Prince William & Kate were included on Time’s Philanthropy 100 list

Time Magazine’s latest issue is yet another “listicle.” Time is doing something new, they’re introducing “The Philanthropy Issue,” wherein they highlight the “Time 100” in global philanthropy. A good idea, genuinely, but it seems less about tangible philanthropic objectives and more about “hey, these people have a foundation, no follow-up questions needed.” Speaking of, guess who made the list? The Prince and Princess of Wales. From Time, complete with the asterisk.

Philanthropy is hardly a new calling for British royalty. King George II, in the first recorded act of royal patronage, helped establish an antiquarian society focused on art and architectural conservation in the 18th century. The modern royal agenda, though, suggests priorities have shifted. Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales, are less concerned with cultural preservation and more attuned to social issues, tackling homelessness and rural mental health through their Royal Foundation and spotlighting innovative solutions to climate change through the Earthshot Prize, an environmental award founded by William in 2020.

“It’s more about impact philanthropy, collaboration, convening, and helping people,” the Prince told the BBC in November.

Crucial to the Waleses’ approach is aligning social imperatives with sound business strategies and building corporate alliances to expand their reach. To support her “Shaping Us” campaign, which champions well-being initiatives for children five and younger, Catherine convened a business task force that included the Lego Group and, to assess impact, consulting firm Deloitte. Last spring, the group published a report that concluded investing in early childhood programs could yield an additional £45.5 billion ($60 billion) for the U.K. economy annually. The finding spurred task force members to commit millions towards these initiatives.

*Disclosure: TIME’s owners and co-chairs Marc and Lynne Benioff have supported the Royal Foundation.

[From Time]

Prince Harry and Meghan’s 2021 Time Magazine cover still has these people shaken to their core, I swear. I think Meghan getting invited to speak at the Time 100 summit last month also bugged them, because Kate has now been included on two subsequent Time listicles. I imagine some Kensington Palace lackey was screaming down the phone. As for the asterisk… lol. Of course Time Mag’s owners are in league with the Royal Foundation. Michael Bloomberg has also been tasked with spreading money around to embiggen William. I wonder if Kensington Palace is going to throw another tantrum about “William doesn’t accept honors and awards (except when he’s trying to compete with his brother, who was on the cover of Time)!!”

Two more stories adjacent to this – one of the Philanthropy Time100 covers is David Beckham, I swear to God. It feels like a major royal conspiracy, doesn’t it? And as the British media covered William and Kate’s place on this list, they couldn’t help but show their hand. The Daily Mail’s headline: “Harry and Meghan DON’T make Time100 ‘philanthropy’ list but Kate and William do – despite Sussexes going to New York summit last month.” Sure, but are Will & Kate really winning here, considering Kate did a poor imitation of Meghan’s Time 100 Summit suit AND the Sussexes were already on a Time cover? Where’s Will & Kate’s Time cover, btw?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, cover courtesy of Time.

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

53 Responses to “Prince William & Kate were included on Time’s Philanthropy 100 list”

  1. Blogger says:

    “TIME’s owners and co-chairs Marc and Lynne Benioff have supported the Royal Foundation”

    😂😂😂

    Marc and Lynne, I’m afraid to say you’ve backed the wrong horse. But do keep on issuing your cheques to Willy’s vanity blackhole of attention.

  2. ThatGirlThere says:

    Lol at that asterisk 😂 Nothing this lazy bums do will give them the accolades they crave because they want to be Harry & Meghan.

  3. Maxine Branch says:

    The Wales are such losers. An asterisk * was place re their inclusion on this list. They will take any bone offered to them if it places them within the Sussexes orbit. How pathetic. The Sussexes get the cover and a speaking engagement at the Times summit, the Wales get an asterisk *

    • Hypocrisy says:

      That * made my morning, I needed a good laugh, and it certainly makes the Wale’s look desperately pathetic. When people are laughing because WanK just can’t help themselves from making their petty jealousy so obvious, they have already lost and they are just to arrogantly stupid to realize it yet.

  4. ParkRunMum says:

    Mimetic desire. …credit to season two of The White Lotus.

  5. somebody says:

    If you take millions from people and dribble a little of it back to them, is it philanthropy?

    • Blogger says:

      Is that like Robin Hood in reverse?

    • Josephine says:

      This. And I don’t even think they give money. They give their “time” and their “attention.” They keep all that ill-gotten or public money all to themselves.

      • Square2 says:

        Yes, WanK keep all their “personal” money. The majority (possible all) of the money at Roysl Foundation comes from OTHER people’s donations. Never heard of WanK put any money into both their foundations.

  6. SussexWatcher says:

    Bahahaha x a million to that asterisk. William and Kate are such losers. My goodness.

  7. Sonnyislandgirl says:

    That asterisk in relation to their inclusion on that list shows that it was brought. No one has an asterisk notated which makes the wales and times look bad. In trying to one up HM, they only make themselves look bad because now I am looking for tangible proof of why they should be on that list and there isn’t. Anytime someone is on a list I always look them up and if other people are like me WK did not help themselves being on that list, asterisk and all.

    • Jais says:

      I haven’t looked at the whole list. Are they truly the only ones with an asterisk by their names?

  8. Canterbury says:

    I really want Kate to speak at an event. I really, really would love her being asked. Maybe we can get kp onside. It would make my year! How do we get Kate to speak (🤣🤣🤣) at a time 100 event.. Let’s do it. It

    • Blogger says:

      Definitely. Marc, Lynne, add a couple of zeroes to your cheque and make it worthwhile for Lazy! Throw in a visit to a national park so she can film her next installation of her nature series and you’ll definitely get a lot of attention!

      • Canterbury says:

        I’m sure someone can convince her that she’d be awesome.

        I really want it because I need a laugh. And it’ll be hilarious.

  9. Me at home says:

    Ok. Deloitte is already massively in this field. Yes, you can pay Deloitte to do a caregiving study, and others have already done this, but kudus I guess to the royal foundation for stumping up the cash? Although it’s nothing more than major US not-for-profits have done to stump up the same money. And the article doesn’t mention that Lego’s contribution was donating special EQ Lego sets to daycare centers, which is hardly the same as sponsoring parent training initiatives or pushing for a national caregiver leave policy (beyond birth/adoption) in Britain, for when your kid gets sick or has dr’s appts etc—which is what caregivers really need, but it’s super expensive to businesses.who mostly oppose it.

    Earthshot, don’t get me started.

  10. Amy Bee says:

    I’ve only seen one royal reporter tweet about this and there were no front page articles about it. Furthermore shouldn’t the King be on this instead of William and Kate? People always talk about all the work he’s done with the Prince’s Trust and he’s not on the list. Anyway, it’s clear they’re on this list because the owners gave the Royal Foundation money.

  11. Laura D says:

    [RANT]
    Seriously? Has William fixed up the mold in the properties of their tennants? Has he done anything about the radon gas in the empty prison at Dartmoor where he charges the government millions. William rarely performs any of the royal duties (for which we in the UK pay him an exorbitant amount of money) let alone carry out/contribute to philanthropic ventures. What an absolute load of tosh. And don’t even get me started on Kate Dolittle!

    Nonsense, just a load of gaslighting nonsense.
    [/RANT]

    • windyriver says:

      These are the three items listed under “Our Impact” on the foundation’s home page. This is the self selected summary of what the foundation wants to highlight.

      101K – Industry employees trained in anti-trafficking practices through out United for Wildlife Coalition
      500K – people responded to our 5 Big Questions on the Under 5s, the largest ever public survey of its kind on the early years
      6M – additional people in the UK spoke about mental health since the Heads Together campaign

      Beyond pathetic. But even more so when you look at the foundation staffing and see the huge number of people (ten) listed with a Director title, plus the CEO, former long time head of BAFTA, Amanda Berry. Presumably these people all receive compensation, as they are listed as staff. An additional nine people are listed separately as trustees.

      The salary overhead must be huge. And for that overhead the foundation – according to its own publicity – has virtually nothing to show as concrete accomplishments. This should immediately raise a red flag about so little money being directed to program activities vs. administration. Looks like the foundation’s primary function is providing cushy jobs and nice items for future cvs.

      Of course, not everything on Time’s list (s) are as obviously worthless as the Royal Foundation, and it’s good publicity for people and organizations that may usually fly below the radar. But including the royal foundation on this list is a pretty egregious error, and I’ll remember in future to take any list Time puts out (or for that matter, any reporting about the royal family) with a huge grain of salt.

      • Blogger says:

        “6M – additional people in the UK spoke about mental health since the Heads Together campaign”

        Pray tell, how did they manage to quantify this statistic? Did they hack into people’s phones? Number of calls to a mental health line? If they’re trying to show impact, they’d better have evidence to back up their numbers from the air.

        “ 500K – people responded to our 5 Big Questions on the Under 5s, the largest ever public survey of its kind on the early years”

        Did they survey under 5s? 😂😂😂 the lack of detail is outstanding. Very wishy washy.

      • Magdalena says:

        OMG – “Our impact”???!! They’re even copying the format of Harry and Meghan’s Archewell Foundation’s annual Impact Report? 😀 . Lorks.

      • Nerd says:

        Their “Impact” is very vague and misleading because none of them really give a more detailed description of the timeframe that their “Impact” is being judged or measured by. We don’t know if any of the “Impact” is truly based on their own work or the work of other companies or people who did the actual work because of them or even if this “Impact” was done prior to Will and Kate adding themselves to the conversation. There’s no real detail on the timeframe of whatever “Impact” Heads Together has had being during the time that Harry himself helped them create it or even when Harry and Meghan were both there doing the majority of the work behind the scenes to focus more heavily on mental health within the UK? We know that there have also been numerous times while there and since leaving the UK that both Harry and Meghan have spoken publicly about their own struggles with mental health and it caused a huge influx of people seeking help with their own struggles with mental health. William on the other hand has almost degraded any focus on mental health as if it wasn’t a real issue that needed to be addressed. Regarding her 5 Big Questions that it took her almost as much time to create, what are the questions and have they actually helped anyone learn something that the rest of the world has known long before Kate became the ultimate mother of all mothers?

      • Square2 says:

        “I’ll remember in future to take any list Time puts out (or for that matter, any reporting about the royal family) with a huge grain of salt.”

        Some criminal charged & committed grifters were on those many Time Magazine lists over the years. So, yes, Time list is just like People Magazine’s “xyz people alive” list.

        “Their ‘Impact’ is very vague and misleading because none of them really give a more detailed description of the timeframe that their ‘Impact’ is being judged or measured by. ”

        Any reports from BP & KP have always been vague

      • Christine says:

        TEN?!? There are TEN people “working” for the Royal Foundation? Doing WHAT?!

  12. Becks1 says:

    Hm. Well, okay, i guess. sure. i’m sure no phone calls were placed or demands met and i’m sure the Benioffs will NOT be invited to any royal events over the next few months to a year.

  13. ❤️❤️❤️❤️SCAR says:

    That was bought and paid for.

    • MY3CENTS says:

      I can hear Peggy screaming at his aides “I’m the bloody King! If I want to be in TIME I should be in TIME! Don’t they know who I am???”

  14. Tessa says:

    This is such a farce. Award them for the vacations and sports events? The lazy duo

  15. Jais says:

    Wake me up when either of them gives a speech for the Time summit. Or appears on a list without an asterisk. But sure good for them. Whatever soothes their egos and has them thinking their “winning” something.

  16. Tessa says:

    William turned down taking over the Prince’s Trust. Too lazy. Did he end homelessness yet, did Keen solve the early years yet. What a joke.

  17. Loretta says:

    OMG the asterisk
    this is so embarassing

  18. Canterbury says:

    Surely ‘princess Kate’ wants to give a speech since Meghan did. How can we make this happen. It’s going to be hilarious.. Can we do this?

    • Tessa says:

      words included, Nature, Early Years, (fill in blank) is important, in her speech, reflection,

    • Chrissy says:

      So, it was not about throwing pillows then, it was maybe an actual lamp or furniture being thrown by the “Future King” at the “Future Queen”? Seems plausible but we need witnesses!

  19. Maja says:

    To praise kings for their “philanthropy” who finance themselves through taxes, who have gained their wealth through the labour and hardship of other people and who have caused much poverty and hardship over the centuries, is completely out of line. I think that is completely inappropriate. All that these people do is no more than a small compensation for the suffering they have caused over the centuries.

  20. Connie says:

    Marie Claire had an article about the success of the Hubb Cookbook. The book to this day continues to sell. In 23 the Royal Foundation received 80k that’s over a million. The book has been a blessing and has a major impact. This got very little coverage. Last year KP was listed as Untrustworthy by APF. Kate did zero work. William has yet to step up and help the king. Do this people realize we know how to read and comprehend? We don’t need them to create something that DOESN’T EXIST(🤥). Kate has 20 charities n William 30 yet where’s the impact? These people lie and write 💩to make that useless con artist family look good. They’re not worth their weight in gold. I haven’t seen KW do any fundraising. NY Post wrote 🇺🇸 gives a lot of money to the BRF charities. Yet the charities gets the crumbs. How can this moron write this BULL💩. There’s something major happening. I’m trying my best to understand. The behavior coming from 🇬🇧 screams USELESS. Yet there are people fighting teeth n nail to save that fossil. That family lost the war. NOW they’re losing the BATTLE. If my prediction is right Sentebale will reveal how incompetent and unhinged William truly is. That family is mentally unhinged as F–K! No respect for those 🪳.

  21. Tn Democrat says:

    Will-not deserves no accolades because he failed to launch and has achieved nothing meaningful despite his extreme white privilege. He is also deeply disturbed and dangerously obsessed with his only sibling. He abused his privilege and connections in an attempt to destroy Sentebale to smear his younger brother with no regard for the young people benefitted by the charity. A close follow the money audit of this pratt (and his father) would destroy the monarchy in an instant. Rich people patting other rich people on the back with made up accolades is disgusting.

  22. QuiteContrary says:

    If they had any capacity for shame, they’d be embarrassed by this.

  23. KoRAR says:

    Perhaps this new award category was created specifically for WK. Just as after Harry’s speech at the UN, William’s people ran around the UN to somehow get him in there, which they failed to do, so after Meghan’s speech, and before that their top 100
    and cover, could run around the Times, which in no way wanted to honor them in its ranking, so under pressure and promises, created a side ranking. The funny thing is, however, that the asterisk next to their names and the explanation for this asterisk shows that WK were placed there by force and are “honored” for the funds that the Times spent on charity. 🤣
    Do I understand correctly?

  24. Gingerbee says:

    Since when did these two lazy bores become philanthropists. They cannot do anything without copying the Sussexes. They are too dumb to think on their own.

  25. Lau says:

    The real question is : can you be a philanthropist AND a slumlord ? I’m asking for William.
    Also what came to my mind was how you can apply Charlie from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia confusing “philanthropist” with “full on rapist” to Andrew.

  26. J.Ferber says:

    What do they give? What? As far as I can see, they are hoarding money, taking vacations, being incandescent and furious and watching soccer. Which of those is philanthropy?

  27. FancyPants says:

    If they really want so badly to be recognized for things like this, they could just, ummm, do some philanthropic stuff worthy of recognition? I dunno, that feels too easy.

  28. wolfmamma says:

    They really are empty vessels.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment