I remember Baz Bamigboye’s byline when he worked for the Daily Mail. He was one of their top “showbiz” columnists, and sometimes he had some interesting tea on what was happening in London-based TV shows and film productions. I didn’t realize that he’s now a columnist for Deadline, an actual trade paper in Hollywood. I looked at his Wiki – he left the Mail earlier this year, and went directly to work for Deadline in February. Well, I don’t know if he’s still getting his scoops from British people – sounds like he is – but he’s got a new Deadline exclusive about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s “documentary” or “docu-series.” Keep in mind, the only reason we know that this documentary/series is even happening is because Meghan mentioned it in her profile in The Cut. Since then, the British gossips have been desperate to throw anything at the wall to see what sticks. Here’s where we are now:

Rattled after attacks on Season 5 of The Crown, Netflix has decided to postpone its documentary series featuring Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, until next year. The documentary unofficially had been slated to stream on Netflix in December following the November 9 launch of The Crown.

However, Netflix came under fire over the weekend from former UK Prime Minister John Major, who complained about a plot line in Episode 1 of Season 5 suggesting that in 1991 Prince Charles, now King Charles III, summoned Major to moan about having to wait to take over the throne. Major has insisted that no such conversation about a plot to overthrow the late Queen took place and described it as ”malicious nonsense.” Other establishment figures spent the weekend savaging a show that they’ve yet to see, often relying on inaccurate reports of what the Season 5 episodes are said to contain.

But following days of negative front-page stories, executives at Netflix felt that it would be foolhardy to stream The Crown in November followed by the Harry and Meghan documentary in December.

“They’re rattled at Netflix, and they blinked first and decided to postpone the documentary,” a source told Deadline.

The untitled documentary series produced by Netflix and Archewell Productions did not set an official broadcast date. However, officials at Netflix had stated several times this year that they’d wanted to do a royal double-whammy, with The Crown to run first, to be followed a few weeks later by the docuseries, some of which was filmed at Harry and Meghan’s Montecito estate.

Both Netflix and Buckingham Palace have been ultra-sensitive about both The Crown and the docuseries since Queen Elizabeth’s death September 8, which is when Charles ascended to the throne. It may well suit the Duke and Duchess to have the documentary delayed while they reconsider its content.

There’s also anxiety about the filming next week of the scenes that led to Princess Diana’s death in Paris. Netflix has stipulated that the crash-impact scenes will not be shown.

Netflix said Monday that ”there’s never been any documentary from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex confirmed.” Deadline has reached out to Archewell for comment.

[From Deadline]

This is false: “officials at Netflix had stated several times this year that they’d wanted to do a royal double-whammy” – Netflix officials have said nothing of the kind. British sources and royal sources have been assuming the “double-whammy” and they’ve been running around telling everyone their assumptions as fact. And is that “double whammy” quote not contradicted by “there’s never been any documentary from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex confirmed”? As in, Netflix is still saying that you guys don’t know anything, we’re going to do whatever we want and we haven’t announced anything either way. Plus, the whole argument that Netflix (a multi-billion-dollar streamer) is somehow running scared because King Charles is throwing a lil baby tantrum? Come on. If anything, Netflix will want to strike while the iron is hot and do wall-to-wall royal content through November and December. This delusional argument that Netflix is quaking in their proverbial boots about C-Rex is something coming FROM Salt Island.

PS… Now Page Six claims Deadline’s story is false and the plan is still to release the Sussex doc in December.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Ty (@tyrellhampton)

I definitely did not think this would happen, and certainly not this quickly! Selena Gomez and Hailey Bieber were photographed together at the Academy Museum Gala over the weekend. This comes after a recent and unnecessary rehash of old drama. On a podcast appearance last month, Hailey denied that Justin cheated with her. And then Selena vaguely chastised her fans against trolling by making a video about kindness and plugging her beauty line. Neither mentioned the other’s name. Anyway, they were both at the gala and posed for a pic together.

Hailey Bieber and Selena Gomez shared a sweet moment together last night.

The model and the actress both attended the second annual Academy Museum Gala in Los Angeles last night, and they were captured spending time together. In the pics, which were taken by photographer Tyrell Hampton, the two stars smile as they get close at the event, with one pic showing them sharing a hug.

For the evening, Hailey wore a sultry strapless gown from Saint Laurent’s spring/summer 2023 collection, featuring a torso cutout and ruched detailing, paired with a vintage Tiffany & Co. necklace. Meanwhile, Selena chose a chic black suit with satin lapels and flared trousers, paired with open-toe sandals and statement chandelier earrings.

The moment comes in the wake of Hailey’s statements addressing the years-long fan speculation of an alleged feud between herself and Selena over their relationships with Justin Bieber. During her appearance on the Call Her Daddy podcast last month, the model assured that despite fans’ assumptions, she never dated the “Peaches” singer at the same time as Selena.

In the podcast, Hailey explained that she and Justin rekindled their romance in 2018 after the singer had “closed a chapter” with Selena, saying that she “period, point blank … was never in a relationship with him when he was with anybody.”

Hailey also said that she’s seen what people say about her online, and that she wishes everyone would just let things go and accept the reality of the situation.

“The perpetuation, comes from the misperception, ‘Oh, you stole him,’” she said. “It comes from the fact that they wished he had ended up with someone else and that’s fine. You can wish that all you want but that’s just not the case.”

“[Fans] wish that he had ended up with someone else, and that’s fine. You can wish that all you want, but that’s just not the case,” she added. “If we have moved on, why can’t you?”

Days after the podcast was released, Selena seemed to respond to Hailey’s comments during a Tik Tok live, in which she emphasized that the words you say about other people matter.

“I think some of the things that I don’t even need to be aware of are just vile and disgusting. And it’s not fair because no one ever should be spoken to in the manner that I’ve seen.”

She added that she finds it “ironic” that fans who support her Rare Beauty line, which recently released a collection of Kind Words Matte Lipsticks and Lip Liners, could also not understand the impact of words.

“If you support Rare, I cannot thank you enough, but know that you are also representing what it means and that is words matter. Truly matter. So it’s coming from me, and I just want all of you to know that I hope that you understand that this is much bigger than anything else.”

[From Harper’s Bazaar]

I actually gasped when I saw the picture on Instagram. So is this long-standing beef finally squashed?! One can hope. This middle school love triangle over Justin Bieber didn’t look great for either of them. Even though I’m a Selena fan, I’m a bit skeptical and think this was for optics. Optics like Selena has her Apple TV+ documentary coming out and she also happens to have the best PR team in the business. This little drama was a distraction from that and the constant rehashing was not a good look, even if Hailey was the one bringing it up, it changed the conversation to something Selena and her team likely didn’t want or need. Because frankly, Selena’s career is booming while Justin seems to be struggling a bit and Hailey is a nepo baby turned eternal plus one. (But I do like Hailey’s hair color these days.) Old grudges or not, it looks better for Selena to rise above and graciously pose for a picture. And over it or not, I wouldn’t want to pose with my face right next to my long-term ex-boyfriend’s wife. If you look closely, both ladies look a bit pinched, like they’re gritting their teeth and getting through it, but overall they sold it.

how to break the internet by selena gomez and hailey bieber: pic.twitter.com/N4OKmNF4qL

— chiars (@ghostvofyou) October 16, 2022

Selena Gomez and Hailey Bieber. pic.twitter.com/TopvRCUzBo

— Seya (@shortyboy1789) October 16, 2022

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Selena Gomez (@selenagomez)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jamie Lee Curtis (@jamieleecurtis)

The final (as much as these franchises ever end) Halloween film opened over the weekend. This might actually be the end because apparently, it’s not good. Even with original Scream Queen, Jamie Lee Curtis, back in her role as Laurie Strode. But a couple of dozen bad reviews was not stopping Jamie from looking drop dead gorgeous at the premiere in a red, sparkly, off the shoulder Ralph Lauren Collection gown. Her dates for the evening were her daughters, Annie and Ruby Guest, both of whom wore black and silver gowns. When Jamie spoke with Spanish radio Cadena SER, she talked about how acutely aware she is of the threats to Ruby, who Jamie announced was trans last summer. She acknowledged that by simply existing, there are people who want to see Ruby dead and that scares Jamie, so she’s trying to do what she can to change that. And Jamie thinks it should scare everyone else into action too.

The Halloween Ends star, 63, told Spanish radio network Cadena SER in an interview published Tuesday that increases in transphobia and hate speech against transgender people like Ruby, 26, scares her.

“I have a trans daughter. There are threats against her life, just for existing as a human being. There are people who want to annihilate her, her and people like her,” Curtis said. “The level of hatred is … as if we had not learned from fascism, as if we hadn’t learned what the result of that is. The extermination of human beings. That’s terrifying.”

“So Jamie Lee Curtis is scared, and so should you be,” she continued. “And Jamie Lee Curtis has a voice, and she’s trying to use it, and you should too.”

The actress added, “And that’s how we change things, by thinking about them, learning about them, and then using our voices to draw attention and fight them.”

[From People]

The threat against transgender people in the US is frightening. Both their physical safety and their political and legislative safety. Of course Jamie is scared for Ruby. When Jamie announced Ruby’s transition, she was so excited to watch Ruby go through this journey. But as Ruby’s parent, she’s going to be keenly aware of all the threats towards her and I’m sure every crime committed against trans people jumps off the page at Jamie. This is what people like J.K. Rowling and Dave Chapelle don’t get. Whatever point they think they’re making is still being used to fuel transphobia that leads to violence and loss of civil liberties. Even if that isn’t their intent, that’s what’s happening and they refuse to acknowledge their part in it. So Jamie’s right, we all have to use our voices to shout over the ones who think their singular issue isn’t doing any harm.

In addition to Ruby, Jamie’s looking out for Lindsay Lohan, whom she wants to star in a Freaky Friday sequel with. Jamie’s already pitched it to Disney and apparently Jamie and Lindsay still talk. I’m glad. If Lindsay’s getting back on the right path, Jamie will be a good tether for her.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jamie Lee Curtis (@jamieleecurtis)

Photo credit: Instagram and Avalon Red

I keep thinking that this George Clooney-Julia Roberts movie is called Ticket to Ride, but no, it’s Ticket to Paradise. Should it have been called Ticket to Ride, and maybe they could have licensed the Beatles’ song? Hm. Anyway, after promoting this film for more than a month, the cast came together last night for the big Hollywood premiere. Julia Roberts did something new for this promotional tour: she wore a girly dress. She’s been doing tons of menswear-inspired looks for her appearances, and she’s stayed very covered-up in almost boxy, shapeless looks. Now here she is in the Barbiecore trend, wearing a Greta Constantine gown. While I love seeing Julia try the Barbie-pink trend, this dress is bad! The taffeta, the sleeves, the stupid ruffled skirt. It’s too “prom dress” for 54-year-old Julia. I also think it’s sort of interesting that Julia’s husband Danny Moder hasn’t come out for ANY of the premieres. They generally don’t do red carpets together, but still. PS… Julia’s earrings are Chopard and they are SPECTACULAR.

Embed from Getty Images

Meanwhile, Amal Clooney wore a gorgeous Alexander McQueen dress for the LA premiere. She’s strung together several great fashion moments in a row over the past month. I have no idea if she has a stylist or anyone helping her at this point, but there’s been a real improvement. (I hate her shoes though.)

Kaitlyn Dever – who plays Clooney and Roberts’ daughter in the movie – wore Miu Miu. This is cute and age-appropriate and flattering? I wish it was a different color, but it’s fine.

Bonus knocked-up Billie Lourd!

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty, Backgrid.

The Carol Burnett Show ran from 1967-1978. I remember gathering as a family to watch it and have watched it countless times in reruns. If you’ve never seen it, do yourself a favor and watch the sketches that I know will be mentioned in the comments below. The format was pretty standard for variety shows for the time, with musical numbers, dancers, sketches and guest stars. The cast was incredible: Carol, Harvey Korman, Tim Conway, the heartthrob Lyle Waggoner and the “new kid” Vicki Lawrence, who was only 18 when they show began. The costumer for the show was Bob Mackie. If you are at all familiar with the show, you know how good it was. If you only know Carol, it was her baby so you can imagine how good it was. Carol recently told Michael Kushner on the Dear Multi-Hyphenate podcast that a CBS vice-president tried to shut the show down when Carol first pitched it. Why? Because he said “comedy variety is a man’s game”, not a woman’s thing. An idiot says what now?

After deciding to leave The Garry Moore Show where she gained enough popularity “to do other things,” Burnett told the podcast host Michael Kushner that “CBS offered me a contract to stay with them for 10 years where I would be obligated to do one special a year — an hour-long special a year and two guest appearances on some of their sitcoms.”

Adding that she had “a great agent” at the time, she explained the contract also included a stipulation, stating “within the first five years if I, Carol, wanted to do a comedy variety show, CBS would have to put it on the air for 30 shows, fair play, that if I ‘push that button’ they would have to put it on whether they wanted to or not.”

When the right time finally came, which was the last week of her fifth year on the agreement, she said she called the CBS vice president in New York and told him she wanted to “push that button” — but the executive did not remember the clause.

“And he said, ‘what button?’ and I said, ‘You know where I get to do 30 comedy variety shows.’ He said, ‘Well, let me get back to you,’” she continued. “He called me back the next day and said, ‘Comedy variety is a man’s game…it’s not for you, girl.’”

Burnett noted that the network vice president listed the names of the men who had done comedy variety shows, such as Sid Caesar, Milton Berle, Jackie Gleason, and Dean Martin, before pitching her a different proposal, saying, “And we got this great little sitcom we would love you to do called Here’s Agnes.”

Reflecting on the moment, the Golden Globe winner said, “Oh, my, God. Could you imagine?”
In response, Burnett told the executive, “I don’t want to be Agnes every week, I want to have an hourlong show… I want to guest stars, I want music, I want dancers, I want singers, I want sketch comedy on and on and on,’ And Michael they had to put us on the air.”

[From Yahoo! Entertainment]

I had the wonderful opportunity to see Carol interview Steve Martin for one of his book signings a few years back. They’re both such amazing story tellers, it was a great evening. I read so much of this article in her voice, with her inflection, because it’s imprinted on my mind. Because she is, and I don’t use this word lightly, iconic. I’m not at all surprised that someone told THE Carol Burnett that comedy variety was a man’s game, because that’s the narrowmindedness that pervaded in television then. I’m sure it’s still lurking around today. What is surprising is the adroitness of Carol’s agent getting a stipulation like that into her contract that was so concrete, the execs couldn’t loophole out of it when Carol exercised the clause. Good for Carol for sticking by her guns on that. You know that VP thought he could intimidate this “girl” with his response. As Carol goes on to say in the podcast, the show ran for 276 episodes. It earned 25 Emmys and consistently makes the All Time Best of Television lists. Thank goodness Carol knew her value even when that “man” didn’t. FYI, Carol has written a few memoirs that are all great. I am partial to her first one, One More Time: A Memoir.

As for the The Carol Burnett Show, I could go on and on. The Went with the Wind sketch is brilliant. The Dentist sketch is classic. The best is when the cast started corpsing, which they actively tried to make each other do, by the way. Especially Tim Conway. Like in my absolute favorite outtake, when Tim started improvising as he often did, and set the cast plus guest star Dick Van Dyke off. But Vicki got the last laugh on this one:

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photo credit: Avalon Red and Getty Images

Emma Corrin’s JW Anderson “goldfish dress” isn’t even the weirdest thing they’ve worn this year. This is almost quaint. [Buzzfeed]
Chloe Sevigny says bellbottoms & polka dots are in. [Go Fug Yourself]
A Fox News correspondent claimed he spent $28 for lunch at Taco Bell. [Dlisted]
Harrison Ford is joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe. [LaineyGossip]
Herschel Walker pulled out a fake badge during the Senate debate and Republicans are falling all over themselves to defend him. [Jezebel]
Bruce Springsteen’s new album is full of Motown covers. [Seriously OMG]
Murder, She Wrote was Angela Lansbury’s greatest role. [Gawker]
Amy Adams’s husband is looking a bit Chris Pine-ish. [Just Jared]
Review of Halloween Ends. [Pajiba]
Kim Kardashian is doing that Barbiecore pink trend too. [Egotastic]
RHOSLC’s Lisa Barlow sounds like an insurrectionist. [Starcasm]
Elon Musk isn’t even sure that Grimes is real. [Towleroad]

In 2019, I was convinced that Prince William and Kate would try to have a fourth child. It’s clear that Kate is simply one of those women who likes having a baby in the house, and I thought that the combination (at the time) the Duchess of Sussex welcoming her first child plus Kate wanting to “be like Queen Elizabeth II” would mean that we would see a fourth keen child. At the time, we also heard that William had to be “convinced” to have Louis, that William was actually perfectly fine just sticking with George and Charlotte. We’ve also heard that William really, really doesn’t want any more kids now that they have three, and during the Jubbly, we saw why: Louis is a handful. Still, Kate yearns for another child, apparently, and she’s made “being baby-crazy” into a major part of her personality. So is this for real?

Another little royal? Princess Kate and Prince William are already parents of three children, but they may be thinking about baby No. 4.

“Kate has been talking about wanting another baby for a while now,” an insider exclusively reveals in the new issue of Us Weekly. “She has always wanted four children, and while William was originally happy with three, she has managed to twist his arm.”

The Prince and Princess of Wales, both 40, share Prince George, 9, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4. Earlier this year, the Duchess of Cambridge revealed that her husband gets anxious when she meets babies during her various royal engagements.

“William always worries about me meeting under 1-year-olds,” the princess said during a February event, adding that she gets “very broody” about the subject. “I come home saying, ‘Let’s have another one.’”

Kate previously told an onlooker that the Duke of Cambridge wasn’t that interested in having a fourth child. “I don’t think William wants any more,” Kate told a fan during a royal visit to Yorkshire, England, in January 2020.

The couple’s friends, however, believe that the future king may finally have changed his mind. “[Their pals] wouldn’t be surprised if we’ll be hearing an announcement early next year,” the source tells Us.

[From Us Weekly]

I mean… technically it’s possible. I would also think that IF William agrees to it, it would be more about his branding as a happily married family man, regardless of his rose-pruning extracurriculars. I generally believe that this is the dynamic, that Kate wants another baby and she’ll have to “convince” William that it’s a good idea. I just don’t see him agreeing to it though, even if he wants to present that wholesome-family image. Then again, it’s not like they’re even living together at this point (ALLEGEDLY) so maybe he’ll think “hey, she wants to deal with another baby, let her.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar, Cover Images.

We’re only weeks away from the premiere of The Crown Season 5. The Windsors are truly ramping up their Whining Campaign ahead of the premiere. It’s sad, right? The Windsors are worth more than billions (tens of billions) in real estate, jewelry and art, and all they do is sit around, whining about Netflix. There are so many other options for them. Say nothing and act like the dramatization means nothing. Or issue one simple, concise statement of regret and emphasize that The Crown really is a soap opera/dramatization, and that’s it. Instead, King Charles and Prince William are probably going to persuade all of their royal rota buddies to write wall-to-wall pieces about how they’re incandescent with rage and how it’s all so terribly unfair that the Windsors can’t control Netflix.

Speaking of, there was a piece in the Telegraph about William’s incandescence over the dramatization of his mother’s infamous Panorama interview. You know, the one he successfully buried, but only slightly. The BBC will never air Diana’s Panorama interview again, but HBO’s The Princess showed some clips, and obviously The Crown will devote an episode to it too. William has maintained that he believes Diana was “paranoid” and that the interview was a “false narrative” because… Martin Bashir lied to her. While the BBC will never show it again, the interview lives on and all William can do is whine.

The Prince of Wales believes Netflix is profiteering from his mother’s BBC Panorama interview, palace sources have suggested. Parts of the interview with Diana, Princess of Wales, will be depicted in the new series of The Crown as it delves into the “all-out war” caused by the breakdown of her marriage to Prince Charles.

In May 2021, Prince William said the interview should “never be aired again”. He said it held no legitimacy and had established a false narrative commercialised by the BBC and others for more than 25 years. He also admitted that it brought him “indescribable sadness” that the interview had contributed so significantly to the “fear, paranoia and isolation” his mother felt in the final years of her life.

A source said he had made his feelings about it “very clear” and that a fictional depiction would be “met in the way you would expect”. They added that, given the strong personal statement he had made, one could understand if he was angered about the “dramatisation of it for financial gain”.

Insiders admit that the focus on the fallout from the breakdown of Charles and Diana’s marriage could not have come at a worse time for the King, whose popularity has surged since his accession. A friend of His Majesty has described the drama as “exploitative” and said Netflix would have “no qualms about mangling people’s reputations”.

[From The Telegraph]

This continues to be hilarious to me: This “could not have come at a worse time for the King, whose popularity has surged since his accession.” This is the Tory paper of record admitting the obvious, and admitting the same thing we saw in 2020, when Season 4 aired. Which is that Charles’s popularity is artificially inflated, a mile wide and an inch deep. His “popularity” is so tenuous that it is in danger of being obliterated by ten hours of prestige programming on a streaming service. This is not an in-depth ten-part PBS Frontline series deconstructing the monarchy, it’s a SOAP OPERA (based on historical events). And this soap opera is truly one of the biggest threats to Charles’s reign.

As for William… I actually wonder if he cares that much or if Charles has persuaded William to take up this cause. It’s likely that The Crown’s season 5 & 6 won’t be that damaging to William overall, even though they’ll cover his early courtship with Kate (who stalked him like prey). This feels transactional between William and his father. Either that or Charles has simply manipulated William into this, which is a decent possibility.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Netflix.

What a month it’s been for anti-Semitism, oy vey. Kanye West has been saying all kinds of bigoted crap about Jewish people for weeks now, but don’t forget that he’s also really racist against Black people. In addition to all of his anti-Semitism, he was on video this weekend, repeating the lie about how George Floyd died from fentanyl, not a police officer’s knee strangling him. The Floyd family is now considering suing Kanye. I hope they do. In the same interview – it was Revolt TV’s “Drink Champs” – Kanye made some disturbing statements about Kim Kardashian’s Christianity and how she’s being influenced by Jewish people, and I honestly believe that Kanye thinks Pete Davidson is Jewish.

The real pièce de résistance of this sh-tshow was Donald Trump suddenly chiming in on Kanye. Please remember, Kanye’s support of all things Trump was the beginning of the end. Kanye got one look at that stupid MAGA hat and he turned into a bigoted death cultist. Well, Trump was also spreading anti-Semitic hate speech all weekend (on Truth Social) and then he sent people out to bash Kanye.

Kanye West’s ongoing public meltdown and antisemitic outbursts have become too extreme even for the famous rapper’s most unapologetic, scandal-prone backers. This now includes the leader of the Republican Party, who used to brag that West was “a friend of mine for a long time.”

In the days since West punctuated his recent tirades by posting to Twitter that he planned to go “death con 3” on “JEWISH PEOPLE,” former President Donald Trump has told multiple people that West is acting too “crazy” and that he needs some professional “help,” according to two sources with knowledge of the matter.

Trump has also privately signaled that it’s best if he keeps his mouth shut about West for now — an atypical move for the ex-president who has long relished sharing his unsolicited opinions on celebrity news and A-list tabloid gossip. Trump’s distance from West is strategic — and not rooted in any objection moral objection, the president made clear implicitly on Sunday. Posting to his struggling social media platform Truth Social, Trump berated American Jewish voters over an alleged lack of gratitude to him. “No President has done more for Israel than I have,” Trump wrote. “Somewhat surprisingly, however, our wonderful Evangelicals are far more appreciative of this than the people of the Jewish faith, especially those living in the U.S.”

But even as he lashes out wildly on social media, Trump has thus far kept a calculated distance from the Trump-backing hip-hop artist in the aftermath of the “JEWISH PEOPLE” tweet and also West’s display of “White Lives Matter” attire. It is unclear if there has been any private communication in recent days between West and Trump.

[From Rolling Stone]

During the 2020 election, it was clear that Kanye and Trump were rarely in direct contact, but they worked together through intermediaries like Jared Kushner. Which is still election fraud, although no one ever investigated or charged Kanye or his campaign with anything. Kanye’s “presidential run” was a Republican ratf–king operation, orchestrated at a pretty high level in the Trump White House. Meaning, I’m curious if Kanye realizes that, and if he’s going to mouth off about the Kushners and Trumps now that they’re cutting him off.

Also: after being suspended or banned from Twitter, Instagram and Meta, Kanye is now reportedly buying Parler, that social media platform for Nazis. Sounds about right.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Fox News.

India is making a lot of noise right now about the Koh-i-noor diamond, which was stolen from India in the 19th century. Currently, the infamous diamond is part of the Queen Consort’s crown, last worn by Queen Consort Elizabeth, wife of King George VI. She wore the Koh-i-noor during her husband’s coronation and for official outings during his reign. Currently, Britain is trying to hammer out a massive trade deal with India and Indian diplomats are making a lot of noise about the diamond and how it should NOT be worn by Camilla at her husband’s coronation. Officially, then, Charles and Camilla have to make a big show of being “concerned” and “conscious of the history,” which is why we’re getting pieces like this:

The Koh-i-Noor diamond, which has been part of the Crown Jewels for more than 150 years, is at the centre of renewed calls for its return – with India the most diplomatically-critical country making a claim to it. As the new King and Queen Consort plan for a Coronation unlike any other before them, it is the very last thing they will want to take centre stage.

The diamond, which is often said to have been “given” to Britain in 1849, is currently set in the crown worn by Queen Elizabeth, later the Queen Mother, in her own 1937 coronation.

One source last night suggested that the jewel had not, until recently, been treated as “problematic”. But, they said, aides were particularly alert to moving with the times.

“The Coronation has deliberately been kept quite unplanned, unlike the Bridges programme [for the late Queen’s death] to ensure it can best reflect the climate at the time at which it happens,” they said. “Now is when the planning will begin in earnest, and people at the palace will be acutely aware of and wanting to reflect tradition whilst being sensitive to the issues around today. At this stage it’s entirely possible that the Koh-i-Noor will be in or out. Bluntly, people will be wondering whether they really want a row over a diamond right now.”

A separate source told the Daily Mail that the King was “acutely sensitive” to the issue, with advisors having “significant nervousness” around using the crown jewel.

William Dalrymple, co-author of a book describing the Koh-i-Noor as “the world’s most infamous diamond” said its ownership was “not a small sensitive issue in the eyes of India” but a “massive diplomatic grenade”.

[From The Telegraph]

Keep in mind, all of this hand-wringing and performative sensitivity is merely about whether Camilla will wear the Koh-i-noor. Charles and his people aren’t even mentioning the fact that India would like the diamond returned. Charles and his people are banging their heads against the wall, whining about “well, no one had a problem with it in 1937!” These dumb colonizers, I swear to God. Anyway, Charles will likely continue to side-step the whole “returning the Koh-i-Noor” issue in favor of just choosing a completely different crown/headpiece for Camilla:

As Buckingham Palace works to avoid international row over the Koh-i-Noor diamond, aides have had to look back 200 years to find suitable headwear for the Queen Consort’s coronation. Little-known crowns including one worn by Queen Adelaide in 1831 are understood to be in contention for next year’s event, as the use of Queen Elizabeth Queen Mother’s crown is all but ruled out over a dispute with India.

The crown of Queen Adelaide, used at the famously frugal coronation of William IV, is part of the Royal Collection, but its whereabouts are currently a mystery after it was carefully removed from display at the Tower of London this year. Other leading options are thought to include the 1820 Diamond Diadem, altered and worn by Queens Regnant and Consorts from Adelaide onwards.

Crowns created for the coronation of Queen Mary and Queen Alexandra, both of which temporarily held the Koh-i-Noor, could be used. Experts have told The Telegraph that Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother’s crown could still be used as initially planned, with the controversial diamond replaced by another of similar size. But, they warned, the change would make a significant public statement about the legitimacy of the Koh-i-Noor that the palace would wish to avoid.

The diadem would be visually more in keeping with the modern Royal family, said one source – but has previously only been used for the journey to coronations, rather than for a “crowning” itself.

[From The Telegraph]

“…But its whereabouts are currently a mystery after it was carefully removed from display at the Tower of London this year.” I assume that means the whereabouts are a mystery to the Telegraph and not the Royal Collection! I hope to God the Windsors are at least keeping track of all of their stolen loot, surely? Anyway, other sources say it’s unlikely that Camilla will have a completely new crown made, just as it’s unlikely she would significantly modify one of the existing crowns. So I bet they do go with the 1820 Diamond Diadem (a piece frequently worn by QEII) or they’ll dust off some other piece. Of course, none of this solves the larger problem, which is that the Koh-i-Noor must be returned to India.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.