Taylor Swift had a nice vibe at the Grammys last night. Travis Kelce did not attend as her date, he’s still preparing for the Super Bowl (this coming weekend), so Taylor was just there to rep her album, The Tortured Poets Department and its six Grammy nominations. She was also there to hang out with friends and, as it turns out, cheer for two of her favorite people in music: Beyonce and Kendrick Lamar. Taylor ended up losing in all six categories in which she was nominated, but she presented Beyonce with the Best Country Album Grammy and she shared a toast with Jay-Z when Beyonce won Album of the Year. Swift was also super-happy for Kendrick when he won Record of the Year for “Not Like Us.”

Throughout the night – she made zero costume changes – Taylor wore a fire-red Vivienne Westwood corseted minidress. It was flattering and pretty, and a little bit sexy. I’ve made my peace with the fact that she’s not a huge risk-taker when it comes to fashion, and this feels entirely in her comfort zone. My one complaint is that it’s a bit ice-skater-chic, but again, that’s Taylor. She loves that “ice dancer princess” look. One sexy element was a delicate chain on her thigh with a charm with the initial “T”- for Taylor or for Travis.

Are the Swifties mad that Taylor didn’t win another AOTY? I hope not – I think if she had lost to someone other than Beyonce, they might feel some kind of way about it, but given Taylor’s clear happiness for her friend, I hope the truce between fandoms holds. Yes, another AOTY win would have been historic, but it was also a historic snub that Beyonce hadn’t won an AOTY Grammy before last night.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

Embed from Getty Images

Before the Grammys broadcast even started, Kendrick Lamar was picking up Grammy Awards. He wasn’t even in the audience at that point, so DJ Mustard accepted the Grammys for Best Rap Song, Best Rap Performance and Best Music Video. Kendrick was there to accept Song of the Year and Record of the Year. Keep in mind, ALL of these Grammys were for “Not Like Us,” arguably the most significant diss song of all time. Kendrick released his album, GNX, past this year’s Grammy cut-off date, so the Grammy Awards just decided to give him five awards for calling Drake a PDFile.

The best part was when Kendrick accepted the Grammy for ROTY for “Not Like Us.” That man wore a CANADIAN Tuxedo, all denim. The entire audience stood and cheered for him and several huge stars could be seen rapping along and/or dancing as “Not Like Us” played. That’s got to hurt for Drake – the entire Grammy audience singing along to “A Minnnnnor.” Kendrick also dedicated his ROTY to Los Angeles, and he shouted out neighorhoods and areas affected by the Southern California wildfires. He also showed a lot of respect to Diana Ross for SOTY. Next Sunday, he’s got the Super Bowl Halftime show!

look at taylor messy ass fkfkfmxmxmxmxmxmxdmxkmddk https://t.co/HARFyMJ8GC

— “happy face” (@damn_toe) February 3, 2025

pic.twitter.com/af9vXyGxBY

— media (@ENTplus_) February 3, 2025

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

Ever since Kanye West married Bianca Censori, he’s made/encouraged her to wander around the world in little more than a pair of pantyhose. It’s been a thing for a while now – Bianca is constantly being photographed with her various bits and pieces out and on display. Some have theorized that Kanye is sending a message to Kim Kardashian, the message being “I have a new Real Doll now,” I think. But I think the larger message is that Bianca has a cult-like devotion to Kanye and this whole thing is toxic as hell.

Anyway, Kanye and Bianca walked the Grammys red carpet last night. They arrived early-ish on the carpet, with Bianca wearing a fur coat at first. Then she dramatically removed her coat and posed in a bodystocking which left nothing to the imagination, all while Kanye stood there fully clothed. They posed like that for a while, and then there was some confusion about what happened next. At first, Entertainment Tonight reported that Grammy organizers escorted Kanye and Bianca off the carpet and kicked them out of the show because they weren’t even invited. But Variety’s Grammy source insisted that Kanye and Bianca were not thrown out or escorted out, that Kanye simply “walked the carpet, got in his car and left.” TMZ also had this:

Kanye West and Bianca Censori made quite the splash on the Grammys red carpet … and while several reports claim their antics got them booted, TMZ has learned that’s not the case.

A source close to the Recording Academy tells TMZ … Kanye was an invited guest — nominated for Best Rap Song this year — and he wasn’t forcibly removed from the event.

We’re told he walked the red carpet, got in his car of his own volition and then left … police and Grammys security never got involved. We reached out to police just to see if they ever got a call about the incident BTW … and our law enforcement sources say no one ever complained about Censori’s revealing ensemble.

[From TMZ]

Oh, so he was invited? That’s surprising, and I didn’t realize that he was nominated as well. That explains the red carpet stunt. I guess Kanye didn’t want to stick around and pull focus with his wife – even with the Grammy nomination, Kanye is still very canceled to a lot of people in that room.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

I used to not care that much about Lily Collins, but she’s grown on me a lot because of Emily In Paris, one of my favorite “dumb shows.” Lily is adorable in it, and I like that she’s moved into producing. She’s a nepo baby, obviously, and she married another nepo baby – Charlie McDowell, son of Malcolm McDowell. Well, now Charlie and Lily have a nepo baby of their own! They just welcomed daughter Tove Jane McDowell via surrogacy. From Lily’s IG:

Welcome to the center of our world Tove Jane McDowell. Words will never express our endless gratitude for our incredible surrogate and everyone who helped us along the way. We love you to the moon and back again…

[From Lily’s IG]

I thought it was a nice story, and I actually wondered if they’re saying “surrogacy” when they really mean that they used a gestational carrier. They’re different things at a technical level – a gestational carrier carries an embryo made from (in this case) Lily’s egg, fertilized by Charlie. Surrogacy means that Lily and Charlie might not use their own biological material. They didn’t explain it and it’s their business – they don’t have to speak about why they’re starting a family in this way, and we don’t know if there were fertility issues or what have you. It’s none of our business. Apparently, people were getting into Lily’s Instagram comments and saying sh-t about surrogacy, and so Charlie posted this as a comment:

Thank you for all the kind messages and love. We are overjoyed and very grateful.

In regards to the unkind messages about surrogacy and our path to having a baby— it’s ok to not be an expert on surrogacy. It’s ok to not know why someone might need a surrogate to have a child. It’s ok to not know the motivations of a surrogate regardless of what you assume. And it’s ok to spend less time spewing hateful words into the world, especially in regards to a beautiful baby girl who has brought a lot of love into people’s lives. That’s all for now because she just pooped and I need to change her diaper.

[From Lily’s IG]

“It’s ok to not know why someone might need a surrogate to have a child. It’s ok to not know the motivations of a surrogate regardless of what you assume.” Exactly – I think there are absolutely conversations to be had about surrogacy and exploitation, but in this particular situation, it’s really rude to demand to know “why” Charlie and Lily used a surrogate.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Lily’s IG.

The past week has been one of the most wild moments in Oscar-campaign history. Emilia Perez, a much-loathed and deeply problematic film, was already seen as unworthy of its thirteen Oscar nominations and it was already being targeted – in an above-board way – with bad press. Then EP’s star Karla Sofia Gascon blamed that bad press on Brazilian actress Fernanda Torres. That seemed to be the moment when all hell broke loose. Suddenly, Brazilians were like, okay, let’s play. They began doing deeper dives on all of Gascon’s problematic statements and behavior and amplifying all of it. Then Canadian journalist/culture writer Sarah Hagi simply did a deep dive on Gascon’s long Twitter history. A goldmine of bigotry, racism, antisemitism and hate.

After the initial shock of Gascon’s Islamophic, racist and anti-Asian tweets, people still kept digging. She was literally showing sympathy for Adolf Hitler (she thinks he merely had “opinions” about Jewish people) in between mocking Angelina Jolie, Selena Gomez, and Adele. Well, on Friday, she finally deleted her Twitter account and sent a hilariously bad “apology” – her second apology of the week – to the Hollywood Reporter. THR notes that Gascon’s Oscar campaign has imploded to the point where Netflix simply doesn’t know what to do next. Here’s Gascon’s apology:

I’m sorry, but I can no longer allow this campaign of hate and misinformation to affect neither my family nor me anymore, so at their request I am closing my account on X. I have been threatened with death, insulted, abused and harassed to the point of exhaustion.

I have a wonderful daughter to protect, whom I love madly and who supports me in everything. I had long ago made the decision to close a social network [sic], which has taken a terrible turn, in which I have also sometimes fallen, and for which I apologize.

As part of this society, I have expressed my disagreement or agreement with all the related issues that have touched me and of which I have had an opinion, often erroneous, which has changed throughout my own experience. I have always used my social media as a diary, reflections or notes, to later create stories or characters, not as something that would be scrutinized down to the last of its 140 characters, since sometimes I, myself, am not even aware of having written something negative.

I have defended each and every one of the minorities in this world and supported freedom of religion and any action against racism and homophobia in the same way that I have criticized the hypocrisy that underlies them, because the first thing I am critical of is myself. You will never hear me support a war, an injustice, extremism or applaud anyone who oppresses other human beings. Perhaps my words are not correct, many times due to ignorance or pure mistake. I apologize again if anyone has ever felt offended or in the future.

I am a human being who also made, makes and will make mistakes from which I will learn. I am not perfect. Taking my words out of context or manipulating them to hurt me is something I am not responsible for. I am only responsible for what I say, not for what others say I say or what others interpret from what I say.

I hope to have the opportunity to give a more extensive explanation at some point. Forgive me because I keep going from one side to the other and I cannot be responding to every single thing you bring up to try to sink me. But if you want, you can continue attacking me as if I were responsible for hunger and wars in the world. I apologize again if I have ever offended anyone with my words in my life.

I am only Karla Sofía Gascón, an actress who has reached where very few have thanks to her effort and work, without stealing or harming anyone in this world, just trying to get them to let me live in peace, love and respect, something that seems to bother a lot of people in this world.

It is clear that there is something very dark behind it.

But I tell you something: “The more you try to sink me, the stronger it will make me. The greater the victory will be.”

Please forgive me once again if any of my words hurt you.
Sincerely, Karla.

[From THR]

Starting the apology with “I can no longer allow this campaign of hate and misinformation to affect neither my family nor me anymore” is so funny because… it’s not a campaign of hate or misinformation. It’s people hitting “Google Translate” on Karla’s own tweets. The unimaginable hate campaign…of translating this woman’s tweets. I also didn’t know she had a daughter before now, convenient lil’ human shield she’s got there. Anyway, there are two sides to this – clearly, Gascon has been massively problematic for years, if not decades, and that’s her problem. But the other side of it is: was Netflix sleeping at the wheel or what? Did no one over there think to double-check Gascon’s socials? And as so many people have noted, Netflix made a big choice to put so much money behind Emilia Perez and not, say, Maria and Angelina Jolie. We’ve gotten to the point where people are openly wondering if Gascon’s Oscar nom could be revoked somehow.

@TheAcademy What will you do now that you know Karla Sofia Gascon is pro Hitler and totally antisemitic person and she is defending the Holocaust? pic.twitter.com/YvQqwKJXXa

— Eduardo (@Eduardo_DSales) January 31, 2025

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Taylor Swift is confirmed to appear at the Grammys on Sunday. She’s nominated and she will be a presenter, but I don’t think she’s going to perform. [Just Jared]
Rest in peace, Marianne Faithfull. [NYT]
Colman Domingo went to the Valentino show. I love that he’s such a dandy, but I’m not into the Valentino pajamas look. [RCFA]
Horoscopes for Aquarius Season. [OMG Blog]
“Carlos Plaza” sounds like the name of a mall. [Socialite Life]
Renee Zellweger wore vintage Balmain to another Bridget Jones premiere. [LaineyGossip]
A review of Companion, which sounds interesting. [Pajiba]
This is not the look for Laverne Cox. [Go Fug Yourself]
Matthew Lillard is returning to the Scream franchise? [Seriously OMG]
A 90 Day Fiance star went on a political rant. [Starcasm]
The Grammys are on Sunday! [Hollywood Life]
Wealthy parents describe why they cut off their kids. [Buzzfeed]

Carole Middleton turns 70 years old today, and Middleton HQ organized a treasury of embiggening PR for the new “queen mother.” We’ve heard that Carole has a great figure, that she loves a new diet, that she’s practically QEII’s carbon copy, that Carole is overdue for her very own aristocratic title, Baroness of Bucklebury or something along those lines. There are several problems though. One, all of these embiggening pieces tend to mention the long list of “accusations” Carole has had to face over the past two-decades-plus and… there’s barely anything even Carole’s biggest defenders can really say to contradict it. “She threw Kate in William’s path and stage-managed their relationship for years!” Yes, she did do that. “She’s tacky!” She is, in fact, very tacky. And on and on. And now this – Richard Eden has written a very stupid piece for Carole’s 70th, in which he reminds everyone that Carole briefed the press during Kate and William’s courtship. Some highlights:

The Royal Family depends on Carole: If anyone doubted the importance of the Princess of Wales to the Monarchy, her absence from public duties last year as she battled multiple health problems made crystal clear how much she was missed. There is, however, another woman whose value to the Royal Family is rarely remarked upon, yet she is central to its fortunes. That woman is Carole Middleton. She’s not royal and has been given no title but, as she celebrates her 70th birthday tomorrow, I want to give a personal insight into her character.

Carole spoke to Eden in 2008: Back in 2008, when Kate, as Catherine was then known, had been going out with Prince William for more than five years, her mother broke her silence to voice her concerns about the impact that public scrutiny was having on her own life. ‘You see, I feel very vulnerable about everything,’ she told me at the Hennessy Gold Cup, at Newbury racecourse, just a few miles from her house in Berkshire. ‘I’m not a celebrity and don’t want to be one. Celebrities have minders and PR people. I don’t want a PR person and wouldn’t want to have to pay to employ one. I haven’t asked for all this.’

Carole engineered Will & Kate’s relationship: When Catherine’s romance with William was first disclosed, there were claims that her mother had engineered her relationship by encouraging her to take a ‘gap year’ so her time at St Andrews University would coincide with that of the future king. Catherine also switched to the same history of art course as William, having originally enrolled to study psychology. These rumours were given new force by royal biographer Tina Brown in her 2022 book, The Palace Papers, and by Netflix’s hit drama The Crown, which depicted Carole as the ‘mastermind’ of Catherine’s romance. ‘It is unlikely Kate would be where she is today without her mother’s canny help in negotiating a royal romance,’ Brown claimed. ‘Carole’s fingerprints are all over Kate’s first move on the royal chessboard.’

But William pursued Kate: However, as Carole’s brother Gary Goldsmith has confirmed, the truth is that William already knew Catherine after they met at various events attended by pupils from their respective boarding schools, Eton College and Marlborough College. It was William who pursued Catherine and not the other way round. This is why Carole’s comment to me in 2008, ‘I haven’t asked for all this’, rang true then, and still does.

What Carole told Eden: ‘I’m concerned about my business; that’s my focus,’ she said at the time. ‘I don’t want the attention to detract from that. I’m also worried for my family: I have three children – not just Catherine.’

There’s that word again, discretion: Despite all the criticism, Carole has been the model of discretion in the 17 years since our chat at the racecourse – and that won’t change.

A mention of Meghan: While Meghan Markle cut all ties with her father and most of her relations after she married into the Royal Family, Catherine has been able to rely on the steadfast support of the Middletons. Never has that been so crucial as in Catherine’s past traumatic year. It is no surprise that her parents were included in the video that Kensington Palace released last September after the princess completed her chemotherapy treatment, which did not feature the King and Queen.

[From The Daily Mail]

Nothing says “Carole has been the model of discretion” like telling the story of when Carole went to the races, staggered around until she happened upon a Daily Mail reporter, and promptly shared all of her deepest concerns about herself and her family. Nothing says “discreet” like openly blackmailing your daughter’s in-laws for society event invitations and begging the Daily Mail for favorable coverage after cheating people out of millions of pounds! Also: you can really tell that even the most fanatical royalists don’t have the heart to really push back on the stories about Carole stage-managing William & Kate’s courtship. They were there, they know what happened. While it’s true that William eventually pursued Kate, it was only after Carole convinced Kate to throw herself in William’s path over and over for years until he noticed her. Not to mention, the whole school change thing. One thing was for sure – once the Middletons got their hooks into William, they were never letting go.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

I’m not interested in reading many of the forthcoming books about the 2024 election. I was there, I know what happened, I watched in real time, and I know exactly how thoroughly both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris got f–ked over. So many people f–ked around, and the only thing left to cover is the “finding out” half of the equation. Well, Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes have written one of the first books about the election, FIGHT: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House. As I said, I have no interest in reading it. But NBC published an excerpt for free, so here you go. Right around Election Day, there was this talking point repeated over and over by white men especially: why didn’t Kamala Harris go on Joe Rogan’s show? Was she scared? It really mattered to those dumbasses that Donald Trump and JD Vance went on Rogan’s show, and that became “the reason” why those voters “turned against” Harris. Well, this book reveals that Harris was fully prepared to go on Rogan’s show and then Rogan ratf–ked her.

On October 11, Harris deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty, the aide in charge of digital strategy, made the first Zoom call to start negotiating with Rogan’s reps. He did not know what to expect. These might be juiced-up, UFC-looking supplement people, he thought. He was surprised—perhaps a tad disappointed—to find out that Rogan’s associates were more like Hollywood agents. In that vein, they outlined the podcaster’s conditions for an interview: no staff in the studio, no topic restrictions, and Harris would have to sign a waiver. There was one more item in the small print: Harris would have to come to Austin, Texas. Rogan’s reps said that might be negotiable, but he had only once done an interview with an out-of-studio guest.

Along with fellow Harris campaign advisers Stephanie Cutter and Brian Fallon, Flaherty offered up that Harris would be happy to talk about social media censorship, weed, and other issues they thought would be of most interest to his listeners. From their perspective, it was a suggestion of possible topics, not an exhaustive or exclusive list. That’s not what Rogan wanted to talk about. “Joe just wants to talk about the economy, the border, and abortion,” one of his reps said, according to a person familiar with the negotiations.

After two Zoom sessions, Flaherty called the Rogan intermediaries with an offer. Could Rogan join Harris in Michigan? he asked, proposing a date later in the week. No-go, the Rogan team said after reaching the host on a weeklong hunting trip. Austin or nothing.

“That’s going to be tough,” Flaherty said. “We’re only a few weeks out from the election.” Harris had less than zero reason to be in Texas. It was not a swing state. Her campaign was flush with cash—so it made no sense to take her off the trail to raise money. She was in battleground-or-bust mode. Plus, a detour to Texas might smell like desperation to the press and a waste of money to donors.

Harris campaign chief Jennifer O’Malley Dillon broke the impasse. Harris would be in Atlanta on October 24 with Barack Obama and Bruce Springsteen. O’Malley Dillon said the campaign could fly her to Houston for a rally—under the cover of visiting a state with one of the nation’s most restrictive abortion laws—to put her in proximity to Austin. She dispatched an advance team to the Texas state capital to do a walk-through of Rogan’s studio and get ready for a Harris arrival. She authorized her negotiating team to give Rogan what he demanded—an in-studio interview in Austin—on October 25. For many Democratic operatives outside the campaign, the October 22 announcement that Harris would hold a Houston rally felt like a palm-to-face moment. She was going to lose Texas, by a lot, and a visit would not force Trump to spend his limited campaign money there.

Only a few people knew the real reason: the whole Houston rally was built to put her in proximity to Rogan. The ongoing negotiations on that were touch-and-go. Flaherty had called his Rogan contacts on October 18, before the rally was set. “We could do Friday, the 25th,” Flaherty said. “Wish we had known about this sooner, because he has the 25th blocked out as a personal day,” one of Rogan’s reps said.

“What about Saturday morning?” Flaherty countered. “Only if it’s before 8:30 a.m.,” came the tough reply.

The tone is different, Flaherty thought. The vice president of the United States is offering to come to your f—ing show, and you keep putting up more hoops. Harris’s team still wanted to make it work, but a new wariness set in. On October 22, the same day the Harris camp announced the rally, the Associated Press reported that Trump would be Rogan’s guest on Friday — the “personal day” Rogan had originally reserved.

Mutual friends Elon Musk and Dana White had convinced Trump and Rogan to bury their dispute, according to a Trump aide. There would be no Harris interview.

[From NBC News]

Yeah, f–k Joe Rogan. Not only did he play these disrespectful games, his team spread it around that Harris “refused” to do the show. Magically, the story was “why won’t Harris reach out to young men” and “what is she afraid of” and “she can’t handle a Rogan interview.” Like, that was a HUGE issue with college-aged guys in this election cycle, it was its own little stand-alone culture war. I hope Joe Rogan ***** on a rusty ***********.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Spotify.

The Princess of Wales did two events on Thursday, January 30. She took the helicopter to South Wales and visited the Ty Hafan children’s hospice, which is her new patronage. Then she visited a Welsh textiles manufacturer called Corgi. According to People Magazine’s excessive coverage, Kate “was relaxed, welcoming and stayed longer than expected” at the hospice. At Corgi, Kate basically played on some of the machines and acted like it was just a breezy field trip. I’ve been surprised to see that the photos are not everywhere, and there doesn’t seem to be some new palace briefing in which we are being told that Kate is obviously very brave and hard-working, but she will not continue to work herself to the bone like this. Then I happened upon this curious piece in the Spectator (written by Alexander Larman). The argument is that, obviously, Kate is incredibly popular and she’s the new Princess Diana, but that’s a bad thing! For real. An excerpt:

At a time of great difficulty for the Firm, Catherine remains their greatest reputational asset. The King, Queen and Princess Anne offer reliable dignity, and Prince William, when on form, can be relied upon for matey gravitas. But it is Kate Middleton who is the most straightforwardly likeable and relatable royal, someone who engages with ‘ordinary people’ on an immediate, non-patronising level.

Catherine is, of course, recovering from her own illness, and in an affecting recent trip to the Royal Marsden, spoke about the difficulties and privations that she had undergone in her treatment. While she is now in remission, this is not the same thing as being fully cured, and although she has talked about her hopes for a ‘fulfilling year ahead’, it is inevitable that her public schedule will be a lighter one, with events like the Ty Hafan visit taking place on set-piece occasions rather than with any kind of regularity.

In this, and in many other regards, those around the Princess of Wales could usefully learn from the example of the previous holder of that title, the late Princess Diana. Like Catherine, Diana had a natural rapport with the public that came from her genuine interest in people, and she especially excelled at her interactions with children and the sick. This was noted, and used to the full – some would say exploited – by those courtiers who were desperate for any favourable publicity for their employers. That is, until such time as Diana, tiring of her show pony status, went solo (or rogue) and became a freelance Queen of Hearts, showing up the more protocol-based Firm for the hidebound institution that it inevitably was back then.

The temptation, then, is to rebrand Catherine as the new Diana, a glamorous and photogenic woman who is naturally empathetic and who manages to bring harmony to potential discord through her charitable initiatives and public interactions. Yet as the 30th anniversary of Diana’s death approaches in 2027 – and as her younger son’s glowering estrangement from his family continues to remind us – it is hard to forget that the Firm’s eagerness to push the late princess into the limelight for favourable publicity ended up being catastrophic, both for her and for them. Those who are eagerly adding in future appointments to the Princess of Wales’s schedule should look back on history, and consider dialling it down accordingly.

[From The Spectator]

So much to unpack, my God. What offends me the most is that the royalists’ approach Kate’s PR by flatly telling everyone that of course Kate is the new Diana, despite all evidence to the contrary. But even if you go along with that fantasy… Diana’s story is tragic because of the way her husband mistreated her and the way the Firm mistreated her, the way they punished her, maligned her, gaslighted her and then threw her away. Her story isn’t tragic because she left a legacy of good works, compassion and actual change in her wake. Diana dove into work because that was the only thing she found fulfilling and she genuinely wanted to make a difference and help people. Diana was absolutely exploited by the Firm, but it wasn’t as simplistic as “they forced her to work so that they could get good press!” That’s a total rewrite – the Windsors were incredibly jealous of Diana’s natural charisma, grace, likeability and ease around people. They couldn’t figure it out and they still haven’t figured it out. Which is why they think if they just tell Kate to dress up in Diana cosplay and flash Big Blue, it’s all the same.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

For years now, British tabloids and newspapers have been sending reporters to Montecito, California to stalk the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. It’s a cottage industry in the UK, and I guess it’s a plum assignment for Salt Island reporters. They get an all-expenses-paid trip to California, where they get to rent a car and wander around Montecito, begging people to say something about Harry and Meghan. Every single one of the articles has a judgmental vibe – judgmental about Americans, judgmental about how “their prince” would choose to live in a quiet, elite beach community. Well, right after the Murdochs settled out of court with Prince Harry, the Murdoch-owned Times of London published this piece: “Inside Montecito, Harry and Meghan’s super-rich home town.” Yes, the Times sent a reporter to Montecito to stalk the Sussexes too, just like the Mail and the Telegraph. And that dumb German documentary. This piece is just so sad…

I realise I must be nearing Montecito, the small, unassuming, ocean-side neighbourhood north of Los Angeles that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex call home, when I hear a helicopter purring overhead. The fifth most expensive zip code in the US, here Meghan and Harry’s neighbours include Katy Perry, Natalie Portman, Jeff Bridges, Michael Douglas, Neil Young, Michael Keaton, Oprah and, until recently, Ellen DeGeneres. Their newest is Gwyneth Paltrow, who’s moving into her huge eco-house with her husband, Brad Falchuk. I listen to the whirring blades in the sky and wonder if it’s Harry doing the school run. But I daren’t look up. I am too petrified. I have hired a car in the US for the first time and am bowling along an eight-lane freeway out of LA.

I am here because I have watched the trailer for Meghan’s Netflix show, With Love, Meghan, an eight-part lifestyle series (coming in March) revolving around the Sussexes’ gorgeous, sun-drenched life in Montecito. In it the duchess, glowing with honey skin and white teeth, promises to show us how baking, tablescaping and arranging flowers can be conducted “in the pursuit of joy”, making every moment magical, from sifting flour to eating lettuce.

Convinced by the jaunty soundtrack and how good Meghan looks, I decide to head to Montecito in search of such joy-filled moments for myself. I rent a convertible and take Route 101 up the coast.

They call the Santa Barbara coast the American Riviera, so I imagined I’d pull up somewhere as glamorous as the Croisette in Cannes. Instead, I arrive at an uninspiring collection of low beige bungalows housing a collection of Mom and Pop shops — a post office, a hardware store, a needlepoint shop. Surely Harry and Meghan didn’t move halfway across the world for this?

[From The Times]

You get the idea – this woman flew thousands of miles to wander around Montecito, going into stores and telling herself “I bet Meghan has been here, I hate it so much.” And that’s the whole pathetic story – these papers send their reporters to California to simply be in proximity to the Sussexes, and they’d rather do that than cover the left-behind Windsors. Like, the Princess of Wales and Prince William have been out and about a lot this year. King Charles just became the first monarch to visit Auschwitz. Poor Princess Anne had a life-altering injury last year. Y’all wanna do deep dives on any of that?

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.