this because the implication is that the veterans are “neglected”, and that’s patently false. His work with and for veterans is well established, funded, and consistently exceeds all expectations (Invictus Games/Endeavour Fund). Those two entities are doing exactly what they’re supposed to do to support/fund/assist veterans. Harry is about to host his SECOND Invictus Games in Germany in September, since stepping down from Royal duties. The Invictus Games, just added additional country participants (Nigeria, Colombia, and Israel), with each country sending more athletes than in previous years. They’ve already announced the mixed winter/summer sports for Vancouver/Whistler 2025 (alongside First Nations representatives).

      It seems to me that their work with Veterans is well in hand, (and that’s what we know publicly. We only see what else they’re doing if photos are shared (like when Harry attended some Warrior Games events/meetings earlier this month). Podcasts also aren’t Hollywood, so it’s strange to make that link to what they’re doing. It’s a tool to get their message out there, and I don’t see why that’s a problem.

  43. j.ferber says:

    Patti, very good point.

  44. HeyKay says:

    Harry has Invictus to work with, I’d be much more interested in hearing these people from the military.
    Veterans and their families need much more support than the currently receive in every area.

  45. Tuntmore says:

    The problem seems to be that H&M both (especially Harry) only had broad ideas with no sense of specifics or execution. It isn’t surprising, given Harry’s upbringing, that he would assume other people would take his big-picture ideas and turn them into a finished product. He was born into royalty; he’s accustomed to having a staff to execute his wishes and ideas. As for Meghan, I don’t think she realized just how much time and work go into a professional, heavily edited “non-conversational” podcast.

    There’s nothing wrong with them not being streaming media geniuses. Every piece of criticism is not a personal attack. They seem like lovely parents, which they’d probably agree is the most important thing to be talented at.

    • Bex says:

      Yeah, none of this makes sense. First of all, since the comments are anonymous, we don’t know who this person is or how close they were to those discussions. It’s speculation at best, and obvious manipulation to muddy the waters at worst.
      Second, a pitch meeting is just that… a pitch. You’re throwing out ideas, and the execution of said ideas come later. If this is the case, it’s not unusual or shocking, as the article is making it out to be (and the suggested guest list is nonsensical, but obviously thrown out to incite Putin/Trump sympathizers).

      As far as Meghan goes, this again doesn’t make sense. Her podcast was conversational, with the experts giving their opinion/background/field of study before the main conversation. Her podcast was exactly as she said it would be, so I’m confused how she supposedly “didn’t know” how much time went into it. Also, “heavily edited”? What is this based upon? The lie about her being edited into the conversations has been proven false by people who actually worked on the podcast, as well as the guests she interviewed. So, I’m confused how this is still a talking point.

  46. AC says:

    Andy Cohen also blasted the rumors and defended Meghan on her podcasts.
    Regarding pitches, I remembered years ago being in the same elevator with a senior executive of a very large entertainment company – I made an actual elevator pitch in a few secs that lead to a meeting which eventually became successful. My college professor years ago would tell us students that successful pitches are both due to timing + luck. I think HM has some great ideas, they just need to find where their ideas can have the best fit. WME can also probably help with that. IMO, I think archetypes is a great platform with informative discussions and conversations around women – I think it should continue in a more visible platform and better enhanced.