Martha Stewart and Ina Garten have known each other for decades. Not surprising, considering they’ve built their respective NY-based brands in similar fields, though Ina has kept her focus on cooking whereas Martha sought dominance over home arts at large. As fate would have it, both of them have biographical projects coming out next month: Ina’s memoir Be Ready When the Luck Happens on October 1, and the Netflix documentary Martha on October 30 (whether the real Martha likes it or not). So these women are knee-deep in promotional duties, to the point where they’re even overlapping. The New Yorker recently ran an article on Ina, and they called on Martha for some comments. This is standard practice for profiles, and it’s generally understood that the people contacted offer positive anecdotes on the main profile. But not our Martha! Instead Martha told the magazine that Ina snubbed her when she went to prison, and that it was terribly “unfriendly” of the contessa.

“When I was sent off to Alderson Prison, she stopped talking to me,” Stewart said. “I found that extremely distressing and extremely unfriendly.” (Although she maintained her innocence, Stewart was found guilty of conspiracy, obstruction and two counts of lying to investigators related to her involvement in an insider trading scandal in 2004. She was sentenced to five months in prison, five months of home confinement and two years of supervised probation.)

While Garten “firmly” denied Stewart’s recollection of the end of their friendship, Stewart’s longtime publicist, Susan Magrino, maintained that Stewart was “not bitter at all” about the fallout.

“There’s no feud,” Magrino, 62, told The New Yorker.

Stewart and Garten first crossed paths in the early ‘90s after Stewart was shopping at the latter’s now-closed Barefoot Contessa store in East Hampton, New York.

“We were in a gigantic black Suburban,” Chip Gibson, who was head of Crown Publishing at the time, told The New Yorker. “And suddenly she veered almost crashingly to the curb and said, ‘I’ve got to get lemon squares.’”

“My desk was right in front of the cheese case and we just ended up in a conversation,” Garten told TIME of their meeting in 2017. “We ended up actually doing benefits together where it was at her house and I was the caterer, and we became friends after that.”

Stewart later connected Garten with an editor, who would go on to work with the future Food Network star on her first cookbook, The Barefoot Contessa. Nearly one decade after meeting, Stewart introduced viewers to Garten during a 1999 episode of her Martha Stewart Living.

Stewart also penned the foreword of Garten’s cookbook, in which she wrote, “It took a while, but I finally understood what motivated Ina, realizing that here was a true kindred spirit with really similar but unique talents.”

Additionally, Stewart’s production company tried to help launch Garten’s television career on the Food Network with a show whose working title was Someone’s in the Kitchen With Ina. However, after a director called her out for taking a bite of food on camera and speaking with her mouth full, Garten said she decided TV wasn’t for her and the show was shelved.

She would later go on to star on the network’s hit cooking show Barefoot Contessa, which ran from 2002 to 2021.

Though rumors of bad blood between the pair have plagued them for years, Garten hasn’t shied away from praising Stewart.

“I think she did something really important, which is that she took something that wasn’t valued, which is home arts, and raised it to a level that people were proud to do it and that completely changed the landscape,” she previously told TIME. “I then took it in my own direction, which is that I’m not a trained professional chef, cooking is really hard for me — here I am 40 years in the food business, it’s still hard for me.”

[From Us Weekly]

You know who I feel for? Martha’s publicist! “There’s no feud! Martha’s not bitter! Nothing to see here!” I don’t think this story will damage either Ina or Martha’s reputations; if anything I think each woman comes out maintaining her publicly-perceived image. But I must ask, what was Ina expecting?! I mean, we’re talking about the same Martha Stewart who criticized Ina for being pro cosmo-drinking as we were all muddling through the pandemic (a comment Martha made while launching a chardonnay line, btw). The same Martha Stewart who’s ready for her friends to die so she can date their husbands. I think it’s fair to say that if you’re turning to Martha for a character reference, that gamble is entirely on you. The real scoop of The New Yorker article, in my opinion, is the account of Martha nearly crashing into the Barefoot Contessa yelling, “I must have lemon squares!!!” I need a dramatization of this event put on screen STAT.

PS — I simply adore the title Someone’s in the Kitchen With Ina.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Martha Stewart (@marthastewart48)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by TODAY (@todayshow)

photos via Instagram and credit: Jennifer Graylock-Graylock.com / Avalon

Prince William was in Aberdeen late last week to check in on his big Homewards program. Homewards is basically the Royal Foundation handing out money to various homeless shelters, only instead of just highlighting the work of those shelters, William wants credit for being the savior of homeless people and he spent months centering himself in the issue. Homewards was launched in June 2023, and William’s visit last week was supposed to be a “one year later” check-in (only it was 15 months later). While he was in town, William hosted a Homewards event at a controversial venue. How controversial? Well, the headlines have “Prince William” and “cocaine” together.

Prince William has been slammed after hosting an event at a Scottish venue with close ties to a well-known convicted drug dealer. The heir to the throne held talks at the Union Kirk in Aberdeen city centre as part of a promotional push for his anti-homelessness project Homewards – despite the venue’s links with cocaine dealer Paul Clarkson.

Clarkson is the son of Portugal-based publican Stuart Clarkson, who owns a number of boozers in the granite city, including the Union Kirk. Paul Clarkson was in April this year ordered to pay back the £65,000 he was accused of making in profit from pushing the Class A drug, of which the courts said he had paid back £40,000.

In December 2021, he was sentenced to eight months in prison after being caught with more than £1600 worth of cocaine – which he claimed to have been selling to fund his own habit – at a lockdown-busting party at one of his dad’s venues, the Draft Project. Documents show Aberdeen City Council received scores of complaints about the venue, with the Clarkson family blamed for encouraging lockdown breaches when Covid was still rife.

One furious Aberdeen local told the Sunday National he thought it was “absolutely disgusting” William had visited the Union Kirk last week, owing to its ownership by the Clarkson family.

He said: “Even the local bobbies were disgusted. Terrible message to send to people.”

Graham Smith (below), head of the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic, said the visit called into question Prince William’s judgement. He said: “Prince William’s homeless project has been all show and little substance from the start. So it doesn’t surprise me that he hasn’t bothered to do some due diligence on who he’s working with. This obviously raises questions as to what money was paid for the use of the facilities and what kind of operation William is backing when the people involved have less than stellar reputations. There must be lots of other venues and charities that could have hosted the event. Why did he choose that one?”

Another Aberdeen resident quipped: “With Charlie being his dad, it makes perfect sense for Prince William to visit.”

[From The National]

I found this slightly confusing – from what I gather, Stuart Clarkson (the father) is the one who owns the pubs and venues, and Stuart Clarkson’s son Paul Clarkson is the one who went to prison for dealing coke. Stuart Clarkson is also being accused of allowing his pubs and venues to be used during the pandemic to flout social-distancing and lockdown rules, and Paul was caught in one of his father’s pubs with all of that cocaine. It sounds like the dad owns the pubs and lets his son deal out of them. Wonder how these establishments got on William’s radar, huh? I mean, I could very easily come up with explanations for why William shouldn’t catch a lot of heat for this, but think about what the British media would do if Harry and Meghan hosted an event at a venue owned and operated by a coke dealer and his dad.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

I will always want to give Janet Jackson the benefit of the doubt. Her musical impact is major and majorly underrated. I still believe Rhythm Nation is one of the best albums of all time. Her career was undermined and almost destroyed by very powerful people. My point is that there’s every reason to give Janet the benefit of the doubt. But we can also call bullsh-t on her, because she just said some really f–ked up sh-t to the Guardian. The bulk of the Guardian’s interview/profile is about her life as a divorced mom living in London and her career. She apparently has to live in London because her son’s father Wissam Al Mana is London-based, and I would assume that those were the terms of her divorce from Wissam. Janet “crinkled her nose” when asked if she enjoys living in London. That’s backstory for what everyone’s talking about, which is that Janet is extremely misinformed on the American election. I have no idea what media she’s consuming in England, but it’s bad. Here’s the relevant portion, with everything in context:

We move on to talk about the state of the nation. Jackson brought politics directly to the pop consciousness with Rhythm Nation, which addressed racism, poverty and inequality – all issues just as urgent today as they were 35 years ago. She is a prolific social media user, and has used her profile to support Black Lives Matter, to bring awareness to police brutality. Does she feel despondent about how slow change is in coming or is she hopeful about the future?

“Well, there’s all this child trafficking crap that’s going on and sex trafficking crap, you know what I mean, that wasn’t so prevalent then?” It’s a strange about-turn, not least because of the many allegations of child sexual abuse made against Michael. But it is also the most forceful she has been since we sat down. “At least, we didn’t know about it back then. I don’t think we did, did we? Not really. I think it’s really now out in the open, because it’s like a billion-dollar business and all that crap.”

I wonder what internet rabbit holes she’s been going down, but, before I can ask, she’s moved on. “On [the Rhythm Nation album], for us, it was about making a difference in a kid’s life, a teenager’s life, from them taking this path with drugs and going down the wrong street to trying to make something of themself.”

On that record she sang about “joining voices in protest to social injustice” and “pushing toward a world rid of colour lines”. I wonder where she stands on the forthcoming election. After all, I say, America could be on the verge of voting in its first black female president, Kamala Harris.

“Well, you know what they supposedly said?” she asks me. “She’s not black. That’s what I heard. That she’s Indian.”

She looks at me expectantly, perhaps assuming that I have Indian heritage. “Well, she’s both,” I offer.

“Her father’s white. That’s what I was told. I mean, I haven’t watched the news in a few days,” she coughs. “I was told that they discovered her father was white.”

I’m floored at this point. It’s well known that Harris’s father is a Jamaican economist, a Stanford professor who split from her Indian mother when she was five. “My mother understood very well that she was raising two black daughters,” Harris wrote in her book The Truths We Hold.

The people who are most vocal in questioning the facts of Harris’s identity tend to be hardcore QAnon-adjacent, Trump-loving conspiracy theorists. I don’t think Jackson falls into that camp, but I do wonder what the algorithms are serving her. I start again. Harris has dual heritage, I say, and, given this moment, does Jackson think America is ready for her – if we agree she’s black? Or, OK, a woman of colour?

“I don’t know,” Jackson stage whispers. “Honestly, I don’t want to answer that because I really, truthfully, don’t know. I think either way it goes is going to be mayhem.”

She doesn’t think there will be a peaceful transition of power?

“I think there might be mayhem,” she falters. “Either way it goes, but we’ll have to see.”

[From The Guardian]

I chuckled at the Guardian writer basically writing “what in the QAnon bullsh-t am I hearing now??” And that’s what it is, this has all of the hallmarks of Janet falling down a particularly batsh-t QAnon rabbit hole – the trafficking comments, the eagerness to spin/amplify conspiracies around a Black woman’s race, the ambivalence when suggesting that there will be a bloody insurrection again. And since people are dumb (including Janet, apparently), let’s say it again for the record: Kamala Harris is Black and Indian. She’s both. Her father is a Black man from Jamaica. Her mother was an Indian immigrant. Janet needs to stop falling down QAnon rabbit holes.

Throughout Sunday, this story got even more bonkers when a man claiming to be Janet’s manager apologized for Janet’s comments, saying in part: “Janet Jackson would like to clarify her recent comments. She recognizes that her statements regarding Vice President Kamala Harris’ racial identity were based on misinformation. Janet respects Harris’ dual heritage as both Black and Indian and apologizes for any confusion caused.” Then a few hours later, Janet’s actual manager (her brother Randy) said this guy does not represent Janet and that the apology is not real or authorized. So… even days/weeks after the interview went down, Janet apparently feels no need to backtrack or clarify. Very strange.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Prince Harry is in New York this week, doing high-level and high-profile events and meetings with a multitude of charities and NGOs. He is a busy man who works with a variety of important causes, from landmines to conservation to mental health and children’s health. Obviously, Harry doesn’t have to go to CNN and the Daily Mail and beg them to refer to him as a global statesman. Harry IS a global statesman and an internationally recognized philanthropist and advocate. Meanwhile, Harry’s brother and sister-in-law are still trying to relaunch themselves (in a very sad way) yet again to an American audience.

The Prince and Princess of Wales have set their sights on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s home turf as they relaunch plans for their charitable foundation in the US. The royal couple were so keen to win the necessary approval for registering the foundation’s brand from the American trademark authorities that they broke into their summer holiday to complete vital paperwork, The Mail on ­Sunday can reveal. Their foundation’s focus is now on mental health.

Insiders say that the ambitious move is further evidence that the Princess, 42, is ‘on the road to recovery’ from cancer as she prepares for a return to ‘light duties’ after completing chemotherapy.

It raises the prospect of a trip to the US, where Prince Harry and Meghan live in California, although it is stressed there are no immediate plans to travel overseas. The couple last crossed the Atlantic in 2022 for William’s environmental project The Earthshot Prize.

Now the MoS can reveal a US lawyer acting for Kensington Palace has reignited the [foundation’s] proposals. American projects previously focused on the illegal wildlife trade. But an application to the US Patent and Trademark Office last year instead emphasised ‘campaigning’ and ‘fundraising’ linked to ‘mental health initiatives’. It also included an unusual request for ‘printed race numbers, clothing, footwear, headgear’, prompting speculation the couple, both keen runners, were planning to host a charity fun run in the US.

In March, their trademark was refused over technicalities. It was the same month the Princess revealed she had been diagnosed with cancer, and the application has lain dormant for five months. But after good news about her progress, a lawyer restarted the process . Palace sources say the trademark is ‘internal housekeeping’ and the Royal Foundation has no immediate plans to launch a US mental health initiative.

But Royal commentator Richard Palmer said: ‘Given speculation that the Princess might never return to full-time work, this is a positive sign that she and William have hopes of expanding the Royal Foundation in the US. Perhaps [it]wants to raise its profile to tap into American philanthropists?’

Joe Little, of Majesty Magazine, added: ‘It’s another sign that the Princess is on the road to recovery. Clearly a lot of thought and planning has gone into this application, and we can only interpret this as a positive step.’

[From The Mail]

Remember when William and Kate’s Boston trip was supposed to be their big, splashy, thunder-stealing trip which would knock the Sussexes back on their heels? LMAO. Remember William’s trip to New York last year, where he lied about going for a run and the mayor canceled on him? Yeah. Don’t get me wrong, I have no doubt that William wants to try to relaunch himself in America and make more visits to North America. Kate does not, she doesn’t want to travel anymore and that’s something no one can admit outloud. But sure, trademark applications are tricky, I’m glad the Mail is figuring that out! And it’s funny that Will and Kate want credit for stepping away from their summer holiday to “complete vital paperwork.” The bar is in hell, as always.

It’s also still amazing to me that: William is skipping the Earthshot busywork in New York this year (because Harry’s there) and that he skipped the Tusk Trust fundraiser in the Hamptons in August. While Huevo is desperate to have what Harry has in America (respect & attention), William is also just fundamentally too lazy to actually follow through.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

The Hollywood Reporter recently published a bizarre “hit piece” on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. While THR has been extremely snide about the Sussexes several times now, the Rambling Reporter’s “Why Hollywood Keeps Quitting on Harry and Meghan” came across as six-year-old stale tea from British reporting, with “sources” claiming that Meghan marches around the office, barking orders and making grown men weep. One of the big tells was that THR repeated the “Duchess Difficult” moniker which was started in 2018 by the racists working for Prince William and Kate. It really did feel like THR’s whole piece was sourced out of Kensington Palace… circa 2018-19. Meanwhile, the Sussexes have lived and worked in Montecito for more than four years. Well, there’s some pushback. And now I have a hard time believing that the Sussexes’ team would decide to push back on THR’s story… by talking off the record to GB News? Really? Not Variety? Not Deadline? Anyway, this is seemingly rare pushback from Team Sussex, so enjoy:

Allegations about Meghan Markle’s attitude to her staff have been labelled “fabrications” by Archewell insiders, GB News can exclusively reveal. A damning report published by The Hollywood Reporter had labelled Meghan “Duchess Difficult” and alleged “everyone’s terrified” of her as scathing claims about working conditions under the Sussexes came to light.

The outlet had included source quotes saying the duchess “marches around like a dictator in high heels, fuming and barking orders” – while in the past, Meghan herself has called comments on her so-called “bullying behaviour” a “calculated smear campaign”.

But now, GBNews.com has unearthed fresh details which look to have put the claims to bed in a new twist in the staffing saga. GB News has been handed an absolute denial of the allegations – as well as Meghan’s message to her employees – and has confirmed with several current staffers that the “Duchess Difficult” moniker has never been used.

One Archewell source, who asked not to be named, said: “These quotes were fabricated by someone lacking knowledge of our company. The duke and duchess work from Montecito, and we’re based in Hollywood. They likely think we’re all in the same office and that this quote would fly, but the circumstances don’t even allow for it. If she’s ‘marching around’ and ‘barking orders’, no Archewell employee could factually claim that… It’s total nonsense.”

The Duchess of Sussex had also been targeted by claims that she had filed “angry” 5am emails to employees. In response, another source said: “Who hasn’t sent an email when they can’t sleep or are awake early? I’ve never once ever gotten an email from either of them at that hour – and even if I did, the duchess specifically notes in her email signature that everyone has a different working day, and to not feel obligated to respond outside of normal business hours. These source quotes don’t make any sense!”

In another condemnation of the claims, GB News understands that Meghan’s email signature contains the phrase: “My working day may not be your working day. Please do not feel obliged to reply to this email outside your normal working hours.”

[From GB News]

This is a solid rebuttal and I genuinely hope it’s from someone connected to Archewell. I just wish it was in Variety or Deadline, you know? Why are Sussex sources going to GB News of all places? This whole storyline has been bizarre, another asinine piece of the larger narrative the British media has been trying to force for years: that the Sussexes have not been welcomed in “Hollywood,” that they could be “kicked out” and “sent back to Britain.” It is not happening. As for Meghan’s alleged sign-off… I believe that too, and she probably started using it when she moved back to California. Those British people acted like they had never received an off-hours text or email from their boss or coworker ever. They’re still crying about it.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Sometimes, it really does feel like we all collectively entered some wormhole in 2016 and time makes no sense anymore. For the better part of a DECADE, we’ve been dealing with Donald Trump and his MAGA cult. Think about that. Nine years of dealing with the violent cult of personality around Trump, a cult of ignorance and hate, a cult of racism and misogyny, a cult of fraud and lies. We talk a lot about what a “second Trump presidency” would look like as a very real scare tactic, but what will it look like if Trump loses in November? What happens to his cult after their orange god loses the popular vote for the third time and the presidency for the second time? The con man turned 78 years old this summer. He will be 82 years old in 2028. Would he run again, or pass the torch to some deranged heir? Well, Trump is telling people that he will not run again if he loses.

Republican Donald Trump said that he will not make a fourth consecutive run for the U.S. presidency if he loses the Nov. 5 election, saying “that will be it” in an interview released on Sunday.

Asked if he saw himself running again in four years if he is not successful in his third consecutive bid for the White House, the 78-year-old former president told Sharyl Attkisson’s “Full Measure” program: “No I don’t. I think that will be — that will be it. I don’t see that at all. Hopefully, we will be successful.”

Trump faces a tight race against Democratic U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris, with polls showing the two neck-and-neck in key battleground states that are likely to be decisive in determining the winner, even as Harris has begun to edge up in nationwide polls.

Trump launched his first reelection bid for the 2020 election the same day he was inaugurated in 2017 and announced his latest White House bid two years ago in November 2022.

Asked whether the four year break helped him regroup and figure out who he could trust as allies, Trump said: “It would have been easier if I did it … contiguous.”

“But the benefit is more than anything else, it shows how bad they were,” he added.

[From Reuters]

Do you believe him? The thing is, if he loses this year, that’s pretty much game over for him – chickens will come home to roost, finally. He’s got indictments and court cases up the wazoo. He’s hemorrhaging money on legal bills and civil and federal penalties. Some say that Trump isn’t just running this year to make his court cases go away, that it’s also a money-making venture for him, that he’s using campaign money to pay his legal expenses and debts. Hopefully, by 2028, he’ll be in prison.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red, mug shot.

Prince Harry is already in New York! He was in California on Friday evening, attending and speaking at Kevin Costner’s fundraiser-concert in Carpinteria. Then on Saturday, Harry arrived in New York. We do not have access to any of the photos, but on Saturday evening, he attended the WHO dinner in New York, ahead of the start of the UN General Assembly High-Level Week He met with Queen Mathilde of Belgium and other dignitaries and advocates for ending violence against children. You can read more about the event and the cause here. Additionally, the Telegraph had a preview of two of Harry’s events in NYC this week. He plans to highlight his work with The Diana Award and the HALO Trust.

When he was 18, the Duke of Sussex vowed to finish the work started by his mother, Princess Diana. More than two decades on, he remains true to his word. On Monday, he will take to the stage before a global audience to champion two causes intrinsically linked to her legacy: landmines and young people.

Prince Harry, 40, will be the star guest at five high-profile events held over two days in New York during UN General Assembly High-Level Week and Climate Week, which will also see him focus on conservation, sustainable travel and the many crises facing the tiny African country of Lesotho. But it will be his first two appearances that honour that birthday pledge; when he steps out on behalf of the Diana Award, which works to create positive change for young people, and the Halo Trust, the charity for which the late Princess famously issued a clarion call for action by walking through an Angolan minefield in 1997.

Tessy Ojo, the chief executive of the Diana Award, hailed the Duke’s continuing support as “truly priceless”, while the Halo Trust said that in a time of “unprecedented conflict” the Duke’s voice was needed “more than ever”.

The appearances will come amid a flurry of activity for the Duke, marking something of a shift in his public profile as he takes centre stage, solo, to further his own charitable causes. Travelling without the Duchess of Sussex, he will undertake a busy schedule somewhat evocative of his days as a working royal, with back-to-back charity engagements in place of glitzy award ceremonies and television interviews.

When he steps out at the Sheraton Hotel in Times Square on Monday morning, he may well cast his mind back to that pledge [to make his mother proud]. The Duke’s first engagement of the week will be on behalf of the Diana Award, a charity set up to reflect the late Princess’s belief that young people can change the world – and the only one to bear her name. He will take part in a panel discussion with Christina Williams and Chiara Riyanti Hutapea Zhang, two young recipients of the Diana Award, and Dr Ojo on the current mental health crisis engulfing young people.

The event coincides with the award’s 25th anniversary celebrations, and Dr Ojo said that the continuing support of both the Duke and the Prince of Wales was critical.

“It’s incredibly helpful to have people in positions of power, especially a non-political position, and especially in a system when young people are feeling more and more unheard and unseen, speak up for us,” she said. “To have people who have that platform, who have that power, not only to listen to young people but help amplify their voices, is truly priceless and we are deeply honoured and grateful to have both of them involved in our work, lending their voices to the challenges that young people face.”

[From The Telegraph]

There were equally supportive quotes from The HALO Trust people, basically that Harry is the real deal and he’s absolutely continuing his mother’s important work on landmines. This week is a very big deal for Harry – going solo to all of these significant events, highlighting his causes and speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative too. I hope we get a lot of photos!

Prince Harry at the WHO Dinner at the start of UN Week. pic.twitter.com/TIg3dL7JBT

— Dr. Zanye Omobolanle (@bookedbusy) September 23, 2024

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.

On September 12, the Hollywood Reporter’s Rambling Reporter did a completely bizarre story called “Why Hollywood Keeps Quitting on Harry and Meghan.” The evidence of “Hollywood quitting” the Sussexes is that Harry fired a chief of staff after three months (the guy has been leaking about it ever since) and… something something Netflix! Honestly, the bulk of THR’s story was recycled gossip from 2018-19, when Harry and Meghan lived in the UK and they were under siege on a daily basis from an unhinged national media and a monarchy set on destroying them. That’s when Kensington Palace gave birth to the “Duchess Difficult” narrative, a narrative about Meghan “bullying” staffers and “making grown men cry.” Remember the 5 am emails? THR dusted that off too. One source claimed, “She’s absolutely relentless. She marches around like a dictator in high heels, fuming and barking orders. I’ve watched her reduce grown men to tears.” Goals, truly. A vibe, as the kids would say. Well, it took a week, but now the Daily Mail is trying to piggyback on THR’s story. The Mail’s Alison Boshoff screeches the same question the Mail has been desperately obsessed with for years: “Has Hollywood turned on the Sussexes?” Some highlights:

The Sussexes were missing from WME’s Emmys afterparty: Missing, though, was one of Emanuel’s most famous ­clients, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. She signed with him in April 2023 in what seemed to be a certain harbinger of some big-ticket commercial tie-ups and maybe more deals in entertainment to go alongside her ­existing Netflix gig. But – just three days after a ­brutal take-down in the usually placid industry bible The Hollywood Reporter, which labelled her as ‘Duchess Difficult’, neither she nor husband Prince Harry were showing their faces. They weren’t nominated for any Emmys either – obviously.

Were they invited? Whether they didn’t get an invite or declined to go, their attendance at the event would have made the couple appear at least sanguine in the wake of the article which talked about her working practices, saying she was ‘just terrible’, ‘a dictator in high heels’ and had ‘made grown men cry’. However, for whatever reason, the pair stayed home. It matters if you work in TV and don’t go to the Emmys. People notice and judge which rung of the ladder you are on accordingly.

Schadenfreude & venom: One senior figure, who has watched Harry and Meghan’s progress in Hollywood with interest, said this week that they seem to be reaping the kind of ‘schadenfreude with extra venom’ at which the entertainment business excels. He adds: ‘It was only a matter of time before the industry Press started taking shots. It’s hard to find anyone with a good word to say for their film and television credibility.’

The Hollywood Reporter hit-piece: In all, the Hollywood Reporter article was just the kind of ­unflattering ‘hit piece’ which you might expect the talent agency WME to have strangled at birth for their client, Meghan. One senior Hollywood publicist tells me: ‘First of all, everyone industry-wide, EVERYONE reads The Hollywood Reporter. It’s really striking that WME did not stop this running.’ She adds: ‘WME normally – you would think – would have been threatening and denying access to other stars. Was this done here? The only thing the Sussexes could rally with was ‘no comment at this time’ from a spokesman.’

The Sussexes were never taken seriously: A senior producer says: ‘I don’t think mainstream Hollywood ever took them seriously. From day one Archewell felt to most industry onlookers more like a brand ­building exercise than a genuine production operation. Netflix were handing out vanity deals like candy at the time and so everybody just shrugged their shoulders and assumed their company wouldn’t get much done despite the generous backing. But even Harry and Meghan ­naysayers would have been shocked at how little they’ve ­actually achieved. And in the more austere climate of the industry in 2024 when thousands of people have lost jobs and the entertainment industry economy is struggling, there’s now a genuine dislike and distrust towards them by some.’

Meghan’s Netflix cooking show: Netflix is understood to have offered to run the ARO brand for Meghan, which makes sense as it has huge experience of global marketing and merchandising. And Netflix boss Ted Sarandos, in London this week for the Royal Television Society conference, is a voice on her side. He said of Meghan: ‘I’ve been out with a lot of famous people before – the way that people react to Meghan is otherworldly.’

[From The Daily Mail]

The second half of the piece is just Boshoff trying to mock Meghan’s ARO venture (it hasn’t launched yet) and the cooking show (it hasn’t aired yet) and it all has the whiff of bullsh-t. ALL of this does, from the Hollywood Reporter piece (which mimicked years-old smears on Meghan) to the NY Post picking up THR’s story, to this. The only legitimate point I think Boshoff makes here is that WME should have done more to push back on THR’s story, or Archewell should have pushed back with their own operation. Y’all have yelled at me for this for years, but it’s incredibly stupid for Harry and Meghan to let these nasty “industry stories” sit and fester unchallenged. I get why the Sussexes mostly give the silent treatment to the lunacy from Salt Island. But when these sh-tty, out-of-nowhere attacks come from the Hollywood Reporter or Bill Simmons, you can’t just no-comment the situation. Fight back, it’s about your business! It’s about your professional reputation!

Also: no, Hollywood hasn’t turned on them. They are still famous and well-connected and they have many industry allies and friends. Harry just won an ESPY Award and he’s about to speak at the Clinton Global Initiative. Meghan is one of the most talked-about women in the world and her most recent interview was to the NY Times, where she described her investments in women-led fashion labels. Even if Harry and Meghan were not hilariously successful by every metric, they still wouldn’t come crawling back to Salt Island. Which, let’s be real, is the narrative the Mail is trying to sell.

Photos courtesy of Netflix.

Prince Harry turned up solo at Friday night’s One805LIVE! concert/event, held at Kevin Costner’s Carpinteria estate. Harry and Meghan joined the event last year, and both were on stage to honor various Santa Barbara-area first responders. The event is a huge local fundraiser for firefighters, local police departments and sheriff’s departments. There’s music and tons of local celebrities come out. Meghan missed this year’s concert, and it seems like Harry told people that she was sick. I believe it! Covid is going around, as is a seasonal cold. They have two kids who go to school, and schools are germ incubators. Lots of people are sick this time of year, I’m just saying. As for the event, Harry was once again invited on stage, and he presented an award to an air support pilot.

Prince Harry spent his Friday night in Carpinteria, Calif., helping raise funds for Santa Barbara County First Responders. The prince took the stage at the star-filled One805LIVE! concert, hosted by Kevin Costner. The concert helps raise funds for the local fire, police, and sheriff departments, with proceeds going towards equipment and mental health resources.

The Duke of Sussex took the stage in front of hundreds of concertgoers with the night’s honoree, Santa Barbara County air support pilot Loren Courtney.

“As you’ve probably heard already, 22 years [of] military service over 10,000 hours and rarely sees his family because he’s always here flying helicopters,” Prince Harry said of Courtney. After he quipped that Courtney was 65 years old but looked 40, he asked him, “Why do you still do what you do?”

“I do this because I love doing it and I love doing it for the county of Santa Barbara. It’s a rewarding experience whenever we go out, either putting out fires or rescuing somebody in the back country or medical evacuations from vehicle accidents or doing the law patrol, keeping citizens safe,” Courtney replied.

When Prince Harry asked if there was “an experience or a story that stands out” from his years of service, Courtney recalled an experience when he was doing search and rescue in Colorado and helped rescue a group of skiers who had gone off a 30-foot embankment. One of them, he said, suffered a severe head injury and took five attempts to get out.

“I learned in the military, you never leave anybody behind. We got him out. He spent almost a year in intensive care and then rehab, and now he’s walking, he got married. He actually went to the top of the Grand Tetons and, and proposed to his girlfriend after the accident,” the pilot added.

“You didn’t have to rescue him again, did you,” Prince Harry joked. “You are one of the many heroes here tonight. There are people here tonight who are alive because of you and who are back to their families because of you… from everybody here, thank you so much.”

[From People]

Nice. Harry and Meghan handed out some of the awards last year, and I’m sure they’ll both be invited next year too. I kind of think Kevin Costner has a great deal of affection for the local royals. There were so many other celebrities there too: Cameron Diaz, Zoe Saldana, Pink, Rob Lowe, Richard Marx and more.

I’m also looking closely at Harry’s clothes here – very soft-looking dark-wash jeans, a subtle-striped button-down, a slim-cut sport coat and a necklace. Did Meghan dress him before he left the house or did he put this together himself? It’s really good – casual, but dressed up enough for a fundraiser/concert.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Last Thursday, New York Magazine suddenly announced that journalist Olivia Nuzzi was put on leave after they discovered/learned that she had been engaging in an affair with Robert Kennedy Jr. There are several funny/awful/unethical elements to all of this. Status broke the larger story on Thursday, with some interesting details like Nuzzi did not “proactively disclose” her relationship with Kennedy to New York Mag and the magazine “only recently learned of it.” Which explains why the magazine acknowledged that if they had known, they never would have let Nuzzi cover any part of the election. Status also gave a timeline – Nuzzi met Kennedy late last year, probably October or early November 2023, when she interviewed him for a New York cover story. Then the “romantic” relationship “started around the new year” and continued through this year. The entire time, Nuzzi was engaged to Politico’s Ryan Lizza, and they were seen by some as beltway media’s It Couple. Lizza announced their split on Friday, and then Puck dropped some exclusive news hours later:

In a subsequent statement that contained quite a morsel of a twist, Olivia Nuzzi clarified that the relationship was “never physical”—an insinuation that it was some sort of prurient emotional and sexting dynamic. For its part, R.F.K.’s camp claimed that the two had met only once, for the interview that “yielded a hit piece” in the magazine. (At the time, R.F.K. tweeted out the article and called it “provocative.”)

As it turns out, Nuzzi sent Kennedy nude photos of herself—“demure,” per a source familiar—and the relationship likely was indeed strictly remotus (of course, only two people know for sure). Meanwhile, the relationship probably started just a bit earlier than the existing timeline suggests, and the claim by R.F.K.’s spokesperson that they only met once is not entirely accurate. (It was more than once, but whatever.)

Nuzzi and Ryan Lizza had been engaged for two years, up until a month or so ago, when they broke up. In the immediate aftermath, some of Nuzzi’s associates advanced the idea that Lizza had leaked news of his ex-fiancée’s SMS dalliance to Haskell and New York, perhaps through anonymous channels, in order to exact some measure of retribution. Again, there are certain things only certain people know for sure, but my reporting thus far leads me to believe that this hypothesis is not true. (Interpret this how you will, but Darcy’s original report notes that the 70-year-old R.F.K. was “alleged to have boasted privately about the alleged relationship” with the 31-year-old journalist.)

Outside the rampant speculation about disgruntled lovers and ulterior motives, the most pertinent question is whether Nuzzi will keep her job. After a chaotic first 24 hours in which Nuzzi appeared to have been getting conflicting advice from multiple friends, frenemies, and representatives, she is now quietly awaiting the results of her employer’s investigation. The salient question for Haskell and Vox Media chief executive Jim Bankoff, of course, is whether her relationship with R.F.K. influenced any of her coverage—including, most notably, her memorable July feature about “the conspiracy of silence” to protect Joe Biden from scrutiny over his mental decline. (At the time of publication, Kennedy was still running on a third-party ticket.) In an interview with The New York Times in March, Nuzzi asserted that the 2024 campaign was “a three-man race,” and she knocked “the establishment press” for refusing to take Kennedy’s candidacy seriously. Anyway, it’s a lot for Haskell to think about on the flight home from Milan.

[From Puck]

Like everyone else, I’ve been looking through some of Nuzzi’s political and election reporting throughout this year and I have to say, she absolutely deserves to be fired and blacklisted. She was sexting Robert Kennedy and sending him “demure” (and likely mindful) nudes privately and then going on CNN and MSNBC to mock President Biden’s age and capability AND telling people that Kennedy is a viable candidate? It’s a whole other level of unethical. As for the scandalous/gossip side of this – it would be next-level if Ryan Lizza found out about his fiancee’s affair and found a way to inform her bosses. I would also buy that Kennedy has been indiscreet, and really, it could be all of the above. Plus, I doubt Nuzzi was all that discreet.

Imagine being 31 years old and sending your nudes to a 70 year old dude with a brain worm? That’s something else… like, Nuzzi was still having this extremely inappropriate online relationship with Kennedy even after the brain worm story came out. F–king spare me the “she’s just a 31-year-old girl, HE had all of the power!” No he didn’t. He’s an absolutely batsh-t 70-year-old missing part of his brain because a worm ate it, and she was the one sending him photos and pursuing him.

This was Lizza’s statement in Politico’s Playbook:

Statement from Ryan Lizza on RFK Jr.-Olivia Nuzzi story, via Playbook: “Because of my connection to this story through my ex-fiancée, my editors and I have agreed that I won’t be involved in any coverage of Kennedy in Playbook or elsewhere at POLITICO.”

— Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) September 20, 2024

Photos courtesy of Instagram, Avalon Red.