However, we must acknowledge that the 2022 games already set the stage for Invictus becoming the "Hank and Skank" show, overshadowing the true purpose of the event.
Megan's wardrobe alone, totaling a staggering £38,000 ($48,000) for just three days, grabbed more attention than her efforts to thank Harry for something. To be fair, she did the same at the 2018 games in Sydney. It seems like she has a knack for stealing the spotlight.
In addition to that, they recently released a promotional video for the 2023 games, featuring Megan challenging Harry to a game of table tennis.
This sets the stage for the Sussexes' appearance at the event. They will undoubtedly arrive with cameras flashing, mingling with the commoners. Perhaps Megan will even find a mother with a newborn to wrap in her designer coat, exuding her signature do-goodery to the point of making one slightly nauseous. The events will be portrayed as virtuous, discouraging any potential criticism.
One commenter astutely observed that Netflix, the streaming giant that signed a deal with the Sussexes in 2020, may find themselves trapped in a sunk cost fallacy. They are invested in promoting the Invictus documentary and supporting Harry and Megan publicly.
Once the contract ends, however, a plethora of stories about their difficult working relationship may surface. This echoes the situation Spotify faced, making it the only rational business decision. One wouldn't publicly denounce something they are still financing, hoping to at least break even.
Considering the timeline, the Invictus documentary was announced in April 2021 as Harry and Megan's first Netflix documentary. It was meant to focus on the games that were initially postponed from 2020 and took place in April 2022. Yet, as of now, there is no fixed release date, despite having been filming since 2020. Moreover, the upcoming Invictus games are scheduled for September, which clearly isn't summer. These circumstances shed light on how much of a mess this documentary series has become and how it has been a wasted opportunity for Invictus. Netflix, undoubtedly, must be gritting their teeth until this ordeal is over.
As part of the larger community of athletes with disabilities, including veterans, I have spoken to many who are furious about Harry and Megan's use of Wounded Warriors and Invictus for personal promotion. The closing speech at an American competition should have been given by one of the older veterans, who may not be alive by the next event, instead of a non-American figure like Harry. It's worth mentioning that he was even nicknamed "Bunker Harry" due to his preference for hiding in his SAS-protected bunker and playing video games rather than engaging in combat.
Furthermore, the Sussexes caused Bozo, a real war hero named Trevor Colt, to be demonetized for creating a video about Harry. The promotional video for Invictus Games is highly criticized for being the most ableist piece of content seen in years of adaptive sports. Typically, promotional materials focus on highlighting the abilities of competitors, and able-bodied individuals only appear when handing out medals or assisting athletes with physical tasks, such as transferring from wheelchairs to hand cycles. The Sussexes' video seems to deviate from this norm.
So, let's wait and see what unfolds. Once the Invictus Games are over, we can expect the truth to emerge, shedding light on all these events. As a member of the athletes with disabilities community, I hope for a fair and genuine representation of their stories, free from personal promotion and controversy.
Promotional materials play a crucial role in an athlete's ability to compete, especially considering the limited funding available to cover their training, travel expenses, and equipment. Exposure through these materials can lead to press coverage and speaking engagements, both of which are essential in securing much-needed funding. Additionally, they contribute to forming a positive self-image and a purpose-driven life following a permanent disabling medical crisis. However, Harry and Megan's focus on self-promotion undermines these crucial aspects.
In the video, Harry engages in a series of competitive ping pong games, where one veteran athlete with disabilities is eliminated after another, eventually leading to a final match against Megan. Surprisingly, half of the Invictus promo video is devoted to Sussex self-promotion, cleverly taking advantage of the platform as a public service announcement, which likely utilized Invictus funds. By reducing the number of athletes featured in the video to make room for the Sussexes, it sends a troubling message. It suggests that no matter the sacrifices made, the obstacles overcome, or the victories achieved, no disabled champion can prevail against able-bodied individuals. This undermines the spirit of inclusivity and equality that the Invictus Games aims to promote.
Furthermore, questions arise about Megan's presence in the video. As she is not a veteran herself, her involvement seems questionable. It is disheartening to witness Harry's insistence on holding onto Invictus, especially after giving up his military uniform. There were even rumors that the Invictus Netflix video predominantly featured the Duchess of Sussex, leading to concerns among the producers. It will be interesting to see how Netflix handles this series and whether Invictus makes any statement regarding the Sussexes' involvement.
In reality, both Harry and Megan's actions reflect their status as opportunistic grifters. Despite their attempts to polish their so-called brand, they remain individuals with no substantial contributions. They seem to believe that Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth taxpayers owe them benefits associated with their previous working royal roles, despite offering no tangible public services in return. In contrast, legitimate veterans, who have served with dedication, deserve public funding directed towards important causes such as supporting war efforts, foreign aid to impoverished nations, and government projects aimed at meeting veterans' mental health and medical needs.
The Sussexes possess a royal inheritance and have profited from various sellout ventures. It is only reasonable for them to downsize their lifestyle, live within their means, and take responsibility for their own expenses. Relying on taxpayers, particularly veterans and their families, during times of war, pandemic, economic decline, and cost of living issues is both unjust and unethical.
