Meghan Markle isn’t the first high-profile woman to be criticized for being “too much” — too visible, too ambitious, too everything. But the latest round of media attacks, led by former Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown, have taken a particularly bitter turn. Brown called Markle “enormously shallow,” “unadvisable,” and accused her of trying to be an “instant Michelle Obama” without the same foundational experience. Her offense? Launching multiple ventures — a podcast, a lifestyle brand, and a Netflix series — in the same quarter.

The charge of being “shallow” is a gendered insult. It rarely sticks to men in media or business who experiment with different formats. Elon Musk launches everything from social networks to brain chips. Richard Branson sells soda, runs airlines, and once tried to go to space in a tuxedo. But no one accuses them of lacking confidence or self-knowledge. Instead, they’re called “visionaries.”

In contrast, Meghan’s ventures — however successful or flawed — are framed as proof of a chaotic ego or fragile identity. She is simultaneously accused of craving attention and being undeserving of it. Of course, the same people calling her a narcissist also consume her every move. That contradiction lies at the heart of media misogyny.

Tina Brown’s comments, aired during her appearance on the Mixed Signals for Semafor Media podcast, paint Meghan as a directionless entrepreneur desperate to mimic Beyoncé or Michelle Obama. But it’s a false equivalency. Meghan isn’t trying to be anyone else — she’s trying to forge her own lane after walking away from the most rigid institution in Britain. She’s not trying to be the First Lady. She already was a duchess.

Brown suggests Meghan suffers from ADD, constantly pivoting between projects. But Brown’s complaint isn’t really about focus. It’s about permission. Meghan isn’t playing by establishment rules: stay in your lane, wait your turn, earn approval before trying something new. Instead, she’s building her own platforms, her own media universe, and her own revenue stream — and that deeply unsettles traditional power brokers.

Take her new podcast Confessions of a Female Founder. Critics call it “vapid,” “sycophantic,” and “stomach-turning.” But these same outlets rarely extend the same venom to male-led business podcasts filled with platitudes and buzzwords. And when Meghan’s strawberry jam from her As Ever brand sells out, detractors say, “Let’s see the numbers.” In other words, her success must be proven over and over again — and still won’t be accepted.

Perhaps the most revealing part of Brown’s remarks is her admission that Meghan isn’t “bad at anything she does” — a throwaway line meant to sound generous. But it’s more like a begrudging truth. Meghan isn’t bad at what she does. Her Archetypes podcast ranked at the top of Spotify’s charts. Her Netflix documentary broke viewing records. Her fashion choices drive consumer purchases. Her brand has reach. And she’s done all this without the benefit of institutional loyalty or British media goodwill.

The criticisms lobbed at Meghan would be laughable if they weren’t so predictable. She’s slammed for being too polished, then too performative. For being too emotional, then too cold. For being too visible, then too reclusive. For “monetizing the monarchy” — a charge that ignores the entire royal family’s history of doing exactly that, from royal weddings to tourism merch. It’s not the action that’s the issue — it’s the actor.

Let’s also not forget the undertone of racial resentment pulsing through these critiques. When Brown questions whether Meghan has the “background” to stand beside women like Obama, it rings as coded language. Michelle Obama herself has spoken of the scrutiny and disbelief she faced as a Black woman with top-tier credentials. That same suspicion now haunts Meghan — not because she lacks experience, but because she disrupts expectations of how a woman of color should behave in elite spaces.

The reality is that Meghan Markle’s “crime” is being ambitious and unapologetic about it. She’s navigating a brutal media landscape while raising two children, experimenting with different forms of storytelling, and trying — perhaps imperfectly — to carve out joy on her own terms. That’s not shallow. That’s human. The comments on the article on NY Post called her criticism, Trash.