People: Conversations with the Sussexes have to flow through a lot of middlemen

The past few months in the Sussex trenches have reminded me a bit of Prince Harry and Meghan’s last year in the royal fold, 2019. By that I mean, Harry and Meghan are being attacked and smeared wall-to-wall, so much so that constructive criticism made in good faith is seen as all part of the larger blanket of negativity. When Harry and Meghan stepped away from royal life, one of my biggest hopes was that they would figure out a way to operate, exist and thrive in an entirely new way and never play by those “royal rules” ever again. Yet here we are, four years later, and they’re still under siege, just in a different way. This time, it’s about their business and their refusal to be proactive to protect themselves professionally. Their non-response to the nastiness of the Spotify divorce has led to all of this: months of speculation in the US and UK about their business. People Magazine has another exclusive as part of their cover story and this one is all about their business:

In 2020, they were overvalued. “The attention, commotion, and hubbub was wrapped up in the fact that Harry is a royal, and people threw money at them with hopes and dreams that it would translate into success,” a Hollywood insider tells PEOPLE exclusively in this week’s cover story. “But I think it’s been a rude awakening for everyone — it’s like they built a house with no foundation. The royal element, and the in some ways the drama around them, inflated the price, deals and expectations.”

Their Netflix docuseries was a big success for Meghan: Harry & Meghan broke streaming records, and a different Hollywood source says that Meghan displayed a keen marketing sensibility and was closely involved in the promotional plan. “She was fully engaged and had actionable ideas,” says the source. However, Prince Harry and Meghan’s Netflix projects without a royal component haven’t shared the series’ success. The docuseries Live to Lead, about various global changemakers, debuted to indifference, and an animated project called Pearl, about a little girl inspired by female leaders, was quietly dropped last year, although other scripted projects are reportedly in the works.

Archetypes: One veteran podcasting executive says Spotify is partly to blame, pointing out that the Obamas have since moved their podcasting operations to Audible: “No one stuck it out [at Spotify], because the shows weren’t done well, or they overpaid and they couldn’t bring in audiences,” says the executive.

But critics hated Archetypes’ execution. “What works in podcasting is authenticity and intimacy and revealing things either about yourself or about a topic that says something that [listeners] haven’t really thought about,” says the executive. “None of that happened. And Meghan wasn’t prepared to do that, because she lives an incredibly guarded life.”

Unsteady footing & overstaffed on one end: A source close to the Archetypes production says the couple was not set up for success at Spotify: “They were given no formal lay of the land to kick things off, so they were already on unsteady footing even before the ink was dry.” But the protective web spun around the Duke and Duchess of Sussex did not help. “Things moved very slowly on both ends,” the source says. “It was rare to have a direct conversation with them, so everything had to flow through a million middle persons.”

Meghan signing with WME: Up next? Meghan signed with recently signed with powerhouse agency William Morris Endeavor — something a top Hollywood insider describes as “really smart, because they can put her in touch with filmmakers and creative people and producers and people who know how to make a TV show or a film.” With the right projects and people around them, the insider says, a second act is within reach: “I think within Hollywood, people are rooting for them.”

[From People]

“What works in podcasting is authenticity and intimacy and revealing things either about yourself…None of that happened. And Meghan wasn’t prepared to do that, because she lives an incredibly guarded life.” Again, Archetypes was a huge success and while I would have loved for Meghan to get more intimate and personal, she had a steep learning curve as a podcaster and she hit her stride within a few episodes. Spotify was stupid to let her go and it was disgusting for a Spotify executive to publicly bad-mouth them on their way out the door. Which… is why the pushback shouldn’t be from various unnamed sources in People or Variety – the Archewell spokesperson needed to go on the record with the Sussexes’ perspective the moment Bill Simmons’ “f–king grifter” comments got picked up. Did anyone at Archewell tell H&M that? Did they listen? You can yell at me forever for saying that they need to overhaul their communications strategy, but the whole reason People Magazine and the trade papers are still talking about the Spotify mess is because Harry and Meghan refused to communicate their side and push back with a different narrative.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Spotify. Cover courtesy of People.

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

137 Responses to “People: Conversations with the Sussexes have to flow through a lot of middlemen”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ThatsNotOkay says:

    If companies overpaid for the association with the Sussexes, that’s on the companies. They’ve been overpaying for showrunners for the last half of this decade and are paying for it now (and blaming writers for wanting a piece of whatever puzzle there is). That’s all the businesses’ fault, not the Sussexes’. They were very smart to make those deals and get that pay. So good for them. Doesn’t make them grifters since they were willing to work, it just makes Netflix and Spotify executives bad at their jobs. Good executives would find a way to work with the talent they’ve signed and get the most value and bang for their buck—even the staunchest and most intractable “talent” can be managed and made to produce exceptional content. It just takes skill and more time than these stupid tech companies were willing or able to give. Again, that’s on them.

    • Maxine Branch says:

      Expressed well and NAILED

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Exactly @ ThatsNotOkay!!! Yet what People and every other niche rag seems to ignore is that H&M, along with Barack Obama and other top talent cut Spotify lose for their unhinged demands placed upon every creator. They want more Rogans than Meghan and Barack.

        Spotify is simply an ill informed and biased platform. It’s either what they want you to produce or nothing at all. As for the Spotify exec that made those comments about the Sussex’s, should have been reprimanded for his comments, which were based on lies and misinformation.

      • Megan says:

        Spotify hasn’t found its own footing with podcasting. They rely almost entirely on Joe Rogan who is a complete nut job who will eventually be overtaken by a bigger nut job on another streaming service.

    • swaz says:

      It’s just a bunch of nitpicking 🤢 where is the 100 articles asking “why isn’t Melania supporting her husband 😬 OR “Where’s Melania 😬

      • Eurydice says:

        Because Melania doesn’t support her husband and she never wanted to be First Lady. Also, nobody gives a rat’s ass about Melania.

      • Jaded says:

        There have been a few unflattering articles about Melania lately. She appears to be in a spot of trouble for using PAC money for personal stuff like $108,000 in one year for her personal hairdresser, $155,000 for one barely attended speaking engagement (her English is abominable), and likely some knowledge of the “musical boxes full of highly secret documents” debacle at Mar-a-Lago/Bedminster.

    • Kingston says:


      Perfectly stated.

    • HennyO says:

      Oprah nor Tiler Perry have never made it a habit of reacting or commenting on every (created) storm, naysayers, incompetent industry executives, jealous peers, or whoever. They’ve listen to whoever really matters and kept to their business. Today they’re both multibillionaires.

      I thing Harry and Meghan have excellent people, friends and mentors alike in every industry they operate in. They’re not gonna be listening to what followers, fans or haters at the edges looking, think they should be doing (to please them).

      As Tyler Perry said (I’m paraphrasing): “Don’t listen to the noise, stay focused, learn and keep going. Tomorrow the same critics will come around and phrase you.”

      • Stewartren says:

        @HENNYO I agree. Responding would be defensive. They don’t need to response and are doing what they should – moving on.

      • roooth says:

        I’m glad Harry & Meghan continue to refuse to engage every attack – especially since its obvious the UK gutter media has figured out they can be as ridiculous as they want to try and taunt H&M into a response, but responding is a never win for H&M.

        When you wrestle with pigs the only thing that happens is you both get covered in mud – and the pigs like it.

        I like that H&M stay out of the mud. Let the #HateForHire pigs wallow in their mud

  2. Brit says:

    I’m glad they didn’t comment on Bill Simmons. He showed a lack of professionalism and made himself look like a fool. They were clearly pissed that they left. It’s clear the Spotify platform is becoming toxic because many people have left. I see what people mean about communications but at the same time, when you have people determined to find fault and are making it their life’s mission to destroy you, is there a point? It’s not about being passive but dealing with toxic, narcissistic individuals. It just would’ve fed the beast more especially the tabloids and it’s clear that’s what the Wall Street Journal, Bill and the tabs wanted. They wanted a Spotify vs Sussex battle. In that regard, I’m glad they didn’t play into it.

    • Ginger says:

      I agree. It would have just been a back and forth battle. What were H&M supppsed to say? “We are not f- – -ing grifters?” The reason the press can’t stop talking about the Spotify thing is because H&M have been quiet for a few months. There is literally nothing else to talk about. And the press jump on anything that might seem negative towards them and just try to amplify it. They will win some and lost some. That’s how life is.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Agreed @ Ginger. No matter what statement that they put out, it would have been dissected and twisted to fit into their unhinged narrative and agenda.

    • Amy Bee says:


      • KFG says:

        I’m trying to understand what business issues they need to address. This whole article is bs. Netflix got 2 big series, stated they love their relationship with archewell and the invictus documentary comes out in the fall. Spotify didn’t overpay because archetypes was a massive success. The insane expectations people have are asinine. They address what is important. This is more Murdoch bs.

    • Carrie says:

      It is such a bad look for Spotify to be trashing ideas of their podcasters. Brainstorming should be a safe space and not used in the future to trash someone. If I were a podcaster. I wouldn’t want to work with Spotify knowing they may badmouth me if I left.

    • Lizzie says:

      I disagree. That specific statement was not made by the tabloids but a business partner, that they are grifters and untalented should not stand undisputed. I would have liked to see a breezy quote about enjoying making the podcasts,amazed and humbled by the success in so many counties, basically a nice humble brag and sorry so and so didn’t have the same enjoyment but as we go our separate ways we wish him well.

      • Denise says:

        This sounds perfect. I wish they’ve gone that route

      • Jae says:

        “Never Complain, Never Explain”. Many have jumped on the pile on bandwagon.
        The DDoS have learned how to lose some battles, but eventually win the war.

    • Christine says:

      Hard agree.

  3. JAGirl says:

    This is a lot of nitpicking under the guise of “constructive criticism” by People and even some of their “supporters”. There was a global pandemic, Meghan lost a baby and gave birth, they had a lot of other projects and charity work done, not to mention her healing from the trauma of Harry’s family…

    I’m not sure how much more could be expected from them tbh – work wise.

    As it relates to their comm strategy, why get into a back and forth with Spotify… what would they have gained from that? It would have only lead to more criticism and possibly affected future deals.

    They are doing great imo and people generally need to give them a break – Meghan was never a famed so them being low-key suits her personality.

    • Dee(2) says:

      I’m not going to get into the comms thing again. I agree with your point though that a lot of constructive criticism seems to be about wanting more visibility based on the fact that there isn’t much to talk about when Harry and Meghan don’t respond. While there’s still daily hate for them in the BM, it doesn’t get the same amount of clicks nor does it have the same staying power that it used to. The fact that they are coming up with more outlandish things everyday and nothing sticks lets you know that people are rolling their eyes and moving on. I haven’t seen any indication that they are having professional troubles, they just rolled out a two million dollar grant with their partners. People want to see them more so they can comment and gossip but I think they really aren’t trying to be in that space. Some supporters are going to have to come to terms with the fact that don’t appear to want to be available in for endless articles and critiques whether positive or negative. They just may be those celebs you only see when they are promoting something. Tons of other celebrities are the same way, not sure why some act like they can’t be successful and not updating social media or appearing at events once a month.

      • Andrew says:

        The question you want to ask yourselves is not what the Sussexes would have gained, but who else would have gained from a back and forth with Spotify/Bill Simmons? The answer is the media, the rota, and yes even gossip websites. This public drama would have generated a lot of traffic for all these parties. Hence the shift in messaging from so-called supporters. Hating the Sussexes is a billion dollar industry and everyone and their mother wants to capitalise on it.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Dee(2) said:
        “People want to see them more so they can comment and gossip but I think they really aren’t trying to be in that space. Some supporters are going to have to come to terms with [this] fact…”

        Exactly 💯. That’s it in a nutshell. A lot of haters and supporters alike are experiencing ‘Sussex withdrawal syndrome.’ 😭🥺 This is one reason why Suits reruns on Netflix are being consumed in record numbers. BBC and the BRF tourist gift shops should package and sell a recap video of all the Meghan & Harry royal tours. It would sell like hotcakes. LOL! 😂

        After all, it’s pretty obvious that the BRF and the Britshidtmedia have been exploiting Diana’s image, beauty, life story, style and grace, her popular younger son, etc., ever since mistreatment by her husband and by the rotten royal institution, led to her untimely death. Diana and Meghan are the best things that ever happened to the boring BRF, and deep down, everyone knows this truth.

    • Eurydice says:

      I’ll only say one thing about a comms strategy. There’s a difference between personal attacks by the tabloids and attacks on H&M’s professional capabilities. People in the entertainment industry know all about the tabloids and can discount them, but if someone gets a bad rap from an executive for the quality of their work, that is taken seriously.

      The strategy doesn’t have to be direct quotes from H&M. It can be more indirect, like when the CEO of United Talent Agency said that Meghan had no talent. Suddenly the papers were full of quotes from shocked and embarrassed employees, and somehow it came out that UTA had been desperate to sign Meghan and had approached her many times. Maybe this pushback came from WME, I don’t know – but it blew back in UTA’s face.

      • Dee(2) says:

        @Eurydice that’s an excellent point. That THR and Variety article was timely and great with the pushback. And it was effective because it was rare and had named sources too. I think despite what others may see, they probably have figured out what deserves air and what doesn’t. We haven’t heard a single thing from Bill Simmons again even though you know ALL the BM would have taken him up on his “idea” to get drunk and spill about the conversation he had with Harry. That tells me either he got smacked down or Spotify is having WAY bigger internal issues right now.

      • Becks1 says:

        The UTA response was great and I think is exactly the kind of thing people here are talking about. no way was that response done without the input of a PR person from Team Sussex, or WME. It was fast, it included named sources, and it made the UTA CEO look bitter and petty.

      • Christine says:


        I’m just not sure what the appropriate communications look like for Harry and Meghan, and I’m not sure there is anyone in the industry who can confidently say they know exactly how to help them. Those two are clearly in uncharted waters, surrounded by sharks everywhere. I hope someone a lot smarter than me can help them.

      • bisynaptic says:

        Agreed. Timely pushback of professional bullying is essential.

    • MSTJ says:

      Well said JAGIRL. 👍
      In my opinion, there are fans and there are supporters. I think fans cheer their favs and react based on how they would handle the situation if they were in it. Whereas supporters trust the Sussexes are handling the situation within the limitations they exist as best as they can, and give them grace as they work on finding a way to thrive personally and professionally away from the toxic royal mafia institution. Why? Because the Sussexes exist in an uncharted dynamic whereby everything they are doing is unprecedented (they are British royals with their own businesses who ‘ran away’ from the royal institution) and the toxic royal mafia has tentacles in a media ecosystem that is invested in the Sussex’s failure. Centuries old institutions with people that are interconnected in powerful media conglomerates, some who staunchly support and revere the toxic royals. The Sussexes do not have the resources to preempt or respond to crazy, false narrative on a daily basis. They are one little unit against numerous media organizations with vast human and financial resources that profit from Sussex hate and negativity.

      As long as they are able to find enough support and guidance privately to continue delivering profitable results, and maintain their financial independence and wellbeing, I think they’ll be grateful. I think their primary goal is to not depend on the toxic royal institution for financial support.

      I think after Harry’s cases conclude they’ll have more flexibility to navigate the media. For now, I believe they are boxed in because of the court cases and resources (David and Goliath – rooting for David to win against Goliath). 🙏

      • Kingston says:

        This is exactly it, @MSTJ.

        None of these H&M ‘critics’ have given any indication that they are even aware of, much more to appreciate what H&M are up against in the powerful forces that want nothing more than to end the Sussex family.

        It is an unprecedented situation that even the powerful forces have not had to deal with before. Their old method of just blatantly and even publicly wiping out their opponent cannot work in the 21st century.

      • Marleigh says:

        I love your comment!

      • JAGirl says:

        @MSTJ I wish more persons would appreciate what they up against as just 2 people with very young children. To be honest if I were in their position, I don’t know if I’d be able to mange all the scrutiny, criticism and just the endless hate on a daily basis – it must be so overwhelming.

        I love how rare we see them, I think its a brilliant strategy and it makes them more exclusive – it feels like a treat or lovely surprise when we see them 🙂

        As it relates to their work, they are doing awesome! No need to respond to every single thing, every mean spirited person says about them, it reflects badly on the person without them needing to add anything.

      • Jazz says:

        This thread brought a tear to my eye. Thank you all for your nuanced perspectives and understanding. I agree with everything said. Add to that Meghan said she was still healing a little over 6 months ago. Harry was on the stand just last month emotional as he said they want his family dead.
        There’s an emotional toll that people seem to ignore that Harry and Meghan have had to endure and still endure. THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS!! The fact that they are still functioning is amazing! The fact that they’ve been successful is even more amazing despite a very active hate and smear campaign. NO OTHER CELEBRITY has to deal with what Meghan especially does! NO ONE!!
        I give them all the space and time to do what they need to and figure out what works for them as a fan!
        They are two very strong people cause I couldn’t imagine living their life.

      • Darkwing Duck says:

        @MSTJ I think you have summed up situation very well.

      • Christine says:

        Slow clap, from my heart.

      • aftershocks says:

        Exactly 💯 @MSTJ and @JAGIRL! 🎯Thanks for your articulate and nuanced perspectives. 👏

  4. Chantal says:

    True! A more proactive, timely and effective comm strategy is more essential than ever. Attacking the Sussexes is one thing (and by now routine) but attacking their businesses and the value of their brand cannot be allowed, esp with all of the other negative narratives endlessly repeated about them. It’s the potential investors and business acquaintances/future partners that might be deterred by this messiness and negative publicity that should gravely concern them. Once you start messing with my money, the gloves come off!

    • Anna says:

      This, exactly.

      I hear the counter argument about not wanting there to be a back and forth, but a firm, decisive response to the bullshit (i.e the Spotify mess and the inaccuracies around Pearl being “quietly dropped”) would have been enough for at least SOME publications not to parrot BM talking points. AW doesn’t need to answer for every accusation thrown their way, but they need to do better to protect their brand and business reputation.

      • Brit says:

        @anna. Which is why signing with WME was for the best. They are in the process of building their brand. It’s still new. Yes, they are successful authors, they have successful documentaries with Oprah, Netflix and a suits renaissance currently. That mess with Spotify, wall street and that bitter agent who made that “no talent” comment, that was them trying to discourage them and basically attempt an industry shakedown, which didn’t work. That was Murdoch and co trying to get ahead of the success they already had and will continue to have.

      • Ginger says:

        H&M released an official statement when it was revealed their deal was over. That’s all that was needed. That Spotify executive was the one that decided to act like an asshole. They didn’t need to respond to that and get in a back and forth. He looked bad and it made Spotify look bad. The British press are always trying to make H&M look like they are fumbling and that will never change ( whether they respond or not)

      • aftershocks says:

        ^^ That’s exactly right @Ginger! 💯 The statement Archewell reps released after the Spotify deal ended was for sure, “all that was needed.” The bitter Spotify exec spouting off with snarky personal attacks backfired and boomeranged. He’s the one who looks like the nasty, projecting, grifting a’hole he’s probably always been.

    • Anne says:

      @Ginger — 100% agree with your comment. They made one professional official statement, that’s it. Responding to every single attack, personal or professional, would make them look petty and defensive. I think what they’re doing is a perfect example of “pick your battles.” They may have been able to “win” the Spotify “battle” (not really, and to be clear, there’s isn’t one. Her podcast wasn’t a flop; it won awards, hit the top charts globally. For business reasons, both sides decided to part ways. Happens ALL THE TIME.), but responding to everything false wouldn’t have made everyone go, “oh, OK! NOW I get it!” They would have been misquoted and the RR would have dissected every word and purposely misinterpreted everything, so why bother? They DID respond and look what happened — their statement got buried and NO ONE mentions it because it doesn’t fit the narrative they’re making up. I’m glad they’re not responding. They’re living their life, working and COMPLETING projects and then dropping them when everything is done and dusted. No PR articles about “raising awareness” or useless appearances. They do the work and let the work speak for them. The fake news machine will keep cranking out fake stories about them no matter what they do or say or strategy that they employ, so why waste the energy?

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Anne, I think your comments hit the nail. I think they’re greyrocking the crap that flies around. Murdoch would love it if he could get them to respond to crap in the US since they won’t comment on any from the UK. Instead, they’re using the same strategy, which I think is the only way to go forward. Don’t give Murdoch and his minions ANYTHING. I would love to be a mouse in the room when everything the media throws at them ends with nothing that they can use. I the saturation point for the hate is getting closer all of the time. People are getting burned out on the Sussex hate. There’s always going to be some wingnuts that carry on and the bots. Well, the bots won’t prove effective at some point. Then I wonder what the bm (and brf) will do?

  5. LeaTheFrench says:

    The Spotify outcome is typically something a good comms /PR team should have framed better. There are articles in reputable outlets (e.g. “Spotify hit by cost of unwinding aggressive podcast push” in the FT in July) explaining how Spotify is rethinking their podcast approach and the wider commercial pivot behind. It’s a well documented shift in Spotify’s strategy, it was not hard to push back against the notion that their deal “failed.” I’m frustrated their comms team could not shape that narrative more proactively.

  6. Becks1 says:

    Honestly, with spotify, it really sounds like Spotify expected one thing from them (royal gossip/dirt) and H&M wanted to do something different. That, combined with Spotify’s own issues, just meant it didn’t work out. The thing that gave this legs was Bill Simmons opening his mouth.

    But the comments in this article are also just wrong. Archetypes didn’t work because Meghan didn’t reveal things about herself? How could Archetypes have been more successful, pray tell?

    As for the rest – we can and I’m sure will continue to debate their comms strategy for the rest of the day which will be fun and different, lol.

    • Hail says:

      That I also don’t understand. Are they forgetting when Meghan revealed the fire in Archie’s nursery incident? How the daily mail tried minimizing it and calling Meg a liar just for the South African media to back up what she said. Or when Meg talked about spending the summer with Sophie Trudeau and their children? Or Meg bringing her mom on? Are there ways to be more interactive with listeners like opening an Archetypes instagram or asking fans to send in questions/thoughts? Maybe, but that’s something that can be in the future.

    • Nic919 says:

      This is why I am not going to take articles from People or US Weekly seriously when they pretend to discuss business. They state so many false things and spin it negatively. Get me a Variety or Hollywood Reporter analysis and then we can talk.

      • Amy Bee says:

        It’s my understanding that these pieces were written by People’s royal correspondent who lives in the UK. If he doesn’t want to be attacked by his colleagues in the royal rota he will continue the British press narrative. And here we are.

      • Ginger says:

        They completely left out the statement from Netflix saying they valued their relationship with H&M and have projects coming. Also, they left out that the animation department at Netflix was cut and that’s why Pearl was cut. All to make it look negative…

      • BothSidesNow says:

        @ Ginger, agree!!! Strange how the rags conveniently leave out the most important facts about the Netflix dumping most, if not all, animated films. This is ALL on Netflix and not on Meghan.

    • Tan says:

      It’s the same grift from before – all these rags and snippy businesses just want the Sussexes to respond and in turn then then Brit trash media can also respond more based on the Sussexes responses and all of a sudden it’s a bunch of more baseless articles in the tabloids and some more seemingly not tabloid media – then all the ppl who’ve been in this back and forth with the Sussexes get more clout, money and Ferraris.
      Then ppl who’ve said well tHey need better comms would be like omg why is their comms strategy so bad!

  7. s808 says:

    I absolutely agree their comms team needs an overhaul. They don’t have to reply/give push back to everything or even 99% of things but situations like Spotify talking shit is something that needs a response. They need to promote their projects better. I will say though, I don’t understand the “second act” comment or the headline suggesting they’re “under pressure”. I mean….are they? I mean yes, them being successful after their time in Hell is important but they’ve already done/proved that. It just seems like folks are acting as if they’re in the trenches and need redemption when that isn’t the case at all? maybe I’m reading too much into it.

    • Julia says:

      I agree the framing of these articles is really weird. It’s suggesting that if everything they do is not a blockbuster success it’s all over and they will be begging on the streets! In real life people try new things sometimes they succeed sometimes they fail. If things don’t work out they try something new. Why is this different for the Sussexes? They have had two huge successes, the memoir and docu series. They are not poor so why are they under any more pressure than the average person with a job?

    • MrsBanjo says:

      They really do need a comms strategy that isn’t based on their experiences on the royal fold, if that makes sense. It’s absolutely one thing to ignore the constant stream of garbage coming out of the rags, but while they’re doing way more, especially during a pandemic, than expected, they’re not effectively promoting it.

      They don’t need a personal social media, for example, because their personal lives and activities are none of our business. But basic 101 in this day and age, their foundation does. At the very least, Archewell should have an Instagram and they should have a regularly updated email-based newsletter. Even Angelina Jolie, who steered clear of SM for eons got on IG to promote her refugee work. Everyone, especially potential investors, and not just Squaddies, should be well and consistently informed of their work. It’s not throwing negativity at them or being a hater by pointing that out.

    • Jais says:

      Agree about the headline “under pressure.” I don’t see them as under any super pressure at the moment. They parted ways with Spotify. It’s not the end of the world, jeez. When they were in Canada, and their security was taken away by family members and their location was outed by family members, just as the borders were closing, now that was them under pressure. When in reality, they’re just eating some really good Italian food and looking sexy in stripes.

    • Kel says:

      I agree. It feels like the media is acting as if they are broke and destitute meanwhile they could probably not work another day in their life and be fine. Harry brought in minimum 20 million from his book alone..they also probably got a nice fee from their deals. Shoot if they need money Meghan could sign a deal for just as much or more.
      They have investments and haven’t touched any endorsements. They will not be broke lol.

      The press is creating this narrative just like they did with Harry’s book, the supposed “reality tv” and everything else Harry and Meghan do because they need an angle.

      But when Harry and Meghan have success I notice the press downplay it all. Frustrating but what can they do? This will be their life as long as Harry’s lawsuits are ongoing. The best they can do is find ways communicate effectively. I hope their team around them is finding ways to grow and adapt if things aren’t working just like we do in life. If they learn, grow, and adjust they’ll be fine.

    • Ash says:

      There’s this imaginary start and end date the media has created for them

  8. ana says:

    it’s just frustrating this is the narrative bc it completely erases other things – for instance they did that covid vaccine work and came to the concert in new york city and were SO popular and well received. and archetypes may have been over produced, but some of the episodes were great. she is being graded on an insane scale – that she has to be beyond perfect to even be counted as ‘good’. most podcasts have bad or boring episodes. the number of podcasts I listen to where some weeks I stop listening after 10 minutes? I agree that ideally they could fight back more, but I think the legal battles against the newspapers make that difficult. I agree they seem to have bad comms advisors (that whole statement thing post the car in new york was very messy), and I hope they get new ones. but it’s also a hard gig.

    • Cara says:

      Archewell is set up as a non-profit charitable organization that must follow rules to retain its tax free status. It is not Harry and Meghan’s own personal public relations firm. Meghan and Harry as a couple need to defend themselves, get out there ahead of stories, etc … but not through Archewell. Meghan has signed on with a management company, but they don’t represent Harry. In other words, they haven’t hired anyone to deal with this crap that comes at them as a couple. They are Meghan Markle and Harry here in America, but they keep making decisions like they are the Sussex of the UK. No one had their backs there (quite the opposite) and no one does here either except for their fans and supporters. That is not a great management strategy. It’s kind of a “no plan” plan. There is no push back on anything!! Does anyone here actually see a way that dignified silence is ever going to turn this around and become a success story???

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Cara, Murdoch would be dancing in the street if the Sussexes suddenly started responding to some of this stuff. Let’s remember that he now owns quite a few media outlets. Page 6 and TMZ come to mind. I have to wonder if the idiot at Spotify was encouraged (or paid) to say what he said. I was especially skeptical when he said to buy him a drink and he would tell all. It was completely unprofessional, and I would anticipate that he and Spotify took a hit on what he said. This is not the way to attract podcasters–unless you’re looking for hate podcasts.

      • bisynaptic says:

        Good points.

  9. Talie says:

    I understand why they let the Bill Simmons comment ride – they didn’t want to extend the news cycle. The problem is there is a whole media complex in the English speaking world dedicated to destroying them, so they have to pick and choose where to give oxygen.

    I think WME was the smartest move, but getting a major PR power player like PMK or ID would be even smarter. I also find it intriguing that 3 years later and they still haven’t dipped their toes in the endorsement world. It makes me wonder if there is some kind of hold back with the royal connection. Prince Harry for sale in the brand world for commercials and products would be a big get for any watch or liquor company or just about every British heritage brand.

    • Shawna says:

      A British heritage brand might hesitate if they have a royal warrant they’d like to keep hold of.

    • Polo says:

      I keep wondering why they haven’t tapped into the endorsement side where they could make tons of money too!
      Part of me wonders as well if it’s because of the whole using your royal name blah blah that would come from that.
      Maybe they just are being particular about what they want to tie themselves to versus taking any and everything.
      I kinda wish Meghan would go back to traditional celeb type thing where we see her on commercials and at events.
      Maybe she doesn’t want to do that though. Idk
      Harry and Meghan can’t be compared to anyone else. Their situation is so unique and they’ll figure out what works from them as they go. There will be success and failure. Unfortunately for them there’s a whole industry ready to jump on any of the failures. Other celebrities get to fail in peace. ( not saying that they’ve failed because so far I think they’ve done well).

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I don’t think that endorsement deals is in their wheelhouse of priorities nor desired. Why latch onto to endorse a brand/company?? No, there are too many negative connotations to that type of deal. Plus it’s a complete opposite of what their goals they have in life. It’s more than money for them, it’s about the reflection of what they want to do to make positive change for all of those who need a voice or a hand.

      • Rebecca says:

        Some would argue that an endorsement would cheapen the (perceived) royal mystique.

        It’s one of the many unspoken (outdated?) expectations that make this transition so interesting to watch & so tricky for them to navigate.

    • bisynaptic says:

      Why should they shill for other brands, if they don’t have to? I hope they never do.

  10. Maxine Branch says:

    Interesting to me how @PeopleMagazine have sources when Sussex supporters know they do not respond nor have supporters who would speak to the current team there. Again, to me this is all supposition with a royal family bent. I choose to follow the mantra of the Sussexes, when they have something to say, they say it with their whole chest, they do not use sources. Happy Birthday Meghan.

  11. MsIam says:

    WME was engaged to get deals. I wouldn’t want my clients engaged in some kind of messy back and forth while I’m trying to get new contracts. Best thing to do is to lay low until the ink is dry on the new contracts. If Spotify is struggling and having to retrench, they’ll fade away on their own. Focus on what lies ahead. The best thing to do to get rid of that sting of that ridiculous “grifters” comment is to launch a new deal.

  12. Nanea says:

    I’m going back and forth on their need of a comms team. Because most of the untruths or lies the BM come up with originated in Deranger Land and don’t deserve any kind of reaction.

    But if things like the animated “Pearl” project are so badly researched – although the truth is out there, or that whole multi-layered “leaving Spotify for greener pastures” incident, someone at Archewell needs to issue a finely crafted and pointed statement, just a sentence or two, that presents the bare-bones facts.

    That said, if I see things like Rogan’s latest conspiracy myths trending, or that RFK Jr. antivax stuff, I am so glad they left.

    Still hoping “Pearl” is being developed elsewhere, preferably with someone like Vashti Harrison – in addition to David Furnish and team, of course.

  13. Robert says:

    Seems to me that some of the Royal Family’s motto, “Never complain, never explain.”, has rubbed off on them. More often than not they don’t respond to criticism. But then again, damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

    • Selene says:

      Yeah, I agree and I kinda like it. It makes them inaccessible, as they should be. They are on a very unique echelon, and they need to thread carefully as to not cheapen their value/persona/impact.

  14. ana says:

    it’s funny because I think they really did have a good comms team at the beginning of this – statements like the “service is universal” were great. I think this whole thing could be framed as them being successful – just depends on how it’s spun and somehow broadly they’ve lost the narrative, I assume in part due to the murdoch papers etc. also, the problem they have is that the right wing papers clearly have it out for them, and the slightly more center/left papers/writers don’t always want to engage bc many are anti-monarchy (which meghan and harry really aren’t), or because it feels “silly”. It doesn’t need to feel silly, but just thinking of how marina hyde and others dismiss them. I think them not being out front is good for a while, if they can then just come out with good work over a few years that can hopefully speak for itself.

  15. Tropicalgirl says:

    Sidenote: I notice that since the incident in New York and the questionable stories People Magazine ran the Sussexes have cut them off. It is actually very telling no more cute stories about birthday events etc.

    • Amy Bee says:

      People also published paparazzi’s pictures of Doria recently. I think you might right about Harry and Meghan not dealing with People anymore.

    • Jais says:

      Harry did that exclusive with them. The one where he looked so good in the pics. And that was done to help sell his book. I’d imagine they think very little of People at this point, especially if they’re posting pap pics of Doria.

      • Becks1 says:

        In March the Sussex spokesperson confirmed to People about Lili’s christening, so as of March,the Sussexes had not cut People mag off.

        This type of article is just typical People fluff, like I said yesterday, People writes trash/fluff articles 95% of the time and then a few times a year they get an exclusive. It’s been their MO for ages now.

  16. Amy Bee says:

    People keeps putting the blame on Harry and Meghan for Netflix axing their entire animation department. I would be willing to take what the piece says if it was more truthful. I don’t think things are dire as People wants to portray it and it’s clear that Spotify as was for many other people wasn’t a good fit for Harry and Meghan. Spotify has to take much of the blame for Harry and Meghan leaving.

  17. Shawna says:

    Okay, I’ll play. Archetypes was a massive success. Even if Meghan was “guarded,” full disclosure (a la Kristen Bell and her husband) isn’t required for a success. Not all podcasts need to be the same. And it’s good they go through “middlemen” if executives will use their personal communications as reasons to smear them later on.

    At the same time, something like Live to Lead wasn’t all that interesting to me. Something that is 100% inspiration with no grit or sparkle or glamour or controversy or personal touch is not something I’ll watch. “Pearl” sounded too goody-two-shoes to be terribly interesting to me (unless I had a daughter, which I don’t). I’ll watch the Invictus doc because the inspirational moments are emotionally “earned” by the experiences and training the soldiers went through. And also I’m watching it because Harry has already put in years and years of work into this; it’s authentic.

    So, if the Sussexes’ people are reading this, this is the opinion of a real fan who’s donated to their charities, buys from the brands Meghan is seen in, and tries to clap back at derangers on Twitter. While I don’t think everything they do has to or should be dishing royal tea, they need to find a way to convey their personal charisma, especially in light that they aren’t doing walkabouts where the public directly sees Harry’s empathy and warmth and Meghan’s sincerity and beauty.

    Ideally, I’d like to see a Suits reunion special, a pop-up/virtual charity fundraiser (let me buy something aspirationally fancy for charity), a guest blog post (share the lemon cake recipe or some wellness tips on someone else’s blog!), and some update on the youth leaders who received those micro-grant award things. Could there also be some kind of action item tied to the Dusseldorf games?

    • MrsBanjo says:

      Yes to this.

    • Nic919 says:

      I would like to see something about World Kitchen and Chef Jose Andres.

      • Becks1 says:

        Jose Andres just put out that documentary on NatGeo about World Central Kitchen, I was “disappointed” bc I wanted to see one from Archewell about the community centers, but maybe that is still coming (and obviously Jose Andres is in charge of telling his story, lol.)

        I do think they should do something about those community centers though – not just for H&M and Archewell, but in general – because I think those centers are an innovative way to look at charity endeavors and projects – there is a need here for this during these specific times (hurricanes etc), but we can also see a need for something similar to this during “normal” times so we are going to build something that can be utilized all the time.

      • windyriver says:

        @Becks1 – is there something new other than We Feed People? Because that was actually released over a year ago on Disney+. It’s a documentary directed by Ron Howard and done by his production company.

        I wonder what the status is of the community centers. I knew WCK had some other projects in Haiti (WCK was started after Andres’ experiences post the 2010 earthquake), including a chef’s training school, and I recall something about dealing with the prevalent, problematic use of cookstoves. However, the current website lists these under “Legacy Programs”, 2010 – 2022, so looks like they’re no longer ongoing (not a surprise about anything in Haiti given that very dangerous environment now). The Clean Cooking initiative and Food Producer Network project covered the Caribbean and Central America.

        WCK is so busy with disaster relief – it seems like they’re everywhere – maybe as they’ve grown with the recognition in the past few years they’ve shifted their primary focus. (And certainly Ukraine must be taking a huge amount of effort).

        It doesn’t get much better than Ron Howard doing a documentary, so I don’t expect to see anything else anytime soon.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yes that’s what I’m talking about (I say NatGeo bc it shows up on the NatGeo section of my Disney Plus lol) and I really thought it had come out like three months ago 🤣🤣 (I mean I remember when it came out bc Andres was promoting it, I just thought that was…..3 months ago.) time has no meaning anymore for me.

      • windyriver says:

        @Becks1 – I know the feeling re: time passing! I’ve followed WCK off and on for quite a while, a few reasons: 1) remembered Andres because of a memorable meal I had early on at one of his DC restaurants when his rep as a chef was building; 2) my sister in law was in Haiti during that earthquake (she’s a pediatric OT and was spending a couple of weeks working with kids and training staff at several facilities); and 3) I thought WCK was an incredible concept, and Andres seemed to be making it work. In fact, pretty sure I sent an email to CB 4 or 5 years ago suggesting it might be interesting to cover.

        Anyway, have a great weekend and a very happy anniversary!

  18. Jais says:

    Archetypes won awards. It was not unsuccessful. Pearl was dropped along with the entire animation dept. It was not just Meghan. Leaving these details out is a choice. Choices are being made in this article to frame the Sussexes as lacking. Everything in this could be re-written with a positive slant, in a more honest way. But no, People chose to go with this article during Meghan’s birthday week.

  19. s808 says:

    Commenting here again but I’m wondering what people really from them. Aside from better communication from Archewell and a more robust comms team, I don’t really have any negative feelings about what they’ve done so far. I think if people want more visibility from them, well, good luck but I’m interested in knowing how people *thought* they’d operate/what they’d do at this stage.

  20. Kingston says:

    Thank you! Perfectly stated.

    I dont why some folks continue to insist in making peoplemag out to be a credible source when its nothing more than yet another gossip rag surviving on the dying fumes of its antecedents.

  21. Jojo says:

    Well said @KINGSTON. I don’t think many fully appreciate precisely what layers of insidious power they are actually standing up against. Their current situation cannot be likened to that of literally any other celebrity and they have to prioritise staying safe and keeping their kids safe before anything else. Unfortunately, some ‘fence sitting’ will be absolutely necessary for them. It’s completely up to them how much exposure they are comfortable with at this juncture in their lives and all we supporters can do is remain supportive and cheer them on in this unique journey they (and their children) are undertaking.

  22. Kingston says:

    LMFAO I’m always !!FASCINATED!! by the inability of us human beings to SEE things when theyre right under our noses. Take the quote at the top of my post: H&M have indeed figured out the way they wish to operate and exist now that they are no longer shackled by the british royal mafia organization.

    HOWEVER! there are folks who can only see H&M thru the filter of the british royal mafia organization or thru the lens of the typical “celebrity” and therefore, such folks will continue to fail to see the ethos that H&M are creating for themselves.

    I constantly remind myself: never in the history of the 1000 year old british royal mafia organization has someone so close to the throne not only married a woman with black blood, have children with her, and VOLUNTARILY LEFT the institution and is THRIVING in the most powerful nation in the world. The british royal mafia organization has been known to MURDER their own who dont even come close to any “transgression” like that.

    Harry, more than anyone outside the british royal mafia organization, is highly aware of the EVER PRESENT threat of death of his entire family!!! INCLUDING HIS CHILDREN! from the british royal mafia organization so he will NEVAH! give gossip merchants the pics and info they want about his life and that of his family.

    So all those calling for “better comms strategy” and “better PR” are gonna wait in vain to see the Sussexes live the kind of life thats expected of “celebrities.”

    Y’all just gonna have to learn to cope.

    • Becks1 says:

      you know what, never mind, lol.

      • Mum says:

        I said this yesterday and so many others have as well. They are really in a niche all their own. They aren’t typical celebrities but are also kinda towards the political side. They have to be careful who they trust considering the amount of people trying to sabotage them.

        They are also healing after some serious trauma and figuring out their journey as they go.
        They won’t ever operate the same as we’ve seen other royals, celebs, etc do.
        They have to be guarded for their safety and also mental health considering what they’ve gone through and are standing against.
        I pray they continue to protect their inner sanctuary well.

    • Patricia says:

      Well said Kingston, people need to look at this historically. Royalty is not to far removed from a crime family. They will do anything that will protect their power and control. Harry is aware of this and will continue to do what is necessary to protect his wife and children.

      The Windsors are not far removed from the Borgias or others historical figures, think members of the so called media, who will do whatever is necessary to maintain their status. They are as guilty as their henchmen who carry out what they believe will forward their own ambitions. Disgusting!

      • Nic919 says:

        They are a crime family, they just have the power to create laws so that what they do is legal.

  23. Vanessa says:

    In My Opinion I think this is Organized Campaign to make the Sussex’s look l Bad none of this article made any sense. It’s not dealing with Reality everything Meghan and Harry have done since they left the royal family has been successful Meghan book bestseller Harry book bestseller Meghan podcast broke records and dethrone Joe at number one . Their documentary made history numbers for Netflix suits is doing 3.1 billions views on Netflix and peacock . Meghan Dress she just wore is sold out tell me again how their failing at anything. This is all designed misinformation about the Sussex’s news the British tabloids and the royals have thrown every thing at the Sussex’s to destroy them financially physically and try to destroy their marriage and nothing has work . So here is people magazine who by the way has British editorial has taken up the British tabloids talking point their just making more palatable for the Karen’s and the mini vans crowds who would buy people magazine. To justify their uncomfortable racist bias against Meghan it’s so insidious see people are saying things so it must be true . The Sussex’s don’t need advice for the peanut gallery they are moving on not engaging with the negative the British tabloids want Meghan and Harry to engage they want them to speak on record . So they can spin as many headlines as possible not giving the tabloids and the haters the time of day is the best Revenge because while they are screaming into the air that Meghan and Harry are separated or divorcing . A new picture drops of the couple living their best lives looking more In love .

  24. Catherine says:

    On Wednesday. They released a 2 minute video. It received global coverage. The organization are still tweeting about. There are local news stations covering the organizations. Anything wrong with that comms strategy.
    The notion that they needed to respond to the blatant unprofessionalism of Simmons and the UTA CEO is ridiculous. And since when is People a good arbiter of what’s good for business. They have been propping up the Wales with little effect. There has been so much shade and misinformation in these articles I can’t take them seriously and neither should the Sussexes. For example. The Invictus doc was delayed because the games were cancelled by the pandemic. Pearl was cancelled because Netflix eliminated their entire animation division. If not for those two factors those projects would have been out before the Harry and Meghan doc.

    • Becks1 says:

      they DID respond to the UTA CEO though. Or WME did. do you think the immediate pushback to his comments, in industry publications, with named sources, was out of thin air, with no input from the Sussex camp? and that response was perfect and shut up the narrative about the Sussexes lacking talent (or was it just Meghan? I can’t even remember because the story was shot down so fast and effectively.)

      • Catherine says:

        How do you know that response came from them? It was the NY POST that published the first story pushing back against his comment when they published the story about UTA trying to sign Meghan. I doubt that the Sussexes would go to Murdoch media. People within the industry probably knew that the Sussexes were being pursued by multiple agencies just like they knew they were being pursued by Netflix and Spotify. I think the response was so immediate because (1). His comments were so gross. (2). He probably has his own enemies in the industry who were happy to shade him. (3). As was pointed out in it’s just not the way you do business. So trade mags were happy to shade him also. (4) Other articles stated that his own employees were angry about the comments because it would make it harder for to negotiate with new clients if they thought not signing with UTA would result in public criticism. So there was a lot of industry reason for that pushback.

      • Becks1 says:

        because quite honestly, I don’t think that pushback would have come without WME’s approval.

        There have been other gross comments from people with their own enemies in their industry that did not get that same immediate response. Other employees get mad about the things their bosses say publicly.

        the response to those comments was so immediate and strong that frankly, I think its naive to think WME was not involved.

        But lets say they weren’t, and H&M had no involvement either. It’s still a good example of how fast these stories CAN be shut down and how fast the oxygen can get sucked out of them. They don’t have to linger out there for weeks/months.

      • Catherine says:

        IThe spotify story is lingering because of certain outlets that want it to linger because they want to push the Sussexes are failing narrative. Just like these rumors about them divorcing are lingering with no evidence at all because their love for each other is the foundation of everything. Spare is a huge success. The Netflix doc is a huge success. They can’t challenge that so they are creating a they are troubled personally and professionally to distract. Lastly I don’t think it’s naive to think that WME wasn’t involved on the pushback on UTA. We’ve seen pushback on other things that was organic and not orchestrated. There was huge pushback on Jeremy Clarkson because it was so heinous. There was huge pushback when the bullying allegations were dropped because it was such an obvious plot to distract from the upcoming Oprah interview. There was even pushback when Piers Morgan questioned Meghan’s comments about her mental health. There was pushback when that magazine labeled Meghan a narcissist. So much that the mag distanced itself from the author by saying she was just a guest contributor or whatever. There has been pushback to a lot of the ridiculous criticism of Spare and the Netflix doc. It happens

  25. JJ says:

    I agree with you about the communications. They don’t have to respond to every little thing but this Spotify split was not a little thing. Yes, the Obama’s split from Spotify but the announcement was “The Obamas are moving to Audible” and then Spotify was mentioned as a “yeah so they will no longer be there” type of thing. The way that H&M’s parting with Spotify was announced made them look like they were dumped and had no place left to go and no plan of action despite the “mutual parting of ways” part of the statement. Then that opened the door for some Spotify exec to call them grifters… What is their comms team doing for them? I kept thinking a statement would come out from their team that day or at least that week about a new project for Meghan but no. Nothing up to now except that she is going to Invictus with Harry. I love the Sussexes but their comms team has it looking like Harry is doing everything and Meghan is along for the ride sometimes but mostly goes to farmers markets or stays home with no projects on the way. Please H&M get a comms team who is proactively looking out for you.

    • KP says:

      The initial Obama announcement was that they were leaving and looking at other options. About 3 months later they announced audible!
      Maybe Meghan and Harry don’t want to do more podcasts? Maybe they want a different focus? Also maybe there wasn’t an offer considering what the industry is going through. There are layoffs everywhere. Harry mentioned he’s not an office type guy so I don’t think they were necessarily looking for something similar.
      Also notice the obamas haven’t produced anything for audible except michele and no one is criticizing them.
      We’ve also heard nothing about if audible has benefited from the Obama’s being added. Let that be hard or Meghan and we would have endless articles and opinion pieces. Smh

  26. L4Frimaire says:

    I understand some of the criticisms of their communications but part of that stems from people wanting the Sussexes to constantly engage and refute these people, but that is exhausting and they have other things to focus on. Their lack of engagement with the tabloids have revealed how much crap those papers make up and how bitter they are over there. Also there is some revisionist history going on. Archetypes was incredibly successful, brought in huge numbers and new listeners and sparked conversations. To say otherwise is disingenuous and sour grapes. If the Sussexes wanted to continue with Spotify, they would have, but they didn’t. Also they say it’s difficult to get to Meghan but not one mention of why they think that is? Someone who faces constant death threats and malicious rumors and leaks may be a bit more guarded. That is a glaring lack of analysis and a bit of wishful thinking. Not sure if part of the same article but they described Harry as a beer and potatoes type of guy. Seriously. In Spare he mentioned he doesn’t really like beer and based on how fit and lean they are, suspect potatoes aren’t making regular appearances on their plates. This article is fluff, speculation and second hand analysis. Yes constructive criticism is good but they have mentors and resets. I don’t think they’re in closed off silos the way the UK royals are. We are assuming their priorities are what we are prioritizing with them. Based on the digital awards and how Travalyst is expanding, that offered more of a glimpse to those priorities, and the word spread on the awards and they shut down the Travalyst rumors of Harry not being involved. Not the most thorough or well-sourced article.

    • Kp says:

      Yes yes!! That why they write articles when H&M aren’t seen. There’s an industry that needs to be fed and they aren’t feeding it by chillin at home in peace.
      It’s why the Wales kids have to be shuffled out constantly now to feed the beast and the papers can threaten them.
      Kinsey Sch literally said if Harry and Meghan talked to us we wouldn’t create all these rumors. The British media and tabloids operate like a mafia. If you don’t play the game you get punished. The person talking in the article is literally pissed that they don’t have access to Harry and Meghan or know more about their life. It’s so obvious who the “insider” is.

  27. kirk says:

    Stunned and dismayed that none (zero, zilch, nada) of the comments here are willing to tackle the Montecito Mafia! C’mon!!!!!

  28. Ennie says:

    I am glad that they have a well round protective circle, friends, employees, relatives. All of the people near them now don’t betray them.

  29. Brooke says:

    The spotify thing came right on the heels of their New York paparazzi swarm. How did people react to that statement? They tore it apart word by word and then claimed H&M said things they never said, aka “high speed.” They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Press reacted to that statement as if they were just public whiners. If they can’t even make a good faith statement when there is video footage of them getting help from the police, how would a comms team change anything? They CANT make statements because it feeds into the whiner narrative. They have to let actions speak, both for them and the unprofessional people who trash them.

  30. HennyO says:

    Oprah nor Tiler Perry have never made it a habit of reacting or commenting on every (created) storm, naysayers, incompetent industry executives, jealous peers, or whoever. They’ve listen to whoever really matters and kept to their business. Today they’re both multibillionaires.

    I thing Harry and Meghan have excellent people, friends and mentors alike in every industry they operate in. They’re not gonna be listening to what followers, fans or haters at the edges looking, think they should be doing (to please them).

    As Tyler Perry said (I’m paraphrasing): “Don’t listen to the noise, stay focused, learn and keep going. Tomorrow the same critics will come around and phrase you.”

  31. Lizzie Bennett says:

    Is Pearl completely dead in the water? I think it’d be a great fit for PBS and it’d certainly pass the Bechdel test.

  32. Meh says:

    Also, if I was dealing with trash tabloid spinners, bishhhh, the only thing I’d be giving is closed doors and middlemen.

  33. Well Wisher says:

    This particular type of reporting from the varying forms of media is called circling the drain, the Sussexes’ need patience and “this too shall pass”.

    My interpretation/opinion is that they are a success in every way that matters to the point that they have become the target….

    Be like Johnny Carson in this respect, use the earnings for dependable business ventures and the talent to do what you love…
    This will avoid ‘ burnout’, Meghan is old enough to remember ‘Arts and Entertainment’, a safe space to enjoy popular culture.
    Many of the people will always be supportive and will follow you there…..

    I hope Pearl – movie and the podcast find a new home.
    Look at Lebron’s podcast, an enjoyable romp, has moved to YouTube where it thrives ….

    Remember it is when things are down that real learning and maturity occurs and define what
    is considered SUCCESS on your own terms…..

  34. Nerd says:

    At this point I won’t to know what type of middleman is needed for the media to talk about they deplorable allegations about one of their own? People seems to be focusing a lot on the Sussexes, as are all of the other media that take the words of these so-called “royal experts” at face value but don’t question how biased and unethical the “royal experts” are. I only care what the Sussexes are willing to reveal. It has been seven years of nonstop lies about them and I refuse to listen to what any reporters say above what they say. The media have been out of the know about the Sussexes since the left and told us that they only will work with credible journalists. There are only a few on my list and People mag isn’t one of them.

  35. QuiteContrary says:

    Harry and Meghan have opted out of the sick game played by the British media. Their silence is their response.

  36. Tessa says:

    What happened to those special royalty people magazine issues. I guess very few people were buying them

  37. Commonsense says:

    At least one of the writers of this People article, Simon Perry is british and he brings his british media bias to this article.

    It is the same issue I have with with Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast and Jack Royston at Newsweek.

    These writers are hiding their british media bias behind the perceived objectiveness of the US outlet they write for. These writers honed their skills in british tabloid system. They are not objective no matter how much they pretend to be.

    Bias aganst the Sussexes has now become so ingrained in the british media that I think if any US oulet uses british writers to write or contribute to any article about Harry and Meghan it should be declared so readers can correctly assess how objective and unbiased an article really is.

  38. Commonsense says:

    Harry and Meghan are in quite a unique situation. They have the UK’s entire estabishment (royals, government & media) actively working to smear them with no iend in sight.

    Worse yet, the anti-Sussex bias has now started creeping into US media coverage as more Brits are hired by US outlets and they bring their british media bias to any articles they write about the Sussexes.

    I think Sussex current Comms team is adequate to handle the daily operations of their businesses and philanthropy, however I think they sometimes struggle to handle the unique challenge of the Sussexes being the focus of this constant wall of manufactured negative press.

    I think they need to add one or two troubleshooters and/or crisis managers to their Comms team specifically to triage the negative press coming at them and to spot what could blow up into a crisis that could damage Sussexes and/or their businesses and shut it down early and also to effectively handle any damaging media crises if they do blow up.

  39. MikeB says:

    It is unfortunate that H&M are playing by the RF rule of “Don’t explain, don’t complain”. Simple responses from them would kill many of the stories about them quickly, not every one needs to be challenged but those intended to harm them the most.

  40. roooth says:

    Does anyone remember the attacks & lies that were being told about Harry & Meghan, their marriage, their house, their children, their businesses, their charities, 1 year ago? 6 months ago? 3 months ago? They all go down the memory hole, replaced by this week’s lies, then next week’s lies, until they are regurgitated and reused. Imagine the time and energy that would have been wasted if H&M had responded to even a fraction of this garbage. Right now all the UK tabloid BS is a reflection on them. The instant H&M engage, it becomes about them, instead of about the lies and the lying liars who tell them

  41. annie says:

    Im terrible at PR but I believe that the Spotify comment was bad but why remind people that a legit (but stupid) comment by someone “in the know” happened? I’d pretend it didn’t happen. When one person say you’re bad at sth, I’d let it go and just move on. Because what to say? “I am talented and worthy.” too much on the nose. Actions speak for themselves and I already forgot about Bill’s drama.