A good explanation and I can agree. I do think perhaps he might be expected to cover what it might cost extra, if any, to be living in Canada. That would be a good PR move too.The Royal Family
Today, The Prince of Wales met world leaders, politicians and environmentalists including Greta Thunberg at The World Economic Forum in Davos.
His Royal Highness officially launched the Sustainable Markets Council at the forum: the new initiative aims to create sustainable markets whilst helping the global economy become more environmentally friendly.
The annual meeting at Davos encourages open discussions about ways to tackle some of the world’s biggest challenges.
A good explanation and I can agree. I do think perhaps he might be expected to cover what it might cost extra, if any, to be living in Canada. That would be a good PR move too.The Royal Family
Today, The Prince of Wales met world leaders, politicians and environmentalists including Greta Thunberg at The World Economic Forum in Davos.
His Royal Highness officially launched the Sustainable Markets Council at the forum: the new initiative aims to create sustainable markets whilst helping the global economy become more environmentally friendly.
The annual meeting at Davos encourages open discussions about ways to tackle some of the world’s biggest challenges.
That makes sense but I do wonder if that entitles her alone (when she is doing her own thing) as well to this government funding ? Do all of the royals still have security ? The grandchildren ? When not doing royal business ? Am curiousI agree completely. No matter where he lives in their new position, it doesn’t change who he is...son of the future king, son of Diana and grandson of the Queen. As you say, being born into the RF wasn’t his choice, so I agree he is entitled to paid protection. It seems almost punitive to remove it. He isn’t abandoning the Queen and his family, and would have kept a more active position if he could have.
JMO MOO
I agree completely. No matter where he lives in their new position, it doesn’t change who he is...son of the future king, son of Diana and grandson of the Queen. As you say, being born into the RF wasn’t his choice, so I agree he is entitled to paid protection. It seems almost punitive to remove it. He isn’t abandoning the Queen and his family, and would have kept a more active position if he could have.
JMO MOO
Is that a cartoon? I am not familiar with it...
That makes sense but I do wonder if that entitles her alone (when she is doing her own thing) as well to this government funding ? Do all of the royals still have security ? The grandchildren ? When not doing royal business ? Am curious
I think it’d be great if press left them alone for a few months....give them what they want. We can all sit back & watch MM’s creativity as she tries to once again be ‘the news’. I think she lives for the attention. Moo
It’s not just the DM. It’s all over the headlines. And if this is the kind of “press” they are attracting, maybe it’s time for a new PR strategy?
I’m looking at this from a business perspective.
I’m sure Meghan loves animals. Taking on a role, Royal role, spokesperson, is a business persona. Unfortunately, the part that’s backfiring is the focus of their bad timing. And that makes people question motives.
And the feedback is not good. I’m talking about the feedback that’s not been deleted from their IG page...
This has been the failure of a lot of their PR. They are not the first to have bad PR. Fergie has had her share of bad choices and terrible PR...
Perhaps she calls him Henry then?Yes- it is everywhere. Having the day off, I read the latest news from around the world... Using Royal seems to be in question, and I wonder if Meghan will change her name to her real name of Rachel now too? Does Harry call her Meghan or Rachel at home I wonder?
Prince Harry and Meghan could face costly fight for Sussex Royal brand
I think MM is quickly becoming one of the most despised women in the world.You can’t post that on Instagram then, right?
Who is going to leave them alone when they post every day?
I fear they will be the most “disliked”. But they are heading down that highway.
Jmo
I guess I just don’t quite understand why he “couldn’t” have continued in an active position. I think it’s more he didn’t “want”to any longer. And in my opinion this is the root of the bad feelings for many. It’s actually quite fascinating watching the whole thing and people’s reactions.
How would you measure that I wonder?Oh I agree.
I think MM is quickly becoming one of the most despised women in the world.
I don’t think the evidence bears this out. And I think most reasonable people also realize there is no need to take sides between her and Kate. Different people, different lives. Many celebrate both women.How would you measure that I wonder?
I just can’t celebrate a woman who is as hypocritical as she seems. And, yes, I realize what she seems is in some part influenced by press coverage. But the fact that sheI don’t think the evidence bears this out. And I think most reasonable people also realize there is no need to take sides between her and Kate. Different people, different lives. Many celebrate both women.
I don’t think the evidence bears this out. And I think most reasonable people also realize there is no need to take sides between her and Kate. Different people, different lives. Many celebrate both women.
Is there any reason why you refer to Kate as "Kate" and Meghan as "Markle"? It's just an interesting observation I've noticed before so I am curious.I'm a reasonable person and I think the comparison is totally valid vis-a-vis the Royal Family. Kate is thoroughly on board with it and Markle is not. If Markle didn't marry into the Royal Family, she would be entitled to be a different person with a different life. But she did,so she's not -- at least without repercussions. So if one believes in the importance of tradition, the historical significance of the monarchy with all of its protocol and restraint, etc. you'll tend to take sides with Kate. If one prefers Markle's qualities, on the other hand, they'll tend to take sides with her. For me, it's not so much about those two as individuals (although I personally prefer Kate to Markle as a person, too), but about the impact this is having on historical/social issues now involving the entirety of British v. NA culture and politics. That's why I thought it was a bad idea for Harry to marry an American actress in the first place. I knew it would cause problems.
Is there any reason why you refer to Kate as "Kate" and Meghan as "Markle"? It's just an interesting observation I've noticed before so I am curious.