Meghan Markle and Harry release Archewell Audio trailer

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle seemingly delighted fans with the recent launch of their long-awaited Archewell Foundation website. When announcing the project last year, the couple said: “Like you, our focus is on supporting efforts to tackle the global Covid-19 pandemic, but faced with this information coming to light, we felt compelled to share the story of how this came to be.” Explaining how they arrived at the name Archewell, Harry and Meghan said: “Before SussexRoyal came the idea of ‘Arche’ – the Greek word meaning ‘source of action’.

“We connected to this concept for the charitable organisation we hoped to build one day, and it became the inspiration for our son’s name.

“To do something of meaning, to do something that matters.

“Archewell is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon.”

In a joint statement issued by Harry and Meghan upon launching, the couple revealed their new site will be a one-stop destination for all their Netflix and Spotify projects.

We will use your email address only for sending you newsletters. Please see our Privacy Notice for details of your data protection rights.

But as it turns out, not everyone is so thrilled about the couple’s debut.

Critics have accused the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of displaying some hypocrisy with their new website.

Taking to Twitter, one social media user pointed out the site can take in and share users’ data and personal information, which is ironic given they left the Royal Family for privacy reasons.

The user tweeted: “FYI Prince Harry and Meghan Markle – who are suing photographers for invasion of privacy – may collect your name, address, IP address, texts, videos etc. and share them with profit-making companies.”

While the homepage boasts a welcoming letter alongside a picture of Prince Harry and Diana, Princess of Wales, eagle-eyed fans noticed the hidden disclaimer in the website’s ‘privacy’ section.

The Privacy statement on Archewell reads: “When using our site, you may voluntarily provide information about yourself, including your name, your email address, your location and any other information you choose to provide.

“We collect this information when you subscribe to our mailing list, send us feedback or request information, share your story, or interact with us for any purpose.

“We will also collect any content that you provide to us, such as text, videos or social media posts, when you link to or otherwise submit that content on the site.

DON’T MISS
Prince Harry and William’s relationship ‘tricky’ and ‘a world away’ [ANALYSIS]
Harry and Meghan’s ‘challenge to social media giants’ explained [EXPLAINED]
Royal POLL: Are Harry and Meghan right to ‘quit’ social media? [POLL]

“We may share the information we collect with other parties, including the following: with third party service providers who process data on our behalf, such as email service providers; with other charitable, nonprofit and for-profit ventures associated with The Duke and Duchess of Sussex that exist now or may be established in the future.”

People were quick to fire back at the couple after the news went viral on Twitter.

One person wrote: “Other people’s privacy doesn’t count though… only theirs.”

At the same time, another critic added: “Once you are forced to give them your email to view Archewell’s website. It’s difficult to unsubscribe and they can still sell your info to third parties even if you do unsubscribe.”

Despite the backlash, not everyone saw the problem with the Sussexes’ privacy terms on Archewell, with several people pointing out that all websites are similar.

One person wrote: “Nope, they’re telling you what they’re doing. So if you don’t like it, you don’t have to click! The choice is yours.”

Another social media user in support of Harry and Meghan simply tweeted: “Every website does this.”

Many however, might feel uncomfortable at the thought there could be a fast buck in selling personal information for private gain, whether or not they have read the small print.

Source: Read Full Article