Royalist clowns cried about Prince Harry’s GMA interview & they’re being called out

As we discussed on Friday, Prince Harry’s Good Morning America interview was just the right amount of royal gossip and Sussex gossip. Harry never spills his guts in his Invictus interviews and he always chooses his words carefully. We heard some generalities about how injuries and infirmities can have a reunifying effect in families, and that Harry hopes to see more of his father in the coming months. The reaction from the Windsors was immediate, with royal sources crying to Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast, shrieking about how Harry needs to “pipe down” and that it was “sickening” to hear Harry speak vaguely about how he immediately traveled to London to see his dad. Keep in mind, those same sources were probably barfing with rage that Harry did NOT mention his father at the NFL Honors, but I digress. It looks like people are starting to get wise to these reindeer games. From a new piece in New York Magazine: “Prince Harry Infuriates Royals by Saying Nice Things About King Charles.”

Have you ever had a moment when you’re relentlessly complaining about someone and then you suddenly realize that, actually, you’re the problem? It seems that such a revelation is long overdue for Britain’s royal family and many royal commentators.

Last month, Queen Camilla got the proverbial tongues wagging when she accompanied King Charles to his treatment for an enlarged prostate. Apparently, it is a breach of royal protocol to comfort your spouse of 18 years during a medical procedure. Now Prince Harry has generated negative headlines — and has reportedly infuriated the royal family — by speaking about King Charles’s recent cancer diagnosis to Good Morning America.

So what did Harry say that was so awful? Hope you’re sitting down. He said, “I love my family. The fact that I was able to get on a plane and go see and spend any time with [my dad], I’m grateful for that.”

Even before the interview aired in full, GB News anchors fretted about what Harry might reveal, and royal correspondent Rafe Heydel-Mankoo said he should have “sought permission” to speak about his father’s health. On another GB News program, host Stephen Dixon declared, “The king is going to hate this.”

Grant Harrold, Charles’s former butler, told the New York Post, “I don’t think William and the king will be thrilled about Harry’s interview. Even though the king has already shared some information on his diagnosis, he is very private.” He added, “I have no idea why Harry feels the need to speak out. That’s what I don’t understand.”

To be sure, with the tell-all book and multiple interviews and documentaries, Harry and Meghan have given the royals plenty of reason to tense up whenever he’s set to speak in public. But in the GMA interview, Prince Harry managed to politely respond to the questions on everyone’s mind without really saying anything at all. Doesn’t he deserve a little credit for doing exactly what the royals trained him to do?

[From New York Magazine]

Exactly – the thing about the royal freakouts is that they don’t actually sit down and listen to what Harry is saying and not saying. He left a lot unsaid in the GMA interview, but the only reason GMA spent the money to send Will Reeves to Canada in the first place is to get Harry to say something on the record about his family. He didn’t trash them, he didn’t reveal palace secrets, he didn’t even say how his father is actually doing. These royalists make clowns of themselves regardless of what Harry says.

Incidentally, the Telegraph had another pearl-clutching piece about the GMA interview, which was, apparently, “exactly what royal watchers had feared.” This Telegraph piece has everything, from vague suggestions that Harry’s words killed QEII and Prince Philip, to claims that the Windsors will always and forever prefer a “dignified silence” (all evidence to the contrary), to a flat-out admission that the interview “could have been worse.” I got whiplash from that: Harry basically killed his grandfather but actually his GMA interview was okay.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid. Screencap courtesy of ABC.

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

69 Responses to “Royalist clowns cried about Prince Harry’s GMA interview & they’re being called out”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Yup, Me says:

    Meanwhile, they’re all heaving sighs of relief “THANK GOD! We have some legit Harry content. Writing and talking about the congealed Oatmeal duo all the time is excruciating.”

    • Pinkosaurus says:

      I feel like most of this hysteria is coming from the royal Rota and self-declared royal experts. They are beside themselves that Harry won’t talk to them so whenever he talks to a reputable source, they lose their minds. They may be on the same page as the palaces but I think they are the main drivers.

      I mean really, we know he escaped a controlling and abusive relationship with the British tabloids/Rota and now we get to watch as they melt down when he makes new friends (GMA) or holds someone else’s hand (his wife’s). They want him to tell ALL THE SECRETS but only by whispering in their ear and telling them they’re special. That’s why we are seeing temper tantrums.

      • harpervalleypta says:

        I’ll always say that what killed the half-in/half-out deal was the request that the Sussexes would no longer deal with the royal rota. That would have killed the rota’s cash cow and would have been unacceptable.

        None of them believed, though, that in return, H&M would totally leave, killing the cash cow on the way out. At least with half-in/half-out, they would be doing SOMETHING in public and thus would have had content, just not exclusive content.

      • Proud Mary says:

        Well, Pinkosaurus, neither of us have the inside scoop, but unlike you, I really do believe that this fake outrage emanates from the firm, specifically KP. I believe the Firm decided years ago that the worst mistake they made with Diana, was failing to hit back hard and often to every thing she did and said. To that end, and with regards to Harry and Meghan, they will always use a hammer to swat a fly. So when ever Harry and or Meghan are set to speak, the Firm will issue two different statements to their media lackeys. They will attack him for not mentioning his father at an award show that has nothing to do with him. Yet he mentions his father innocuously in an interview, and he gets abused. This is not merely a knee jerk outrage, the reaction is strategic. It’s why one of the worst mistakes Harry can ever make, is to try and marshal his behavior in anticipation of the vitriol. His enemies are highly dishonest, and unethical.

      • Caribbean says:

        The funny thing is that is that Harry basically ‘audio book’ what was already written…His father told him personally and he flew over immediately.
        From a sensible person (hello all my sensible Celebitchy readers) point of view, he answer the question [about the health issues possibly bringing the family together] perfectly, he had to say what he said…imagine if you ask a man that is selling you ‘a water that has the power to hydrate forever’, and you ask that man if that water can hydrate your family and that man said “No”…
        The Invictus game is supposed to have the power to help in the recovery process for wounded and their families, so he is supposed to say that the illness can bring the family together, Dah!

    • Barrett says:

      His answers are mature and not to revealing ab his privacy. This is a man who does his emotional work in therapy and has been dealing w overpaying press his whole life. I applaud him and I am impressed.
      Leave him alone.

    • Barrett says:

      His answers are mature and not to revealing ab his privacy. This is a man who does his emotional work in therapy and has been dealing w overprying press his whole life. I applaud him and I am impressed.
      Leave him alone.

    • Kathleen Williams says:

      I got the distinct impression that most, if not all, of the meltdown articles were written before the interview aired when it was publicized that Harry was going to discuss his Dad’s illness. When the interview actually took place, there was nothing to criticize but the articles had probably gone to print. This is just like the Oprah interview when outraged (faked)analyses were given by people like Ingrid Seward &Richard Fitzwilliams before the interview even aired.

  2. They want dignified silence? They complained when he said nothing when he was handing out the Walter Payton award. Now they want dignified silence. They should practice what they preach with that because it’s coming back to haunt them with this absolutely lovely article. I hope more of these articles are written.

    • Just an Aussie says:

      Perhaps the RR hoped that Harry would spill the beans on what cancer Chuckles has and what is really happening with Khate. They know they can’t publish it so if Harry said it, then they’d have frenzied stories about Harry but also the truth would be out about C & K so they could write about it.

  3. Becks1 says:

    The British press always deals with this when Harry is doing something in the rest of the world, because that’s when the international press calls them out for their coverage.

    If they run countless articles when H&M are “quiet” about how Meghan destroyed the monarchy by closing her car door that one time 6 years ago, they can largely get away with it. But when the international spotlight is on the couple for something like Invictus, the British coverage just seems that much more unhinged in comparison to the international coverage. The British press either hasn’t figured out yet that what plays to their small insular audience isn’t what plays on a global scale, or they don’t care, or a combination of both.

  4. Jais says:

    nymag does some really good titles sometimes. My favorite is still the one about Kate at Harry and Meghan’s last commonwealth service. It was titled “imagine being rude in this dumb little hat” with a picture of Kate in her little red hat. Will love that one forever. This new one is good too though.

    • Mtl.Ex.Pat says:

      Is that the one where they said something like Kate has a mean pinched little face?

      • Jais says:

        No, they don’t say that about her face. They just describe the moment when Kate ignores and snubs Meghan. How she proceeds to look in the opposite direction like an owl. It’s more about Kate being called out for acting like a bad-mannered middle-schooler all while wearing a silly looking little hat.

    • Proud Mary says:

      Was that Nymag, or was it the Cut?

    • CatMum says:

      that one is a favorite of mine as well! classic!

  5. Mslove says:

    Shouldn’t the royalist clowns be clutching their pearls over Prince Peg’s lack of conversation skills? Or the missing princess of Wails?

    • Proud Mary says:

      Oh I guarantee you they are. They’re just not allowed to say so, hence the fake Sussex outrage.

  6. TIFFANY says:

    I’m almost embarrassed for everyone on Salt Isle.

    Harry (and Meghan) is just winning and money. All Salt Isle has is well, not Harry and Meghan. Oh well.

  7. Freddy says:

    The British media are crackheads. Harry and Meghan were the top 7 articles on Daily Mail for a week. They should be cutting H&M a check for all the clicks their mere existence provides. I said it before and I’ll say it again: “The BRF is simply a long-running serial drama where all of the best characters either died or left the show and you wonder why you still watch it.”

  8. ArtFossil says:

    There’s a wonderful Town & Country article titled, “In Canada, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Remind the World of Their Impact.” Includes quotes from the competitors and Chief Sparrow and Harry’s closing remarks: “I know how much you love to serve. In many instances, you live to serve.” He finished with a promise, outlining the duty both he and Meghan feel to the community. “We will continue to serve,” he said, “and to inspire people up, down, around the country and around the world.”

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Wonderful, Artfossil! And it’s not paywalled. This is the kind of thing I’m referring to in my comment below.

    • JanetDR says:

      That was beautiful! Thank you for sharing @ArtFossil!

    • Patricia says:

      Thank you @ArtFossil I read that yesterday and thought it was excellent. I loved everything about it but especially liked the comparison to his mother. This is what journalism is really about and how it should be done.

    • Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

      What a beautiful article, thanks for sharing! I did laugh however, when it was mentioned how Harry and Meghan make people feel seen and heard, thinking about the screaming headlines about how William is so awesome and how He makes people feel, etc cuz you know those headlines are being written as we speak. lol

    • Giddy says:

      What a great article! I love the emphasis on how the schedule goes out the window because Harry just wants to spend so much time with the veterans, and that he remembers them and specific conversations from year to year. One participant is quoted as saying “We really genuinely feel as if we matter to that lovely couple.”

    • Krista says:

      Thanks for posting.

    • Kristen from MA says:

      “We’re his people and he’s our people.” <3

    • Glamarazzi says:

      Great article, thanks for linking. Just goes to show there is some trustworthy journalism about the Sussexes out there, if you know where to look.

    • Lady D says:

      What an amazing article. I’d almost forgot what good press looks like for those two incredible human beings. I am so happy they found each other, I’m not sure why I’m so happy for two people I don’t even know, but again, I’m so glad they found each other.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      Thank you @ArtFossil for the share. Lovely article. Truth.

      “So shines a good deed in a weary world.”.

  9. Brassy Rebel says:

    I wish the American media (I’ve given up on British media) would call out the tabloid coverage more. It’s unhinged, it’s contradictory, and it’s just plain full of hate and disinformation. Unfortunately, this is all about destroying the Sussexes’ reputation in Britain and around the world. And they’ve had some success even here in America.

    • WiththeAmerican says:

      Isn’t the Daily Beast owned by a British monarchist? She was married to Sir Harold Evans, former editor of The Sunday Times. That’s where a lot of the anti H and M originates in the states.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        No. Believe Tina Brown was a cofounder of DB. She was gone in 2013. Interesting thing about Harold Evans. Yes, he was given the Sir title. From all the things I’ve read, he didn’t have much tolerance for BM nonsense. May have missed something. My understanding, is that he was respected in America because he acted as a respected man of journalism. Tina, moved forward on the waves of his fame/respectability. Plus, her bs claims to being Diana’s “good friend”.

        The latest I found about DB.

  10. Lady Digby says:

    A lot of outrage for backing the wrong brother? Harry out there alongside his beautiful wife, glowing with vitality, promoting the IG. William skulking about doing nothing with a mysteriously absent wife, SHE WHO CAN NOT BE SEEN.

  11. Shawna says:

    “the only reason GMA spent the money to send Will Reeves to Canada in the first place is to get Harry to say something on the record about his family.” Thank you! Reeve was there to get a very specific quote using targeted questions. Harry threaded the (poisoned) needle well, so good on him.

    • Eurydice says:

      I don’t get this. Clearly GMA was invited to cover the event, so they had to send somebody. I assume Will Reeves was sent because of what happened to his father, but any correspondent would have asked Harry the same questions. Everyone wants to know how Charles is doing and if the relationship between Harry and Charles has changed.

      • Magdalena says:

        Most journalists would have courteously referred to his recent trip to the UK and asked how his father was *and then left it at that* and moved on to talking about Invictus, which is why he was invited to interview Harry. Instead, this reporter decided to push on with the soundbitey “reconciliation hopes” tripe usually pushed by the UK hacks, and then on his own or with the producer decided to introduce the interview, not as being about the fantastic Invictus games as previous similar interviews have done, but instead, about “King Charles, the royal family and Prince Harry’s role as a father.” A clear miss, IMO. Poor form, badly done. I don’t care who he is, or how experienced he is supposed to be. The reporter clearly decided to go for the gossip angle instead of the serious purpose view. It was all so very unnecessary. He blew it.

        P.S. I would say most people really aren’t fussed about Charles and whether his relationship with Harry has changed, given that they simply shrugged after the first headlines about his cancer. It’s the media who want the details. Many ordinary people moved on the same day. The questions in this interview felt designed to tie the royals to Harry’s work yet again, when everyone else was focussed on the excitement around Invictus and no-one was thinking about them over there in the UK.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Magdalena – I guess I don’t have that exalted a view of GMA – it’s a breakfast show that wants ratings like everybody else. The producers decide the questions to be asked and how the interview will be marketed, and they know that any interview with Harry brings eyeballs.

        And the reality is that although the Invictus Games is a great cause and helps people, not many know about it. But a lot more know about Harry and Charles – even if those are only a handful, that’s still a handful more than those who know about IG. So, I don’t think it’s a great price to pay to give a couple of non-committal answers about the RF in exchange for a feature about IG on national TV – and, evidently Harry doesn’t think it’s too much to pay, as well.

      • ArtFossil says:

        The GMA interview was wonderful! Harry answered skillfully and most importantly, the visibility and importance of the Invictus Games was greatly enhanced.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Magdalena, you’re giving too much credit to other reporters. Yes, they would have ask much the same questions (or more) because that’s the name of that game. I also have to point out that there was a second interview that was about IG. I would say that Harry made a good exchange because he answered a couple of questions without saying anything, but got US wide coverage for IG. I’d say anyway you measure it it was a win.

        I think Will was a very good choice.

      • Shawna says:

        He asked a leading question that fed Harry the idea that illnesses/injuries have the power to reunify families. Harry didn’t come up with that wording; he responded to the exact wording Reeve used. I don’t care that it was Reeve specifically, but that it was a leading question specifically suggesting that families are “reunified” at these times is what matters. The journalist was after the soundbite.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Will Reeve/GMA being there was planned well in advance/before Chuck’s diagnosis. A two part interview, that covered a minor soundbite about Harry’s father, is not on the fault of WR or Harry. That the BM or any other outlet wants to amplify 2 simple questions with basic non answers – while ignoring the beauty of the IG, is wrong.

        Will Reeve, asked the questions that have been out there on social media and elsewhere. Harry was not surprised.imo Questions asked/answered. Will Reeve was not randomly selected. This 3 day event has been in the works for a long time. WR was chosen, by Harry for legit reasons. I mentioned in a different post about WR doing an interview with Different & Able-a great cause/foundation. Good interview.

        If outrage gives publicity to the Invictus Games. I support that. Every frickin’ day.

        My fave from that article..

        “So what did Harry say that was so awful? Hope you’re sitting down. He said, “I love my family. The fact that I was able to get on a plane and go see and spend any time with [my dad], I’m grateful for that.”.

        Almost p*ssed my pants at ‘Hope you’re sitting down.’ For this terrible horrible thing Harry said. This is an EPIC comment and article. I’m going to give a lot of clicks.

  12. Eurydice says:

    Well, that’s what happens when you write the article before the event. You assume what’s going to be said.

  13. Mary Pester says:

    I know exactly what is wrong with the moronic British press and left behinds. Every time, in every country,and I do mean EVERY time Harry talks, people look, listen and think, now THERE is a global Statesman!
    And not one of them, especially the prk with teeth can handle it!

  14. Athena says:

    Remember when the royal reporters were caught giving quotes about the Oprah interview, before they even saw the interview? I have the impression the same thing happened here. Those articles were written and quotes provided before the full GMA interview aired.

    • Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

      Well yeah😊. Isn’t that what royal reporting is all about? They can’t let something like facts get in the way of outrage.

  15. Magdalena says:

    Forgive me, but I was correct in my initial assessment (so were you Kaiser, up there). GMA was absolute shite for turning an interview to bring publicity to the INVICTUS GAMES into a royal episode. There was ZERO need for it. Look at that banner: “On the King’s health, the royal family and his life as a father”. Really? That’s not why the reporter was invited to do the interview. I bet the Canadian reporters didn’t lead with a banner like that. It’s like: Tell me you had input from the UK clout chasers without telling me that you had help from the leftover welfare recipients on the isle of salty tears.

    Everyone knows about the Invictus games and what they represent, there was no need to frame the interview like this. With any luck H and the IG people get the right to determine how interviews related to the games will be publicised in the future.

    • Chelsea says:

      They do those banners with all interviews. They make a little descriptor for different parts of interviews. I think GMA handled this well; the portion about his family was like a minute of a 10 minute segment and when they kicked it back to the studio the people in the studio were talking about how great it was to get this view of Invictus.

      It’s unrealistic to think that the week after Britain’s head of state announced he has cancer that any journalist wouldn’t ask his son about it in an interview. If this was one of the Biden kids promoting some work and God forbid the same thing happened with Biden they’d be asked about it too. It would be journalistic malpractice not to. What matters is that Will didnt linger on it or push Harry to give more than his brief answers and moved on to focus on the Invictus Games.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Magdalena, you have an unrealistic expectation of reporters. It’s their JOB to get information. They couldn’t ignore the fact that Harry is a member of the brf and his Father is having cancer treatments. They couldn’t ignore the fact that there has been a breach in the royal family. I think the interview was well done. Will asked what he needed to ask and Harry pretty much didn’t say anything (which I suspect Will expected). The spotlight on Invictus was the main topic. More people now know about IG.

      • ArtFossil says:

        Exactly. And I hope that people are aware that the interview was in two parts.

        Invictus got priceless publicity.

    • Shawna says:

      Magdalena, I’m with you. I think the wording of the questions was designed in bad faith—not to honestly ask Harry’s opinion about a newsworthy item (his dad’s health) but to get a specific reaction that the press could jump on.

      And it is good publicity for Invictus. Those two positions can be held at the same time.

  16. Diamond Rottweiler says:

    It’s similar in America in that ignorant people, bored with their boring, unglamorous lives, use this kind of nonsensical garbage the same way people used to use soap operas. Like the soaps, the more dramatically preposterous and “exciting” the better for the rags. If only Harry could suddenly develop amnesia, or King Chuck had an evil twin (who then becomes inexplicably kind after a horse training incident at Ascot). Bored and stupid is literally killing the planet.

    • BeanieBean says:

      We do have a mysterious missing princess, though! Who won’t be seen for a year, then come back six inches shorter & speaking with an accent. 😉

      • Rnot says:

        OMG imagine if they try to recast Kate Middleton!

      • Lady D says:

        I laughed so hard at your comment, BeanieBean.

      • Eurydice says:

        That would be so awesome! Like in that show “due South” when they brought in a new actor who looked nothing like the old one to play the police sidekick. The season opener was Fraser (the main character) trying to prove to all the other characters that this wasn’t the same man – measuring his height, the length of his nose, getting dental imprints from a sandwich – but, by the end, he just had to shrug his shoulders and accept it.

  17. Blithe says:

    Cue: My obligatory “Did any of these people read the Dimbleby book? Or endure the interview that Charles did with him? “ These people have some pretty major blind spots.

    I think Harry handled the interview with Will masterfully, although I still maintain that Will should not have asked the question about citizenship— unless, of course, it was pre-approved by Harry.

    • Just Jade says:

      I think most of the American morning show anchors are hypocrites but Will did not do a bad job with his questions. Personally, I like the question about Harry American citizenship because it shows the mental vampire rats and the left behind that Harry has no problem to denounce what they have been trying to hold over his head. After all his wife and children are Americans.

      • ta says:

        I don’t think Harry would take out US citizenship as long as his father is alive. I can see him going for dual citizenship after Charles’s death. Nobody can really predict the future, but at the moment I can’t see either Archie or Lili going to live in the UK and eventually applying for citizenship. It would be quite something for a descendant of George III to become a US citizen.

    • therese says:

      @ Blithe: I agree with you about Will Reeve. I felt like he was baiting Prince Harry, which makes me mad and seriously makes me disappointed in him. I have tried but can’t find a previous video segment where Will was negatively reporting on Harry that was Royal favorable and inspired. Not that Will should be his father, but his father should be what is inspiring him, as he was an honorable and truly courageous man. I wish he would go to his father for inspiration, rather than a petty and mentally/emotionally stunted Royal Institution to try to trip up another honorable man.

      I’m thrilled to see the reporting on the NY times and by them. I also saw this article by The Cut that echoed the NY Times and what Kaiser said about the reporting on things before they happened. I am hopeful that more sane and unbiased reporting will catch on.

  18. Pinkosaurus says:

    So after some trash tabloid declared the Sussexes had to show they can behave, and they had a phenomenal three days of perfect events, and Lazy Bill can’t get through a couple hours of chit chat at the Baftas without worldwide headlines about a gross gaffe and braying at his own dumb jokes.

  19. Amy Bee says:

    All I have to say to the British press is “Cry more”.

  20. Chelsea says:

    That line in the NY Mag article about the royals being right to be worried because of past interviews and the book really annoys me because it absolves the royals of their role in this. If they hadn’t leaked so much crap about Harry and Meghan there would be no need for H&M to have to address these things. Case in point: everyone got so mad about Harry talking about Charles not allowing Meghan to come with him the night the Queen died but ignore the fact that information leaked within hours. It was literally the FRONT PAGE of the Daily Mail’s site before Betty’s body was even cold. Another example is that the confrontation between William and Harry over Knauf’s bs allegations against Meghan was briefed to the UK press multiple times in 2021 and 2022 but of course they left out the fact that William PHYSICALLY ASSUALTED HARRY IN HIS OWN HOME and then cried when Harry told his side of it in Spare.

    Harry has said time and time again that if the other side doesn’t leak crap he will have no reason to speak about it publicly and it does seem that for now Charles has kept his end of the bargain and not leaked anything from the conversation(probably helps that Camilla wasnt in the room) so I doubt Henry will say anything either. Harry knows how to be discreet but he also doesn’t let people play in his face and they HATE that. They HATE that he won’t be their scapegoat anymore but he’s retired from that job and they need to accept it.

  21. QuiteContrary says:

    The NY Mag headline got a lot of circulation here — retweeted by other journalists and observers who know how pathetic the British tabloids are.