Prince harry

King Charles III’s state visit to Washington this week is the monarchy executing its core diplomatic function with precision and dignity. In Donald Trump’s Washington, an invitation to an event with the British monarch remains the most sought-after in the city. By stark contrast, the King’s son and daughter-in-law careen around the globe representing no one but themselves. They dress up as royals in a sustained exercise in self-promotion and profiteering that repels observers and belittles the very institution that gave them their platform. One upholds the Crown’s purpose, while the other commodifies it. The Sussexes’ grift cheapens the Crown’s reputation and insults the public’s intelligence The King and Queen travel as invited guests of the US government.

When Prince Harry left the witness box at the UK High Court this afternoon, it was observed that he was "visibly emotional." The Duke of Sussex was there to give evidence in his group legal action against the Daily Mail publishers Associated Newspapers a day earlier than expected. There is inevitably a certain amount of personal toil involved in any high-profile legal case – where the stakes for whichever side wins are considerable, both financially and reputationally. But the Duke of Sussex’s emotive, even angry appearance in court today made it quite clear to any onlooker that his motives were deeply personal. It appears that victory for him would represent a spectacular vindication of a quest that he has been on for years.

America was born of revolution, a republic forged in defiance of monarchy. Yet despite our founding mythology of liberty and self-determination, we can’t seem to resist the allure of royalty – so long as it is authentic and dutiful. That is why, even in a land that rejected monarchy, public sentiment favours hands down the Prince and Princess of Wales over the rogue runaways who swapped Buckingham for Beverly Hills.A recent YouGov poll confirms what intuition already tells us. Prince William enjoys a 63 percent favorability rating among Americans, well ahead of Harry’s 56 percent and miles beyond Meghan’s dismal 41 percent (with 25 percent viewing her unfavorably). In the UK, the Sussexes fare even worse: Harry’s approval languishes at 27 percent, Meghan’s at just 20 percent.

“Has anyone in the world ever been so tickled by the sight of lettuces?” Meghan titters to chef Alice Waters, on the final episode of her new “lifestyle television series,” With Love, Meghan. Meghan’s latest venture is an exercise in how many inspirational quotes you can simper out in five hours. She’s less duchess, more Instagram influencer. She doesn’t have the pissed-off husband half-arsedly holding the camera while she explains, in excruciating detail, how to make a balloon arch. Instead, she has a plentiful Netflix crew and reported $100 million budget.  I’m trying my hardest to find something nice to say and, well, the guests aren’t too awful and the food looks alright.

Cockburn blinked twice when he saw that Prince Harry, the not-so-honorable Duke of Sussex will receive the Pat Tillman Award for service. At the Excellence in Sports Performance Yearly Awards, or ESPYs, Prince Harry will be granted the award for his strong connection to sports and for serving the way Pat Tillman did.  Social media reactions to this news did not disappoint: "what sport did he play professionally again" "that is absolute treason" "is this a joke?" and "profoundly unamerican move imo." Many in the comments section were quick to remind the haters that Harry founded the Invictus Games, a “community for all international wounded, injured or sick servicemen and women, serving or veteran.” Prince Harry founded the Invictus Games in 2013.

There is no possibility, if you consume any kind of media, that you will not be aware of Kate Middleton’s absence from public view over the past couple of months. For a time, it was possible to put the various rumors and speculation down to over-excited people on the internet with too much time on their hands and over-vivid imaginations. Then, in an apparent attempt to quell speculation, Kensington Palace released a strangely Photoshopped image of the princess on Britain's Mother’s Day, and all hell broke loose. Even those who would normally have sighed at the increasingly prurient stories found themselves saying things like, “I’m not a conspiracy theorist but...

On September 23, 1951, King George VI was operated on for cancer. It was a grueling, dangerous procedure, conducted at Buckingham Palace by Clement Price Thomas, a leading chest surgeon. The king, unsurprisingly, was miserable at the idea, saying, “if it’s going to help me get well again, I don’t mind, but the very idea of the surgeon’s knife again is hell.” Yet he was kept unaware of the seriousness of his illness, instead being informed that the cause of his health problem was nothing more urgent than obstruction in one of his bronchial tubes, which would require a “resection” of the lung, and that it would cure the “pneumonitis” that he believed he was suffering from.

When you exist in a mixed-race family like I do — black dad, white Jewish mom, Asian uncle, Latino ex-husband — race is something that’s hard to escape. We talk about our similarities, explore our differences and consider how the experiences of one generation might be similar or different for the next. Race is somehow always on our tongues. But that doesn’t necessarily make my family racist. Nor does it make the royal family racist either.  Back in March 2021 during Oprah Winfrey’s sit-down with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, I was horrified by their now infamous exchange over the alleged concern by unnamed Windsors about the skin color of the Sussexes’ first kid. We all know what supposedly went down.