The Times: ‘The tide has turned’ on the Sussexes following the ESPYs

Last Thursday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex attended the ESPYs and Harry received the Pat Tillman Award for Service. He made a beautiful speech and even graciously acknowledged Pat Tillman’s mother Mary, who issued a nasty statement about Harry to the Daily Mail a week prior to the ESPYs. ESPN also put together a really special package on the Invictus Games, and you could just tell that it was a major moment for Invictus and exposing the games to several new audiences. The ESPYs also got their best ratings in five years, and I think partial credit should go towards the decision to feature the Pat Tillman Award package within the first hour of the show. People really were tuning in for Harry, for Serena Williams and for women’s basketball players. Additionally, the videos online of Harry’s speech and the Invictus package have all got millions of views across many platforms.

All of this is good news, of course. The British media’s latest tantrum blew up in their faces once again. Meghan and Harry looked like glamorous humanitarians and Invictus got major exposure on network television in primetime. So of course the British media is still desperately clinging to their f–ked up storylines. The Mail’s Amanda Platell wrote a completely offensive column about how Harry had been nominated for the award for “his relatively brief war record and his role in creating The Invictus Games for injured veterans.” Two tours in Afghanistan is now a “brief war record.” And he FOUNDED the Invictus Games. Platell also claimed it was “brazen” of Harry to reference the bonds between mother and son “after he has spent so much of the past four years breaking the bond between father and son with his petulant attacks on the Royal family.” LMAO. Platell then bizarrely claims that Diana would never have “let Harry trash his own family. And, I’m also certain she’d have seen through mesmerising Meghan Markle in five minutes, recognising her for what she is, a social climbing, money-hungry minx.” In fact, Diana enjoyed trashing the Windsors herself. And the Meghan sh-t is so f–king tired, have they no shame? Jesus.

That wasn’t all – Kate Mansey at the Times wrote an exhaustive screed to prove the British media’s new hypothesis that the Sussexes are “faltering” or “flopping” in America. Because apparently they watched the clip of Harry receiving several standing ovations at the ESPYs and they thought “no, the British audience will believe us when we say that Harry and Meghan are struggling!” Mansey called the award a “publicity crisis for Prince Harry” and wondered aloud: “Yet many are beginning to wonder whether Harry’s popularity across the Atlantic is beginning to wane. If so, can he claw it back?”

An observer based in Hollywood said: “The tide has turned. People in America have been welcoming but they won’t like the way they’ve treated the late Queen and now the King. Mostly, people I speak to say they either don’t like the Sussexes, or don’t care.”

If you’re running a multi-media company, of course, the “don’t care” factor could prove to be the most damaging.

Yet Team Sussex does have reason to remain cheerful. The couple will no doubt be buoyed by some of the voices coming out of support of the couple.

Jake Wood, a US marine and previous winner of the Pat Tillman Award, came to Harry’s defence. While cautious to say that Mary Tillman was entitled to defend her son’s legacy, Wood said he found Harry to be a worthy recipient because of his service in the Army and dedication to helping veterans.

In Britain, the captain of Team UK for the Invictus Games, said that Harry’s sporting competition had “saved lives” by giving hope and purpose to veterans. Stephen Hooper, 40, told The Daily Telegraph: “We wouldn’t be here now if it wasn’t for him being there, creating this environment for us. And I can honestly say it’s probably saved lives. It’s bettered lives, it’s saved lives. To have him there, to at least just say a thank you, it means an absolute huge amount. He doesn’t sit in the shadows, he fully injects himself, he wants to be part of it and I think that’s fantastic.”

Yet no amount of praise will counteract the icy blast directed towards the Sussexes from the Windsors back in Britain. On his last visit, the King’s aides were baffled by Harry’s claims that his father was too busy to see him. Those within the Palace have such a faint dotted line into the Sussexes’ office that it was said to be far from clear what Harry’s plans were in the first place. As for his brother, there is no longer any hope that a meeting will take place in the short term.

By the end of the month, the board of the Invictus Games is expected to decide the location of the 2027 games, choosing between bids from Birmingham and Washington DC. At the moment there’s no obvious sign which location would give Harry a better reception. After being given the cold shoulder by his father and brother the last time he was in London, it seems unlikely that either of them will rush to give the games their seal of approval. The Royal British Legion is behind the UK bid and, rightly, some previously untold stories of triumph over adversity will be heard.

And if there’s one thing Hollywood likes, it’s a plucky underdog overcoming the odds to succeed: the ultimate American dream. If the Sussexes are well advised, Harry will realise that the American dream can only be achieved through hard work. If he wants a career as a popular media personality in the US, he could do to well to start the hard graft of winning the public’s trust all over again.

[From The Times]

“An observer based in Hollywood” means a British tabloid reporter based in LA. “The tide has turned. People in America have been welcoming but they won’t like the way they’ve treated the late Queen and now the King.” These dumbf–ks still don’t understand Americans and I’m getting so sick of these awful people Britsplaining what Americans think or feel.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, screencap courtesy of ESPN.

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

158 Responses to “The Times: ‘The tide has turned’ on the Sussexes following the ESPYs”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Tessa says:

    Charles treated Diana badly and now harry Meghan also. Amanda giving Charles a free pass is a joke. Diana would have decidedly sided with harry and Meghan and would have blamed William for the way he treated harry. Diana was cast out of the family and she would have not have backed charles.

    • TheFarmer'sWife says:

      Doing/saying the same thing repeatedly while expecting a different result—is that not the definition of insanity? The British media keeps choking on their own salty tears and vomit and then telling us about it again! Stop already. H&M will continue to do things the way they want; they need no one’s approval, which is the entire point. I like to think that Diana and Doria would’ve made a great team of grans! It’s a lovely thought, isn’t it?

    • Christine says:

      It’s insanity to suggest Diana would have ever sided with the monarchy over Harry. QEII and Chuck did the exact same thing to her that they are now doing to Harry and Meghan, and Harry is actually their blood relative.

      Harry could punch Chuck on live TV, and Americans still wouldn’t care.

      I honestly have no idea how this wacko shows her face anywhere, this isn’t even bad fanfic, it’s a total delusion.

  2. Liz says:

    Diana would have loathed Carole and embraced Doria. She’d have loved H & M cutting loose from the Windsors, their Stateside adventure and their beautiful Montecito home. It’s what she wanted herself.

    • seaflower says:

      You can just see a sunny Montecito afternoon with the kids being chased by Doria and Diana.

    • Mil says:

      We have no idea who D was. She was from an upper class family, she liked nice clothes. She became popular cos she died young and had a lousy marriage.
      Celeb culture is changing. M would have been more popular 5 years ago. Not just Meg. Why can’t these columnists understand that? Im sure she will be fine, regardless. HM are still a puzzle, they left the royal life, it takes lots of trial and error to find their niche. As for the award, gimme a break. At least that’s one good thing H did in his professional life.

      • Eurydice says:

        I don’t think celebrity culture is changing – it is what it ever was. The thing is that you have to work at being a celebrity and Meghan isn’t doing that. She would have been more in the public eye when she was with the RF, but not necessarily more popular, considering the media narrative. And now, she has many opportunities to be seen, but she chooses not to take advantage of them. As for Harry, if the Invictus Games is the only thing he ever does with his life, it will be a great achievement.

      • Julia says:

        Whilst Diana’s tragic death catapulted her to new level of fame that is not why she is popular. She had a level of charisma and vulnerability that is rare in a royal. The only other modern royal who has that essence is Harry. That’s why when he left the royals and British media have desperately been trying to sabotage him. As for Meghan would have been more popular 5 years ago! That’s just unsubstantiated nonsense.

      • Tessa says:

        There was a lot more to Diana. There are lots of books like the Morton book.and the princess documentary that give background and first hand information about Diana.

      • MichaelaCat says:

        @MIL She became popular because she had the human touch, actual empathy, did a lot for charity and did not shy away from controversial issues if she could help people that very few were helping.

        Her touching and embracing people with AIDS did more to stop patients from being shunned than you will ever understand.

        As for her popularity, she was very popular before she passed away and before it was widely known her marriage was bad, so you’re talking complete nonsense.

        You might think your comment makes you look smart, but it does do anything but.

      • Wagiman says:

        We do know a lot about Diana.. You may not, but those of us who are her age or older do remember very clearly who she was. What you wrote about clothes and being posh is so offensive.

        Harry’s professional career and what he’s achieved is listed on his website and it’s about 500 fold eggs. He’s done more for others than most people could in 10 lifetimes. You’re simply displaying your ignorance.. Give me a break..

      • MichaelaCat says:

        @WAGIMAN. Exactly

        I am quite a lot younger than Diana and I still remember the impact she had and i know my peers do too.

      • Interested Gawker says:

        “She became popular cos she died young and had a lousy marriage.”

        She had a lousy marriage and died young cos she became popular.

        FIFY

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Mil, what you’ve written shows that you know nothing about Princess Di. Do some research. She was compassionate, empathetic and a person of substance. She married days after she became 20. She grew into the person that she became. It’s fairly apparent that you don’t know what the world saw or you don’t care. Okay, but don’t rewrite history to those that know better.

      • Jaded says:

        @Mil — Excuse me but I and many others know EXACTLY who Diana was and the tireless work she did with the underprivileged, AIDS patients, destroying land mines and many other humanitarian issues. Yes she came from a posh background but didn’t shy away from getting down in the trenches with real people. I don’t know how old you are but it sounds like you have no idea who she really was and what she accomplished. Do some research before you drop uninformed comments like this.

      • Lawrenceville says:

        @MIL, who exactly is “We have no idea who Diana was”? Please speak for just yourself, you do not represent anyone else but yourself.

      • Michael Harris says:

        @MIL. Translational reductionism. Was going to reprimand you, but others beat me to it. You don’t understand the Diana phenomena at all. No problem though. The great pundit/scholar Christopher Hitchens didn’t either. Smart people aren’t right all the time. Sometimes passion and love triumphs over power and tradition. Diana was peerless in that family.

      • L Williams says:

        Sorry but it seems to me you didn’t do your research on Princess Diane. She was the one that championed the removal of Land mines world wide and because of her they are now illegal world wide. She championed Mother Theresa fight for young women in New Delhi slums and Aids awareness in the U.K.Also this idea of sleeping rough to highlight poverty and homelessness didn’t come from Prince William. It was Diane that took her boys out to sleep rough to show the that not everyone has economic security. There are tons of pictures out there with Princess Diana and her charitable work and stories of things that she did behind the scenes.

      • Joy says:

        Diana was enormously popular from the second she started dating Chuck. She was the most famous woman in the world when she died.

        “She became popular cos she died young and had a lousy marriage.” LMFAO

      • Flowerlake says:

        @Mil,
        Like Joy pointed out, she was popular the moment she came into the public’s eye, so that was before she was even married.

        You have no idea what you’re talking about.

      • Cersi says:

        I’m sorry, but what? Diana became popular because she died young and had a lousy marriage? Are you kidding? Diana was popular right out of the gate and remained popular. People LOVED Diana. I’m not sure how you even came up with that narrative.

      • aftershocks says:

        @Eurydice:
        “The thing is that you have to work at being a celebrity and Meghan isn’t doing that… she has many opportunities to be seen, but she chooses not to take advantage of them.”

        I understand that you made these comments in response to the nonsensical things @MIL said about Diana, Meghan, and Harry, which have been roundly and deservedly debunked by many commenters.

        In any case, I disagree with your rebuttal about Meghan. Quite honestly, Meghan does not have to work at being a celebrity, nor does she have to be seen to be popular. She merely has to breathe, exist, and do what she does so well: Be herself, with rare grace and authenticity. This does not mean she is a perfect person. But she’s never tried to be perfect, nor does she try to project perfection. She is just a kind, giving person who is amazing at taking care of the business of her life, while also expending great effort in helping others.

        Part of the reason for Meghan’s high profile popularity is the incessant way the royal firm and British media have continued trying and failing to destroy her, and attempting to bring Harry to his knees. Love not only wins, Love has conquered everything the salty isle fools have thrown against the Sussexes. And still the desperate left-behinds keep doubling down with their pitiful, ridiculous attacks.

        FYI: These constant attacks won’t succeed but the continuing existence of such deranged, obsessed hate is dangerous for the Sussexes’ safety and well-being. This is the huge reason why we do not see H&M and their children in public as often as we might if the unhinged attacks and hate did not exist. So, saying that Meghan “chooses not to take advantage of opportunities,” while true, misses the point of why. First of all, Meghan is in a position of being able to say no to the majority of professional offers she receives. Secondly, due to the situation H&M are in as a result of 24/7 salty isle attacks, they must be strategic and mindful of their choices.

        The Sussexes are not a couple intent on being in the limelight anyway. For H&M, it appears to be more about making an impact for others, while taking the best care of Archie & Lili, and building financial security, emotional well-being, and a solid legacy for them to carry forward. It is about the art of living with grace and thriving no matter what obstacles you face.

      • Sass says:

        Diana was an extremely young girl who met her future husband when she was still a minor and she was groomed into marrying him. They thought her youth would make her easily manipulated and she would not outshine Charles. The problem is Charles is a petulant manchild who was never good looking, was intelligent but tedious and had the emotional range of a teaspoon. He was pathetically jealous of his wife. Diana was popular because she was young, beautiful, and wanted to have fun because she was young. She refused to stay in a loveless marriage and got out and only became more popular because she chose to use her popularity for good. Like others have mentioned: AIDS awareness; and of course her work to eradicate land mines. Diana is the reason the BRF stayed relevant; her sons left behind are the reason after her death it continued to be relevant.

      • Proud Mary says:

        Thank you aftershocks, for your push back against Eurydice comments. Ignoring the volume of media assault against Meghan’s character is quite an amazing attempt at rewriting history. People seem to want to have it both ways. On the one hand, Meghan is a calculating social climber who wormed her way into the BRF; on the other hand she isn’t working at being a celebrity. Pick a lane.

  3. Tessa says:

    People in America are not royalists. Charles has been booed on the uk.

    • Josephine says:

      Right? Everyone I know thinks that the royals are a joke and need to get off the public dole. They also associate the royals with Jeffrey Epstein, rapists, and pedophiles, and nothing is going to change about that. Our FBI did not get to complete their investigation and the royals are happy to support and hide a person of interest. That’s the stain the royals have left in this country.

    • mblates says:

      the way these articles always say americans get upset about how he’s treating the memory of the queen and king? like we didn’t care when they were alive, why would we care now?

    • Wagiman says:

      Nonetheless, this is based on a false premise, the lie that gets repeated by these toerags. Harry hasn’t been awful about his father or the Queen (QE2) – he adored the Queen. They keep repeating this lie about repeated attacks. There were NO attacks. Chuckie, bride of chuckie and egg are the ones who have been ripping into Diana M and H. And chuckie was WAY harder on QE2 in his authorised biography.

      This reminds me so much of push polling. Start with a false premise, act outraged as if it’s true.

    • goofpuff says:

      Exactly. They are not our king/queen and we are not the commonwealth. We are not a colony. And the Windsors don’t matter to Americans at all. The Times is really slipping hard into tabloid culture with their shoddy reporting/opinion pieces and the lack of any factual information.

      • Lawrenceville says:

        Meh, even commonwealth countries care little to nothing about Charles and his mistress bride and they are the kind and queen of some of those countries. Charles and Cowmilla and Pegilliam are being booed all over the UK, they are not liked or wanted in their own country and these their moronic minions think Americans are hurt because Charles and Camilla this and that? C’mon now!

      • GTWiecz says:

        It’s a shame no American big publication gives space for editorials actually defending Harry and Meghan. It’s like all of them are scared of the RF. Too much power from one dysfunctional privileged family in one country.

  4. Tessa says:

    A money hungry min x. Really. Do these writers live in the sixteenth century.

    • mblates says:

      i always feel minx is code for sl-t. which goes along with the money hungry-gold digging narrative they try to push.

      • Nanea says:

        I always wonder why they so willingly accept the real lazy, scheming, gold-digging slut — the white one, who has lots of photos out there of falling out of cabs while drunk, of flashing photographers on *state* visits, of not working, of just wanting to do things that bring her joy, while being too lazy to even write two lines in support of her charities.

        The one who, despite apparently getting a degree in art history, is too dumb to know anything about her subject and doesn’t know much besides it.

        They’re completely silent about that one and her family of equally dumb, scheming, gold-digging grifters, despite supporting them with too many millions of undeserved funds from taxes they pay for them.

      • bisynaptic says:

        @mblates, 🎯

    • Wagiman says:

      They know they mean Kate, but because they’re all gagged, it’s. M.

      SO money hungry she walked away..

    • one of the marys says:

      My jaw dropped when I read that my god

    • Cara says:

      “Minx” is Camilla’s word for Meghan. Coincidence??

    • Shannon says:

      It really bothers me that they’re so openly hateful–and proud of their hatred! This woman doesn’t know Meghan. And yet feels perfectly comfortable calling her vile names. It’s ugly, cruel, unfair, untrue, but it works. They call her names and their readers believe that she’s the monster they make her out to be.

      It’s maddening to watch the hate campaign play out so openly. She never deserved this, and they’ll never stop.

    • bisynaptic says:

      Yes.

  5. Barbara says:

    I don’t know one single soul who cares about Chuck or the late queen. Honestly, not many care about the Sussexes or Egg and Sausages either.

    • Proud Mary says:

      American’s do care about underdogs, and about people being bullied. Americans do admire a come from nothing to something story. American’s do admire people who “give back.” Americans do admire resilience. Americans definitely don’t like being told what to believe or whom to or not to like. Otherwise, you’re right. Americans don’t see royals as anything other than celebrities.

      • kirk says:

        Americans also like other Americans. Especially when those Americans are being vilified by people from other countries.

  6. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    Americans really don’t care how anyone treats the late queen and current king of a small island off the coast of Europe. These reporters have a very inflated sense of how important their tiny island and their monarchy is on the world stage, which was probably true 300 years ago but isn’t true any longer. I believe, most Americans, if they pay any attention to the British monarchy, are interested solely for their constant running soap opera of an existence and not because they or their government hold any kind of real power. The British monarchy is a novelty, a throwback to the golden age, certainly not something to be taken seriously especially not with the world on fire and democracy under attack.

  7. Anonymous says:

    So everyone is either don’t like or don’t care, no one likes them at all? Guess they realized the everyone hates them argument was falling in it’s face. Also, what IS with this idea that most Americans give a crap about how he ” treated” the late Queen or Charles. I doubt many Brits under 40 care, why would Americans? I think most Americans realize that family dynamics are weird, and toxic families take all shapes, so if he’s not speaking to them he probably has his reasons. That seems to be their last play, ” he’s so mean to us, and won’t let us dictate his life and treat him and his family like crap!” At least they are acknowledging that they got a standing ovation. I saw an article that flat out claimed that Marie Tillman Shenton refused to give him a standing ovation and was giving them “cold looks”.

    ETA- this is me Dee(2)

    • Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

      The quick pan to Marie Tillman did show her to have a rather dour look on her face, but I only saw her once and couldn’t speak to the rest of the time.

      • Dee(2) says:

        Yeah she has tears in her eyes and her husband patted her hand. I don’t know what clips look like but watching it live, she was clearly VERY moved by the introduction video. I can imagine the BM isn’t trying to show anything but what they feel reinforces their narrative though because this is all aimed at the domestic audience to prevent them from making the obvious comparisons.

      • Julia says:

        It was Marie’s Foundation that selected Harry for the award. Why would she approve the award and turn up for the show if she wasn’t happy? If she didn’t want him to get the award he wouldn’t have received the award. She controls the foundation. To me she just looked emotional.

      • Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

        Thanks Dee and Julia for pointing out that Marie was emotional not dour, sometimes I don’t read facial cues correctly and appreciate you pointing out the difference.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Harla I have seen a few pictures that people are trying to spin as her looking dour and unhappy with Harry, so I know what you’re referring to, but when watching the clips it was clear that she was emotional and trying not to cry.

      • Wagiman says:

        She definitely had tears in. Her eyes.

    • MsIam says:

      Marie had tears in her eyes. Too bad for the UK media that there is plenty of video so people can see what happened. Not to mention all of the tweets of support Harry is getting, even from people who didn’t really know or care about him or Invictus. There was one idiot on Garbage Bag News that claimed that so many people calling Harry a “great guy” was somehow “toxic” and Harry should come back to the UK so they could “knock him back down”. I hoped she was joking but I bet she wasn’t.

  8. sevenblue says:

    Diana said loudly that Charles doesn’t have what it takes to be a King. She literally advocated for the monarchy to skip a generation and go to William. That is what the monarchist call “treason”.

    • Tessa says:

      No not treason. Diana said the top job would put limits on him not that he was not up to it. Diana would be horrified though at how William has turned out. He censored her interview.

      • sevenblue says:

        @Tessa, the monarchy is about the birth right. You can’t say this man can’t be the King because of his limits, that isn’t how it works. Diana crossed the line with that comment at the time (according to the monarchist, this isn’t my personal opinion). Harry didn’t even say anything close to that.

      • Tessa says:

        Diana crossed no line. Writers like penny j said the same thing. As king Charles was not free to speak out on issues like he was as prince of Wales. Diana did not commit treason. Diana would be disappointed in William though. If Diana committed treason she would be arrested and Charles would not have given her that large divorce settlement. Charles said a lot worse about his own parents through dimbleby book.

      • Tessa says:

        Charles himself would not dare have accused Diana of that. What with his own behavior and he had dubious mentors like savile and van De r post

      • windyriver says:

        Tessa is correct, at least according to what Diana said in her interview. She was asked if she thought Charles would wish to be king. She said, he was always conflicted about that when they discussed it:

        “And being Prince of Wales produces more freedom now, and being King would be a little bit more suffocating. And because I know the character I would think that the top job, as I call it, would bring enormous limitations to him, and I don’t know whether he could adapt to that.”

        Nothing about him not having what it takes. The question about whether it would be better to just skip to William came after that.

        Sounds like a very honest assessment to me, certainly at the time, when Charles was still a busy POW in his 40’s. At this point though, Charles seems perfectly happy to finally be king.

      • Tessa says:

        I think the queen never abdicated because she was dubious of Charles abilities. And she held all the cards. Things seemed to have gone downhill after she died.

      • Becks1 says:

        QEII was never ever going to abdicate. It had nothing to do with her opinion of Charles. She was just never going to do it. Do I think she doubted his ability to hold things together? Yes. But she was never going to abdicate regardless.

      • Tessa says:

        And the queen gave that pledge as a young woman to a life of service. I think though Charles was a disappointment to her. And she happened to have the longevity genes

    • sunnyside up says:

      William is even less fit to be King than his father.

  9. MsIam says:

    They just won’t quit will they? Harry’s speech has millions of views but the UK media is convinced this means his popularity is “waning”. Its a wonder these people can put their shoes on the right feet in the morning. And again, Amanda and others, its the Unroyals who look bad in this, not Harry. Nothing is keeping Charles from seeing and having a relationship with Harry and his children except Charles himself. But I guess Charles has his Horse and the Rota Rats to keep him company so I’m sure he’s perfectly happy.

    • windyriver says:

      The Windsors, especially Charles, have been such publicity hounds over the years – and over those years created such a toxic relationship with the media where both sides constantly need to be fed – I’ve come to think they just don’t understand a relatively more normal situation where you can still be respected and well-liked even if you’re NOT on the front pages and generally in people’s faces, every single day for every minute thing you’re doing.

    • sunnyside up says:

      They don’t need to be able to put their shoes on the right foot, they have someone else to do it for them.

    • Proud Mary says:

      The thing is, in order for his popularity to be “waning”, they have to admit that he was at one time popular in the US. But they’ve never, ever acknowledge anything of the sort. From day one of Harry and Meghan stepping back, they’ve been reporting that Harry and Meghan were no longer popular. They’ve been desperately pushing this “flop era” story for years. None of their popularity polls have ever shown the couple to be popular. Yet, in a week when Harry does a mike drop appearance that garners millions of views, plus across-the-board accolades, we are being made to believe that he used to be popular, but today, today, he’s not!! Who are the worm brain folks who fall for this shite?

  10. Eurydice says:

    Lol, seriously? The only reason Diana would have interfered with Harry’s “trashing” is because he’s been too nice. Just imagine – Diana would have been brutal. As for the stupid spin about Meghan – if she were a social-climber, she would have stayed in the RF.

    Yes, the BM is still working hard with the narcissism and Britsplaining. Americans hardly remember Elizabeth was alive, never mind caring about Charles. And it’s hilarious to think that the location of the next IG will based on what’s best for Harry’s PR.

    • Proud Mary says:

      “Americans hardly remember Elizabeth was alive, never mind caring about Charles.” Do Brit’s remember her? I have to admit I’m really surprised that, for as much as all you heard when she was alive was “the queen, the queen the queen,” since her passing, it’s seems Charles is doing all he can to make sure all memories of her is buried with her. Did he even recognize the 1st anniversary of her death?

      • Christine says:

        They were “reflecting”, in private. Harry is the only one that visited her actual grave on the first anniversary of her death, we have that photo of him sneaking out a door. You can’t make up how bad these people are at basic PR.

  11. Jan says:

    The veteran Minister that was pushing for the IG lost his seat in Parliament, so I don’t know if it will have any bearing on the selection.

    • Dot Gingell says:

      The new Veterans Minister seems like a good guy. He’s a recently retired Marine who’s already been saying and posting positive things about IG and the Royal British Legion. Sounds promising.

    • Amy Bee says:

      His party also lost the election and the new government hasn’t appointed a veterans Minister.

    • Lady D says:

      Colour me confused.

    • Christine says:

      I didn’t know Johnny Mercer lost his seat! He seemed to be really earnest in his intentions towards the veterans and wish for Invictus Games Birmingham.

  12. Hypocrisy says:

    I’ve been keeping track of two different videos on Twitter and between just those two it’s 10M views. Thats pretty huge especially since there are so many videos of it out there across every platform. Prince Harry is blowing the British media out of the park with interest and views I truly hope it hurts and their numbers continue to decline. We are all tired of them, just leave the Sussex’s alone to live their lives.

    • Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

      A lot of comments I’ve seen on SM say that they didn’t know that Harry founded Invictus, how cool Harry seems to be and how deserving Harry and Invictus are of this award. The tide has certainly turned, exactly opposite to how the British press is describing it.

      • Christine says:

        This. We watched the tide turn, in real time, in the US, TOWARDS Harry and Invictus Games. You can lie to people in the UK all you want, it changes nothing about how extraordinary the last 3 days have been, both for the Sussexes,and most importantly Invictus Games.

        It was a joy to watch people from all over the world discover Invictus Games.

    • Proud Mary says:

      Hence, the desperate hue and cry: “between just those two it’s 10M views.” Please show me anything William or Charles have done this year that’s garnered that many Xtwitter views? It must be a very sad day in royalist land.

  13. Tessa says:

    The sussexes were not mean to queen Elizabeth. Charles took away their security and evicted them. They did not badmouth the queen. In fact Charles complained about his parents through the dimbleby book

    • Wagiman says:

      They didn’t badmouth anyone. I’d ask the ratchets to show exactly WHERE and WHEN Harry badmouthed anyone. He was shady about Camilla but that was it. He told the truth and that’s what this is about really.

      Meanwhile the rest of the left behinds badmouth H and M on the daily. And Diana.

  14. Sunny says:

    This is such a false narrative. They will never stop trying to tear this man down simply for escaping them.

    Also calling Meghan a minx is sexist and deeply racist. It leans on the image of Black sexual woman whose sexuality is too much for white men to resist. It was used to justify raping us during slavery and has persisted since. JFC.

    • Tessa says:

      It is very offensive and those writers should be called out on it.

    • bananapanda says:

      Also, didn’t Harry ask to meet her bc he saw her on Suits? It was a mutual friend who set them up. Then they discovered a common ground in public service/charity.

      • Layla says:

        @bananapanda- Harry’s own words in the Netflix doc were that he saw Meghan on an Instagram story of a mutual friend.

        Will and Kate were the ones who watched Suits, NOT Harry. Harry told us that in Spare. The lie that he knew Meghan from Suits came from K. Nicholl- a Brit tabloid writer freelancing a Vanity Fair now, with an alleged history of using illegal methods to stalk Harry. She just swapped H in for W.

    • Oh come on. says:

      Yes I was horrified (but sadly not surprised) that Platell’s editors let this hateful phrase go into print. But then, British tabloid media published Jeremy Clarkson’s weirdly sexual, hate-filled rant go into print, as well. Nothing is too gross to say about a Black princess, I guess.

      Also, they wonder why Harry doesn’t want to come back? Smdh.

    • Proud Mary says:

      To me, their going that low, tells me they know the Sussexes have won. I measure the Harry and Meghan’s success, by the level of their vitriol.

  15. Freya says:

    Who uses ‘minx’ anymore to describe women? It’s like they’re bringing the ugly sexism back from the 1920s.

  16. Pinkosaurus says:

    People in the US do not care about what William or KC3 think, they just don’t. It doesn’t matter to the 💩 british media though because they are writing for their british readers and telling them a story from the land of make believe. This is 100% in line with the colonialist cosplay of the epic fail tour of the Caribbean. None of that was planned for the benefit of the countries they were visiting, just how it would be received at home. This is why William is so shocked getting booed and ignored in the US because his idiot advisors keep blowing this smoke up his 🫏.

    • Christine says:

      100%

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Pinkosaurus, I don’t get it either. Why do they think people in the US spend any time thinking about the brf? We just don’t. Until Meghan joined that family, I hadn’t thought of them for decades–since Princess Di died.

      Now, if anyone is paying attention, they are watching to see what H&M are doing next. After this ESPY, there are more people waiting to see what Harry and IG does. I really hope the Games go to Washinton D.C. because awareness has now been made in the US on a wider scale. It would be hugely successful.

      When I think of the UK, I’m hoping that the new government will help the people.

      • GTWiecz says:

        I live in the suburbs around DC and will certainly get tickets or even volunteer if it happens here!

    • bisynaptic says:

      🎯

  17. Maxine Branch says:

    I think the Espy awards and the Sussexes reception has gotten those angry clowns shook. All of their howling at the wind re the Sussexes landed with a thud, no one cares. Therefore, those gutter rats are now trying to create another false narrative around their reception to sooth those hurt egos left behind.

    • Em says:

      Anytime Meghan steps out she always has a gracious smile on her face, derangers and trolls in the media spend time photoshopping her face because they can’t believe she’s still standing and their people are supposedly battling all kinds of diseases

  18. bb says:

    It’S so weird. How could you not be moved by Harry’s grace, intelligence and empathy in that speech..?

    • Eurydice says:

      It’s easy, if you’re being paid to lie.

      • Miranda says:

        That famous Upton Sinclair quote comes to mind: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

      • Pork Belly says:

        Exactly. It’s the reason why they’re now spinning Baldy’s non-military service as somehow more superior to doing 2 tours of Afghanistan.

    • Blithe says:

      So many people refuse to accept the humanity in others. When that’s their starting point, that shifts and colors everything else. Then, too, not everyone actually values —or even recognizes that others value — qualities such as grace, intelligence and empathy. If you don’t value those qualities, it probably becomes difficult to be genuinely moved by them.

  19. Jan says:

    I know that no one is forcing Anne to make appearances, but it looks awful, when the lazy wails only make sports appearances.
    Harry was the workhorse of the family and it shows.

  20. BlueSky says:

    “If Diana was still alive she would have seen the Middletons for what they are, social climbing grifters” There fixed it for you.

  21. Agnes says:

    When I read your headline, “The Tide Has Turned,” I immediately thought that the British Media is finally acknowledging the real good Harry does with his chosen focus, disabled veterans. Which millions of Americans now know about and applaud thanks to the ESPYs. But nah. Same old same old. Harry was and still is much too big for that cramped little backwards isle.

    • Monday says:

      Same! I was like “FINALLY!”. But no its the same old nonsense. I live in a Commonwealth country and honestly no one cares about the Royals. We barely blinked when the Queen died. Charles will get even less than that.

      • Oh come on. says:

        > barely blinked when the Queen died. Charles will get even less than that.

        Living in Canada now, and very much the same. People didn’t really care when the Queen died, and folks really weren’t keen to have to start seeing his face on the money. Other than that, most Canadians, except a few elderly Brit-descended royal enthusiasts, dgaf.

    • Becks1 says:

      Yes! Those were my thoughts as well! But apparently its more of the same. The tide has turned against the sussexes because millions of people have watched that award and he’s getting a lot of praise for his role in Invictus?

      Ummmm…..sure Jan, lol.

    • Proud Mary says:

      That’s what I thought too! How can the tide turn against them, when you’ve been saying for years that the tide is against them?

  22. ABritGuest says:

    lol even in the times piece they can’t make up their mind if Charles tried to see Harry or snubbed him on his UK visit. And not sure what Harry’s relationship with Charles & William has got to do with the great reception Harry got at the awards & towards his speech. The need to constantly centre the Windsors in Harry things that have nothing to do with them is so annoying.

    But as they went there- this Hollywood source is probably Sharon Osbourne or some other pathetic royalist in USA if it even exists. Also hilarious that they try to act like people care about Harry’s alleged treatment of Charles especially in the US. That card might have worked with Betty but it doesn’t with Charles who is up there as one of the most famous cheaters. Outside of deranged royalists very few believe that Charles is this big devoted family man who is above reproach & many of us remember Charles own book & interviews discussing his difficult childhood & first marriage.

    • Layla says:

      It’s probably LA-based (since 2020) Caroline G. Of the DFail. She of the “moved in next door to T. Markle, and takes photos with Confederate flags”. She also tried and failed to get into some event in LA that H&M were at, but still wrote about it (with wrong details) as if she’d been there.

    • Gabby says:

      Or that Kinsey Schofield. Something is very wrong with her.

  23. Julie says:

    Platell’s job must be on the line for her to be so vicious.

  24. Over it says:

    Charles cheated on Diana with his side piece he then married who turned Harry bedroom Into a closet because that gigantic house did not have one empty room to spare for her horse shoes, hay and kibbles and bits. Charles then took away security from Diana son and grandson. So , nope, I think Diana wouldn’t have gave a f how many truth bombs Harry dropped about his dog -s father

  25. Em says:

    These articles are not being written for Brit’s, they’re being written for members of the royal family to read and feel better about themselves.

    First you claim they were never popular and now claim their popularity is waning? Harry and Meghan look great and Amanda even admitted in her useless article that Meghan is mesmerizing and I think the main reason is the fact that she literally doesn’t care anymore but on the other side we have premature aging, cancers and accidents because they literally can’t let go of all the hatred in their hearts.

    I think the Invictus games will be better served in Washington DC but Harry might have faith that his countrymen will get their sh** together by 2027 but I don’t.

    NB- I don’t know but I never really noticed it till that picture of Meghan standing in the middle but she’s really hot

    • bisynaptic says:

      Cancer isn’t a consequence of hatred.

    • windyriver says:

      @Em – your first paragraph, that thought had also crossed my mind. This so the poor Windsors won’t get indigestion when staff lay out the papers with breakfast! Likely primarily aimed at Charles; I assume Will scans the ‘net obsessively, as Harry said he himself once did. Charles though, I picture him not reading anything that hasn’t been researched by some staff underling and vetted (i.e., massaged and ‘interpreted’) by a senior person. I have wondered how much of reality actually gets through to him; there’s so much potential for information to be skewed when it’s filtered through people who very likely have their own agendas.

  26. ABritGuest says:

    Also shows how unprofessional & vindictive the BRF are if they couldn’t support a UK invictus if selected as host city, especially considering Charles is meant to be commander in chief . I thought the BRF is meant to be all about “duty”. They need to step aside from military connections altogether if they can’t do their basic job & support sick & injured veterans competing for Britain on home turf

    But personally hoping for a Washington games

    • sunnyside up says:

      Well said, neither Charles or William are suitable to be CIC of our armed forces as they don’t care about those with life changing injuries suffered while on active service. I was really disgusted with both of them especially with William who sat at home and did nothing during the 10 year service, he hadn’t got the decency to turn up. The Garden party might have been arranged before the service so I have to excuse the King.

  27. Kokiri says:

    Real question
    Why is Birmingham even pitching for the Games?
    The UK hates them, right? Why would a city with its council & mayor think it’s a good plan to ask for the Games? Wouldn’t it make Birmingham hated?

    I hope he doesn’t go there. Who need that. No one, that’s who.

    His speech was magnificent. No notes, just heart.

    • Jan says:

      Why do countries/Cities pitch for the IG? To bring in visitors to spend money.
      Birmingham is part of England and if some people hate it tough, hating more is not going to make a difference.

    • sunnyside up says:

      It’s only the readers of the right wing press who hate Harry’s success with Invictus and have to belittle it.

    • Kingston says:

      @Kokiri says:
      Real question
      Why is Birmingham even pitching for the Games?

      The truth is, as Harry said in Spare, the british media is not a reflection of the reality of british society.

      Thats just a fact of the state of the 4th estate in the UK. What this means is that the media as a whole is neither a mirror on the society nor an accurate reflection of the true sentiments of the people on any national issue.

      Because the undergirding truth about the media in the UK is that its primary goal is to serve the interests of the elites in that fiercely stratified society and they see their role as ensuring that the hoi polloi KNOW THEIR PLACE AND STAY IN THEIR PLACE. And the media is helped in this goal by all the other state apparatuses, all of which have the same vested interest, i:e, keep the hoi polloi in its place and subservient to those high on the hierarchy.

      Having the globally popular Invictus Games return to the UK would be a huge feather in the cap of the media gate-keepers who believe its their job to ensure that the world sees the royals as STILL IN CONTROL of H&M and all that they do. So that normal, ordinary people, especially those in the US who see H&M’s move away from family of origin to start a new life with the family one creates for oneself as a very normal rite of passage available to all free human beings, dont believe their own eyes.

      The Royal Firm and their media henchmen that keep them propped up, DO NOT want the world to believe that H&M have “won.”

      So if IG returns to the UK, you best believe that the media and all their spox & online bots will spin like crazy to get everyone to believe that chuckyTheTURD flexed his kingly muscles and DEMANDED the return of the Games and H had to obey.

  28. Judy says:

    Thanks to the brilliant (of course I mean ridiculous) PR plan of the idiot men in grey, the RR, Charles and Willy to spew hate towards 2 people who have done nothing wrong, the work the Sussexes do now has a new audience of over 5 million people. The more they all try to destroy Harry and Meghan the more they simply destroy themselves. Yet the ridiculous PR plan of hate continues as this article shows. Harry and Meghan win again! Love wins!

  29. Jais says:

    Propaganda. If they repeat that their popularity is waning enough times maybe people will stop believing their eyes. Of course, how their popularity could wane when they simultaneously claim they are unpopular remains to be seen. This schtick is predictable and boring. Rinse and repeat.

    • RRN says:

      This 100%. The british media and the royalists have been extremely consistent in repeating lies. A lie told 100 times by 10 different people spread across various mediums comes off as the truth. It is nothing but the propaganda spreading real time. It is dangerous and evil. It is impacting the sussexes negatively and it has become worse over the years when we actually thought that it would eventually die down. But I’m also not sure what the solution is.

  30. Noor says:

    The exhausting vendatta against Harry and Meghan launched by the media since 2018 should stop . Charles should admit defeat and call off the media dogs. It is not working and damaged the monarchy

  31. Amy Bee says:

    Harry and Meghan were well received at the ESPYs so the piece that Kate Mansey wanted to write was revised to this non-story. The people she should be advising to work hard live in palaces in the UK not Harry and Meghan. It’s also interested that nowhere in her piece does she repeat her false story that Harry was willing to return to royal duty to assist the family. I guess this confirms that she made it up.

  32. Serena says:

    The british media need to know that nobody outside of the UK gives a f- about the royal family, if not for Diana, H & M, and some gossip. Give it a rest with these pitiful stories, when reality is screaming something else entirely.

  33. Brassy Rebel says:

    Sure. Meghan is money hungry. When they married, she had more money than he did. And he lived in a hovel.

    What do these people smoke?

  34. girl_ninja says:

    With this sad press corps it’s the case of, “if we say it enough, then it will be true,” even though the facts are completely opposite.

  35. aquarius64 says:

    The BM is angry its ordered hit jobs on the Sussexes didn’t translate in the US that much and the ESPYs just wiped out the effectiveness. The Fail can’t use Mary Tillman at this point. The BM is losing money. If IG goes to DC, I think the BM fear people will blame the media and the BRF.

    • sunnyside up says:

      Justly blame the media and the RF As a Brit. I am afraid that if they do come here that the media and the RF will continue its war against Harry and make my country look really bad, I am hoping it goes to DC to avoid the embarrassment.

      • Carmen says:

        To be perfectly frank, I don’t see how the UK could look much worse than it already does. By shooting themselves in the foot with these never ending attacks on Harry and Meghan, they have effectively shot all their toes off.

  36. Beverley says:

    Why do these royal stenographers keep insisting that Americans have some special deference and love for the British monarchy. They appear to entertain fantasies that this American colony will be reconquered and brought to kiss the ring.

    Stop.

    We don’t give two flying figs about Charles, his home-wrecker side piece, or the useless Wales layabouts. But we do like your prince Harry. And apparently he’s finding more warmth, more welcome, and more acceptance here in the US than he ever had on Salt Island. So stop trying to explain Americans as though you really know us. Like Harry and Meghan, we made the decision to throw off our oppressors and like H&M, we’re never looking back.

  37. Emf999 says:

    I spent the weekend being vaguely annoyed about life, the universe, and everything. Two things set me off one was the Republicans response to the attempted assassination by trying to blame Democrats.

    What really set me off though was an article in the Fail alleging that Wallis Simpson stole jewelry and managing to accidentally call her the Duchess of Sussex in the headline. Ugh they just keep sinking lower.

  38. Oh come on. says:

    It’s hard to even convey how deeply the American public dgaf about King Charles or the late Queen.

    If they knew Chuck was estranged from one of his sons–which they don’t, bc Americans dgaf–they would not care.

    I’d guess <5% of all Americans can even tell you which one is William and which is Harry. (But for Black Americans, I guess it'd be more like 30%, because of Meghan.) The few Americans who care enough to know which of these princes is which, overwhelmingly side with Harry. No one (outside of this site and Fox News) gaf about the spat within the BRF.

  39. Anonymous says:

    Sorry but no one in America cared about the Queen either – we thought she was cute and colorful and old or whatever. We never really cared in the way they thought.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Anonymous, the only thing I thouht about whenever I saw a photo of her (which wasn’t often) I would think she needed to update her hair style. Geeeezzzz, I guess that would be too modern for the monarchy.

      • Carmen says:

        LOL you too? I liked Elizabeth but every time I saw her all I could think of was why in God’s name does she keep wearing those dowdy outfits?

  40. Lynwall says:

    I have such a low opinion of the British press in general. Not just the tabloids.
    This has led to a low opinion of the British who seem to accept rubbish from their media that has no qualms about lying to their faces.
    The election has somewhat changed my mind and I realise that the British are not exactly buying what the media is selling.
    That being said, Harry got a standing ovation the reaction to his speech across social media has been mostly positive.
    Only those people who rely solely on the press will buy this stupid Ness.
    Given that the readership of most of these newspapers has been declining, I really have hope that they have lost the battle, even in the UK.

  41. teresa says:

    It’s just so bizarre that the Brits think we give one rats behind about their royalty. Do they not know why we fought the Revolutionary War. I’m still going to laugh so hard when he is a full naturalized American.

  42. QuiteContrary says:

    The misogynoir continues unabated from the British media. It’s appalling.

  43. LOLikes says:

    What I don’t understand is they’re claiming that H&M are already unpopular in less than a week. jeezus! Randi Mahomes (Patrick Mahomes’s mother) who I think is a Republican??? met H&M at the Espsys & stated how they are not “the villians.” And she boasted of having a photo with them. They’re so unpopular, ya know. https://amp.marca.com/en/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/2024/07/13/66925bee268e3e2a0e8b457e.html

  44. Lululu says:

    Both of my gen Z daughters sent me videos of Harry’s speech to watch. They were impressed. One called herself a “new Prince Harry fan.” The tides have turned indeed.

    She wasn’t not a fan before, but she says her generation are not fans of the BRF due to their racist/colonialist history, so she hadn’t really paid attention until now.

  45. L4Frimaire says:

    Always find this narrative so tired and annoying. What exactly aren’t the Sussexes doing that they’re considered a flop? How much are they supposed to be doing? Who said Harry’s goal is to be a media personality because haven’t heard it from him. As for her nasty screed about Meghan, she had her own money, and still making it, and seems really happy now. I don’t know if they think the Sussexes are supposed to be part of the daily news cycle here, and equates that to popularity, which makes absolutely no sense. Anyway, try as they do to downplay Harry’s work, it just got major attention and a positive boost.

  46. kelleybelle says:

    They’re pissed because Harry was so well received and got a standing ovation, that’s all. Liars.

  47. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    The royal sycophants love to print opposite stories. What I get from this article is that Americans don’t care about William and Kate’s desperate attemps to gain popularity in the USA; Diana would have never allowed William to abuse Harry, and that she would have seen through Kate’s social climbing and money grubbing. Just flip the names within these types of “opposite day” articles, and you get a glimpse of what’s really happening with the royals that the tabloids are not “allowed” to print.

  48. Saucy&Sassy says:

    This is why Billy Idle should think twice before trying to “win over” the US, and I’m sure he is lighting up the entire continent with his incandescence. The brf must have gotten some serious dollars from the wealthy here that they don’t want to stop flowing to them. I think we can guess that money for the Wails’ Foundation probably is found to have been used in ways not expected.

  49. therese says:

    1776. Britain lost the war. They are going to lose this one. As I said before, Harry is a war veteran, and Camilla is just an old w…e. She is, the British media acts like one, and they have the nerve to tear down Meghan and call her a minx. I looked up the definition of minx; one of the meanings is a wanton woman. So, people judge by what they themselves are. Meghan is a woman of substance, intelligence, she is industrious, compassionate and charismatic. No wonder she and Harry found each other and bonded fiercely like magnets. Oh yes, Meghan is a fellow American. You’re trying to trash a fellow American and tell us what we think. They are trying to tell we Americans what Harry is when he is serving our fellow Americans. No. Espy’s video was profoundly moving, as was Harry’s masterful speech. It was supremely diplomatic and compassionate toward Mary Tillman, and extremely moving. What woman of substance would seek to tear down another woman, or man, who are doing good to other people. Speaking of the journalist mentioned in this article. Why? My only hope is that trash media Brits and the RF become the author of their own demise in public opinion. Now I love Randi Mahome. Yeah!!!!!!! I am constantly amazed at the stupidity of the British media. Are not Brits angry that their trash media makes all of Britain look like mongrels and idiots?

  50. equality says:

    What the BM doesn’t understand is that you aren’t handed respect in the US for just being born or for being a sperm or egg donor. Otherwise, books like Spare, I’m Glad My Mother Died, Mommy Dearest and more wouldn’t have sold so well.

  51. Mel says:

    We all know that this is why Kate showed up at Wimbledon,right? In any case, once again they waste time writing entire articles about stuff they make up in their head. They think they’re diminishing him instead of just showing themselves to be continually confused as to what Americans think. Harry isn’t getting booed anywhere, but they are……

  52. ohwell says:

    Ok, so everybody hates the Sussex’s, they are sooooooo irrelevant. Will the British media finally stop writing about them???

  53. bisynaptic says:

    RIP The Times of London.

  54. Berkeleyfarm says:

    Still trying to make fetch happen! After Harry gains a lot more respect among “super sports fans”.

    Including trying to wrap Charles in his mother’s popularity. I think a lot of people liked and respected her but don’t have the same view of him.