Meghan, Duchess of Sussex posts rare video of her children for Father's Day
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has posted a Father's Day video showing her husband, Prince Harry, playing with the couple's two children.
The footage, posted on Instagram on Sunday, features a mixture of photos and videos, including one in which the duke is seen dancing with son Archie in his arms.
Another clip shows Harry teaching Archie to ride a bike while daughter Lilibet runs behind them.
The duchess captioned the post: 'The best. Happy Father's Day to our favorite guy 💕'
The couple have been known to guard their children's privacy closely, but, while the children are only seen from behind in many of the clips and photos, others clearly show their faces.
This is the latest sign of a change in approach from the family, as Meghan has recently made a series of posts featuring 6-year-old Archie and 4-year-old Lilibet.
For example, on June 4, Lilibet's birthday, she shared rare photos of the little girl.
In one black-and-white picture, Meghan can be seen cuddling Lilibet, whose face is partially visible behind her mother's hand and arm.
A second image shows Meghan cradling Lilibet, whose face is visible in profile, shortly after her birth.
A separate post features two photos of Prince Harry with his daughter, with the caption: 'The sweetest bond to watch unfold. Daddy's little girl and favorite adventurer.'
The couple did release a Christmas card last year that featured a photo of both children, but their backs are to the camera as they run toward their parents.
Five other images appeared on the card, taken throughout the year. It marked the first time since 2021 that Harry and Meghan released a Christmas card featuring their children.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
an hour ago
- CNET
I Took a Quick Tour Through Longevity Culture. Here's What I Learned About Reverse Aging
I'm standing in a drafty room with several hundred people in London's Truman Brewery, all of us shaking our hands above our heads, woo-wooing our way to the end of another day at SXSW. I won't lie –– I'd hoped something like this would happen at some point during the week. Weird, offbeat moments such as this really separate a fun conference from a boring one. This particular moment is a mini taste of a "longevity rave" –– an event style that's popping up around the world, run by those who believe music, movement and connection can impact our health and happiness in the long term. "Genetics is a very small determinant of health –– other factors are more important," Tina Brown, a social entrepreneur and systems architect who co-founded Longevity Rave, told us just minutes earlier. "The joy of living is a really powerful motivator." The idea of living longer, healthier lives is nothing new, but the science of aging is now better understood than ever, and methods to reduce the often substantial gap between our lifespans and the length of time we're able to stay healthy (known as health spans) are becoming more accessible. I've long been skeptical about the idea of investing significant time and money into trying to live longer –– but perhaps that's because I just assumed it wasn't for people like me. Back in 2017, I interviewed billionaire tech entrepreneur Bryan Johnson about his mission to level up everyone, including himself, by implanting chips in our brains so that we could compete with AI. This conversation has haunted me over the years. Even though I've dabbled in biohacking myself (I have a chip in my hand to do basic smartphone-related tasks), I'd advocate for a cautious approach. Entrepreneur Bryan Johnson talks about taking extreme measures in the name of longevity. Hubert Vestil/SXSW Conference & Festivals via Getty Images Since then, Johnson's name has become synonymous with taking extreme measures to reverse aging and extend his life — among them, injecting the blood of his 17-year-old son into his 47-year-old body (he has since ceased this practice in favor of "total plasma exchange"). The quest for longevity is often associated with Silicon Valley billionaire biohacker boys like Johnson and Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, which makes it feel alienating and inaccessible. That's why at SXSW London, I was curious to see not one but two all-female panels discussing reverse aging and extending our health spans. The panels didn't indulge in the kind of anti-aging rhetoric I've grown up with, which demands that women do everything in their power to remain young and beautiful. Even though, as Canadian comedian Katherine Ryan joked during one of the panels, women should avoid stress by staying single, as "it makes you ugly, being married to a loser." The new science of aging Ryan hosts a podcast called What's My Age Again?, in which she interviews celebrities who have undergone testing to determine their biological age as a jumping-off point for discussing their own relationship to aging. Celebrity women, perhaps more than any of us, live inside a vanity pressure cooker, where their appearance is constantly judged. It's fair to say that a surge of famous women, from the Kardashians to Meghan Trainor, have been vocal about all of the many steps they've taken to reverse their aging. Cosmetic benefits aside, the health and quality of life benefits often make the most compelling case for the pursuit of longevity. With more women having babies later, they want to maintain their youthful energy to be present, active parents, said Ryan. Also, for many of us, there is a significant gap between the number of years that make up our lifespan and the number of years we remain healthy. But many believe that this gap is ours for the closing. "A person's biological age and chronological age often don't match," said Nichola Conlon, a molecular biologist and CEO of healthy aging company Nuchido, who is a frequent guest on Ryan's podcast. "Everyone associates age with a number… that kind of doesn't matter anymore." Katherine Ryan, left, and Nichola Conlon at SXSW London. Lorne Thomson/Redferns In the past, scientists thought that how we age was a fixed process determined almost entirely by our genetics. That's no longer the case (as confirmed by multiple peer-reviewed studies that confirm aging is influenced by multiple factors). "Aging is a malleable process, as we are finding," said Brown. The science is fast evolving, and there's even an XPrize Healthspan, offering $101 million to anyone who can come up with a solution to knock 10 to 20 years off someone's age. We already know that aging is influenced by a variety of factors, in addition to genetics –– largely how we live our lives. As such, it's important that we attempt to understand our bodies and treat them well, which is pretty universal advice. "You can live more healthily in middle age if you stop following general guidelines and instead follow your data," said Deepti Agarwal, a doctor specializing in healthy aging, during a panel about valuing health span over lifespan. This approach, known as precision medicine, advocates for a tailored, rather than one-size-fits-all approach to health. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of medicine, but isn't without its criticisms. Longevity, but only for a select few? Transferring the responsibility for aging to the individual can reduce support for public health measures, said Timothy Caulfield, a professor and the research director at the Health Law Institute at the University of Alberta, speaking not at SXSW, but on the Atlantic's How to Defy Death podcast (a deep dive I'd recommend if you want to learn more). It's all very well emphasizing that you have control over your own longevity if you have the time, money and resources to take care of yourself, he said. But that's simply not the case for many people, meaning that seeking to prolong longevity has the potential to exacerbate existing inequalities. He added that it also sends the message to people that "if you're not doing it, you're failing." It also creates space for the wellness industry to exploit people's anxieties by selling them products based on sketchy science-adjacent claims that aren't necessarily supported by a robust body of evidence, said Caulfield. There is an important conversation to be had about equal access to longevity treatments as it becomes more mainstream, said Cat Wiles, founder and CSO of marketing agency Spark, who appeared on the panel alongside Ryan and Conlon. "We're already starting to see warning signs about inequality," she said. Age spans might be increasing among the wealthy elite, but in poorer areas, the reverse is often true. Private health companies are already giving people who can afford it tools to improve their health, and it would be worrying to think insurance premiums could be tied to your biological age, Wiles added. Conlon has hope, though, that we'll reach a point at which longevity medicine is so affordable that it will become "unethical" for doctors not to help you slow down or reverse your aging. Plenty of the more extreme measures taken by the billionaire biohackers –– Johnson's blood exchange, for example –– will likely remain inaccessible (as well as unsavory) to most of us. The same might not be true of other solutions. Nuchido, Conlon's company, makes NAD Plus supplements, which are popular among celebrities and have some evidence to support their use for anti-aging, although they are the subject of much ongoing research. During the health span panel, Tamsin Lewis, a doctor who founded the de-aging company Wellgevity, said that intravenous NADs are not the answer to slowing down your rate of aging. It will slow down your finances, though. Instead, she and the other women on her panel advocated prioritizing cheaper interventions. What actually works? It might not be what you want to hear if you're ready to throw money at the problem, but the best scientific evidence we currently have to support healthy aging and longevity are the obvious solutions: We need to prioritize nutrition, exposure to sunlight, movement and building muscle. "We wear this meat jacket, but it's very much a scaffolding for our longevity," said Lewis. "It protects our brain, bones, hips, sleep and blood sugar levels." Other key factors include getting enough sleep, minimizing stress, maximizing resilience and bolstering our emotional and mental health. "The movement of longevity has got bogged down in biohacking bros," said Nikolina Glauc, co-founder and CEO of GlycanAge, a company that uses biomarkers to detect disease on a molecular level. The biggest thing that has made a difference for her in her own quest to extend her lifespan is psychotherapy, she added. As Lewis closes out the session with breathwork and the mini rave, I feel as though I've been on an entire journey through longevity culture. I feel skeptical about some of the pricey reverse aging options that I've come across, which feel a little like exploitative wellness culture dressed up in dubious science. I also worry about unequal access to reverse aging solutions and the social and public health impacts. At the same time, I feel buoyed by some of the research currently underway, particularly by what Brown calls the "science of connection," which she's exploring through dance, music and community. "In the end, humans need to be with other people," she said. Of all the advice I've received, it feels like the easiest to follow –– and even if it doesn't wind back the clock for me, it will at least keep me sane and happy for the duration of my lifespan.
Tom's Guide
2 hours ago
- Tom's Guide
Do you even need Dolby Atmos? I test soundbars for a living, and here's what I think
It's a fact of life: most of the best soundbars boast Dolby Atmos. If you don't know what Dolby Atmos is, first, why are you here? Second, don't worry, I'll tell you. So what is Dolby Atmos? Dolby Atmos is basically a spatial audio format built into soundbars (and other audio gear). It makes the sound feel like it's coming from all around you. On soundbars with extra channels like surround speakers and subwoofer, this sensation is all the more heightened. Soundbars come with channel setups; these act like codes, so you know what you're getting. For example, a 2.0 channel setup (like the Majority Elias, which I'll discuss later) has two stereo channels in the soundbar and no subwoofer or surround channel speakers. An 11.1.4 setup, like the JBL Bar 1300X, has 11 stereo and surround channels in the soundbar, a sub channel, and 4 Dolby Atmos channels. Confused? You're not alone. I know — it's actually really complex. Dolby Atmos is everywhere, but beyond its mad channel setups and confusing names, do you really even need it? Although I'd be the first person to jump at getting an epic surround home cinema setup, I can also acknowledge that my apartment doesn't really bode well for Dolby Atmos, and here's why. So if you get a cheaper soundbar, it probably has something called upfiring speakers. These types of soundbars lack channel (secondary) speakers, so they rely on speakers that shoot sound upwards to provide that surround-sound experience. For example, The Majority Elias (£99, UK-only) is a soundbar that has "Dolby Atmos". Those quotes are doing a lot of legwork right now. Sure, the brand paid for the Dolby Atmos license, and the upfiring speakers inside the soundbar that is somewhat capable of Atmos. However, if you live in an apartment like mine, these particular upfiring speakers are completely useless. I live in a gorgeous period property — it was built in 1792. As a result, my apartment's Georgian ceilings are high. Like, 16 foot high ceilings. Yep, I know. That's high. As a result, height upfiring speakers simply don't work in my home. Similarly, if your ceilings are angled (like, you live in a penthouse or your cinema room is the attic), the sound waves will struggle to bounce off the surface as planned. However, this is only the case for cheap 2 channel soundbars. If you have a soundbar with rear and side upfiring speakers and high ceilings, this probably won't be as much of an issue. So if you have flat ceilings between 8-12 foot tall, you're probably good to go. If you don't, your lovely upfiring speaker soundbar may as well be as Atmos-less as the $99 Sony HT-S100F, which you should definitely buy instead. Full candor, this soundbar used to be $99. The price just got raised to $159. This makes it far less competitive, which is a shame for Sony. Even so, it's probably the best cheap soundbar available on the market right now. It sounds excellent, much, much better than other $159 soundbars I've tested. The bass is great considering there's no subwoofer, and there's a range of listening modes. 5.1 is not Dolby Atmos — it is basic surround sound. If you haven't already noticed, basic tiers of even the best streaming services lack Dolby Atmos. You'll need to look for 'Dolby Atmos' in the audio quality section. Streaming services will literally say 'Dolby Atmos' in the movie information. If it says '5.1' that is not Dolby Atmos. It is more basic surround sound. It's worth noting that streaming services compress size of the file. This means the file will cut out elements at the high and low end of the frequency range to save space, and results in a weaker-sounding track. Just like with Bluetooth audio, you'll never get as high-quality audio on streaming as you will on Blu-ray. Netflix's cheapest tier ($7 a month), Disney Plus's cheapest tier ($10 a month), and Hulu ($10 a month), do not have Dolby Atmos. Apple TV+ ($10 a month) and HBO Max ($10 a month) have Dolby Atmos in the basic tier, so I'd recommend either of these sites for the cheapest way to get Dolby Atmos on streaming. Amazon Prime Video ($3 a month on top of Prime) offers Dolby Atmos on the ad-free tier, so would be a fantastic streaming service if you've already got a Prime account. You can even get a free 30-day trial of Amazon Prime Video right now. For the best Dolby Atmos, I'd recommend getting some Ultra HD 4K Blu-rays. I test all soundbars with UHD 4K Blu-rays on a Panasonic Blu-ray player, and oh boy, does it make all the difference. Obviously. Not all 4K UHD Blu-rays have Atmos, though, so you'll still need to check the box. So, if you don't have the aforementioned streaming services, and you don't have 4K UHD Blu-rays, I don't think you need Atmos. The best Dolby Atmos soundbar I've tested is the JBL Bar 1300X — which is amazing. It's also $1,700. However, if $1,700 is just a little (or in my case, a lot) out of reach, I'd recommend the Polk Audio Signa S4. This 3.1.2 setup is $399, which is much more affordable than other surround soundbars I've tested. It's also often on sale for $299. Most people agree that more like 5.1.2 is the minimum, which would price you out of the Polk Audio option, too. However, in a pinch, I found 3.1.2 to be perfectly serviceable. It just won't be as good. As a result, if your budget is below about $300, then 'true' Dolby Atmos is likely not going to happen. The cheapest one I've seen recently is the TCL Q75H Class, a massive $599 (and that's cheap!). You can get a 3.1.2 setup for $300 (like the Polk Audio Signa S4 on sale), but a true Atmos soundscape (with real height channels) will definitely run more like $500. If you've got the following: Then yes, you do need a Dolby Atmos soundbar. And you'll have an amazing time immersed in movies, TV shows, heck, even gaming (if you have the Xbox Series X or Xbox Series S). Dolby Atmos really does make movies feel more immersive. Obviously it will — it's literally an audio format designed for that sole purpose. If you can afford an excellent soundbar and you want to get 360° audio out of your movies, then by all means, get a Dolby Atmos soundbar. My favorite is the JBL Bar 1300X, but there are plenty more excellent options out there — all of which I've mentioned here. I adore this soundbar. It has a stonking 11.1.4 channel setup so it's truly Dolby Atmos and immersive. I felt like I was inside the TV screen, no matter what movie I was watching. It's high-quality, and has a premium price to boot. If you've decided you don't need a Dolby Atmos soundbar, Sony HT-S2000's $499 offering could be a fantastic purchase. The 3.1 channel soundbar is compact and has crisp dialogue.
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
While Midjourney Gets Sued, These Two AI Studios Get Signed
As copyright lawsuits escalate against some of the most widely used generative AI companies, two smaller studios are gaining industry traction by designing their workflows to avoid legal risk. Killer Kings on Sky History. The true crime-style docuseries features AI-generated visual ... More reenactments. This week, Gennie, a generative video studio focused on nonfiction content, premiered Killer Kings on Sky History. The true crime-style docuseries features AI-generated visual reenactments. Separately, animation studio Toonstar signed with WME and announced a new original show with comedian and digital creator Nigel Ng. Both companies rely on AI to accelerate production, yet neither is facing scrutiny from copyright holders or regulators. Gennie and Toonstar represent a different path for AI in media, one that favors preemptive compliance and transparency. Their work is broadcast-ready and structured to minimize legal exposure, offering a potential model for others. On June 12, Disney and Universal filed a joint copyright infringement lawsuit against Midjourney in federal court, alleging that the company enabled large-scale unauthorized reproduction of copyrighted material. Getty's separate case against Stability AI began the same week in London. The results of these cases will likely shape how AI content is made, distributed, and monetized. In response, companies that want to operate inside the traditional entertainment ecosystem are moving to establish clearer boundaries. Gennie was founded in 2024 by Max Einhorn, Chelsea Durgin, and Tejas Shah. Their debut series Killer Kings, produced by UK-based FirstLookTV, dramatizes the lives and crimes of six historical monarchs created using generative video. Visuals were created with tools like Google Veo and Luma's Dream Machine, and incorporated into a more conventional documentary format featuring expert commentary and voiceover narration. According to Einhorn, each reenactment is the product of extensive historical research and prompt engineering that draws on academic consensus. Character designs are reviewed by subject-matter experts and finalized prior to image generation. The team developed a formal framework called the 'Pillars of Protection' to guide their work. This includes prompt documentation, indemnified toolchains, and AI-specific insurance coverage underwritten by Lloyd's of London. 'Our goal is to put accurate history on screen and reduce the risk that typically comes with using generative tools,' said Einhorn. 'We're building a system where legal and creative standards can co-exist.' Each episode of Killer Kings includes eight to ten minutes of AI-generated content, intercut with interviews and narration. Gennie operated in parallel with the UK production team, acting as a visual effects unit—designing scenes, characters, and locations with visual continuity in mind. Toonstar co-founders John Attanasio (CEO) and Luisa Huang (COO). Toonstar was founded in 2015 by John Attanasio and Luisa Huang. The company has focused on short-form and mid-form animation designed for YouTube and social platforms. Their series StEvEn & Parker, created with TikTok personality Parker James, now draws over 30 million weekly views and has been dubbed into multiple languages using AI voice cloning technology. This week, Toonstar became the first AI-native animation company to be represented by WME. Their first joint project is a new animated series with Nigel Ng, best known for his Uncle Roger character. Toonstar's production tools include Ink & Pixel, an AI animation engine customized for each show, and SPOT, a proprietary system for testing content and gathering performance data. These technologies allow the studio to move quickly, test new IP, and adjust based on audience response without sacrificing quality. Huang said their goal is to enable creators who otherwise couldn't access traditional animation. 'We're not replacing artists. We're working with them to open up the format to more people,' she said. Gennie and Toonstar have made different bets on format and audience, but both have prioritized internal guardrails over open-ended experimentation. They rely on indemnified models, avoid referencing public figures or copyrighted works, and maintain close relationships with traditional partners—from distributors to talent agencies to insurers. This mindful, compliant approach is now paying dividends to these early movers. Killer Kings is airing on Sky History and being distributed internationally. Toonstar is scaling its model through a major agency partnership. Both companies are producing commercial content with AI while meeting the legal and editorial standards of traditional media.
