The usually Sussex-sympathizing New York Times is stunned by Omid Scobie’s new book and states that Harry and Meghan’s favorite journalist is doing them ‘no favors’.
In a pithy review of Endgame, the liberal American newspaper claims that a chapter about the couple even ‘reads like a press release devised by ChatGPT’.
It also says the book, out tomorrow, is “not so different from what Harry presented in ‘Spare,'” and is “dedicated to righting minor slights against the Sussexes.”
America’s first review of the book adds: ‘Readers hoping for a final death blow from gossip will be disappointed. We’ve heard a lot about it. From Fergie, from Diana, from Charles, from Harry, from Harry, from Harry again’.
It came as Britain’s equally left-wing independent news website claimed that ‘he is painting Meghan and Harry in a ruthlessly saintly light’.
The first reviews of Omid Scobie’s Endgame are out and critics have said it is ‘dedicated to righting minor slights against the Sussexes’.
The pithy New York Times review says we’ve heard most of it before
The Independent gave Endgame three stars in their review. They claim the book portrays William as the ‘bad guy’
NYT writer Eva Wolchover, co-host of the royal podcast Windsors & Losers, is critical of Endgame after receiving an advanced copy.
She says: “Whether or not Scobie actively collaborated with Meghan and Harry on this book, he is not doing them any favors. Their chapter reads like a press release concocted by ChatGPT, and does little to shed light on them as people.
‘He says that the couple – who used to focus on reporting about themselves – now remain wonderfully unconcerned. Harry’s next chapter will focus, among other things, on philanthropic efforts in the “military space,” while Meghan (and here Scobie quotes an unnamed source) “builds something more accessible… something rooted in her love of detail, curation, hosting, the simple pleasures of life, and family. ”
Ms Wolchover also says of the author’s warnings that the royal family is facing extinction: ‘It is difficult not to find Scobie’s dire predictions a tad hyperbolic.’
She writes: ‘Scobie defines the term ‘endgame’ as ‘the final stage of a chess game after most of the pieces have been removed from the board’, adding: ‘Unless Charles and his heirs act quickly, Scobie points out, they will miss out. risk of losing. the crown, or at least its residual cultural relevance. But there’s a paradox here: as long as people buy books like Scobie’s, they’re buying the whole worthless operation.’
The Independent has the first UK review of Endgame and gives it three stars.
Writer Anna Pasternak says Mr Scobie is ‘unfailingly sympathetic to the Sussexes’.
The New York Times had the first review in the US, and The Independent in the UK. Both are left-wing press
She writes: ‘He doesn’t hold them responsible for anything – he doesn’t demonize Charles, as I expected, or castigate Camilla. I expected something different: he would possibly address the evil monarch King Charles and the evil stepmother Queen Camilla. The real royal villain here is William.
Scobie also has kind words for the Princess of Wales. She says: Scobie points out that Kate has had “several rounds of speaking lessons” and now sounds “more posh” than her husband. And he writes wistfully that you’re unlikely to read in a British newspaper that Kate has had “five different private secretaries in six years”, adding that one found the role “uninspiring and frustrating.”
She added: ‘Scobie fully expects that he and his book will be discredited in the British media. He’s probably right, and he certainly won’t be helped by the fact that he’s painting Meghan and Harry in a ruthlessly saintly light. Harry is very much pictured as the happy prince in his happy place “cycling and walking and taking ice baths”; The mornings are “family only – no staff” and the hands-on parents “take turns taking care of the school drop-off and pick-up every day.”
“The only criticism of Scobie is their ill-advised commercial deals made in haste.”