I wonder if Clarkson had a lovely time at the party with Camilla, then went home, had a few more glasses of wine and went all out?It probably should be said (frequently) that the party the queen attended was days BEFORE the article was published.
As a part of the Firm, H&M are no longer working members but as (supposedly much-loved) members of the Family, it very much should have something to do with the BRF.About the Clarkson article? It's nothing to do with them and they'll do what they always do and ignore it. If H&M want to take it further that's up to them.
The editor of The Sun is female. It's all quite horrific.
As a part of the Firm, H&M are no longer working members but as (supposedly much-loved) members of the Family, it very much should have something to do with the BRF.
But I do agree with you that they'll do nothing, as per usual.
Unfortunately for them, this one has really caught the public's attention and no matter their culpability, the RF aren't coming out of this looking good. Their Twitter was flooded with negative comments when I checked earlier today.
Yes, I agree. No way should they react or they'd be called upon to do it all the time.No it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.
Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.
No it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.
Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.
The Mail were the ones who used the lunch to prove a point, implying that Camilla would condone the article. Probably because they know a large proportion of their readership would not care about degrading and shaming a woman who does not conform.It probably should be said (frequently) that the party the queen attended was days BEFORE the article was published.
But they manage to do it when Tatler, in a puff piece about Kate implies thst she is annoyed about the amount of work she has to do, or that she has hair extensions? They are just proving Meghan and Harry's point. It was written by an individual but published by a National newspaperNo it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.
Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.
But the Palace don't represent H&M any more. The Sussexes can respond if they want to, they've never been slow at that in the pastThe Msil were the ones who used the lunch to prove a point, implying that Camilla would condone the article. Probably because they know a large proportion of their readership would not care about degrading and shaming a woman twho does not conform.
But they manage to do it when Tatler, in a puff piece about Kate implies thst she is annoyed about the amount of work she has to do, or that she has hair extensions? They are just proving Meghan and Harry's point.
Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.But the Palace don't represent H&M any more. The Sussexes can respond if they want to, they've never been slow at that in the past
She was working for them at the time of the incident though and the incident occurred in their 'house'. It's different. The Palace have never employed ClarksonHussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.
The initial incident took place at an event hosted by the Queen Consort, so it makes the Palace would be involved in its resolution. It's silly to conflate this with a column.Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.
They may not have employed Clarkson but was he not invited to a lunch hosted by the Queen. If it was Dan Wootton, Sarah Vine making this commented I'd still find them disgusting but he has not been embraced in royal circles in public.She was working for them at the time of the incident though and the incident occurred in their 'house'. It's different. The Palace have never employed Clarkson
She didn't host it. She was a guest along with many others. The RF aren't going to change. If they didn't respond to H&M themselves then they're not going to respond to third parties.They may not have employed Clarkson but was he not invited to a lunch hosted by the Queen. If it was Dan Wootton, Sarah Vine making this commented I'd still find them disgusting but he has not been embraced in royal circles in public.
By continuing this never complain or explain policy, it allows the press to see how far they can push it, and essentially if anyone decides they no longer want to be part of the working RF, it's a free for all for you to be harassed by the media.
Because Hussey was working for the Palace when it happened.Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.
But she is friends with him - That's wildly reported.For those who still haven’t realised… Camilla did NOT host the lunch. She was just a guest, as was Jeremy Clarkson.
Extremely bad timing but it has NOTHING to do with Camilla!
I don't think the DM editor was there. I just can't see the problems with her attending a Christmas party with Clarkson, Morgan and a LOT of other people. H&M have made it very clear they have not time for the royal family and think they're liars and racists and that they are not represented by them.But she is friends with him - That's wildly reported.
Piers Morgan AND the editor of the Daily Fail were at this party too and as Queen Consort I'm sure she had the guestlist in advance to see who was going. The optics for this are so bad on her part.
Also, Harry and Meghan are FAMILY to these people - I'd like to think they'd have their back on some level with a public comment
The optics are only bad if you ignore the fact that the party was a few days BEFORE the article.But she is friends with him - That's wildly reported.
Piers Morgan AND the editor of the Daily Fail were at this party too and as Queen Consort I'm sure she had the guestlist in advance to see who was going. The optics for this are so bad on her part.
Also, Harry and Meghan are FAMILY to these people - I'd like to think they'd have their back on some level with a public comment
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?