The A172 was closed for the majority of Wednesday as officers examined the scene following the discovery of a body, believed to be Tracey Smith, in a crashed car

The body of a missing woman has been found in a crashed car down a roadside embankment.

Tracey Smith, 57, vanished on July 24 after she was last seen leaving her home in Stokesley, North Yorkshire, driving a black Fiat Panda. Police launched a search effort to locate Tracey but almost a month later the search has come to a tragic end.

However, following North Yorkshire Police’s latest appeal on Tuesday, a member of the public called to say they had noticed a black vehicle crashed in undergrowth down an embankment on the A172 near the Cleveland Tontine.

The vehicle’s driver was tragically found dead inside and while formal identification is yet to take place but North Yorkshire Police believe the deceased to be Tracey.

An update from North Yorkshire Police yesterday confirmed an investigation is underway.

A spokesperson for the force said: “Last night (18 August 2026) North Yorkshire Police were called by a member of the public after they noticed a black vehicle had come to rest in undergrowth down an embankment on the A172 at its junction with the A19 near the Cleveland Tontine.

“Sadly, the sole occupant of the vehicle was found deceased inside. While formal identification is yet to take place, officers believe the deceased to be missing Tracey Smith from the Stokesley area.

“The road was closed and remain closed for most of the day. This was to allow investigators to examine the scene and to recover the vehicle. Due to the location of the vehicle, forensic examination and recovery took longer than usual. The road is expected to reopen later this evening (19 August).

“Our thanks go to members of the public who responded to appeals for help to find Tracey, including the person who called in after noticing a vehicle in the undergrowth.

“An investigation will be carried out to determine how the car came to leave the road. Our thoughts are with Tracey’s family and friends at this very sad time.”

The popular TV and radio presenter, known for his unmistakable Northern charm, was a guest judge on tonight’s episode, the second in the new series.

Keeping to his northern roots, Paddy asked the contestants to cook him a delicious pie, saying that despite trying foods from around the world, he was still a fan of the old-school staples.

Emily Campbell, Jason Mohammad, Shakira Khan, Joe Pasquale, Jay McGuiness, (Image: BBC/Shine TV)

He said: “Well, being a northerner, this food is in our very DNA. I want you to bake me the most beautiful, the most glorious pie.”

Read more news on Paddy McGuinness here

He said he loved pies because no matter where you go in the country, you can have a cheese and onion pie in Scotland and it will taste different to a cheese and onion pie in Birmingham.

Paddy said: “You tuck in and it is always a treat.”

Although primary judging duties lie with the formidable Grace Dent and Italian Michelin-starred maestro Giorgio Locatelli, this series has invited celebrity guest judges, including Paddy and Zoe Ball, who can trace her family back to Bolton.

Tonight, celebrity contestants Emily Campbell, Jason Mohammad, a colleague of Paddy’s, Jay McGuiness, Joe Pasquale and Shakira Khan served up proper pies that did not disappoint.

He sampled everything from mushroom and lamb pies to sweet dessert pies.

With his northern charm fully on show, Paddy had something positive to say about every pie he was served, even giving a Paul Hollywood-style handshake to Jason for his pie.

He described Joe’s pie as “proper”, with the contestant explaining he had made a roux.

It was then, during the judging of the final pies, Paddy reminded Giorgio he did know a thing or two about cooking when the chef began describing what a roux was.

Giorgio started to explain that it was flour and butter, but before he could finish, Paddy said: “Oh, I know I’m from Bolton, but I know some things, Giorgio!”

He then gave him a hug.

Giorgio said: “You looked a little puzzled when he said that.”

Shakira’s sweet pie reminded Paddy of his local Bolton pie shop, which he used to go with his mum.

The winning pie was as Paddy thanked the celebrity chefs for feeding him, stating the judges had a very tough task.

To find out which was favourite pie, watch the episode on BBC iPlayer.

A guide for asylum seekers published by the Home Office has told them not to rape or sexually harass people, including partners and children.

The document tells people arriving in the UK after fleeing other countries that women are allowed to “earn their own money” and “make their own decisions about their lives”.

Men appear to be the primary target for the instructions, although there are also resources for asylum seekers who think they may be victims of illegal behaviour.

Politics Live: Funding questions over Burnham’s rough sleeping plan

The guidance states that people are expected to not make sexual remarks about someone “even if you think it is a compliment”, whistle or make “kissing sounds” at someone, follow someone or “block their path”, make rude or offensive gestures, or “verbally abuse someone because of their gender, religion, or how they look”.

The guidance warns throughout that breaking the law can lead to trouble with law enforcement, lead to someone losing accommodation or support, and could affect an asylum claim.

People are warned it’s a serious crime to take or share sexual images without someone’s consent. As well as the guidebook, a series of posters have been designed by the Home Office to inform asylum seekers.

The guidance was published in a nine-page document titled “Understanding behaviours and expectations in the UK: A guide for asylum seekers”.

Sections include: gender equality, domestic abuse, sex and consent, and respect in public – as well as getting help and living in the UK.

Illegal migration and the visible issue of people crossing the Channel in small boats is a policy area the government is determined to look tough on, and these documents are understood to be part of a plan to ensure not knowing the law is not an excuse for illegal actions.

It has also been focused on by parties like the Conservatives and Reform UK, and there have been a series of high-profile criminal cases involving asylum seekers.

Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said: “Instead of trying to train these mainly young, male illegal immigrants behave in a civilised way towards women, they should be deported.”

Some 101,000 people claimed asylum in the year ending December 2025, 4% less than the previous year, with around 46,000 detected arrivals coming to Britain via illegal routes, such as small boats or other clandestine routes.

Read more:
Asylum seekers jailed for rape on Brighton beach
Asylum seeker jailed for abducting and raping 12-year-old
Asylum seeker jailed for seven years for raping woman in Staffordshire

Examples of the guidance in the document include a section stating that “everyone in the UK is expected to treat men and women equally” – and “even if you are a family member, like a husband, father or brother” you must never do things like stop a woman working or studying, control what she wears or where she goes, or make decisions for her without her agreement.

Domestic abuse is defined in the guidance as physical violence, threats, controlling behaviour, emotional abuse and taking away someone’s documents.

Asylum seekers are told they are expected to treat family and their partners with respect, let them make their own choices, and never physically or verbally abuse or control them.

The sex and consent page explains that both people must consent to sex without threat or pressure, someone can change their mind at any time even if they agreed previously, and someone “asleep, drunk, or unable to respond” cannot consent.

It adds: “Consent is needed in every situation. This means even if you are married or in a relationship with someone, they must consent to sex every time.”

The chapter says that people are expected to never use “threat, force or pressure” to make someone have sex, never try to have sex with someone who is asleep, drunk or unable to consent clearly, and to stop if someone says no or changes their mind.

It is mentioned that anyone under the age of 16 is considered a child and therefore legally cannot consent to having sex.

How to behave in public is also covered, with asylum seekers “told that people have different beliefs, religions, cultures, relationships and ways of life” and they must “treat others with respect, even if you disagree with their beliefs or how they live”.

Tap to never miss an episode: Follow Cheat Sheet here

Support numbers for victims are provided at the bottom of each section and in a chapter at the end of the document.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We expect everyone who comes to the UK to abide by our laws. If they do not, they will face consequences, including the refusal of their asylum claim and removal from the UK.”

The airline operates five direct routes from Leeds Bradford to Palma de Mallorca, Malaga, Paris, Barcelona, and Belfast.

The popular budget airline has assured travellers that flight schedules up until that date will continue as normal.

What the airline had to say

An easyJet spokesperson said: “Following a review of our routes from Leeds Bradford Airport, we have made the decision to no longer operate flights from the airport after January 5. Our focus is on maintaining and developing routes which prove most popular with customers.

“We have contacted customers with bookings beyond this date to provide them with advance notice and inform them of their options, including a free transfer to flights from an alternative airport or a refund, and we are very sorry for the inconvenience caused.

Launch of the Paris service (Image: easyJet)

“We value the relationship we have built with Leeds Bradford Airport and we always keep options for our network under review, with the aim of providing more choice and connectivity where we see demand.”

easyJet taken over by another firm

Eight other airlines continue to operate from Leeds Bradford, including Ryanair and Jet2.

The announcement comes just two weeks after easyJet confirmed a £5.7 billion takeover by private equity firm Apollo.

It has also been reported that increased expenses in jet fuel and lower bookings have also caused a 70 per cent fall in profits for the firm.

LBA has been contacted for a comment.

Councillors and a body representing bus users said allowing disabled bus pass holders to travel for free all day from April would give them more freedom and independence.

But a local disability rights activist said that although the move was welcome her and others were concerned any savings could be wiped out by future welfare cuts.

It follows a Government announcement on Tuesday, August 18 that restrictions on what times disabled people can use their passes would be removed in a move backed by £60m.

RECOMMENDED READING:

Prime Minister Andy Burnham said it was not right that disabled passengers could only use passes at certain times and the move also aimed to ease cost of living pressures.

It follows calls to scrap time restrictions including from Liberal Democrat Harrogate and Knaresborough MP Tom Gordon.

York councillors backed a call in November for the Government to change concessionary bus pass hours.

Passes are currently only valid nationally from 9.30am to 11pm, though morning hours in York were previously extended to 9am.

More than 3,500 people in York are set to benefit from April’s change, according to York Council estimates.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham announced the move on Tuesday, August 18 (Image: James Manning)

City of York Council’s Labour transport spokesperson Cllr Kate Ravilious said disabled people did not live their lives according to bus timetables and had to get to work, hospital and meet other commitments.

Cllr Ravilious said: “For many disabled people buses aren’t just one transport option among many, they can be absolutely essential for getting around and living independently.

“This is about fairness, but it’s also about independence, disabled people should have the same freedom as anyone else to get on a bus and go where they need to go, when they need to go.

“There’s much more to do to make public transport genuinely accessible for everyone, but removing this restriction is a very welcome step forward.”

Opposition Liberal Democrat transport spokesperson Cllr Stephen Fenton said the move was a huge victory for Mr Gordon and others who had campaigned hard for the changes.

Cllr Fenton said: “Disabled people already face additional costs as part of their day-to-day lives, which made the time restriction on use of the bus pass even more difficult to understand.

“Hopefully this change will make it easier for disabled people to access work, education and social activities.”

Doreen Magill, chair of the York Bus Forum, said it would help disabled people leave their homes and participate more fully in the life of the city.

The chair said: “Many disabled people rely on buses to access work or group sessions and these frequently necessitate travel outside of the time-restrictions which were imposed.

“This is a vital step in helping those with disabilities.

But disability rights activist Flick Williams said she hoped savings on bus fares would not be cancelled out amid fears ministers could be planning further welfare cuts later this year.

She added 291 Labour MPs had voted against the measure, including York Central’s Rachael Maskell and York Outer’s Luke Charters, when it was previously tabled in Parliament in September.

Ms Williams said: “This suggests it is not about the merits of a policy rather who is proposing it, which at that time was the Liberal Democrat MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough who has long campaigned on this issue.

“The prime minister has presented this as a mitigation against the cost of living crisis, we have to hope that a few bus fares saved is not completely wiped out.”

Employers in certain sectors will have been concerned to read reports from the UK government that the costs of promised reforms to “zero hours contracts” under the Employment Rights Act 2025 may be anything up to £2.9 billion.

The changes, due to be implemented in early 2027, are designed to redress what are seen as “one-sided” working arrangements under which workers bear all the financial risk of fluctuations in demand for their labour.

In December 2025, the number of people working under zero hours contracts as their only or main employment was 1.23 million, with young workers and all workers in the retail and hospitality sectors being disproportionately represented in those figures.

The term “zero hours contract” first appeared in academic literature in 1997, but even then, it was still seen as a shorthand description for a collection of employment practices that had been developing from the 1980s onward.

The term was not used or defined in UK legislation until 2015. The use of zero hours contracts expanded significantly after 2008, as businesses sought flexible ways to manage employment arrangements in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. The flexibility offered to both employers and workers to plan for fluctuations in demand for and supply of labour is still seen as the primary advantage of zero hours contracts.

Controversial from the start

Zero hours contracts have been controversial from the outset. Worker representatives view “flexibility” as synonymous with “exploitation” of vulnerable and low-income workers, who are said to be disadvantaged by the lack of job security and guaranteed stable income levels. They bear the cost of last-minute changes or cancellations of shifts.

The changes in the Employment Rights Act 2025 represent a watering down of the 2024 Labour general election manifesto pledge to “ban” zero hours contracts. But nevertheless, the new statutory provisions represent the most radical change to this form of working arrangement since its inception.

The provisions are mindbogglingly complex, and the fine details are still to be worked out through ministerial regulation.

The main changes to zero hours contracts are the introduction of:

1. a duty on employers to offer guaranteed hours to workers, based on the average number of hours the worker regularly works over a “reference period” – yet to be defined, but there is a general view that this may be 12 weeks

2. a duty on employers to give “reasonable” notice of shifts and shift changes or cancellations, with compensatory payments to be made to workers in the absence of such notice

3. a right for workers not to suffer detriment or be dismissed for accepting or rejecting an offer of guaranteed hours, with any dismissal primarily for this reason being deemed automatically unfair

The duty to offer guaranteed hours would only apply to workers on contracts where the existing contractual hours were below a (yet to be decided) threshold.

Similarly, there would be no obligation to offer guaranteed hours to workers on short-term contracts which were shorter than the reference period. It must also be borne in mind that workers who are content with the zero hours contracts arrangement are under no obligation to accept an employer’s offer.

It is difficult to judge whether the costs estimate provided by the government is accurate in the absence of clear information on how notions of threshold hours, reference periods and reasonable notice are defined and measured. The higher the number of threshold hours – the government has indicated that this could be anywhere between 8-20 hours per week – the greater will be the costs to employers of the duty to offer guaranteed hours of at least that number.

Attempts to avoid triggering the duty by agreeing contractual hours just above the threshold are likely to backfire if the threshold is set at a level that is unsustainable during quiet periods of work. Employers will need to exercise caution when identifying the reference period, as calculating regular hours over a busy period may result in guaranteed hours that are unaffordable during the quieter periods that follow.

The use of contracts which are of shorter duration than the reference period may represent a cost saving, but this may be outweighed by the cost of having to prove that the use of such a contract was reasonable.

Payments of salary or compensation for last minute changes to or cancellations of shifts is likely to represent a significant cost to employers, but this is likely to be borne disproportionately by employers in sectors where such events are common but unpredictable.

Unwanted costs

For businesses which currently use zero hours contracts, some costs, such as the administrative costs of calculating regular hours of workers and the need to update payroll systems, are going to be inevitable. Other potential costs, which may not be so obvious, could include termination payments to workers by employers unable to sustain current workforce levels, or legal fees to explain the impact of the changes.

The statutory changes will impose additional unwanted costs on employers. How much those costs are likely to be can only be guesswork in the absence of further government regulation.

Employers will have to weigh up the continued advantages of flexibility against these additional costs in deciding whether zero hours contracts still meet the requirements of their business models.

This is likely to produce a different answer in different sectors of the economy. The changes also raise the question whether they will achieve the certainty of work hours and stable incomes for workers when the cost to employers may be too much to be sustainable.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s bombshell decision to move their family back to Britain six years after fleeing royal life is likely to be seen as the most dramatic admission yet that their grand plans to conquer America have failed.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex swept into California in 2020 with Hollywood seemingly at their feet, armed with their royal titles, global fame and blockbuster deals worth tens of millions of dollars.

There was a reported $100 million Netflix agreement. A $20 million Spotify contract. Podcasts, documentaries and television shows were promised. 

Archewell Productions was supposed to turn the Sussexes into serious Hollywood power players, while Meghan later attempted to reinvent herself as a lifestyle entrepreneur.

They settled into a $15 million mansion in sun-kissed Montecito, surrounded by billionaires and A-list celebrities, as they embarked on what was supposed to be an extraordinarily lucrative second act.

But six turbulent years later, the couple are heading back across the Atlantic.

News that Harry and Meghan plan to return to Britain for an extended period and enroll Archie, seven, and Lilibet, five, in an English school suggests the couple have accepted that their American adventure has not delivered the glittering commercial empire once envisaged.

The Spotify deal is long gone. Their original Netflix contract has ended. The duchess’s With Love, Meghan lasted two seasons. 

In 2021, to mark her 40th birthday, Meghan Markle launched the 40×40 initiative on Zoom

A string of heavily promoted projects either struggled to find audiences or never materialized at all.

Even the couple’s first jointly produced feature documentary, Cookie Queens, endured a humiliating opening weekend this month when it was beaten at the US box office by a compilation of internet cat videos.

And their difficulties have stretched far beyond television.

Meghan’s lifestyle business endured an embarrassing start when American Riviera Orchard, a name unveiled with enormous fanfare in 2024, was eventually abandoned and replaced with the considerably shorter As Ever.

Her first Spotify series, Archetypes, ended along with the couple’s lucrative deal with the streaming giant, while her subsequent Confessions of a Female Founder podcast failed to generate anything approaching the cultural impact of the couple’s earliest post-royal ventures.

There have also been repeated reports of staff upheaval, including the departure of senior communications executives, while critics have questioned whether Meghan has managed to secure a place among America’s celebrity elite that once appeared to be hers for the taking.

The Duchess was absent from the Met Gala this year and reports have even claimed she was attempting to secure invitations to Paris Fashion Week events as her standing in the fashion world came under scrutiny.

Against that bruising backdrop, the timing of the Sussexes’ return to Britain is remarkable.

Woman of Vision Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex speaks onstage with Gloria Steinem and Teresa Younger during the Ms. Foundation Women of Vision Awards in May 2023

Advertisement

Meghan Markle launched her lifestyle brand As Ever in March 2024

Sources close to Harry briefed at the weekend that his family reunion with King Charles last month left the Duke feeling ‘buoyed,’ ‘very happy’ and ‘really energized.’

Crucially, they added: ‘He wants to spend more time in the UK with his family.’

He will now get his wish.

Harry, 41, and Meghan, 45, are understood to be returning to Britain before the end of August for an ‘extended period,’ with their two children believed to have already been enrolled at a British school.

The family are expected to establish themselves in a private, non-royal residence and could remain in Britain while Archie and Lilibet complete their education.

But there will be no return to life as working royals.

The King, who is understood to have been informed of Harry’s plans only on Sunday, is said to welcome the opportunity to spend more time privately with his younger son and grandchildren.

But Buckingham Palace’s position on Harry and Meghan’s official status is understood to be unchanged.

There will be ‘no alteration’ to their roles as private individuals and non-working members of the Royal Family, in keeping with the arrangements established after their sensational departure in 2020.

The Netflix documentary also showed the couple in deeply difficult moments, with Meghan seen in tears and Harry describing the intense media scrutiny, family tensions and emotional turmoil they said ultimately drove them from royal life

Sources have also insisted that the Sussexes are not plotting a return to the royal fold.

The Sussexes are expected to retain their sprawling Montecito estate, meaning their return is not a clean break with California. They also have a residence in Portugal.

When Harry and Meghan arrived in America, they were among the hottest properties in global entertainment and the money followed almost immediately. 

For the couple, America represented freedom.

The move offered financial independence, privacy, sunshine and the chance to build a global media empire free from palace courtiers and the constraints of royal protocol.

In September 2020, the couple signed their enormous Netflix agreement through Archewell Productions, promising documentaries, films, children’s shows and scripted entertainment that would ‘inform’ and ‘give hope.’

Three months later came their lucrative Spotify deal.

It appeared that Harry and Meghan had achieved precisely what they had wanted when they left royal life: independence, enormous earning potential and control over their own global platform.

Initially, the strategy appeared to work as their explosive Oprah Winfrey interview in 2021 became a global television event, although it was not part of either streaming deal.

Meghan also tried her hand at publishing with her 2021 children’s book The Bench, inspired by Harry’s relationship with Archie, which topped the New York Times children’s picture-book bestseller list but received scathing reviews from some critics 

Then came Netflix’s Harry & Meghan in 2022. It was a ratings success in a six-part documentary series, packed with deeply personal claims about their experiences inside the monarchy.

Harry followed it in January 2023 with Spare, his candid memoir detailing everything from fights with Prince William to tensions with Charles and his experiences growing up inside the Royal Family. It made more than 6 million global sales.

The problem for the Sussexes was what happened when the royal revelations began to run out.

The audience appeared far less interested when Harry and Meghan were no longer the subject.

Netflix’s Live to Lead made little cultural impact.

Heart of Invictus, centered on competitors preparing for Harry’s Invictus Games, failed to approach the same attention generated by Harry & Meghan.

Then came Polo, a five-part series about the elite equestrian sport beloved by the Duke.

It failed to crack Netflix’s global top ten and received a dismal 25 percent critics’ score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Other grandly announced projects disappeared before audiences ever had the chance to judge them.

Meghan and Harry’s docuseries ‘Polo’ on Netflix, failed to make an impact

Pearl, an animated children’s series being developed by Archewell, was scrapped by Netflix in 2022.

A planned adaptation of Carley Fortune’s bestselling romance novel Meet Me at the Lake was announced with considerable excitement but failed to materialize during the Sussexes’ original Netflix deal.

Spotify proved even more disastrous.

Harry and Meghan signed their reported $20 million agreement with the audio giant in late 2020, with enormous expectations surrounding the kind of programming two of the world’s most famous people might produce.

Yet Meghan’s Archetypes ultimately ran for just 12 full episodes in 2022, plus a Christmas special released under the couple’s earlier Archewell Audio banner.

By June 2023, Spotify and Archewell Audio announced that they had ‘mutually agreed to part ways’.

Then came a brutal public broadside from Spotify executive Bill Simmons.

On his own podcast, Simmons notoriously branded the couple ‘f***ing grifters’ and mocked his experience of attempting to develop ideas with Harry.

‘I have got to get drunk one night and tell the story of the Zoom I had with Harry to try and help him with a podcast idea,’ he said.

‘It’s one of my best stories… F*** them.’

Meghan eventually returned to podcasting with Confessions of a Female Founder, this time through Lemonada Media.

Meghan eventually returned to podcasting with Confessions of a Female Founder, this time through Lemonada Media

But by then the dizzying excitement surrounding the Sussexes’ arrival in America had faded.

The Duchess also attempted to establish herself as a lifestyle mogul.

American Riviera Orchard was unveiled in March 2024 with a hazy Instagram video showing Meghan arranging flowers and cooking in a kitchen.

The name appeared to be a nod to Santa Barbara, the wealthy coastal region that encompasses Montecito and is sometimes dubbed the American Riviera.

What followed was a painfully drawn-out rollout.

Jars of numbered strawberry jam were dispatched to celebrity friends and photographed on social media, but months passed without the anticipated full-scale launch.

Then, in February 2025, American Riviera Orchard abruptly became As Ever.

Meghan acknowledged the original name had limited what she could sell, saying she had secured the As Ever name in 2022 and was now returning to it.

As Ever subsequently launched products including preserves, flower sprinkles, teas and other lifestyle goods, with some releases selling out.

But the brand has not yet transformed Meghan into the Martha Stewart-style commercial force her most enthusiastic supporters once envisioned.

Other ventures have similarly vanished.

When Harry and Meghan arrived in California in 2020, they appeared to have the world at their feet – armed with global fame and multimillion-dollar deals with Netflix and Spotify – but over the years the seemingly golden promise of their post-royal life began to lose its shine

Meghan’s 40×40 initiative was launched with celebrity backing on her 40th birthday in 2021, asking 40 friends to spend 40 minutes mentoring women returning to work.

The Duchess predicted the initiative could create a global ‘ripple effect.’ Instead, it also quietly disappeared from public view.

Her children’s book, The Bench, became a New York Times bestseller in the United States but received savage reviews from some British critics and failed to become the beginning of a broader children’s publishing empire.

Meanwhile, Meghan’s attempts to establish herself as a television personality culminated in With Love, Meghan, the glossy Netflix lifestyle series featuring the Duchess cooking, entertaining and dispensing hosting tips from a rented California home.

It survived two seasons but was not renewed for a third.

In yet another flop, Cookie Queens, executive produced by Harry and Meghan through Archewell Productions, follows four Girl Scouts as they compete in the high-pressure world of cookie selling.

Meghan personally helped promote the documentary, discussing her own childhood experiences as a Girl Scout before its theatrical release.

Yet according to reported Box Office Mojo figures, the film managed approximately $354,000 from 446 theaters on its opening weekend.

CatVideoFest 2026, essentially 70 minutes of viral cat footage, took approximately $569,000 despite playing on just 255 screens.

The royal couple had been beaten by skateboarding cats.

Whatever the quality or commercial success of their output, Harry and Meghan have never struggled to generate publicity – their every project still attracts global headlines, even when audiences have proved far less enthusiastic about the content itself

‘There’s no getting around the optics of finishing five places behind a 70-minute compilation of internet cat videos,’ royal commentator Kinsey Schofield told Fox News.

‘Hollywood can forgive a lot, but being beaten by CatVideoFest is the sort of indignity that writes its own punchline. 

‘Harry and Meghan remain extraordinarily effective at generating headlines, but headlines and paying customers are two very different things,’ she said.

‘There was a period when simply attaching their names to something guaranteed enormous curiosity. I’m not convinced that’s true anymore.’

Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams similarly pointed to the Oprah interview, Harry & Meghan and Spare as the couple’s genuine blockbusters.

‘What is undoubted is the publicity that accompanies everything they do,’ he said.

But he claimed audiences had proved less interested in projects including With Love, Meghan, Heart of Invictus, Polo and now Cookie Queens.

‘So it’s all about buzz and nothing else, save their link with real royalty,’ he suggested. 

The couple have also cycled through a striking number of employees since their relationship began, including repeated changes among senior communications staff.

Commentator Fitzwilliams claimed earlier this year that she had developed a ‘disastrous habit of falling out with Hollywood’s top power brokers’.

Her absence from the Met Gala became another talking point.

So too did reports about her relationships with figures including Lauren Sánchez Bezos, the Kardashians and Vogue’s Anna Wintour.

The Sussexes unquestionably remain famous.

Their every move still generates headlines across the world, Meghan continues to operate As Ever and Archewell Productions remains active. 

They will also retain their Montecito mansion, leaving open the possibility of continuing to work in America.

But their return to Britain represents a remarkable full-circle moment.

In 2020, Harry and Meghan left the monarchy believing their future lay 5,000 miles away in California.

They had royal fame, Hollywood money and almost unlimited curiosity on their side.

Six years on and a string of abandoned projects later, they are coming home.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly planning to move back to the UK later this month

Advertisement

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly planning a return to the UK, more than six years after their departure to California, according to the Press Association.

The Daily Telegraph reports that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be relocating to Britain later this month, settling into a non-royal property outside the capital.

Sources indicate there will be no alteration to Harry and Meghan’s current standing as private citizens and non-working royals.

The King was reportedly informed of the decision on Sunday and is said to be pleased at the prospect of spending more time with the family in both private and personal settings.

However, their official position remains unchanged, with no possibility of a “half-in-half-out” arrangement regarding their royal duties, PA reports, reports the Irish Mirror.

The Telegraph, which first revealed the news, states that the couple’s children, Prince Archie, seven, and Princess Lilibet, five, are due to begin attending British schools in September.

VANDENBERG SPACE FORCE BASE, Calif. (AP) — Five news reporters and two members of the military who were invited to an event at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California were briefly detained at gunpoint by security officers who thought they were gate crashers, according to local news reports.

The incident happened Monday ahead of an invitation-only groundbreaking for a new training facility for missile operators at the federal airfield near Santa Barbara, California. Reporters from Noozhawk and KEYT were among those detained, and both outlets published articles detailing the detainment.

In a statement to Noozhawk, a Space Launch Delta 30 Public Affairs spokesperson called the incident a breakdown in communication.

“Vandenberg Space Force Base is experiencing an increased number of unauthorized entry attempts,” the statement said. “Every potential unauthorized presence must be treated as a legitimate threat until proven otherwise. While we recognize this may have been unsettling, the security of the base and its personnel is our priority.”

The reporters and military members were part of a convoy being escorted onto the base by uniformed public affairs staff in a government minivan when they were suddenly ordered out of their vehicles with their hands up, according to news reports.

Officers pointed guns, sirens were sounded, and barricades went up at the gate entrance, KEYT reported.

The two military members assigned to the base — one enlisted and one a junior officer — were handcuffed and placed in base vehicles, while the civilians were ordered to sit on a curb, Noozhawk reported.

The reporters for outlets also including KSBY-TV and the Santa Maria Times/Lompoc Record were held for more than 30 minutes, causing them to miss the event. All were let go without further incident.

“We respect the military’s need to provide security for the base,” Tom Bolton, Noozhawk’s editor in chief, said in a statement Wednesday. “But clearly what occurred was unfortunate and unnecessary, and potentially dangerous, as firearms were drawn.”

Bolton said he hopes to have a conversation with base leadership later this week to review what happened in the hopes of preventing a similar occurrence in the future.