A Blog Offering from
False Facts Uncovered:
"Tommy" from Upstate N.Y. Exposes the Bullying and Hypocritical Media
UPDATE: So, it’s been a year since the media (not all outlets, but some) tried to crucify me for being intelligent, knowledgeable and of British blood and ancestry on my mother's side, and yet I am still here. Though I was told I should not know what I know, simply because I was not born in Britain, I am still volunteering my time to different media outlets and continuing to educate about the monarchy. Still, I am not paid a single penny for my contributions and never have been, where Royal education is concerned. To say that I “shopped my knowledge” (Vanity Fair) for the Royal Wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – how mistaken those putting such a story together were and are. I have never had to shop my knowledge to anyone - the media has always come to me, including the Wall Street Journal. I continue to donate my time instructing workshops for charities and further give lectures to students about the Crown in government, amongst other various Royal themed topics, because money is not what motivates me to help and educate others. I am not a bad person. I have done nothing wrong. I will not apologise for the person I am. However, I refuse to be both bullied and apologetic for an article which failed to tell even a fraction of the truth to my life story, the many positive aspects of my career and the charity works I have undertaken. Looking back over the past year, nothing has changed for me; except I see the media world a lot more clearly now than I did before. I see the media for what it truly is - a dirty, biased and bullying business with no integrity or accountability.
Despite working in a close and direct relationship with different factions of European media outlets for nearly nine years, and then having certain factions of the ignorant America media (not knowing who I am, what I do, or even having the first inkling about my career and life abroad) trying to slander me and the person I am, without a single drop of proper research completed in 99% of their reports, it is painfully true that the “copy and paste” method of reporting is fully alive and well. I have come to learn how hypocritical and biased the media is, when outlets only take a fraction of one reported story (true or not) and simply re-package the information, without checking on the facts or interviewing others, to simply get a story out as fast as possible, despite it being true or not. The media does not give a care in the world about the moral responsibility it has to fair and balanced reporting. Nothing I watch, listen to, or see in the media registers as fact, simply because the media puts out a package which represents news, but is a fragile imitation of what news used to be - true and honest reporting. Now the “news” is packaged in such a way to extract anger and contempt from readers, to “trigger” their emotions, and further add their own bias and profiteering agenda into the mix. This is a lethal combination as we have seen with several events over the past year, case in point the media targeting of sixteen-year-old Nick Sandmann at the Lincoln Memorial confrontation. How terrible it is when the media tries to destroy an innocent boys life for the sake of a story which was reported with out proper research, without proper facts, an alternative narrative, and underlying biased motive.
The “news” today is nothing more than a product that needs to be sold, after all, the “news” is what makes the corporations that produce it more and more money. It is about making profits from the distribution of a product which affects the bottom line. The more interesting and horrible the story, the more money there is to be made. As we all know, good news doesn’t sell quiet as well as mean spirited and bad news. Like any other business wanting to make as much money in as short of time as possible, the news does not need to be true, nor does it need to be well researched for proper facts – it is all about being the first to put out a package, somewhat resembling of the truth, with the main focus to obtain as many clicks, likes and views as one outlet can manage to obtain. Long gone are the days of true, unbiased and fair reporting, where both sides of an issue are properly researched and morally reported.
ORIGINAL BLOG POST: So, all of a sudden, some people say that I am famous. Too bad being rich is not synonymous with being famous haha. I am now known around the world as the “Royal expert and commentator from upstate New York”, less a few extra juicy terms and titles bestowed upon me by the media which I have left out, as I am keeping this blog nice. I am not a celebrity. I am not a film star. I am just a person who has spent decades researching, learning about and studying the institution which is Constitutional Monarchy, along with the place and position of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II and her family in a constitutional aspect. I guess this is my “fifteen minutes” - couldn't they at least have used a nice photograph of me! Despite my confusion as to why I am a story, I am more perplexed as to why the media has tried to destroy me? They know nothing about me, how hard I have worked and all of the accomplishments I have made in my life, nor do they want to know. The media set out with an intent to hurt, destroy and damage every aspect of my life...and for what? To sell their "news" when in fact my story was anything but?
"He has gathered more information about the British Royal family than you'll ever want to know - a veritable laundry list of characters close to the throne reaching back to Oliver Cromwell, an English military and political leader and one of the signatories in 1649 of King Charles I's death warrant that led to his beheading."
As I have been writing and revising this blog for the better part of six to eight weeks, l have had to joke and poke fun at certain parts of this whole nonsense of a "story", as if I didn't, I more than likely would not have been able to contain my emotions. The one thing I am undoubtedly good at, even if many think my accent is questionable, is the "stiff upper lip" and repression of "feelings" the Brits are noted for. Despite my positive demeanour and positive outlook on all of this, the sheer amount of hypocritical coverage of this "Royal Commentator named Tommy from Upstate New York" saga by the media, certainly is mean spirited and nothing more than a tolerated form of bullying which many around the world have subscribed to. Throughout history, people have changed their accents, names and locations for countless centuries, why is my case any different? Is it just because I gave running commentary at the Royal Wedding of Prince Harry to Ms. Meghan Markle, with years of experience and knowledge to back up my appearances? Am I news worthy simply because the subject matter is Royal in theme? I have been ridiculed and bullied for the very things the media reported positively on years ago, with respect to David and Victoria Beckham's and even Baroness Margaret Thatcher's accents. They were celebrated for doing one of the very things I have been bullied and mocked for.
As of April 2019, migrants to the United Kingdom are undertaking not just English lessons, but also elocution and direct regional dialect lessons such as in Bradford, Yorkshire as reported in the Telegraph on 6 April 2019. This report, which can be read here, states: "Yet for asylum seekers living in Bradford, not only has learning how to ‘speak Yorkshire" become an integral part of English lessons - it may also be the solution to bridging the north-south divide". This is about assimilation and fitting in, to not be the odd-one out. This is not any different than what I did to fit in, granted I was/am not a migrant or asylum seeker. I have paid a pretty penny to be an active and productive part of British society, to start a heritage organisation with tens of thousands of pounds from my own funds and I take nothing, not one penny, from the British state system. I give and continue to give to charity, educate and care for the nation in which I love and admire. The elocution lessons I took a very long time ago do not pinpoint a direct region from which I acquired my accent. A broad, clean and precise way of speaking in order to fit in, is what I set out and accomplished to do. The media attacked me for wanting to assimilate and fit in, but when others do it, nothing is said. This certainly is a double standard on the part of the media, and shows that what they did to me was only a way to keep their profits going using the Royal theme of Prince Harry's wedding. I am not even going to enter into what the Media has done to the 16-year-old high-school student, Nick Sandmann (his truth is here), better known as the Lincoln Memorial Confrontation. All one needs to know about the media can be summed up by the Lincoln Memorial Confrontation.
"A 'British' commentator on the royal family turned out to be a guy from upstate New York — but he's still one of the world's leading experts."
Now, I have to warn you - this is a LONG blog, simply because the story of what has happened is long, but also because there are several factions which need to be addressed and broken down from several media outlets and "Royal" blogs which are well off the mark. I have broken it down into sections for an easier read, but have released all the sections at once, and not individually building up to a full story, which may help you with time constraints:
- Introduction: 15 Minutes of Fame
- An Accent: Me and David Beckham... and Sandi Toksvig O.B.E... and Loyd Grossman C.B.E ... and Tony Blair... and Margaret Thatcher and....
- My Crime
- The Sensational Media
- A Problem In Media: Sir Cliff Richards and Glenn Beck
- Media Defence of Me
- Thank You Bolton Landing and The World
- Bullies: American and International Media
- Not Hatched, but born with both British and Italian Ancestry
- The British Monarchist Society
- The Royal Wedding
- Working With The Media
- Truth: The Wall Street Journal Article
- My Family. My Life. My Business!
- Royal Reporting Circles
- Royal Musings BlogSpot - MISINFORMATION
- Full Disclosure Omission: The Daily Blast Live (TDBL)
- Further Media Interest
Please stay with me, plough through the story below, and take away the truth from this ridiculous and overly sensationalised media circus.
This blog is not about getting the public, or anyone for that matter, on my side. This is simply my story and my truths revolving around the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article, which I should refer to as "the article which should not be named", and subsequent international media interest into who I am. I am happy with my life and know who I am and what I have been through to get to where I am. Trials and tribulations, highs and troughs - its all part of this experience we call life. I have been blessed to have some wonderful experiences in my life. I have dined on this "banquet" called life, when "most poor suckers are starving to death!" - a reference to Aunty Mame. Some media outlets have gone as far as to rudely compare me to Eliza Doolittle, however, in the end, "would Eliza Doolittle have still gotten to dance with the prince at the ball if she still had her Cockney accent?" I have been very fortunate and extremely lucky to have done and continue to do the things I do. I do not need to impress people. I really don't care what people have to say or what they may think about me. The only opinions and thoughts I care about are those whom I Iove, cherish, and respect, those who are family and dear friends, those that truly know me, my life and my truth.
Introduction: 15 Minutes of Fame
There certainly is a problem with the media and "Fake News", and no, I am not a Trump supporter or hater. I am not politically aligned. The Daily Blast Live is one of the most sensationalist media outlets operating today, like many others, as they simply need to embellish stories to have more clicks and a "buzz" happening on social media, in order to be picked up by main stream media television news shows. This is their main agenda and the agenda of modern media today. Click-bait and ratings whores - the truth of most of today's media outlets. They, The Daily Blast Live, referred to the media attention surrounding me as "A Wall Street Journal Investigation" and even ran a segment titled "Royal Expert Exposed" - what nonsense! This is actually quite amusing and funny, as there was never an "investigation" or "uncovering" or "expose", just an article that was the result of me working with the WSJ for almost four weeks, which ended up in the hatchet job you have all read, if not in the paper itself, then the other syndicated media outlets the WSJ is attached to. Did you know I actually worked with the WSJ for weeks on end to create a story? You can read all about me working with the WSJ below by reading on or clicking on the link above. I guess it is true when they say, that "when you play with the big boys, you are fair game to be a target to be taken down" - or at least that is what I have been told. I have never considered myself a celebrity or anything resembling the term, just a guy who defends and advances Constitutional Monarchy through an organisation I created to support the British Crown. Everything I have ever done has been in defence of the institution and the society I created. The media outlet named "Zeitblatt", long before this media storm took hold, completed an in-depth interview with me, as to who I am as a person, why I care so much about education etc. etc. I never once thought of myself, and still don't think of myself, as anything more than a person who promotes education about Constitutional Monarchy and the Royal family. Zeitblatt, to my amusement, titled me the "King of British Media" simply because I have worked in the industry for several years with almost 200 media credits, across several different platforms, on my CV. If you really want and/or care to learn about me according to the Zeitblatt interview, read the interview by clicking here. Anyway, back to the Fifteen minutes of fame thing...
My fifteen minutes however, has been a witch hunt filled with controversy, accusations and bullying not only from media outlets, but from private individuals that I do not know and who do not know me. The treatment of me by some acquaintances and colleagues based in California, who have had name changes of their own and further use fake titles and post-nominals to make themselves appear far more important than what they really are, has also been grossly unfair and unjust - however these people will one day reap what they have sown. To jump on the bandwagon of bullying hate, without knowing the truth or trying to find it, says more about these people than what a few media outlets could ever say about me. Fifteen minutes of an unwarranted character assassination has been the legacy gifted to me by the WSJ. I have been branded a fraud, a fake and an impostor by several of the world’s media outlets with others not wanting to work with me at the moment. Their nasty names and headlines are just words, not truths. What they have printed may hurt but they certainly will not break me. If complete strangers and “keyboard warriors” can spend the time to make horrible comments such as “I should kill myself” and “They should re-start Royal be-headings and use you [me] to practise on”, then I feel sorry for these people and the sad state of upbringing that they came from. These fifteen minutes have proven that society does not value education, positive efforts and good deeds, but thrives on fake news, negativity and the destruction of what people have selflessly worked their entire lives for.
"A guy from Upstate New York turned out to be
the biggest American, British Royal-themed, non-substance news story of the year - It must have been a very, very, very slow news day"
People don't want the truth, they want the nasty details of a could be story. I have always taken the high-road, very rarely fighting back and avoiding confrontation and unpleasant situations, but this time it is a bit different. I have always been and hope to remain a gentleman, but there are certain media outlets and certain blog writers who are not going to get away with the drivel they have produced and promoted about me - okay this blog may get a bit heated and juicy in certain parts, but hey, here I am for all to see - they started it and I will finish it. "No holds barred"!
My crime is simply knowing ridiculous amounts about British Royal history and being born in America. I am but a mere mortal, someone who has worked for nearly a decade to promote what I believe in on my own time and at my own expense: Constitutional Monarchy. I recently gave an exclusive to Britain’s largest news publication, The Sun, to defend myself from what some in the media were trying to portray of me. I have never hidden where I was born or where I was from. The Sun was outstanding and very supportive of the work I have undertaken these past many years. They truly were legend in allowing me a platform to get my side of the story and the full truth out. Click here to see the EXCLUSIVE SUN video and read the article.
An Accent: Me and David Beckham... and Sandi Toksvig O.B.E... and Loyd Grossman C.B.E ... and Tony Blair... and Margaret Thatcher and ...
Okay, yes, I may speak with an accent (which I took elocution lessons for and a long time, years actually, to get right) and consider myself to be British in many ways, however being British is being a part of an institution, not being based on where you are born. The WSJ references and credits a secondary school production of "Oliver" where I played the part of Mr. Sowerberry, the undertaker, for my accent. This is entirely false. I can certainly say that whatever sort of terrible accent I took on for that part, when I was maybe 13 or 14 years of age, is certainly not the trained and professionally changed accent which I speak with today. It was really not until the mid 2000's that I really began concentrating on my change of speech and accent, a product of immersing myself in British society and culture, to advance education and further conceptualise the patriotic organisation which I was eventually to create. Despite my desires to advance education and defend the Crown throughout the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth, changing my accent was about acceptance, assimilation and a sense of belonging to something bigger than myself.
Throughout my life I have come across many people who were born in different countries, who feel out of place and not in sync with the country in which they are from. To fit in, to not be the "odd man out" and to, at times, be taken seriously, people have purposely changed their accents, their nationality and the very places in which they live and reside. Ever since I was a child I have never felt like I "fit in" in America - that I was born in the wrong country and this was disclosed to the WSJ. I am not the first and certainly not the last of the millions around the world who have felt this way and have done something about it. Danish born Sandi Toksvig, C.B.E., American born Lloyd Grossman and countless others have adopted and practised a British accent for this very purpose - the same purpose that I took countless lessons to fit in and advance my options within the society I wanted to assimilate into and be a part of. It is not just people from outside the United Kingdom, but Brits themselves that have purposely changed their accents as well, such as Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair and even such contemporaries as David and Victoria Beckham. In 2013 The Guardian put out an article, more of a discussion and Q & A about accents and speech by Quentin Letts, a columnist from the Daily mail, and Kevin Maguire, Associate Editor at The Mirror, which outlined the Beckham's accent and linguistic transformation stating: "Good on David Beckham for poshing up his accent. Since moving to America the footballer has reportedly gone upmarket in the way he speaks. Some will accuse a good Essex boy of selling out, of ditching his glottal stops for something more dollified and grand, but what is wrong with that?" You can read the article by clicking here.The article further goes on to defend and celebrate the Beckhams, the journalists own friends and others who have changed their accents for a variety of reasons. This article certainly outlines the hypocritical tone and nature with which I have been accosted throughout the media.
The American, Gertrude Stein, born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, stated, “America is my country and Paris is my hometown” due to her affection for and love of the city where she thought she should belong. Paris was the city that best defined her, encompassed her beliefs and let her be who she was truly meant to be. This is exactly how I have always felt about London and more so about the United Kingdom in whole.
Many people who are not born in the United Kingdom have worked in, moved to, visited extensively, or relocated for a time in their life to the country. Such people, those who have taken elocution lessons, changed their accents to fit in and have further made wonderful careers for themselves, have been rewarded for doing so by making great contributions to British society and culture. I have not become who I am, or have worked as hard in the areas that I have, solely to be honoured by the government and presented a "gong" from The Queen (although that would be the highlight of my life). I am outlining just how ridiculous and hypocritical this whole media circus has been, considering that the two well-known and famous people mentioned below (there are many others) have been celebrated and even granted an O.B.E. and C.B.E. for doing the exact same thing that I have done with my life!
There are many people who are able and fortunate enough to do something about living in places that do not represent or define them - they move around, they become part of the international set and they assimilate into and become a productive part of their adopted society. Case in point, Sandi Toksvig O.B.E. (Order of the British Empire) who's story is similar to mine. Sandi Toksvig was born in Denmark and spent most of her youth until her teens mostly in New York City. She underwent elocution lessons to speak proper British English and to change her accent – something she recalls and explains that she had to do in her own words to Stephen Fry and Alan Davies. She even states, "This is why I sound like I am trapped in a black and white film". Watch Sandi explain this in her own words by clicking here.
Another case in point would be Lloyd Grossman C.B.E. (Commander of the British Empire) – an American who was born near and lived in the Metro-Boston area for most of his young adult life, who amassed his fortune and positive publicity by speaking with a posh British accent, which obviously was learned and perfected. He did not travel to the United Kingdom until he was 25 years of age (eight years of age after my first extended visit to the UK) . Mr. Grossman is originally from Marblehead, Massachusetts, speaks with a British accent and has made a great life and name for himself, profiting off of his media contributions, cooking shows and his own line of gourmet foods - his line of sauces are truly culinary masterpieces! Nom Nom Nom. Has he or Sandi come under fire for their contributions, elocution lessons, where they were born or how they transformed themselves to assimilate into the society which they felt they wanted and needed to belong to? The answer is NO.
In 2014 the Guardian released another article titled, Do Accents Really Matter in Modern Britain - "Dr. Alexander Baratta from the University of Manchester spoke of "accentism", where people are discriminated against because of how they speak, and likened it to racism. In a study, he asked people why they changed their accents and how it made them feel. A third of those questioned said they were "ashamed" about flattening out their accents. But what was the alternative? We all want to get ahead; for the most part, the best way to do that is to "fit in". Still, there is a price, the professor says. Facing the world with a voice that is not your own can "undermine your sense of being". And perhaps that's right. But it must depend on the level of confidence and self-worth that existed at the outset. Think of all the migrants from years past who tinkered with their names to better enable them to make a success of life in Britain or America. They altered something pretty fundamental and survived with psyche intact". You can read this article in full by clicking here.
Some comments I have read under certain articles on different media platforms mention that I sound like an old film star from the "Golden Age" of Hollywood. I actually take such comments as compliments, as old time film stars spoke beautifully with proper diction and annunciation. It was not until I looked into these suggestions and did some research for this blog, that I fully understood what the comments and their assertions actually meant. According to the Vintage Times, "Actors from Hollywood’s Golden Age, such as Cary Grant (born Archibald Alec Leach in Horfield, England) and Katharine Hepburn, speak with a unique accent that doesn’t sound like it comes from any particular region... it’s called the Transatlantic or Mid-Atlantic accent and is not quite American and not quite British... the name “Mid-Atlantic” actually refers to the area directly between Los Angeles and the U.K., symbolizing the influence of both countries. Some typical characteristics of the accent are the dropping of r’s at the end of words, like “winner” or “clear,” and the soft pronunciation of vowel sounds, “dahnce” instead of “dance”, for instance. ‘T’ sounds are also enunciated and Mid-Atlantic speakers will hit that T so that a word like ‘butter’ does not sound ‘budder,’ as most Americans today would pronounce it". I have never given this "Transatlantic" accent thing much thought, especially since my elocution classes were "British" in nature, but it is interesting just the same when reading the Vintage News article, as to why and how so many Americans spoke eloquently and ever so clear in the early half of the twentieth century. One question asked by the author, which I am very interested to know myself is, "So why don’t we hear the Mid-Atlantic accent anymore? According to linguist William Labov, the Mid-Atlantic speech fell out of favor after World War II, as fewer teachers continued teaching the pronunciation to their students". You can read the Vinatge News article by clicking here.
The Atlantic also weighs in on the Translatlantic accent in an article titled "When Did Americans Stop Sounding This Way?" by stating, "It's not faux-British, but it's a particular kind of lah-dee-dah American diction that at one time was very familiar and now has vanished ... it still leaves the question of why it so totally fell out of fashion, and so fast. It's very hard for laymen to have a sense of how quickly accents changed in the past. Because there weren't movies and only a few recordings, we lack the vivid sense of how people actually sounded in the 19th century and before. But the total disappearance of what had been a prominent part of American public culture -- the formal lah-dee-dah tone -- in just a few decades is remarkable and must mean ... something". You can read The Atlantic article by clicking here.
It has never been kept a secret by me that I was born in America, specifically New York. My friends, business partners, business affiliates etc., they all know where I was born - this is nothing new to them. Truth be told, I have not lived in New York or have been a resident of the state since 1999 – almost half a lifetime ago. The fact that I was born in America has been public record on all of the companies I have belonged to, owned or have been a director of. I have always been upfront about this fact when asked or have come into contact with others from America, especially New York or Carolina where I lived during one of my university stints. I have never stated that I was born in Britain, although I am in love with her lands, her beauty, her history and her people.
My story is not new and it certainly is not a new-found concept of self-identity. Some of America’s greatest public figures and celebrated people were not and are not American, so why am I such a story of interest? Alexander Hamilton who is on the $10 note was not American (born in Nevis), but is celebrated and considered as such. Look at the waves of people who emigrated to America, changed their names, or had their names changed for them at Ellis Island by the Federal Government, and assimilated into American society – what they did and have done is no different than what I have done. There are plenty of Americans who live and work all over the world who eventually become citizens or subjects of the country which they have adopted. Renowned American author T.S. Eliot moved to the UK and became a British subject in 1927. I am from upstate New York, selflessly defend the Crown and pay for the pleasure of doing so. My contribution to society through education, the works of the BMS and further projects created to promote the understanding of the place of the Crown and the Royal family in the modern century does not earn me a penny of profit, and it certainly does not pay for any of my expenses. As of late, these efforts exhaust me, financially burden me and further take away any joy I used to have from undertaking the good fight for Crown and Country. However, this is temporary, and I will soon return to the sense of joy that education and Royal history have always brought me. I do have some great projects lined up!
For others, some of whom I know personally, who are unable to move around such as the international set do, to relocate to places which identify them as people, they remain within the nation to which they were born but are steadfast supporters of their favourite countries such as the United Kingdom. There are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of such people in America itself - these people are called Anglophiles and they know so much about the United Kingdom, often times more than those who were born within Her Majesty’s Realm. There are several outlets dedicated to Anglophiles, such as online outlets, organisations and even a proper magazine called Anglotopia!
I often times hear in different places, that people are tired of foreigners, that they don’t speak the language, that they don’t assimilate, that they stay to themselves and their own… this is said on both sides of the Atlantic. In many ways this is true, and this is something that I have always been aware of during my years of extensive travels around the world. I have always been an active part of the society in which I am immersed in, visiting or living in. If I was to be visiting France extensively or living there, I would be expected to not only know, but speak French and know the customs and culture of its people, the same as speaking German, if I was to visit extensively or live in Germany. During my time in Holland I learned conversational Dutch and made it a point to study and learn the language, even if it was from friends and Dutch television programmes with English subtitles. The point is, I made the effort to be an active part of British society and not the “ugly American” that Marlene Koenig speaks of (she obviously doesn't know the terms meaning) in her "Royal Musings" blog about me which you will read more about below.She is the epitome of what being ugly is about as she is the worst type of person, someone who took falsities, touted it as truth and embellished her own story to try and join the ranks of the media to discredit me. She is nothing more than a bully who works for a professional educational establishment - there is a lot wrong with this!
The Sensational Media
"Vanity Fair", a supposed reputable media outlet, ran a ridiculous article like so many other outlets, which stated that I "came clean" - however, there is nothing to come clean about as I have done nothing wrong and have hidden nothing. This notion and running theme that I have done something bad, withheld information etc., is a nonsense. I never once spoke to Vanity Fair, and they certainly did not speak to me or ask for an interview. So, my question is, from where did they get their facts and information? Their facts came from other news sources which were re-branded, re-worked, repackaged and put out for consumption without even referring to or speaking with me, the source. This is a perfect example of what Zeitblatt Magazine has termed "Click and Paste" media reporting.
The media has lost it's integrity and has really scraped the bottom of the barrel to make a story about me which is slanted, skewed and has left out pertinent facts which actually matter to the overall substance of a fair and balanced story. Not only did they create a sensationalist article, they further inflated the story without facts and twisted and turned the situation and theme, to fit into their agenda of pushing ratings through naughty headlines designed as click bait. Alas, the modern day media is about driving profits, not facts. Many media outlets followed suit and did the same as Vanity Fair, wanting in on the action from the topic of the day, regardless if the story was factual or not. What would have been an interesting story is what the WSJ originally said they wanted the article to be about - "a small town guy makes good". The story of what life was and has been for me, how it led me to love the UK and how and why I ended up where I am - providing commentary for years to the world's media about the Royal family. Trials, tribulations, experiences, charity works and projects - there is plenty in my life to make a great story, including some negative juicy bits, which did not need to be fabricated into some false, negative narrative to drive ratings and skew my positive contributions to society.
As of late, there has been a running theme within the media and that is not telling the whole story, omitting truths and designing an alternative agenda and narrative to progress their own means and profit from it through ratings. Almost every media outlet which ran a piece about me took their "facts" and assertions from the WSJ, and even quoted the WSJ - taking it as the ultimate word of truth. If these media outlets would have known the truth behind the WSJ article, how I worked with them and the underhanded and deceitful way they propagated a story, cutting out 90% of my life story, I would hope that they would think twice before repeating what they have read - however I know this would never happen. The media (except a very small percentage) will run with any story, true or not, to get ratings, to beat out other outlets and to get web traffic to and clicks on their sites - this translates into profits. The media has no integrity and I will now think twice before helping any news outlet again with any of my contributions. What the media have done is unfair, wrong and damaging not only to my person but my family, friends, career and business, which I have worked so hard to build, improve and maintain. For the media outlets that no longer want to work with me - no worries - your loss!
A Problem In Media: Sir Cliff Richards and Glenn Beck
Just today, 18 July 2018, it was announced that Sir Cliff Richards (British celebrity, singer and national treasure) has won his case against the BBC. For years, Sir Cliff has been the centre of a media nightmare and a story which the media thought to sensationalise and promote as if Sir Cliff was guilty, without a shred of evidence to his name. Sir Cliff was never charged or arrested, as he was always innocent, but the media pushed a line and a theme which made the singer appear to be guilty and hiding something. The media nearly destroyed this man's life and career, and if that was not enough, further added emotional and mental trauma to compound his suffering. Sir Cliff has my understanding, respect and sympathies for this wrongdoing by the media. The BBC released an article about the case offering: "In his judgement, High Court Judge, Mr Justice Mann, said the BBC had infringed Sir Cliff's privacy rights in a "serious" and "sensationalist" way. He rejected the BBC's case that its reporting was justified under rights of freedom of expression and of the press. Standing alongside Sir Cliff outside court, his solicitor Gideon Benaim said the case raised "serious questions", about the way BBC management scrutinises the work of its journalists and how the BBC focused on preserving an exclusive story rather than respecting Sir Cliff's rights. Mr Benaim furher said Sir Cliff had "never expected his privacy and reputation would be tarnished in this way". Sir Cliff told reporters he would not comment further now, adding: "It's going to take a while to get over the whole emotional factor." Speaking outside the High Court in London, the BBC's director of news and current affairs Fran Unsworth apologised to Sir Cliff and said: "On reflection, there are things we would have done differently." You can read the entire article by clicking here. At a hearing on 26 July 2018, The BBC was refused leave to appeal against Sir Cliff's privacy ruling and the Corporation agreed to pay £850,000 worth of public money (raised from the television license fee) towards Sir Cliff's legal fees which could top £3m.
Recently Glenn Beck himself (I am not a fan and refrain from being political) brought light to this same issue within the media world, its negative agenda, its skewed views and its seemingly absent reporting integrity. He has understood and realised his somewhat questionable contributions to the media and has since made amends for it. He states that THERE IS A PROBLEM in the mainstream media. Though his stance is about politics in the clip below, it still highlights the issue with the media that I am also explaining here and now. I feel for Glenn as I can relate to and understand how he felt at the end of the reporter's questions. I think you should really watch, better yet, hope you watch, the recent exchange between Glenn and Brian Stelter of CNN. It truly defines and "exposes" everything that is wrong with the media. Watch the exchange between Glenn and Brian here.
Media Defence of Me
Several outlets have come to my defence, in addition to The Sun and Inside Edition, although some of their facts are still not correct. Inside Edition even sensationalised their wording in promotion of the televised interview I appeared on, to gain more viewers - they also even stated I was "exposed" haha. With media outlets defending me, I should not complain in the slightest, but I do not like being referred to so informally as "Tommy" by people I do not know intimately. I think that I am due some respect as an individual, the same as anyone would want and deserve. It is only right to be called Thomas unless otherwise given permission to refer to me as something else. As for my surname and legal identity, Mace-Archer-Mills is how I should be referred to and recognised as. I have not hidden from the media the surname I was born with. For example in July of 2013, when I was written about in the London Evening Standard about my book on the drinking habits of the Royal family titled "To The Queen: A Royal Drinkology", I was asked what the initials of "J. M." stood for on the cover of my book which was being featured. I very happily told the reporter they stood for my middle name and my surname, and told him my surname was Muscatello. As it was my old surname at the time and I was not being addressed by it anymore, I was in the last stages of phasing it out - I never kept it a secret and was forthcoming with the information. You can see in the photo from this article from the Evening Standard, dated 25 July 2013, that my former surname appears at the bottom in the reporters notes. Any current reference to my person using my previous surname is not just wrong, it is just plain rude! You can read the Evening Standard article and see the reference to my previous surname in full by clicking here.
"The Royals Family" youtube channel has created a video about me with contributions from the Associated Press, which is a pretty well positive creation and can be viewed by clicking here. However, their facts are still variable. The "Business Insider" - a great media outlet, has also put together a story, albeit originally based on the WSJ story, but has since updated it to reflect new information they have received. Despite me being born in America, I am STILL referred to as "one of the world's leading experts" on the subject. You can read this article by clicking here. "Newser" took a somewhat different approach with the tone of their report, also stating the vast amount of knowledge I have, however their report uses the WSJ and the Associated Press to which their facts and assertions are not all true and are also implied. Newser does have a little bit of "sass" and "cattiness" throughout its report and further states that I "could also be called Tommy Muscatello" - this is not correct, not proper and certainly is not valid at this point in my life. You can read the Newser report by clicking here.
"Zeitblatt Magazine" out of Germany has been a great supporter of me and my work stating: "Being the most interviewed man of the Royal Wedding of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan is not easy. All of the sudden jealous competitors who get less google results and minutes on air pop up. And all of a sudden a discriminatory wave – that has hardly ever be seen before in mass media – starts slamming the expert... The wrong-doing [done to me] is a copy and paste phenomenon of 2018 as many #fakenews publications just copy from each others. So the expert has to suffer, despite his huge reputation, achievements, charitable activities and hard work for promoting historical facts about monarchy. Not fair. Not good. It is time for a change in the media, especially to evaluate the actions taken by journalists in a fast and fury media world." You can read the Zeitblatt article in full by clicking here.
It was further reported in several outlets, even on a Wikipedia page about me (does this mean I have made the big time – having such a page?), that I was an estate agent (real estate agent) in New York. I have never undertaken estate agency in New York, and have never held a real estate license in that state, but in South Carolina where I owned my own brokerage. I am not sure what to make of the Wikipedia page as their facts are solely based on the WSJ article and not the full truth. What was kept a secret by the media was not only the good things I have done, the charity I have undertaken and the many accolades and accomplishments I have made, but that I have also been educated outside of America. They failed to further report that I have been both extensively visiting and living outside of America for the better part of 18 years. When I lived in New York, not only did I frequent Montreal, Canada (an hour and forty minute car ride away from my family home) as a youngster with my parents (when they were still married), but I further spent much of my teenage years not only in Montreal, but Ottawa and Quebec City - visiting close family friends, skiing and further exploring the many historical points that Her Majesty's "Northern Realm" had/has to offer. It is not only where I practised, but immersed myself in conversational French. I have very few regrets. My life is what I have made it and I have worked extremely hard to be successful and happy with who I am and where I am at in life. In the words of Gabrielle (Coco) Chanel, “I decided who I wanted to be, and that is who I am”.
Thank You Bolton Landing and The World
Now, before I go any further, I want to thank so many people for sending me messages of support and encouragement, friends and strangers alike from all over the world. Many of which have given me examples of other people throughout history, and recently, who have changed their lives to be more reflective of the people they are, and have moved to, or visit extensively where they feel they belong. I am most grateful for some media outlets that have reached out to me with messages of support and encouragement – also not understanding why this is such a newsworthy story. I have now received a ton of positive messages, more so than negative ones, and the outpouring of support from my hometown of Bolton Landing on Lake George has really been overwhelming – considering I do not live there and do not visit frequently. People from ages ago have reached out and I cannot thank them enough for their messages of support. I wish Bolton Landing was given a better Wikipedia page - it does not do the town justice in any way – it has such a rich a colourful history along with the story of its founding! If you have not been to the Lake George area, in particular Bolton Landing, it must be on your bucket list as it is one of the most beautiful places you will find that is still left un-spoilt.
Bullies: American and International Media
Carrying on... people often mimic and badmouth what they don’t understand or bother to try to understand, and I get that – it's life, and that’s people for you, but a country such as the United States of America, a beacon of hope, a country of people who are “free” and allowed to be who they want or should be, free from persecution, entitled to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, is anything but. The American media has made sure of that for me and my story is the perfect example. Most of the hate and fierce bullying directed towards me has come from America, with the rest of the world not really giving a care, as there are more important issues facing mankind than the question of where I was born. In America it should be a positive thing that people not only want, but aspire to be happy, to do well and make something of themselves - people who dare to be different and are happy with who they have become and celebrate the things that they are passionate about. However, different is no longer a treasured value or mark of freedom. America to me, media wise, has been the biggest outlet of bullying and hate towards my person - an outlet that does not report facts and further embellishes stories and further makes up stories to add fabrication to their sensationalist reports to further their own ratings. Case in point, The Daily Blast Live – I will explain this in full detail below.
This blog post is not so much about what I have done in my life, but more so about who I am and the way I have been portrayed around the world as a result of a misleading article in the Wall Street Journal, which other media outlets picked up on and beamed across the world, simply because it was Royal Wedding related. The Royal Wedding sold papers and created a newsworthy hyper-buzz, so why not keep it going and milk it for what it’s worth, right? A story about an obscure, non-celebrity who likes constitutional monarchy, supports the Royal family and happens to be from America - that would be a great way to further keep the Royal wedding coverage going, especially if it can be spun in a negative context, right?! This was the basis of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article that they published weeks after the Wedding at Windsor. There was no substance to the story, nothing positive and nothing negative. It was a non-story which was transformed into a hatchet job, which other syndicated outlets embellished and further added to in order to create a news story. This was truly sensationalised, fabricated and “fake news” at its finest. This is certainly a form of BULLYING which people pay to support in the form of buying papers and taking out subscriptions to such media outlets. Below I describe the WSJ article in full detail.
I am certainly not letting the British media off the hook, as the Times – can you believe it… my favourite paper that I have the utmost respect for (I am going to have to re-think this) – even did a piece on me! I was gutted that I only made it to page 15 haha. They went as far as to falsely state that I give interviews in top hats… I have no idea where this “fact” came from, but I have never been filmed in an interview wearing a top hat. I have only worn top hats to Ascot and to tea at a Buckingham Palace garden party with Her Majesty.
There is a photo of me in a top hat at Buckingham Palace which the Mail on Sunday (MoS) has used without any authorisation or my express permission to do so, considering that I own the photograph and the rights to it. The Mail on Sunday was certainly a full out attack on not only me, but the very organisation which I created - the British Monarchist Society - not only with the release of their non factual article, but the very way in which I was not only treated and depicted in the publication, but the tone, aggression and blatantly ugly treatment of me by their reporter. The MoS are nothing but low-class bullies without facts to back up their assertions. I think that the Mail on Sunday is more than a bit naughty, they really are the lowest of the low when it comes to ethics and the treatment of sources – “What a Cheek”!
Not Hatched, but born with both British and Italian Ancestry
Firstly, I have TWO parents, like most people have – something the media did not report on. ONE, my father, who is of Italian descent, not Italian, and TWO, my mother, Regina (Latin for Queen) who is of English (British) and Irish descent. It is amazing that the papers omitted her and her heritage to create their headlines and further the story claiming me to be an Italian-American without any British blood or ancestry. I guess it would have been a great headline to say that I was hatched by an Italian man around a brick oven whilst he was sweating making pizza or turning a pasta maker, but this unfortunately did not appear in any paper haha – however the insinuation was there, especially in Marlene Koenig's Royal Musings blog. The WSJ only spoke briefly to my father who has also made his outrage at the Wall Street Journal known by commenting in the Sun. You can read my father's defence of me and his outrage at the WSJ in THE SUN by clicking here.
I did not grow up in an Italian household, and further do not speak Italian or hold any Italian customs within my lifestyle. Okay, I like pasta, but so do many other people who are not Italian. My paternal grandfather, from Italy, passed when I was young, as did my paternal grandmother. My cousin of Italian and Greek descent will be the first to say that I make “the best Irish lasagne ever” – Americans of Italian descent will appreciate and understand that statement.
I certainly do have British and Irish blood and ancestry. Yes, I do wear flat caps as reported, but I have been wearing them since my secondary school days. My great-grandfather (Irish) always donned flat cap, so this style of head-wear is not something I just picked up from nowhere. I think this is something that I get a liking for from my maternal great-grandfather as he was always part and partial to a flat cap being Irish and all. It cannot be denied that I was born into British history, as where I was born saw almost one-third of the revolutionary battles against British forces fought not just in New York, but the Lake George region. The French and Indian War was fought on the very lake which is where I grew up, Lake George, named after King George II.
The lake is 32 miles long, three and a half miles wide and contains sandy beaches, bays, islands and some of the prettiest scenery that America has to offer. It is known as “The Queen of American Lakes”. At the south end sits British Fort William Henry, so named for both Prince William, the Duke of Cumberland, the younger son of King George II, and Prince William Henry, Duke of Gloucester, a grandson of King George II and a younger brother of the future King George III, and at the north end in the narrows leading into Lake Champlain sits Fort Ticonderoga, the French fort. Almost a quarter of the way up the lake from Fort William Henry sits the town of Bolton Landing, made famous by the luxurious Sagamore Hotel (my favourite place on the lake) and “Millionaires Row” which defined the town and its affluent associations.
Today, battle boats of the French and Indian War, known as bateaux (Sunken Fleet of 1758), are still discovered in the lake. Not far away is Crown Point, Valley Forge, Fort Ann, Fort Edward and many other towns, which were fortified posts during the settlement of the area by the British. The massacre at Bloody Pond and several other interesting historic events were centred around where I was born and lived during the early years of my life. This is also the area in which James Fennimore Cooper’s film, “The Last of the Mohicans”, was based on. British history is not a new interest for me, but a part of who I am - it is in my blood and has surrounded every aspect of my person since birth.
The British Monarchist Society
With the organisation that I have created from scratch, the British Monarchist Society, it is important that people know, because the media did not tell them, that I have created an education programme within the society named "The Red Box" to further understanding of the institution, how it works and how it benefits society in the 21st century. I have funded the organisation from the start out of my own pocket, and further provided for many who have been attached to the Society in many different ways. Also, I have created other projects and events which have added to the mission and overall direction of the organisation. This organisation has been a culmination of my life's work and deserves the credit it is due for what it stands for and provides. European channel Yourope, along with documentary maker, ARTE, were very excited about the BMS during the Queen's Diamond Jubilee in 2012 and really did a nice job in creating a mini-documentary about the Society, what it stands for and what it does. It also has some tongue-in-cheek and funny clips with me and my union flag addiction lol, oh and yes I did weigh a bit more in the film than I do now haha. Watch the ARTE documentary here. I have spent years defending the Crown in the United Kingdom and across the Commonwealth at my own expense, whilst bringing education about the institution to the forefront for everyone to understand. A direct result of these efforts would also be the magazine I have created, Crown & Country. I did not know that creating something of educational and societal value would be considered a crime worthy of character assassination and extensive bullying. As they say, “No good deed goes unpunished”.
Anyway, lets get into the real reason I have made this blog and the reason that you are reading it, or still reading it I hope. Am I really the type of person who is “news”? Should I not be allowed to know facts and provide education because of where I was born? According to the world’s media and several people within the small, malicious and jealous circle of “Royal” reporting, I am the scandal of the century!
The Royal Wedding of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
Being invited to provide live running commentary and further be interviewed about the Royal Wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on 19 May 2018 is a great honour indeed. There are several components to the criteria that networks have when considering someone to appear on their television programmes, anyone in media knows this to be true. I did not wake up on the morning of the Royal wedding and just decide, “Hey, I am going to be a commentator today and comment on the nuptials of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle”. Being asked to be a Royal commentator from any network requires one to be knowledgeable in their field, someone they know and trust, someone who has worked with the network before with a core concentration on the subject being reported about etc. If I was not considered an expert by certain international media outlets, would I have been asked to not only give interviews, but provide running commentary for the Royal Wedding? I did not provide any commentary or give any interviews to British or American television media outlets on the day of the wedding itself. A few days before the wedding I provided interviews for the American news outlet, The Daily Blast Live, and interviewed with Voice of America weeks before the Royal nuptials took place. Of course I worked with the WSJ as you know, but this is the minuscule extent that I have worked with the American media regarding the Royal Wedding.
Working with the Media
I have spent many years (6+ to be exact) working directly with several of the world’s top media outlets to become their “go to” person for proper information and commentary where the Royal family is concerned. I have appeared on Radio, on television and in print as a Royal expert and source of Royal knowledge – this cannot be taken away from me. Due to this, I have a long list of media credits which cannot be denied – nearly 200 media credits between television, radio and print. I have always conveyed the information and knowledge I have to offer in a clear and concise way with rarely a second take needed. The media networks always get what they want from me, when they want it, even when I am not given so much as a 24-hour notice. I have at times gone out of my way to accommodate and make myself available for these networks. If I am not available, I have always helped to provide an alternative stand-in, someone who has the same, if not more knowledge than me. I am always the first to ask if they have everything they need or if anything needs another take, as I want to make sure the network is happy with what I have offered. What people have not been told and what they do not know, is that I have never been paid for my time, not one penny for one news media contribution where my knowledge about the Royal family has been used and/or showcased. The networks have come to me time and time again because I DO KNOW my subject – they are the ones who have used me repeatedly and consider me an expert for my knowledge and education on and about the Royal family. It was a producer from the French media who coined me “Monsieur Monarchie” – Mr. Monarchy. Any attempt to discredit these facts are just mean, uneducated and further show those who have reported and/or created fabrications in the media to bear a touch of the “Green Monster” – where were they reporting from, if reporting at all on the Royal Wedding? I gave interviews and/or running commentary for five different networks on the day of the Royal wedding, not one outlet was American or British, yet the American media were the first to report on the WSJ article and further sensationalise it. Zeitblatt termed me “The Most Interviewed Man of the Royal Wedding” – you can read the article by clicking here.
Truth: The Wall Street Journal Article
Many media outlets have stated that the WSJ “exposed” me as a "fraud" with their "investigation"– HAHAHA. These outlets and their readers have no idea that I worked directly with the WSJ for almost a month, however my negative experience with the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) is not uncommon. Music artist Marie Digby, along with several others, has had to defend herself from the fake media and set the story straight according to her own blog, much like I am doing here. The WSJ nearly destroyed her career and she took to her own blog for justice. Her story gave me the inspiration to write this blog. Click here to read her story about her own WSJ experience.
The WSJ first approached me to interview with them about the Royal Wedding and the Cryptocurrency I conceived in April 2018. I was approached by their Money and Investments reporter. You can see from the screen shot of their original email to me below, that what they initially wanted and got from me, is not what they put out in the mainstream media:
I met with and interviewed with the WSJ on 3 May 2018, providing everything they wanted and needed. It was not until a week and a half later that I received a phone call from my brother telling me that the WSJ had phoned my father, asking questions about my early childhood. In being candidly honest and transparent here, I have not had the best relationship with my father and have just started speaking with him again and forming a relationship with him after many, many years. I was quite surprised by this, as I could not understand what the WSJ could possibly want to know from my father – he has not had anything to do with my career or interests in Royal subjects, let alone the BMS or the “Royl” coin crypto. A few more days went by and I had a message from the WSJ reporter who asked me to complete a fact check. I was then given the opportunity to confront the reporter on my terms and ask why these questions were relevant to the original ask of interviewing me etc. I was told by the reporter, “I probably should have let you know that we have changed direction with the story. The Story is going to be a light-hearted look at a small-town guy who makes good and reports on the Royal family. You will even have one of the famous WSJ dot drawings made of you.” From this conversation I had my reservations and was not happy about not being told about the change in the story until after the fact. It is not what I signed up for, or agreed to do, under the auspices of the WSJ’s initial correspondence. I was quite surprised that the WSJ would pull a 180 on me and the piece that I originally agreed to help them with. I made my displeasure known via an email (pictured below) which did not give the WSJ permission to use the video footage of me or any information I had provided. I was assured, as you will see by the email screen shot below, that they were going to mention my new book, "Their Majesty's Mixers, When They Reign, They Pour", my views on the monarchy and my career history etc., they never did. Everything I was told by the WSJ reporter was a lie and if they would have mentioned the important bits such as my career history, the world would understand that I did not just wake up on the morning of the Royal Wedding and decide to be a "commentator". Nothing I wanted to clarify and add made it into the WSJ article as the reporter assured me it would. You will see my email accusing the WSJ of deception and the reporter's subsequent response as described below.
In all I worked with the WSJ for about a month in total, constantly providing information, fact checking, providing the latest charity projects of the BMS and things I have been involved with etc. The result of working with the WSJ and providing everything for a good profile article, which was to be "light-hearted and fun", was anything but. You all know how it turned out. I was told several times that the article would be coming out, but it was pushed back, so much so that it finally made an appearance almost ten days after the wedding - what a way to capitalise on the Royal nuptials!
In looking at the article and the sheer non-substance and mis-information, along with fake facts, I even sent fact checks to the WSJ reporter the night before the article was released, especially about the new charity book to benefit Prince Harry’s nominated wedding charities which we have undertaken. Harry & Meghan: The Wedding Acorn. This appeared nowhere in the article. Actually, nothing positive or charity minded appeared in the article at all. The fact that I did not learn how to ride horses in Kent, but had my first lessons and pony rides when I was young, aged 4, did not even make the correction list. I even provided photographs for the reporter. I further rode when I was in South Carolina, a lot, and of course with friends over many years in England. I love horses and those of you who truly know me acknowledge the truth to this. The reporter did not mention my mother, her British and Irish lineage or the fact that where I grew up was steeped in British history. He omitted the pertinent facts of my English and Irish heritage and also the fact that I had been travelling Europe for many years and even attended the Noordelijke Hogeschool Leeuwarden (NHL) in Holland in the late 1990’s. I have a certificate in History from this university. There is so much more to the WSJ story than meets the eye. The biggest objection I had was the reporter’s insinuation that I was in fact not a current Royal Consultant to the Royal family of Serbia, having worked on the Royal wedding of Prince Philip of Serbia and three other events for the Royal family. I still speak with the Palace and am currently sorting another visit in the near future to undertake works. The very fact that a Royal House would seek me out and ask me to help them shows that I do know what I am doing, know a thing or two about Royal history and also know the proper ways things are to be done within a Royal household.
The fact that the WSJ did in fact mention my name change did not upset me, but the way they conveyed it was not nice. The reasons for my name change many years ago are private, between myself and my family, and I will not be forced to explain it. Some things are just private and will be kept that way. Many people change their names for many reasons and I have changed my name to one that reflects not only a maternal family name but also the names of families to which I belong to and am apart of, that have made me who I am today. Countless numbers of people have changed and/or do not go by their given names. Kings, Queens, Presidents, Politicians and celebrities are but a few categories of people who have done this. People such as "Bill Clinton", "Gerald Ford", "John Wayne", "Boris Johnson", "George Michael", "Freddy Mercury", "Willy Brandt", "Ho Chi Minh", "Katy Perry", "Demi Moore", "Meg Ryan", "Woody Allen", "Alan Alda", "Kirk Douglas", "Portia De Rossi","Queen Victoria", "Emperor Haile Sellassie" and many other notables around the world, from the past and present, do not in fact use, go by or keep their given birth names.
My Family. My Life. My Business!
One great objection to the WSJ article was not so much by me, but those who are and have been a part of my family not only since birth, but for several past decades. The Wall Street Journal alluded to and asserted that I “poached” old people in England to call them grandparents. This is simply false and very hurtful to those who have adopted me and make up my family unit. Most people have a story about "Aunts", "Uncles", "God-Parents" and other members of their own specially designed "family", that includes close family friends and non-blood related individuals, however these individuals do in fact make up a family unit. Formally recognising an individual as a Grandson, such as in my case, truly does make us family. My dear friend "Carly" who resides in South Carolina (I will not give her full name due to privacy) offered me an example of her "family" - Carly: "There are the kind of elderly neighbours who act like surrogate grandparents around the world, most people are familiar with this and also have a family like this. My own grandmother in Anderson (SC) died when I was 2 and my neighbour across the street has been my grandmother in town since then. Sometimes I would accidentally call my Granny in Columbia, SC, Jackie and she said that was a compliment. Jackie gave me my first bath when I came home from the hospital, watched me as a child, and now I help take care of her. My dad calls her every morning and brings her Gatorade to keep her hydrated. When I was at home I would bring her meals so she didn't just eat peanut butter crackers. Having non-related elders is not a new and/or sinister thing."
Another example of family recently explained to me was, "like how your childhood friend's family becomes your own. I still go over to visit them when I am town and have a seat at the dinner table". This is not so much "Blood vs. Tribe", but the combination of blood and tribe, the creation of a family, and the building of a deep and fortified family unit which provides support, encouragement and love for all who belong to it. It is not always true that blood is thicker than water, but when you add the components of wisdom, affection and positive examples, water and blood co-exist harmoniously to the benefit of all involved.
The WSJ has no idea as to the depth and extent of my personal relationships, as my dear Grandfather George (Mills), and his lovely wife Betty, have been in my life as proper parental and grandparent figures since the summer of 1998 – more than half of my life. When my darling “Granny” passed due to stage 4 breast cancer in the late 2000’s, it was my Grandfather George who then fell terribly ill, and thank God I was able to be with him, to keep him going, to be a supportive son and grandson figure. The same goes for Mervyn Redding who was also mentioned in the WSJ article – she is not some frail old lady who has been taken advantage of, and those who know us and our relationship will certainly tell you otherwise. I should not have to be forced to explain the very private essence of my family unit as I am, however here I am doing so for all of you to see thanks to the WSJ.
We are a family and no one, not The Queen, not the President of the United States and certainly not the WSJ can tell me or those closest to me who can make up my family unit and support network. My mother Regina speaks with Grandfather George, they send cards and Christmas presents to each other etc., they even speak on the phone, but how close my mother and Grandfather George are was also not mentioned in the WSJ article. My blood and tribe are my family - one complete unit, with no differentiation between blood or water. Family is all that matters to us.
The WSJ has no right to assert anything about my family that they do not know the ins or outs of. To write about such matters in the way they did is not only wrong and hurtful, but a certain violation of privacy. Many people around the world have different familial compositions, different heirs and different names. Why is it only my situation that has been scrutinised in such a way? This is nothing but malicious and mean spirited, a complete contrast to the interview they stated they wanted to be "light-hearted" and "fun". I have been through something similar to what the WSJ recently did to me a few years ago, as in 2015 an anonymous letter was circulated by a jealous "friend" (we later learned the identity of the anonymous sender and their accomplice) about my American "origins", which also brought into question my familial relationships. A response to the letter was generated not only by a Justice of the Peace of Her Majesty's Government, who conducted an investigation in cooperation with the American Embassy in London, into the accusations and exonerated me, but also by my Grandfather George, who feels that his response to that situation is in fact relevant again, with the latest interest in me resulting from the WSJ article. To read a statement from Grandfather George about this, please click here.
To be honest, I have not read the WSJ article but once, and the issues which were most offensive to me were the insinuations made that there was some sort of deception and an uncovering of a scandal with the publication of their article. Some media outlets have quoted the WSJ as gospel and have further stated that the “WSJ uncovers fraudulent Royal commentator” etc. My father was so upset with the article he was quoted in from the WSJ, that he sent three different emails to the reporter, to which the conversation ended up with the WSJ offering to work with me on another article about things which were omitted from their original article. My father was told to have me contact the reporter to arrange a meeting to discuss the possibilities etc. ABSOLUTELY NOT! I would never work with or trust this paper again. My father was quite angry that the WSJ stated that I had a "rough childhood". The truth is, growing up in an affluent town such as Bolton Landing on Lake George, really did not see me want for a thing. I travelled all over the country, Canada and internationally from a young age, skiied, skated, had the latest toys, games, boats, cars and everything anyone could ever want. However, there are certainly more important aspects to life and the quality of "family" than monetary items and the size of a bank account - items that in the long run truly mean nothing.
Concluding the saga with the Wall Street Journal, the WSJ had one opportunity to work with me, they deceptively, yet successfully baited me for an interview and then maliciously created the story they released, after lying to me again via email, which sparked this entire worldwide media frenzy, which has branded me many terrible things which I am not. Simply put, I have blocked the reporter from contacting me and the WSJ can certainly “Foxtrot Oscar”. The WSJ had an agenda and it was not a nice or factual one.
I stand by what I said from the beginning:
“The Wall Street Journal breached journalistic trust, omitted truths and mis-sold what the initial interview was for. Many of the facts in the article are inaccurate and the Wall Street Journal itself was given many opportunities to ensure that the article was published with the most accurate information available. The WSJ chose not to adhere to the facts or their integrity.”
Royal Reporting Circles & Facebook's Royal Groups/Pages
Some people have judged me, “unfriended” me on Facebook (like I really give a shit) and added to the rumour mill, whilst not having a full understanding of the facts at hand or hearing my side of the events which have transpired. Many of these people are superfans that support, own, operate or work for “royal” reporting outlets, “Royal” news regeneration outlets or run their own “blogs” because they are involved with or have a keen interest in history, specifically Royal history. These people have been quick to judge me without even knowing the truth, or knowing me, but then again, they do not want to know me or know the truth. They have used emotion rather than logic, not my issue or my problem, which has shown me their true colours.
Now this is where I should take the high road and let certain things go, like water off of a duck's back, but why should I when certain people think they can say and promote terrible and untrue things to the world's population without any recourse. I have had enough of the bullying rooted in this media circus and I think people deserve to see the horrible and destructive extent that some will go to in order to bring more anguish and pain upon an already suffering individual. People such as “Royal Musings Blog Spot” writer Marlene Koenig, also a Reference Librarian at Virgina Tech in Alexandria, Virgina, (who was supported in comment by her adoring cult of followers) further took all of the falsities from the WSJ, sensationalised the information reported on her own accord and created her own hatchet job with further embellishments, assertions and accusations which her admirers endorsed and weighed in on.
She has blatantly stated that I have no British ancestry at all – how is that for “factual”? She then goes on to assert that I live and have lived in Florida. I have never ever lived in Florida, have never been a resident of the state and have only visited twice in the past eight years. She further states she does not know me and hasn’t met me, but the "one time she was introduced to me", she thought enough of me to take my photo. She is nothing more than a "pot stirrer" who is supposed to be a learned and professional woman. Please see screen shots from her blog below and use the number key to read the discrepancies in her blog about me titled “When You Play Pretend”. I do not understand the hate directed at me from this “specialised” community. I always build people up, help people and want to see people do well, especially those that share in the same goals and have the same mindset as myself. Some of these people are also Americans who love history, respect the Royals and visit the United Kingdom frequently and for long periods of time. We should be helping each other and building each other up, not being petty, malicious and cut-throat, possessed by the “Green Monster” of jealousy. I guess it is true when they say “no one likes success, unless it is their own”. I have to wonder why Ms. Koenig is so infatuated and obsessed with me and these now debunked media "revelations", so much so that she went out of her way to create a story, on top of a story, which has only created a double false information thread? Her blog certainly reveals more about her true, terrible and malicious nature than it ever will reveal about me.
Royal Musings Blog Spot – MISINFORMATION
The author of this blog, Ms. Marlene Koenig, has publicly produced, published and promoted false information using slanderous tones about my person. She has maliciously and purposely engaged in a character assassination against my person to defame me, a competitor, for her own benefit. She has engaged in defamatory actions through fabricated content which she has produced and purposely promoted to an audience of royalty reporters, websites and enthusiasts with the sole aim of advancing her own agenda and career. The author has caused irreparable damage to my business, my reputation and to my personal well-being. Her actions are reprehensible, careless and destructive. Miss Koenig can rest assured and not be surprised that a Cease and Desist Order will be forthcoming.
Never have I stated that I was born in the United Kingdom. The reason for my name change many years ago is a very private family matter which is not the business of anyone other than myself and my family. I am not a fraud as the author states and wants to portray me as in her publishing of blatantly wrong material and hypothetical assertions, which are not only slanderous and defamatory but malicious. Her blog is a blatant character assassination, further embellished with her own assumptions to progress and advance her own works and credentials as a person with a Master’s in Library Science. To respond to her assertions and false information, I offer the following:
Below you will find screen shots of the Royal Musings BlogSpot by Maureen Koenig with my counter points below each image.
1 – I did not appear at any time on any BBC station, television or radio, for the Royal Wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex or the lead up to it.
2 – I certainly do have British and Irish ancestry. I have nearly just as much British/Irish blood in my veins as the Italian side of my family does. Who does this woman think she is to assert such ridiculous claims? She does not know me or anything about me! I was not hatched to an Italian man, but born to two parents, one of Italian descent and one of British/Irish descent. The author clearly has not been informed as to my genetic make-up as expressed in an exclusive with the SUN, to which my mother Regina makes reference to her family and where they are from. Link below. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6468483/new-yorker-who-posed-as-a-posh-brit-for-us-royal-wedding-coverage-says-hes-felt-under-attack-since-being-exposed-as-he-tells-haters-to-bugger-off/
As the author of this so called "history blog" wanted to assert that I had no British history, my family and I (we know where we come from) decided to use 23 & Me to confirm our genetic make-up. The largest parts of my being are British/Irish and Italian - we already knew this. In total, including the "Broadly General European Areas", my genetic make-up is: 42.5% Italian and 40% British/Irish and in total 98.3% European.
3 – Tommy Muscatello has never been my legal name. I was born Thomas J. Muscatello Jr. and underwent a legal name change in 2013 to my current name.
4 – The author refers to a “German reality TV personality” – The Patrons of the British Monarchist Society are of no concern to the author of this blog. She does not know how the BMS works with its Patrons or how the Patrons help to promote the cause and mission of the Society. She is grasping at straws and trying hard to discredit an organisation and one of its Patrons. Such behaviour is not becoming of a proper historian who professes to like Royals and Royal history.
5 – I hold two Bachelor’s degrees from Coastal Carolina University in Conway, SC, not Myrtle Beach, in History and Political Science with a minor in International Political Economy, an Associates in History/Humanities from SUNY Adirondack and a Humanities/History certificate from Noordelijke Hogeschool Leeuwarden (NHL) in Holland. I have further taken history courses and seminars which have been Royal in theme.
6 – I have never lived in Florida. Ever. As my legal name is not Muscatello, I would not appear on any voting register or as a resident in Palm Beach Florida, etc. as the author states.
7 & 8 – The author posts registries. These registries are not official state registries and are hypothetical based on a family name and who could be related to the family name in that area.
9 – Mace-Archer-Mills is my legal name according to my name change paperwork of 2013
10 – The author states that she has had an interest in Royal themes since her teens and that she has been writing since her 20’s. She further states that she is an expert because she has read lots of bits and researched more bits and has collected a library of books etc. I have had an interest in the same since I was a child – I am now 38. I would not have called myself an expert when I was in my 20’s either. If time is what makes one an expert along with study, researching etc, then, as she can be called an expert, I can also be called one. The author states that for her to have credentials to be an expert she has amassed a collection of footage, books, clips etc. I too have an extensive library, artefacts, archival material and have gone on to publish two books, one of which has won a Gourmand Award. I also have many, many media credits to my name. For the past 21 years of my life I have had intimate, hands on experience in learning about Royal life, Her Majesty’s Guards etc., from a Grenadier Guardsman himself who served not only The Queen, but Princess Margaret and The Queen Mother.
Two paragraphs under section 10 in the blog above, the blogger states, "I am angry that an American pretended to be British to acquire a status as an alleged historian. I have been doing this Royal thing for many years..." These sentences go to show her complete and utter jealousy of a situation that she can not comprehend, so she makes erroneous assertions based on her own version of "alternative facts". I am not an alleged historian. I am an historian, just in the way that she too became an historian. The only difference between her and me, is not only age, but that I have had a lot more international exposure than she, and this is something that she is clearly angry about as she blatantly states above. She even states where you can find her name and various credits within other historian's written works. I did not pretend to be British or American or anything in order to be an historian. It does not pay to let the green monster take over your emotions or ability to reason, as one will only fall on their own poisoned-tipped sword such as in her case. She has been hoisted by her own petard.
I ask, should the disbursement of such blatantly wrong information which is not fact and written in a way to defame someone (when the author does not know the facts and does not want to know the facts and further assumptions which are hypothetical) which is published and promoted in such a way to defame and slander a person, be a punishable offence? She is so far off the mark in every way, with every assertion she has written about me. If the author of this blog can be called an expert because of the aforementioned in article 10 above, why am I not allowed to be? Ms. Koenig is a jealous, mean, malicious and spiteful person, consumed by jealousy - weighing in on something she does not know the first thing about, using "facts" and sources which are sensationalised and flat out wrong. She is no better than the main stream media. If she wants to go on about me "playing pretend", that can be fixed, however, you can't fix stupid.
Full Disclosure Omission: The Daily Blast Live (TDBL)
Where to start with these people. I was contacted by the programme asking if they could interview me in regard to the Royal Wedding. I was happy to oblige and help them to the best of my abilities. I was told they reach about four million people and are syndicated across America and can further be watched online. This is not exactly how they work. It was not until later that I found out they are a social media based platform that broadcasts online and hope to be picked up for inclusion on syndicated news programmes.
Upon first contact, I was told that a place to film was needed and they wanted it to be very British, with a quintessential British theme, such as having a chat over tea etc. Having good contacts in central London, I set out to find the perfect place which would meet all of their desires and expectations. As it was a “news” outlet, there would be no financial compensation for my time or my efforts, but it has never mattered to me as I wanted to get the word out about the Royals and Constitutional Monarchy etc. I spoke with my contacts at the Royal Horseguards Hotel, a five-star hotel in central London with amazing British history, who agreed to host the programme. A special room was set aside for filming not only in the morning but also the late afternoon, where tea would be served for the cameras etc. I arranged everything with the hotel to make sure that the participants would be treated properly etc. There was no room hire charged for production, there was no charge for the tea or the food or even the champagne - two glasses were provided. In all, The Daily Blast Live (TDBL) was given the “Royal” treatment which they did not spend a penny for, whilst using my contacts for their own benefit and eventual profit. As the show host, Tory Shulman, and I were only poured a glass of Champagne each, one glass per person comes with the tea, it was not enough. Though we both love Champagne, Tory decided on her own accord that the champagne reserves behind the bar were up for grabs. Let's just say that liberties were taken without proper permissions granted - a blatant abuse of my contacts and the hospitality offered.
When I first met the crew and host, Tory Shulman, we had great conversation and chemistry from the beginning! They were from New York, to which I told them I was originally from New York as well. We spoke about the city and the boroughs they were from and even how I used to spend a lot of time in New York City. There was full disclosure as to where I was from and where I grew up. I even spoke to them about my fondness of comedy films such as the “The Nutty Professor”, Madea’s character films and others. We all got on very well and they were very happy with everything we filmed that day. We filmed from 0900h until 1330h and then again from 1530h until 1645h. The latter segment was for their Facebook live, to which one of my contacts, an ex-Member of Parliament, also helped TDBL by being an interviewee.
We filmed several different segments, so what was seen on the final version/cut, was not all that had been discussed in its entirety. What TDBL did was splice different conversations to make their final cut, which made it “juicy” and a trigger for social media action to attract notoriety. I made my displeasure known as they made it seem that I was and am not a supporter of the newly married Duchess of Sussex. This simply is not the case. I have further documentation and proof of my displeasure with their edits in email form etc, with acknowledgements from a producer. Anyway, moving forward, after the wrap I further offered my assistance for the time they were in London and knowing they were not happy with their accommodation, offered them the corporate rate at the Royal Horseguards Hotel that the British Monarchist Society has with the establishment. They did not end up moving accommodations in the end. I then offered for TDBL to join me at my Private Member’s Club (PMC), “M”, the evening of the Royal wedding to say goodbye, have some drinks etc. They agreed. Before arriving at the club I had a text message from one of the producers asking how we should divide the bill so that I was not stuck with it all. I said we would divide the bill and enjoy the evening.
My PMC was very welcoming towards TDBL and offered us not only a private room, but the entire members area without room hire charge, a complimentary bottle of champagne (£100 per bottle) and further applied my members discount. TDBL arrived to the club an hour before I did as I was late departing from Windsor after the Royal wedding, but that did not detour them from ordering a bottle of champagne etc. Once I arrived we all sat in the private members area, ordered some food from the menu and enjoyed a lovely evening. During the evening there were several discussions about Tory and I working on a show together, blending history and drinking etc. The producers liked this and were going to use footage not used from the original interviews to make an approach to networks, showcasing the chemistry between Tory and I. We got on so well that Tory and I referred to each other as “BFF’S” and "a brother from another mother". The evening ended and it came time to pay the bill. We were all going to split the bill evenly, but I was told from the producer that I was going to be covered as a thank you for how great my hospitality had been and all the help I gave them. I ordered a glass of champagne and a £12.50 chicken starter (Karaage) all evening.
After they left, and the segments aired, I was asked to call in for further comment on the wedding the Monday following the Royal wedding weekend. I obliged, and we had such a good time. I explained how the wedding went down, what people in London and Britain were feeling and giving general feedback. I myself said that the sermon from the American “preacher man” was a bit much and a first for St. George’s Chapel. I further went on to say that he evoked a feeling in me that just wanted to say “Hallelujah praise the Lord”. Well after I filmed the segment with Tory and it went live on air, one African American host named Erica Cobb doubled down on me as "disrespectful" to her culture, then went on saying that she thinks the monarchy is crap etc… needless to say, I am not a fan of hers and she is not a fan of mine and I am totally okay with that. If she wants to now accuse me of white privilege and a barrage of other things I can just hear her spewing, then I can certainly tell her to check the chip on her shoulder. She is a nasty piece of work and a hypocrite.
Further to this, the other hosts of TDBL went to town on me which I thought was horrible considering they did not know me or spend time with me. I was really surprised with Tory, as having spent time with her, her knowing my fondness of black comedies such as Eddie Murphy’s “Klumps” franchise etc – she did not even offer any bit of defence of my person. She agreed with her colleagues and threw me to the wolves. That’s showbiz for you, all for the sake of ratings. Fast forward to the release of the WSJ article. Tory then sent me a text message acting like she cared about me and how I was being treated, playing on the newly formed relationship we had. She started the conversation stating: "Hey Thomas! What's up boo boo? Would love to get your take on all of this that's breaking from the Wall Street Journal. Would you want to call in today or this week?" - You can read the texts of her ploy to get me on the show under the guise of a "caring friend" for yourselves below.
Long story short, I did a segment with her to which she then attacked me and treated me horribly, so much so that I ended the interview and did not give permission for the segment to be used. She said that she felt duped and sold a lie - how could this be when I gave her full disclosure up front as to where I was from? Tory got angry and once the taping ended she threw down her headpiece and abruptly left her seat, no good bye, nothing. I was told by production that someone would be in touch and that they hoped I would let them use the segment.
NO ONE FROM PRODUCTION EVER CONTACTED ME and they used footage of me anyway, without my permission. The segment then went live and the hosts of TDBL all chimed in and doubled down on me again without having facts, proper information etc. That dreadful African American, chip on her shoulder Cobb, was then joined by her African American colleague Al Jackson, and all of her white co-hosts, to rubbish me and bully me on their segment. The “chipped shouldered” Cobb then went on to accuse me of ordering the most expensive thing on the menu at my PMC and further stated that I stuck Tory with the bill! WTF – SERIOUSLY? This is something Erica Cobb may think of doing, but I would never in a million years think of doing this to anyone. Tory never told the truth and purposely let her co-host carry on with a flat out lie! The most expensive item on the menu at my PMC is a steak at £100.00 per gram! What I ordered is a far cry from the most expensive thing on the menu - I ordered a starter (appetizer)! I then lost it and sent an email to TDBL about this, outlining the cost of the bill, how it was split and sent a copy of the bill from the evening. I further did a breakdown of the financials for the evening – see below.
From the email: In addition to saying I ordered the most expensive thing on the menu and stuck you with the bill on live television, attached is the bill! A total of £362.40 for 11 people - that's £32.95 per person at a private members club in the heart of London, in a Private area. There were 3 bottles of Champagne - the club bought us one, that leaves 2. My members discount was £56.00 off the bill. I had 1 chicken Karaage @ £12 and one glass of champagne. The most expensive thing on the menu... it wasn't even the most expensive thing on the bill! Your hosts are rude, don't have the full story and to carry on about me sticking Tory and you all with the bill - disgusting.
This bill, together with the conversation documented about how the bill was to be divided up before the evening even took place is what I want everyone at DBL to see. I'll take this bill and the text conversation to every other network I will agree to go on as well, to make sure that DBL is mentioned for further making assertions that are not true and are flat out lies. I do not think you should be able to get away with such slanderous and flat out false assertions and accusations that I would ever order the most expensive items and stick anyone with the bill, especially after a £100.00 bottle of champagne was comped, my members discount applied which reduced the bill £56.00 etc. What was said by your hosts was a flat out lie. I will be taking this further with a visit to my solicitor this afternoon.
I was sent a message back saying they would set it straight. I watched for the next segment the day after, to which a small disclaimer appeared during airing which was ever so small and stated only that the bill was appropriated between the parties present. There was never an apology for their blatant lie and promotion of fake and malicious news! After the little disclaimer was shown they then doubled down on me again with that disgusting Erica Cobb leading the pack. This was enough to get their social media buzzing to the point that they were picked up by none other than John Oliver! TDBL are nothing but publicity seeking ratings whores and I hope they are proud of themselves for fabricating false stories which they broadcasted to the world about me, whilst taking advantage of me and all I did for them to have a nice story and filming experience whilst in London. You can see my email to a TDBL producer below along with Tory’s tweet of thanks to John Oliver for using their segment with me in it. Their plan and format surrounding me and their sensationalist reporting, mixed with flat out lies, resulted in success for the Daily Blast Live - they made it to the "John Oliver Show", a show syndicated around the globe, which of course gives them notoriety, credit, clicks and more views = Ka-Ching, $uccess! They are nothing more than complete ratings whores with no morals or ethics. Further more, the Daily Blast Live sent to me directly, the video files of me appearing on their show, which are currently all over the web. I uploaded the videos I appeared in, as I was a main contributor, to my website and youtube channel, to which after I called them out on the Bill from my PMC - they complained to Youtube and forced the videos to be removed. I was reprimanded by Youtube. This media company uses people, abuses contacts and niceties and then further lies about people, promotes fake news and complains about my use of clips from the show which I appear in, when in fact they turn around and thank John Oliver for using the very same clips. Hypocrites.
Further Media Interest
It amazes me that outlets do not want to pay for people’s knowledge, education or years of experience and/or research, but are quick to pay for scandal, negativity and a story which can be skewed and/or made negative. After the WSJ article was released and the negativity toting media outlets reported on me, there was renewed interest in me. I went around the world! Europe, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, South America – I was everywhere! However, the truth had still yet to be known.
Megyn Kelly – This host tore me to shreds on her talk-show following the release of the WSJ article. She was absolutely horrible towards me in her segment, however her producer decided to contact me after airing to ask me to come on the Megyn Kelly Show. As if I would give her the time of day after treating me so rudely. She even went as far as to speak in a Bronx accent imitating an Italian "Guido", stating for her segment on me: "Tommy from New York". Talk about being stereotypes!
Update: Isn't karma a bitch? Ms. Kelly was fired from her own show and released from the NBC network in the Autumn of 2018 for comments relating to black face.
The Mail on Sunday – A Mail on Sunday reporter named Simon Walters verbally abused me when trying to get information about the BMS, its charitable actions etc. He refused to call me by my legal name, told me I was born “Muscatello” and that’s how he would refer to me and further accused me of horrible things. He was so disgustingly rude that I apologised that he was so grossly misinformed as to his facts and I then put the phone down on him.
John Oliver – Is a brit. He went to town on me during one of his segments on HBO, not knowing me, not knowing facts and reporting on what the media was going on. He knows absolutely zero about me! He used TDBL as a source, which sensationalised facts and blatantly lied about me as supported above. He said some horrible things about me without a right of reply. This man is British and a comedian, not that he is at all funny. His show is dressed as comedy when in fact it is sponsored bullying for profit. He is in America using his accent and British “charm” to gain viewers and use his sch-tick to profit because he couldn’t cut it in the United Kingdom. He has no room to mock me or say the horrible things he did. I certainly have nothing nice to say about this Brit.
Closer Weekly – This American magazine was happy to ask me questions and allow me to respond to them as my responses would help give credit to their ridiculous tabloid reporting. I featured in their weekly issue to enhance their article on the Duchess of Sussex several weeks AFTER the WSJ article appeared. I deeply regret agreeing to answer any questions for this media outlet which may have caused the Duke and Duchess of Sussex any issues regarding privacy matters where Court business may have been concerned. The issue I feature in, is the 18 June issue, which can be read by clicking here. The magazine even asked me to provide answers and facts to another series of 12 questions about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge for their next weekly issue. I spent a lot of time – not being paid anything – answering not one set, but two sets of questions at different times, one of which was used and the other voided. When I enquired as to when the release of the next issue would be, about the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, so I could obtain a copy, I was told that they did not use my answers after all. Whether this is related to the WSJ article I do not know, but I have a funny suspicion it certainly is, however it is wrong just the same to ask me to do the work and then not use it. I did the work, I helped out when they did not have a lot of time to spare and they even pressed me for the answers in a short amount of time. I was further told that they could certainly see themselves working with me again…. I guess not. You can see from the email below that they liked my contribution, state I am very knowledgeable etc.
The Washington Post – I was phoned by a Washington Post reporter on Friday 22 June, three weeks on from the publication of the WSJ article, to which I was asked to provide comment about Lord Mountbatten’s same sex wedding later this summer. I spent about 20-25 minutes giving in depth questions, giving the history of same sex relationships within the Royal family, King James I etc, and also educating as to how Lord Mountbatten’s Wedding is not of a great constitutional concern to the nation etc. The reporter made sure to have my name correct before hanging up and asked how I wanted to be referred to after use of my full legal name in the article. Surprise! When the article was released, I was not quoted, and I was not mentioned at all. Why even waste my time, call me and let me go on about Lord Mountbatten when you aren’t going to use me and certainly not pay me? In reality it is not the fault of the reporter, but that of the Editor - poor form either way. Again, I did not earn a penny for my time that this paper wasted.
Despite everything that has come my way over the past many weeks, I am okay. Actually, I am more than okay. I have learned a lot about the media, people - the general public and the vicious way the "copy and paste" phenomenon works. Some good has popped up from all of this and I am excited about these positive prospects I am currently working on. Once I hit "publish" on this blog (along with the delivery of Marlene Koenig's Cease and Desist Order), I draw the line, will not be a victim and will forgive those who have not only created, but distributed and endorsed this disgusting, fabricated portrayal of who they think I am. I will take the advice of Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber: grab the bolt cutters and break free from what binds me to this saga and its mistreatment of me. I will apply her teachings and have a little faith and Forgive Assholes. If you have no idea as to who Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber is and what her teachings are, click on the link above for her quick, two-minute, enlightenment about how to forgive those who have done you wrong and how to move past it without absorbing the negativity they have brought to your feet.
The hypocrisy of the mainstream media has truly been outlined in the paragraphs above, however nothing in my life has changed for the most part. I have still attended Royal events, have not had invitations rescinded, but have actually received more, have not lost friends, business partners or Patrons etc. The only sad part to this story is that the time, effort and energy I go through to give proper education and facts to the media about the Royals, goes completely undervalued and is used to make themselves appear knowledgeable at my expense. With instances above involving the Washington Post and Closer Weekly, I feel that I have been put on a “black list” where media contributions are concerned. If media outlets no longer want to use me because of a non-factual and sensationalist article, that is their choice and their loss. I still possess the proper knowledge, understanding of Royal history and a thorough understanding of Royal related subjects - nothing will ever change that or take it away from me - The Business Insider is correct in relaying this thought.
For years I have made good contributions to the world’s media, enriched their programmes and reports and it really saddens me to think that the media would be so fickle as to create a non-news story about me and promote fake news without the proper facts, then turn around and shun me and my knowledge for something they created, peddled and endorsed. Something is not right in all of this. I know things, a lot of things. This is why news outlets around the world have come to me time and time again for many years. This is why some of Europe’s Royal Houses have asked me to undertake work for them, not once but on several occasions. The media has tried to take away my knowledge and my education and my know-how, but these are things that belong to me and only me. It is up to me who I want and will share this with.
The media and those with an agenda that belong to such "Royal" reporting circles, have tried to succeed in breaking me in a mean spirited and malicious way with their own "special" way of non-factual reporting, which has branded me in many negative ways, whilst casting a devastating light of their own creation, but those who know me, my contributions and my value are not fooled by the media. I will not bow down and stop fighting for what I believe in. I will not abandon the education I know, promote and have given for free. I will rise above this and hold my head high. I have nothing to be ashamed of and I certainly have done nothing wrong. The media serves itself, with its own agenda and I will not be a part of that. DO NOT FORGET THAT THE MEDIA IS A BUSINESS - they need to sell their product and produce a profit. Also, these "reporters" need a paycheque to feed their families, so they will do what they have to do, by any means, to ensure their wages are a steady stream of lies, misinformation and fake news which will sell their despicable products.
I know the truth, my friends and family know the truth and that is all I care about. Those that support me and my works – I appreciate you all so much. Those that want to continue to ridicule and spread misinformation can “bugger off” just like the The Sun news article headline states! You wanted the truth and my side of the story – here it is. I hope that you got something out of my efforts here and I hope that the back story and the explanations I have provided show that there is a lot more to the story of me than was originally reported or circulated around the world. Thank you for reading!