Latest news with #Harpo
Newsweek
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Newsweek
Prince Harry and Meghan Farce That Had Oprah in Stitches: 'Funniest Thing'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Oprah Winfrey recalled the frantic scene as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attempted to rehome a family of ducks in their pond, offering a rare glimpse into their A-list Southern California community. The talk show queen is neighbors with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in Montecito, and the trio are still friends years after Oprah provided the stage for their most explosive interview ever. In a less controversial moment that was still dramatic in a light-hearted way, Harry and Meghan were left running around their estate trying to catch their feathered friends. Oprah Winfrey interviewing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in March 2021. Oprah Winfrey interviewing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in March 2021. Joe Pugliese/Harpo Why It Matters Oprah is predominantly linked to the Sussexes in the public imagination due to the high drama of her March 2021 CBS interview with them, complete with allegations that a racialized comment was made about the couple's unborn child by a royal they did not name. Rarely, though, has she discussed the interview itself in the years that followed, despite major high-profile debates about what Harry and Meghan told her. It is interesting, therefore, to hear about their friendship continuing privately even if she does not ordinarily provide a running commentary on the royals. What To Know Oprah told the story during an appearance on Live! with Kelly and Mark host Kelly Ripa's Let's Talk Off Camera podcast, which filled in the blanks around an Instagram post by Meghan earlier in the year that showed the ducks. It all started when Oprah got a call from Harry on Easter Saturday saying, "Sorry to bother you, O, but we have a duck problem here." Harry described how a duck had come onto their land and laid eggs, which then hatched into fluffy ducklings near their $14.7 million mansion. "Our pond is a stream. We don't have a pond, so can we bring the ducks over to your pond?" Harry asked. The duke and duchess brought the ducks over in a box, but chaos ensued when they got out of the car in front of Gayle King and her kids. "As he opens the door," Oprah said, "the mama duck flies out and he's got all the baby ducks in a box. He goes, 'Oh no, the mama duck has flown away.'" "Then we're chasing the mama duck who's in the front yard and has flown to the other side. We've got her ducks. Harry's running after her," she said. "Megan gets out. She's running after chasing the mom and trying to get the mom to come back for their ducks. And for like a half an hour, we're running around with the ducks in the box and we're we have video. It's funniest thing I've ever seen." What People Are Saying Kelly Ripa joked after hearing the story: " just like us." In her original Instagram video about the ducks, Meghan wrote: "Wishing you a Happy Easter full of surprises!" Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent for Newsweek, based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page. Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@ We'd love to hear from you.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Trump's call to "investigate" Bruce Springsteen ignores the reality of celebrity endorsements
Nothing seems to incite angry social media posts from President Trump quite like criticism from celebrities. And while celebrities in 2025 seem less interested in feuding with the volatile president, Bruce Springsteen did manage to poke the bear with an unsparing speech delivered before a May 14 concert in Manchester. The president noticed. On Truth Social, Trump called Springsteen 'a pushy, obnoxious JERK' with 'atrophied skin.' But the pettiness didn't stop with dermatological insults. In the early hours of May 19, Trump escalated even further, implying without evidence that Kamala Harris' presidential campaign paid Springsteen and other stars, including Oprah Winfrey and Beyoncé, for their performances at campaign events, which was a 'MAJOR AND ILLEGAL CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION.' He proclaimed his intention to 'call for a major investigation into this matter.' Springsteen isn't backing down in the wake of Trump's stream of attacks, and musicians like Neil Young and Eddie Vedder have since come to his defense. The doubling and tripling down is so far mostly symbolic. But could Trump really investigate celebrity endorsements? I don't this so. Celebrities typically do not get paid for making endorsements. According to the Federal Election Commission, candidates can pay for endorsements as long as they are listed as a campaign expenditure. The Harris campaign has denied paying celebrities directly, claiming that any money sent to Winfrey ($1 million), Beyoncé ($165,000) and others are event production expenses paid out in accordance with federal election law. 'Usually I am reluctant to respond to rumors in general, but these days I realize that if you don't stop a lie, it gets bigger. I was not paid a dime,' Winfrey said in video response to the Trump post. 'My time and energy was my way of supporting the campaign. For the livestreaming event in September, my production company Harpo was asked to bring in set design, lights, cameras, crew, producers and every other item necessary (including the benches and the chairs we sat on) to put on a live production. I did not take any personal fee. However, the people who worked on that production needed to be paid. And were. End of story.' Tina Knowles issued a similar denial last year when the same rumors circulated about her daughter: 'The lie is that Beyonce was paid 10 million dollars to speak at a rally in Houston for Vice President Kamala Harris. When In Fact: Beyonce did not receive a penny for speaking at a Presidential candidate Vice President Kamala Harrris' Rally in Houston." It all looks aboveboard and normal. Then there's the obvious flaw in Trump's argument: Billionaire Winfrey is so rich she flies in English Muffins from Napa. Why would she be persuaded to do anything for a paltry million dollars? In other words, a quick Google search suggests Trump doesn't have a legal leg to stand on here. But while these two cases appear to be documented and legitimate, Trump's intimidation can still have consequences. Digging into celebrity campaign endorsements could have a chilling effect — at least while Trump is in office. Should celebrities be alarmed? Yes. And no. Studies have demonstrated that celebrities are effective at issue-based advocacy. They are often better than politicians at raising the profile of an issue, are perceived as more credible than politicians on many issues and can be persuasive. But there are limits to this influence. Notably, celebrities are generally not persuasive on highly partisan issues. For example, Bruce Springsteen is not going to convince Americans who believe strongly in the Second Amendment that they ought to support gun control. Last August, a month before Taylor Swift endorsed Kamala Harris, my colleagues and I conducted a national survey of over 1,000 Americans to determine whether her endorsement would make a difference in the 2024 election. In this study, some respondents were shown a picture of Swift encouraging voters to register, and some were shown a picture of her encouraging people to 'vote for Democrats.' While Swiftie super fans heeded her call to register to vote, Swifties who already had decided to support Donald Trump were not convinced to change their vote. And undecided respondents were actually less likely to support a Democrat after hearing Swift's endorsement. These findings are consistent with what we know about celebrity influence more broadly. Harris' endorsers may have fired up the base, but not changed anyone's minds, just as Springsteen's comments at his concert likely only appealed to those who already agreed with him. There is one recent documented case of a celebrity endorsement tipping the outcome of an election: Winfrey endorsing Barack Obama's candidacy for the Democratic nomination in 2008. And of course, many others have tried. In 1920, singer Al Jolson was probably the most famous entertainer in the U.S., and he endorsed Republican Warren Harding for president. Whether he really supported Harding is another matter. He was paid by an ad agency to sing 'Harding, You're The Man for Us.' He was then hired to sing for Harding's vice president, Calvin Coolidge, in the next election. Franklin Roosevelt's 1944 campaign featured performers and endorsers such as Rita Hayworth, Orson Welles, Judy Garland, Humphrey Bogart, James Cagney, Groucho Marx, as well as Frank Sinatra. Sinatra and Garland were back at the 1960 DNC, along with their friends Janet Leigh, Tony Curtis, Sammy Davis Jr., Nat King Cole and Judy Garland. Sammy Davis Jr. would ultimately flip and support Richard Nixon for president, and Sinatra would flip for Ronald Reagan in 1980. The Allman Brothers famously jammed for Jimmy Carter in 1976. Not every presidential cycle is celebrity-laden as 1944 or 1960 — or 2024. And the Harris campaign was not the first to discover that support from the biggest stars on the planet does not guarantee a win. Warren Beatty, Shirley MacLaine, Peter Paul and Mary, Simon and Garfunkel, Alan Alda, Julie Christie, and Dustin Hoffman could not save George McGovern's candidacy in 1972. John Lennon's very vocal condemnation of Richard Nixon did not prevent the Republican's re-election. Moreover, there are many documented cases where celebrities wade into politics and it backfires. Congressional Republicans criticized FDR during World War II for consulting with Sinatra, a 'mere crooner' who had been exempt from the draft. (Some celebrities also get criticism for inaction. Swift faced backlash for simply not showing up for the Women's March in 2017). Other endorsements, such as Clint Eastwood's awkward monologue supporting Mitt Romney at the 2012 RNC, do nothing to help the endorser or the endorsee. All of this is a sober reminder that voters are swayed more by economic variables and partisanship than they are by a sea of conflicting celebrity endorsements from opposing political parties. If celebrities are ineffective at this kind of advocacy, why do they do it? Many of them are keenly aware that their fame gives them a bigger megaphone than the average citizen — for better and for worse. Time will tell just how invested Trump is here. It doesn't look like he has any actual evidence of wrongdoing. But again, that isn't really the point. Trump transforms criticism into fuel for the culture wars, reinforcing his core support and exploiting political divides to his own advantage. Celebrities shouldn't be intimidated by his tactics — if anything, Springsteen seems to be relishing this moment — but they should be ready for them. This article was originally published on
Axios
19-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Axios
Trump says he'll call for "major investigation" into Kamala Harris' celebrity endorsements
President Trump, in an at-times all-caps post early Monday, called for a probe into former Vice President Kamala Harris' celebrity endorsements. The big picture: The president has continued to take aim at some of his former rival's celebrity backers, lashing out against both Taylor Swift and Bruce Springsteen — who called Trump "corrupt" and "treasonous" during a recent concert — in the last week. Driving the news: The president took it a step further in a 1:34am ET Truth Social post, demanding a "major investigation" and accusing Harris of paying for endorsements "under the guise of paying for entertainment." He singled out Springsteen, Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey and U2 frontman Bono and alleged Harris engaged in a "very expensive and desperate effort to artificially build up her sparse crowds." He added, "IT'S NOT LEGAL! For these unpatriotic 'entertainers,' this was just a CORRUPT & UNLAWFUL way to capitalize on a broken system." Reality check: While Harris' sprint to November did quickly attain star-studded status with a flood of Hollywood endorsements, Trump also pulled in several celebrity backers, including Kid Rock, who performed at the Republican National Convention. Catch up quick: Rumors circulated that Harris' celebrity backers were paid for their support, but high-profile allies quickly rejected those claims. Harris' campaign paid $1 million to Winfrey's production company Harpo for a town hall, as reflected in campaign finance records, and it paid Beyoncé's production company $165,000, USA Today reported. But Winfrey and her team said she was not compensated with a "personal fee" and that Harris' campaign had paid for production costs. Tina Knowles, Beyoncé's mother, said her daughter "did not receive a penny" for speaking at a Harris rally in Texas last year. Zoom out: Adrienne Elrod, who served as a senior adviser and senior spokesperson on the Harris campaign, told Deadline last year as rumors circulated that "[w]e have never paid any artist and performer. We have never paid a fee to that person."
