The timeline last Friday was as follows: we heard late Thursday that a verdict would be coming in on Prince Harry’s security appeal in the UK. The appeal verdict was released at 9 am EST (2 pm GMT) and 6 am PST. Roughly six hours after the appeals verdict came out, the BBC aired their exclusive, bombshell interview with Harry. I would imagine that Harry and his team already had conversations and negotiations in place for an interview for whenever the verdict came out, but the way the raw interview came out so quickly – and the fact that the BBC aired the whole thing without edits – was a huge surprise to supporters and haters alike. It caught Buckingham Palace off-guard and they spent the entire weekend reacting to it. So who gets the credit for the interview? Apparently Meredith Maines, the Sussexes’ chief of communications, who only started the job in early March.
Prince Harry shocked the producers of his bombshell BBC interview after he spoke for 20 minutes over their agreed time in an emotionally charged interview.
The Duke of Sussex launched a diatribe against his family in an astonishing interview with the broadcaster on Friday just moments after he lost his legal challenge over his UK security arrangements.
According to The Times, the BBC team had been expecting a maximum of 10 minutes with the Duke, who ended up tripling that length of time and speaking for around half an hour.
The outlet reported that unlike previous controlled interviews with the Duke, nothing was off-limits in his sit down with journalist Nada Tawfik. Sources told the outlet that he appeared ‘subdued’ but also ‘very keen to talk’ as he he leveled not-so-veiled criticisms at his family and the British government.
A property near his Montecito home in California that he shares with his wife Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, and their two children was picked as the location. The Duchess was not present at the interview. She also never appeared alongside Harry as he fought in court the last three years.
The chief of communications for their Archewell Foundation, Meredith Maines, had been the chief architect of the interview, the outlet reported.
I’ve talked about Maines before in the context of a brand new communications approach for Harry and Meghan this year. You can really see the difference in the Sussexes’ presentations and comms since they hired Maines, and she’s doing an amazing job. It was an incredible move to get Harry in front of the BBC cameras within the same newscycle as the verdict, and the palace and the press were on the backfoot immediately.
You can tell so much about the efficacy of Maines’ work because the Mail has now devoted several stories to analyzing what little they know about her. The Mail had a hilariously unhinged piece about how Meredith and Meghan are very similar – buried within that piece is this line: “But Mrs Maines has also faced scrutiny this weekend after it was revealed she was the chief architect of Harry’s disastrous BBC interview, in which he launched another scathing attack on his family.” Disastrous, huh? Disastrous for whom? For the royals who were called out on the BBC?
Photos courtesy of BBC News and Meghan’s IG.
The rats wish Maines worked for the Palaces.
This is what happens when talent attracts talent. Talent is wasted on the Lazies.
So bravo to Maines. She is doing an incredible job to have a target on her back by the Fail.
That interview was brilliant, especially the timing. Do people actually read this garbage and think, “Oh, it WAS a disaster, what was I thinking?”
Of course the rats are pissed because the truth came out and it came out quickly. So now it’s time to bash the Director of Communications as well as Harry. It’s what they do. They can’t stand the idea of the Sussexes setting the record straight before the lie parade starts.
It was a brilliant move in the sense that Harry put out what his legal fight was about before the tabloids made up hundred lies about it. That is what good PR people do, getting ahead of the narrative. Harry usually did this kind of interviews with ITV because of his relationship with the journalist there. It was a great choice to go with BBC this time, since ITV isn’t known globally much compared to BBC.
Well said, SevenBlue. ITA with going with the BBC for the same reason: their coverage drives the RF narrative in other countries. They are seen as the main, most prestigious British TV news source–this interview went around the world before the RF and the rota responded. And Harry’s interview was compared to his mother’s BBC interview–the one the royals buried.
Umm, Andrew’s interview was disastrous. This was raw and open and will be remembered. I’m kind of laughing that they thought it would be 10m and got 30. I’m kind of like I bet they could’ve gotten more. Harry was happy to go in. And you can tell it was a brilliant move bc they’ve been scrambling ever since. Trying to turn Harry into a paranoid Diana-type figure. Well-trodden and rusty moves. Obvious and desperate. Final note, so clearly Harry and Meghan are friends with their neighbors if they let them use their property for this interview, just saying.
They’re upset that they don’t know anything about her because they want to discredit her too. They want to link her to some scandal to show evidence of Harry’s ” poor decision making” by hiring her and listening to her, and how he needs to be back ” in the fold” with those geniuses that work for the palace.
And there was nothing that was disastrous about their interview. This is just the Royal reporting doing what they do. Saying that something is a certain way until it insidiously makes its way into people’s brains. That’s why you have people out there thinking, Archetypes was a flop, Harry and Meghan do nothing but talk about and complain about the BRF, everyone hated WLM, people were angry about the Oprah interview and Spare and the docu series when that wasn’t the sentiment at all.
Doing the interview was such a good movie. It’s interesting that this piece made sure to say that Meghan wasn’t there and was never in court as if to imply that Meghan doesn’t support him.
@Amy Bee says:
“It’s interesting that this piece made sure to say that Meghan wasn’t there and was never in court as if to imply that Meghan doesn’t support him.”
Precisely! Just as they tried to make fetch happen when H did all his Spare interviews without M. And of course, as we all know, if M had been with H on any of his interviews for his projects & causes, they would make it all about her.
The palace goons are still trying to copy the blueprint that is H&M: H&M appear together for Archewell projects; M appears solo for the commercial ventures for the family that she spearheads; H appears solo for his big pre-Meghan projects, like African Parks. But projects/causes like Invictus and Sentebale are family-oriented so of course the founder, now that he has his own family, would have them by his side.
The left-behinds, of course, have virtually no projects/causes which is why they have to keep their make-work and their performative photo-ops going.
Yup, they are obviously trying to revive some speculation about the Sussex marriage. I think using the fact that Meghan wasn’t in the courtroom when the whole point of this legal mess is that it clearly isn’t safe for her to travel to the UK as “proof” of relationship troubles is a particularly low blow. Mind you, if she had accompanied him to court there would be wall to wall coverage about how she is controlling him, how she’s a distraction, and hysterical questions about her failures as a mother and “WHERE are the kids??? Why aren’t we seeing them?”
What’s also interesting is that there were no leaks from the US that this interview would take place immediately after the Appeal. I’m willing to wager that if it had been held in the UK someone would have contacted the palace(s) and the interview would have been fully vetted before it was aired. Someone at the Beeb must have known but, whoever it was made damn sure the palace(s) didn’t get wind of it beforehand. OK, they issued a “corrections and whatever” statement but, they did so AFTER the interview had been seen by 100 of 1000s of people around the globe. It’s almost as if someone upstairs has had enough of the palace(s) interfering with their programmes (i.e banning the Diana interview and editing the Princes and The Press documentary), and wanted the story out there before the nonsense began.
I am pretty sure all UK media has to communicate with the palace before airing something about them. Otherwise, they could ban them from their whatsapp groups or media rooms. That happened to Omid because he refused to write the palace-approved talking points about Meghan. That is why the palace was so comfortable asking to see the interview of Harry with American journalists before it aired. Two American journalists made a comment that they don’t do that ever in USA.
Harry was the architect of this interview. They are crediting Maines as a way of undermining Harry’s independence and agency; and to further the narrative that Harry is being controlled and manipulated to say and do things that he doesn’t really want. Remember, they tried to undermine Spare by claiming that Harry was being unduly influenced by JR Moehringer’s personal issues. This interview was no diffferent from the one he did with Tom Bradby or Oprah or Dax Shepard or Bryony Gordon or in both The Me You Cant See doc and the Harry and Meghan doc. It is not some new media strategy. When Harry decides to speak. He speaks with emphasis and emotion. IMO. This case has been ongoing for almost five years. He had a lot of time to think about what he would want to say if he lost the case so it made perfect sense that he went on the record immediately. Also, He had the Diana Awards event coming up in few days so he likely wanted to get it over with it before that. That interview and that statement were both pure Harry.
I think, timing of the interview, no one getting info about it before airing smell like it was a work of a good PR team. Of course, Harry knows how to put his own words out there to tell the truth about what is happening to him. But this was a well organized, professional interview. I am sure, behind the scenes his communication chief did a lot of work to make sure he got a fair platform. That doesn’t mean Harry wasn’t in control.
There were no leaks before any of the 3 televised and 2 print interviews he did for Spare either. And he was absolutely exceptional in all of them. Also, the choice of the BBC was IMO because the story was primarily a UK story. The jounalist who interviewed Harry said that she was not given any instructions or limitations with regard to the interview. I’ll say it again . If you look back at interviews that Harry has given at any point the last five years: his demeanor and impact are the same. When someone says that someone else is the “architect” of something the implication is that that person is the actual person in control.
@Catherine, those interviews got advertised a few days before airing. BBC interview was kept secret until the last minute. That is why it surprised everyone, nobody expected it.
“The jounalist who interviewed Harry said that she was not given any instructions or limitations with regard to the interview.”
His communication chief chose the platform and approved of the interviewer. That is their main job. That was what I meant by “fair platform”. I don’t like the ITV guy Harry always chooses to give interviews, he always plays “both sides”. That is why I liked the choice here. It seemed more professional.
Sounds like the Sussexes have found themselves a “gold standard advisor”, huh?
Part of the rota’s rage is the timing of this interview, right after the ruling, and clearly getting ahead of any narratives the rota and their, ahem, very well-placed sources in the palaces would have been trying to push. You can just imagine the DM having drafted several stories about how Harry should stop whinging about the safety of his family and come back to be the palace whipping boy, then seeing his interview on the BBC and having to press delete. No wonder they’re mad!
Obviously, Harry knew what he wanted to say and chose his words carefully with the BBC, and I think we can assume he was well-prepped by Maines (as opposed to, um, not prepping for an interview and spinning wild lies, assuming that your social position will protect you!) .
But the Sussexes also have some other communication advantages: One is, when they speak, they speak as one, so their strategy is more focused and effective. In contrast, the royal family has factions that often brief against each other. not just Charles vs William, but Middletons vs. Windsors, too. That’s not a problem that is going away any time soon.
Plus, although the DM is implying that Harry extending the interview more than 10 minutes is somehow terrible, I think they would die of happiness if they could get any member of the royal family to give an interview that was so eloquent and authentic. Harry’s not mumbling through notes or giving platitudes! He’s clear, he’s engaged, and he’s direct – everything I’ll bet the rota secretly wish the leftbehinds could be!
Harry tells the truth.
And he tells it clearly, directly, with heart and with empathy for others, even those who should be closest to him, but instead have done everything they can to destroy him and his beloved wife & kids.
He is everything that those who live by lies and propaganda both hate and fear.
I’m glad he and HRH Meghan Sussex have found a worthy partner in Ms. Maines.
I just saw the interview today on YouTube. And I was touched and taken by Harry’s professionalism especially under the circumstances. It came up on YouTube and on the same page was a very wonderful article put there by the Sussex Squad. It told how Sunny Holstein and the view reviewed the interview. All of them especially wopoie were very critical of the interview. Sunny came from a very legal standpoint and was the only one that was applauded for what she said. I also learned that the other channels use Harry and Meghan as a cash cow. They make thousands writing negative and untrue stories about them. There is no incentive to stop doing this. But it was very easy for me to delete them and never to see them again on my views. They will make no money off my clicks. This is how they make their livings.
Whoopi is a regular guest of morning shows in UK. She has connections to the people who lied about H&M for years. The only time they were nice about H&M was after Oprah interview and I imagine, it was because of the sensitivity of the topics discussed there, race, suicidal ideation. After that, it is all bashing. I remember Sunny was mentioning how the tabloids treat Meghan in UK, but that is all. They don’t go into BRF’s contract with the media, probably because the View is on ABC, the channel once killed the Epstein story because the palace threatened them with no access to K&W. There are some American channels that are given access to the BRF, not to the extent of the rota, but they get to go to the palace and meet Charles & Camilla for example. It is hilarious to me when people claim BRF has no power.
Meghan is also my test. If a show talks sh*t about her without mentioning what BRF or the british media did to her, I don’t watch their content. They can kiss Charles’s ass all day long, I don’t care.