Is the media working for the Royal Family?

The Us Weekly article attempts to paint Meghan as a divisive and overly ambitious figure who struggles to follow through on her projects. However, this portrayal is rooted in misinformation, bias, and a failure to recognize the structural barriers she has faced. The article also highlights the hypocrisy and double standards applied to Meghan Sussex compared to other women in the public eye, including those within the Royal Family.

Here are the main points from the article:

1. Public Perception and Media Criticism
   • Meghan’s attempts to build a personal brand are met with harsh criticism from both UK and US media.
   • Her new Netflix show, With Love, Meghan, received mixed reviews, but still ranked tenth in Netflix’s Top 10 Shows Overview list.
   • Critics argue Meghan’s ambition is excessive, and she should simply enjoy her life rather than continually pursuing projects.
2. Comparison with Other Female Celebrities
   • Unlike Meghan, celebrities like Kim Kardashian and Jennifer Lopez are accepted as business moguls without much backlash.
   • Meghan’s ambitions are seen as negative, while others are celebrated for similar pursuits.
3. Brand Building and Consistency Issues
   • Meghan launches many projects but struggles with maintaining them over time.
   • Critics argue her constant quest for reinvention leads to failure when she doesn’t maintain consistency in her endeavors.
4. Cultural and Racial Dynamics
   • Being of mixed race, Meghan doesn’t fit neatly into the categories of Black or white, complicating public perception.
   • Danielle Cadet argues the backlash against Meghan is partly due to her race and the difficulty the public has in accepting a successful Black woman.
5. Misalignment with Royal Expectations
   • Meghan’s independence and established career prior to marrying Harry clashed with the monarchy’s traditional expectations.
   • Critics claim she would have been admired if she had remained a full-time royal.
6. Feminist Backlash
   • Meghan is labeled as ambitious, bossy, and manipulative for her public presence and entrepreneurial spirit — criticisms not commonly applied to men.
7. Strained Royal Relationships
   • Meghan is perceived as having come between Prince Harry and his family, particularly Prince William and King Charles.
   • Critics argue she profits from her royal title despite distancing herself from royal duties.
8. Public Relations and Image Strategy
   • Meghan’s unpredictability is both a strength and a weakness.
   • Critics suggest she would benefit from a more down-to-earth, self-deprecating approach to improve her public image.
9. Mixed Public Opinion
   • Meghan’s divisive image is partly what makes her so talked about and, paradoxically, successful.
   • Younger audiences are more likely to support her entrepreneurial efforts and personal brand.

To begin with, Meghan’s alleged inability to sustain her projects is a flawed argument that ignores her many successful ventures. Before meeting Prince Harry, Meghan starred in Suits for seven seasons and founded The Tig, a lifestyle blog that became popular for its content on fashion, travel, and wellness. Meghan did not abandon The Tig because of lack of interest or failure; she chose to shut it down in 2017 as she was preparing to join the Royal Family and adhere to the restrictions placed upon her. This demonstrates a willingness to sacrifice her own successful endeavors for the sake of her royal duties.

Additionally, Meghan’s critics consistently accuse her of being “money-hungry” or obsessed with wealth. Yet, the facts reveal a different story. From the moment Meghan’s relationship with Prince Harry became public, she faced hostility from the Royal Family. According to reports, King Charles made it clear as early as 2016 that Meghan would not be financially supported by the Royal Family, despite the fact that Charles himself controls a £28 billion coffer. His refusal to place her on the payroll despite the family’s vast resources illustrates a fundamental hypocrisy: Meghan was expected to work as a senior royal, but not provided with the financial support traditionally given to royals performing those duties.

Further complicating this narrative is the public’s acceptance of wealth and fame from other women who are not held to the same impossible standards. The Us Weekly article mentions Kim Kardashian and Jennifer Lopez as examples of women whose ambitious pursuits are accepted, but this is factually incorrect. Both Kardashian and Lopez have faced intense public scrutiny over the years. Kim Kardashian has been continually criticized for her reality TV origins, accusations of cultural appropriation, and perceived superficiality. Jennifer Lopez, despite her extraordinary talent, has been a target of media scrutiny over her relationships, body image, and cultural identity. Their acceptance in the public eye was hard-earned and riddled with backlash. However, they were given the freedom to respond to critics and reshape their narratives — something Meghan has continuously been denied by the British tabloid media.

The article also frames Meghan’s various projects, including her Netflix show and podcast, as evidence of her insatiable desire for power and influence. This characterization is not only inaccurate but also deeply rooted in sexist and racial bias. Meghan’s ambition is no different from that of countless women who pursue entrepreneurial success. She is building a brand because the Royal Family provided her no alternative. Meghan’s entrepreneurial efforts, such as the As Ever brand and her upcoming podcast Confessions of a Female Founder, should be celebrated as evidence of her resilience, creativity, and ability to adapt to a challenging public environment.

The criticism against Meghan is particularly hypocritical when contrasted with the public persona of Kate Middleton. Social media commentary has pointed out how Kate, despite holding a degree in Art History and being a patron of the Victoria and Albert Museum, failed to demonstrate even basic knowledge about the Fabergé in London: Romance to Revolution exhibition. This incident, along with others, reflects Kate’s often superficial engagements, which are limited to photo-ops and ceremonial appearances. Unlike Meghan, Kate receives extensive financial support from the Royal Family, yet her lack of substance in public appearances is rarely scrutinized to the same degree. Meghan has driven sales for many businesses. Her sales impact from her show is well known.

Additionally, Kate’s recent fashion faux pas of wearing a Chanel bag to a Holocaust remembrance event shows a disturbing lack of awareness. Given Coco Chanel’s documented collaboration with the Nazis, the choice was not just a style error but a significant misstep in judgment. Had Meghan made the same mistake, it would have been turned into a scandal of epic proportions. Yet Kate’s fashion choices are mostly dismissed or defended.

The racism Meghan faces is also a significant factor in her criticism. As a woman of color, her actions are constantly overanalyzed and condemned in ways that white women are not subjected to. Despite being told she would receive no financial support from the Royal Family, Meghan is vilified for building a brand to support her family — a decision that would have been praised if made by anyone else. The fixation on her ambition and financial success reveals a deep-seated discomfort with a Black woman refusing to be quiet and grateful.

The notion that Meghan’s efforts are “scattergun” or unfocused is rooted in a desire to undermine her credibility. In reality, her approach to business is strategic and mission-driven. Meghan’s focus on philanthropy, wellness, and entrepreneurship is consistent with her interests even before meeting Prince Harry. The criticism against her is designed to paint her as unstable or inconsistent when her record clearly shows otherwise.

Ultimately, Meghan’s critics refuse to accept that she can be both ambitious and compassionate. She is not only redefining what it means to be a public figure but also challenging outdated perceptions of what a woman — particularly a woman of color — is allowed to do. The Us Weekly article, along with other pieces attacking Meghan, continues to perpetuate harmful stereotypes that have no basis in reality.

It is time to acknowledge the truth: Meghan is succeeding despite the continued attempts to discredit her. Rather than undermining her accomplishments, her critics are only proving her point about the structural biases she has faced from the beginning.