Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread

[Vlad]

I kindly request that all members participating in the MM and Harry thread dial back the vile rhetoric.

I am not opposed to discussing public personas on TPF, including the constant torrent of news surrounding the couple from this thread. But I find it troubling when their looks are being nitpicked apart to a degree that is just not appropriate.

This thread has drawn criticism over the years, and I discussed it at great length with Megs and the mods. I am not looking to close it down, but the vitriol needs to be dialed back.

My personal feelings about hate threads aside, this ultra-negative vibe is something better suited for other forums, Reddit, or elsewhere. I am holding our community to higher standards.

Thanks for reading.

 

[needlv]

I thought Chrissy was cancelled after bullying a young girl?

Anyway, it seems that both MM and Chrissy are narcs … and Chrissy is appearing on MM”’s second season on Netflix.

 

[needlv]

 

[csshopper]

As ever, Diva Markle manages to tarnish her sparkle. Bullies gravitate to one another and Diva manages to find one of the lowest denominator to hang with, Chrissy Teigen.

Chrissy reveals a part of herself, none of it good, in previous posts on Twitter/X. It’s stomach churning. There is no way this woman “elevates” anything. How did she end up being a featured guest?

In addition to being known as a ruthless on line woman bullying a teen ager, Chrissy was fixated by the program “Tots and Tiaras.” Posts like these, posted on line in two different years, seem to indicate an unhealthy fixation with babies and toddlers.
Publicly shared 😳🤯

She has since claimed she deleted thousands of her tweets, but as has been demonstrated many times, somewhere in the Ethernet they linger on.

 

[MiniMabel]

As ever, Diva Markle manages to tarnish her sparkle. Bullies gravitate to one another and Diva manages to find one of the lowest denominator to hang with, Chrissy Teigen.

Chrissy reveals a part of herself, none of it good, in previous posts on Twitter/X. It’s stomach churning. There is no way this woman “elevates” anything. How did she end up being a featured guest?

In addition to being known as a ruthless on line woman bullying a teen ager, Chrissy was fixated by the program “Tots and Tiaras.” Posts like these, posted on line in two different years, seem to indicate an unhealthy fixation with babies and toddlers.
Publicly shared 😳🤯

She has since claimed she deleted thousands of her tweets, but as has been demonstrated many times, somewhere in the Ethernet they linger on.

View attachment 6215095

View attachment 6215094

Those posts are seriously creepy. Very unsettling, indeed.

 

[Chanbal]

Please identify yourselves. Which of you are having a good time exchanging WhatsApp messages?

https://archive.vn/CQOH8

https://archive.ph/ARjQx

 

[xincinsin]

Please identify yourselves. Which of you are having a good time exchanging WhatsApp messages?

View attachment 6215263

https://archive.vn/CQOH8

View attachment 6215270
View attachment 6215271

https://archive.ph/ARjQx

"As If" is rude and petty? I think there are many more insulting (and fitting) re-versions out there.

And I have doubts about the reason given about why the Harkles got the new deal. Makes no business sense. If you have a liability, you cut them loose and write off the loss. You don't hang on to them because they "owe" you content. If you are inclined to pitch a fit, you take them to court and sue them to get your money back.

 

[bag-mania]

And I have doubts about the reason given about why the Harkles got the new deal. Makes no business sense. If you have a liability, you cut them loose and write off the loss. You don't hang on to them because they "owe" you content. If you are inclined to pitch a fit, you take them to court and sue them to get your money back.

Yeah, it doesn’t make any sense to double down on a losing proposition. If the contract renewal is true, I’m inclined to believe that the decision makers at Netflix are morons.

 

[needlv]

Yeah, it doesn’t make any sense to double down on a losing proposition. If the contract renewal is true, I’m inclined to believe that the decision makers at Netflix are morons.

Maybe Netflix wanting first look on any content if they divorce? I mean, that would be a blockbuster set of interviews…. One for H, one for M!

 

[Stansy]

Maybe Netflix wanting first look on any content if they divorce? I mean, that would be a blockbuster set of interviews…. One for H, one for M!

Plus the NDAs of the (former) employees: usually an NDA ends when the reason for the NDA no longer exists. So when H&M and A***well go separate ways or are liquidated, there is a good chance that the NDA is off the table

 

[Chanbal]

"As If" is rude and petty? I think there are many more insulting (and fitting) re-versions out there.

And I have doubts about the reason given about why the Harkles got the new deal. Makes no business sense. If you have a liability, you cut them loose and write off the loss. You don't hang on to them because they "owe" you content. If you are inclined to pitch a fit, you take them to court and sue them to get your money back.

"As if” is neither rude nor petty, and if that’s all Wales’ friends had to say about MM’s new brand, they were being very kind imo.

Yeah, it doesn’t make any sense to double down on a losing proposition. If the contract renewal is true, I’m inclined to believe that the decision makers at Netflix are morons.

There are many things that are difficult to understand these days. Sarandos’ decision to renew their contract is inexplicable at this point, and I’d suggest that merit isn’t one of the reasons.

Maybe Netflix wanting first look on any content if they divorce? I mean, that would be a blockbuster set of interviews…. One for H, one for M!

In my humble opinion, it has nothing to do with potential divorce interviews. At this point, Netfl*x should already have more than enough content about them for a blockbuster.

 

[finngirl13]

 

[bag-mania]

Maybe Netflix wanting first look on any content if they divorce? I mean, that would be a blockbuster set of interviews…. One for H, one for M!

Could be. It’s difficult to understand. They had five years to produce content for Netflix and they didn’t do much in that time period for the money they were fronted. I don’t think a post-divorce show is necessarily what Netflix is waiting for, but maybe since they lost so much on the investment they want to make sure they are covered in the highly unlikely event that Meghan and Harry ever come up with a popular show.

 

[marietouchet]

Plus the NDAs of the (former) employees: usually an NDA ends when the reason for the NDA no longer exists. So when H&M and A***well go separate ways or are liquidated, there is a good chance that the NDA is off the table

Or, the NDA is effectively null and void if the Harkles lack the money for lawyers to pursue litigation.

 

[kemilia]

Could be. It’s difficult to understand. They had five years to produce content for Netflix and they didn’t do much in that time period for the money they were fronted. I don’t think a post-divorce show is necessarily what Netflix is waiting for, but maybe since they lost so much on the investment they want to make sure they are covered in the highly unlikely event that Meghan and Harry ever come up with a popular show.

Perhaps NF staff/insiders have heard/seen/sense enough about the duo's non-fairytale marriage that it was felt "lock this in, something might be coming up soon that we don't want to miss. Toss a small amount of $$$ at them (I feel the duo are pretty desperate for cash) it might pay off if we are patient."