Oprah’s Interview with Meghan and Harry Explained: A Complete Guide

by



[ad_1]

On Sunday, CBS will air a two-hour interview between the majestic United States ceremonial figurehead Oprah Winfrey and two unemployed members of the British Royal Family. Here’s what you don’t need to know, but might want to know anyway.

On TV, Sunday, March 7, at 8 p.m. EST on CBS. (It will air on ITV in Great Britain on Monday March 8 at 9 p.m.)

Likewise, she overcame child poverty in rural Mississippi to become the world’s first black female billionaire: time, effort, and an overabundance of natural charisma. In a video clip released Friday, Oprah recalls that she first called Meghan to offer her an interview in “February or March 2018”. According to The Times of London, the two met in person in March when Oprah “ended up in London”, as is done, “and was invited by Meghan to meet her at Kensington Palace”, as one is.

In April, Oprah invited Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, to her home for lunch and yoga. About two months of acquaintance was enough to earn Oprah an invitation to Meghan and Harry’s wedding.

Days after the couple announced plans to ‘take a step back’ as royals, Oprah released a statement denying rumors she had told them about a course of action. Meghan and Harry eventually moved so close to Oprah’s property in Montecito, Calif. That they could be called neighbors, which in fact is how Oprah referred to Meghan in an Instagram post from December enthusiastically endorsing a brand of latte in which Meghan had recently become an investor.

While drinking tea and riding an open-top bus, Harry described his family’s new life in California, accused the press of ‘destroying’ his sanity, and described how he and Meghan faced a “Really difficult environment” when they decided to leave the royal family and leave Great Britain. He also revealed Archie’s (crocodile) first word.

A little appetizer before Sunday? Or partially return Oprah to the post before its big exclusivity?

Oprah’s interview takes place in what appears to be the Garden of Eden, or the grounds of a lush Montecito estate. Another difference is that this interview will be conducted by someone whose film work has been nominated for an Oscar.

Since announcing their decision to ‘step back as’ senior ‘members of the royal family,’ Meghan and Harry have struggled to fight the widespread interpretation that they intend to become private citizens. According to their official statements, their intention was to create new roles “within” the institution, while continuing to exercise certain official functions.

In his interview with Mr Corden, Harry stressed: “It has never gone away. It was a step backwards rather than resigning.

As for the recent PR blitz: the timing is an estimate for anyone. Last month, the couple officially confirmed to the Queen that they will not be returning as active members of the Royal Family. That may have always been the plan for their American debut, before the coronavirus disrupted their timeline.

Earlier this week, The Times of London ran an article claiming that Meghan faced a bullying complaint while working in the Royal Family. (Harry’s bad behavior was implied in less detail.) The article also suggested that Meghan had worn earrings which were a wedding gift from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman shortly after the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. It goes without saying that this report was very poorly received at Montecito.

Most quotes from The Times of London are attributed to anonymous sources who describe the effects of the couple’s alleged behavior without identifying specific incidents.

“I have had unpleasant experiences with her. I would definitely say humbled, ”said a staff member.

“The young women were shattered by their behavior,” said another.

The newspaper also reported that Meghan “denies the bullying”, and that her lawyers “said a person left after finding fault” – a claim the newspaper was “unable to corroborate”.

Although similar reports have sometimes appeared in British tabloids for years, The Times of London has a reputation for being Britain’s go-to newspaper – more Philadelphia Inquirer than National Enquirer.

No; only the victims and the bad guys. The relationship and identity of each depends on which version of events you believe. An anonymous source nodded at Meghan and Harry’s dissatisfaction with the inner workings of the palace, while criticizing the palace’s alleged failings: “The institution has just protected Meghan permanently. All the men in the gray suits that she hates have a lot to say, because they have done absolutely nothing to protect people.

Fury. Lawyers for the couple accused the royal family and their staff of malice and deception, telling The Times of London the newspaper was “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a completely false story”.

Through a spokesperson, Meghan and Harry decried the stories as “warped accusations dating back several years” brought together in a “smear campaign” intended to damage their reputation ahead of their interview with Oprah.

Since the publication of the allegations, Buckingham Palace has issued a statement express concern and announce intention to consider the matter:

“Accordingly, our HR team will review the circumstances described in the article. Staff members involved at the time, including those who have left the home, will be invited to participate to see if any lessons can be learned. “

Unsurprisingly, some backs are being raised that the Queen has a son who faces questions from the FBI about his associations with a convicted pedophile, but the palace is instead opening an investigation into Meghan’s conduct.

Meghan received a pair of diamond earrings as an official wedding gift from the Saudi Royal Family.

According to the Times of London article, when she wore them to an official dinner on a royal tour of Fiji in October 2018, media were told by staff that they had been ‘borrowed’, but no received no additional information. The dinner took place three weeks after Mr. Khashoggi’s death at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. A source in the article said palace staff advised Meghan not to wear the jewelry after wearing it a second time.

Lawyers for the Duchess insisted that at dinner time she was unaware of speculation that the Crown Prince was involved in the journalist’s murder.

A source in the Times of London article said palace staff recognized the jewelry after it appeared in the dinner photos, but “made the decision not to confront Meghan and Harry about it, out of fear of what their reaction would be. “

Not everything, but an uncomfortable number have a dark and bloody past. One example is the dazzling Koh-i-Noor diamond, taken from a young 10-year-old king in India by the British East India Company in 1849 after settlers imprisoned his mother so that it could be given to Queen Victoria. .

Earlier this week, national eyebrows were raised over when the Sussexes trotted back to back TV warnings when Prince Philip was gravely ill in hospital.

But then came the brazenly preventative bomb that was the Times of London article. And deja vu to look at the same thing very white, very middle aged, very masculine A panoply of mainstream British media types are lining up to ‘defend the honor of the royal family’ by verbally attacking a pregnant woman who has been repeatedly subjected to relentless racist smear over the years.

Hysterically attacking Meghan, only this time about the earrings and in the same breath as calling her a bully (again), just feels a little hopeless, frankly. Nor does it put “Plague Island” in a particularly good global light at a time when the British could be content with positive press.

As the Guardian’s Marina Hyde clearly put it: “Alas, as ridiculous as what Meghan and Harry do is – and they are often ridiculous – it will never, never even be a hundredth as ridiculous as the behavior of those who froth in the mouth. about that.”



[ad_2]

Source link