The discussion on social media highlights ongoing frustrations surrounding Meghan Markle’s treatment by the Royal Family, the British press, and the public narrative that continues to be pushed against her. Many users are calling out what they perceive as double standards, financial inequality, and a deliberate attempt to undermine Meghan’s reputation, both during her time as a working royal and after her and Prince Harry’s departure from the institution.

Key Concerns Raised in the Conversation

1. Meghan was expected to work for free while others were paid: Several users point to King Charles’s claim that he “couldn’t afford” to support Meghan financially, even though other working royals, including Kate Middleton and Camilla, receive financial backing from the monarchy. Some argue that Meghan’s work within the Firm, including her charity engagements and patronages, was treated as a favor rather than as part of the institution’s formal duties, even though she was expected to contribute in the same way as other senior royals.
2. Claims that Meghan was given financial support are misleading: A major point of contention is the claim that Meghan benefited significantly from the monarchy’s wealth. Users argue that any housing, staff, or financial provisions she received were actually given to Prince Harry as part of his birthright, and Meghan’s access to them was simply by virtue of being his wife. Comparisons to other royal spouses, particularly Kate Middleton, highlight what they see as unfair treatment, with Kate receiving substantial royal funding and support while Meghan was told she was an additional financial burden.
3. Meghan and Harry’s wedding generated massive profits for the UK: Multiple users push back on the idea that Meghan’s wedding was a financial drain on British taxpayers. Instead, they argue that the wedding generated over £1 billion in tourism, media rights, and economic stimulation, ultimately benefiting the UK and the Royal Family more than it benefited Meghan personally.
4. British media’s biased reporting and suppression of positive news about Harry and Meghan:
   Several users express frustration with how the British media continues to report on Harry and Meghan. They point out that Harry’s recent legal victory against Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers was largely ignored in UK media, while any negative coverage about him and Meghan is amplified. This has fueled accusations that the Royal Family and British press work together to control the public narrative and protect the institution at Meghan’s expense.
5. Claims that Meghan should have been “grateful” for royal life ignore deeper issues: Some participants in the conversation criticize the idea that Meghan should have been thankful for what she was given, arguing that this ignores the systemic issues within the monarchy. They argue that royal life was not a privilege for Meghan but rather an environment that demanded compliance, silenced her, and expected her to endure public and private mistreatment. Many draw parallels to Princess Diana, noting that extravagant gifts or wealth mean little in an institution where personal autonomy is restricted.
6. Allegations that the Royal Family actively worked to smear Meghan’s reputation: A recurring theme in the discussion is the belief that the Royal Family and British media coordinated efforts to damage Meghan’s reputation. Some users believe that because of Meghan’s popularity, particularly among younger generations and international audiences, the royal institution saw her as a threat. They suggest that the smear campaign against her was meant to reinforce traditional power structures within the monarchy and prevent her from overshadowing more senior royals.
7. Public sentiment is shifting against the Royal Family: Several participants argue that the British public and global audiences are increasingly seeing through the negative press against Meghan. They suggest that while orchestrated media attacks may have initially shaped public perception, many now recognize the monarchy’s role in pushing certain narratives. Some predict that continued attempts to vilify Meghan and Harry will ultimately backfire, further eroding the Royal Family’s credibility.

Overall Sentiment

The general consensus in the conversation is that Meghan was treated unfairly by the Royal Family and British press, expected to work without financial compensation, and then vilified when she and Harry chose to step away. Many see this as part of a larger pattern of control within the institution, where those who do not conform to traditional expectations are cast aside. The ongoing frustration with media coverage suggests that for many, this remains an unresolved issue, with lingering resentment toward both the monarchy and the British press for their roles in shaping public perception.