The media’s fascination with Meghan Markle has been relentless, with coverage ranging from admiration to outright hostility. The latest discourse surrounding her attempts to rebrand herself through new business ventures and media projects, such as her upcoming podcast, Netflix cooking show, and lifestyle brand American Riviera Orchard, continues to fuel intense criticism. The transcript under analysis exemplifies a widespread media narrative: skepticism about Markle’s authenticity, competence, and motives, with a heavy dose of mockery and disdain.

1. Meghan Markle’s Career Shift: From Royalty to Lifestyle Entrepreneur

The discussion in the transcript repeatedly questions Markle’s credibility in the lifestyle and media space, particularly her qualifications to lead a cooking and lifestyle show. Unlike established figures such as Nigella Lawson or Martha Stewart, who built their careers on expertise and experience, critics argue that Markle lacks any substantive background in this field.

“Why on Earth do I want to know about Meghan baking cakes for her mates in California? What’s her qualification for this?”

This sentiment reflects a broader issue Markle faces: the perception that she gains opportunities not based on merit but on her marriage to Prince Harry. The analysis suggests that without her royal association, a project like With Love, Meghan would likely not have been greenlit. Critics also mock the simplicity of the content, implying that it lacks originality or depth, with comments such as:

“Ice cream and strawberries—this woman’s a genius!”

This critique extends to her lifestyle brand, American Riviera Orchard, which has so far launched a single product—strawberry jam—and faced legal hurdles related to trademarks. Commentators deride it as an example of how the mighty have fallen, arguing that Markle, who once held a global platform as a duchess, is now reduced to selling jam.

2. Accusations of Hypocrisy and Opportunism

One of the most recurring themes in the discussion is hypocrisy—the belief that Markle and Prince Harry constantly contradict themselves. This includes:

• Lecturing about compassion while estranged from her own family:“She talks about friendship and joy while cutting off nearly every friend and family member she had before marrying Harry.”
• Criticizing the monarchy while benefiting from royal titles:“They constantly trash the institution that gave them their titles, yet refuse to relinquish them.”
• Denouncing social media for ‘online harm’ but returning to Instagram for personal branding:“They quit social media because of online toxicity, yet she suddenly has no issue with it when she needs to promote her business.”

This perceived inconsistency has fueled skepticism about Markle’s sincerity, with detractors accusing her of manipulating narratives for personal gain. The discussion also highlights instances of poor timing, such as launching her brand amid significant global tragedies, further framing her as tone-deaf.

3. The Alleged ‘Grift’ and Media Deals Without Work

The term grifters has been frequently used in media critiques of the Sussexes, including by figures like Bill Simmons, a former Spotify executive. The transcript reinforces this notion, arguing that Markle and Prince Harry sign lucrative media deals but fail to deliver substantive content.

“They wanted to do massive deals with companies and then not do any work.”

Critics point to their failed Spotify deal, their minimal output for Netflix, and the long delays in releasing new content as evidence that they are profiting off their royal connections without producing anything valuable. The discussion paints a picture of a couple that expected to be handsomely paid simply for their celebrity status, rather than for their creative contributions.

4. Media Manipulation and the Rebranding Dilemma

The discussion suggests that Markle’s latest projects—her podcast, cooking show, and lifestyle brand—are part of yet another attempt to rebrand herself. This comes after several failed narratives, including:

• The Duchess of Sussex as a global humanitarian (seen in the early days of her royal tenure)
• The victimized royal escaping an oppressive institution (as portrayed in the Oprah Winfrey interview and Netflix documentary)
• The Hollywood power couple with multi-million dollar media deals (which has not materialized as successfully as hoped)

Now, she appears to be pivoting toward a relatable, lifestyle guru persona, but the transcript’s commentators argue that this is unconvincing given her history of elitism and estrangement.

“This is Meghan trying to change public perception for the 500th time.”

The problem, they claim, is that Markle cannot handle criticism. They reference her disabling Instagram comments, allegedly managing her public image obsessively, and struggling with backlash. The poor reception of her latest trailer, which reportedly received an 89% dislike rate on YouTube, further reinforces the idea that the public is not buying this reinvention.

5. Prince Harry’s Role: The ‘Instagram Boyfriend’ and the Future of the Sussex Brand

While much of the criticism is directed at Meghan Markle, Prince Harry is not spared. He is portrayed as a passive, directionless figure, playing second fiddle to his wife’s ambitions.

“He seems to have found a role for himself at least—filming his wife on the beach.”

This adds to the emasculation narrative that has been used against Harry in tabloid discussions, suggesting that he has been dragged away from his royal duties, family, and identity by Meghan. The discussion also questions what Harry will do moving forward, as his personal projects (such as his memoir Spare) have largely concluded. If Markle’s ventures fail, critics speculate that their brand’s marketability will suffer immensely.

Conclusion: The Meghan Markle Media Paradox

The overarching theme of this critique is that Meghan Markle continues to struggle with public perception, no matter how she rebrands herself. The hostility towards her—particularly from British media—stems from a combination of factors:

• The belief that she is inauthentic and opportunistic
• Her perceived hypocrisy in moralizing while living a privileged life
• Her continued use of royal titles despite distancing from the monarchy
• A reputation for alienating people, including family and former friends
• A lack of professional credibility in her chosen ventures

However, this extreme criticism also highlights a unique paradox: While detractors claim Markle is irrelevant and unqualified, they dedicate extensive coverage to dissecting her every move. The very fact that her podcast delays, cooking show, and brand launch are headline news suggests that she remains a compelling and polarizing figure.

Ultimately, whether Markle’s latest ventures succeed or fail, her ability to generate conversation—and controversy—remains undeniable. The question is whether she can ever overcome the relentless skepticism that follows her, or if she will continue to be seen, as this transcript suggests, as a Duchess without a kingdom, chasing relevance in an indifferent world.