When Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dramatically stepped down as working royals in 2020, they cited one overwhelming reason for their departure: a desperate need for privacy.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex expressed frustration at intense public scrutiny and claimed the constant barrage of criticism was detrimental to their mental health and wellbeing. Yet in the years following their royal exit, the couple’s actions have raised eyebrows as they appeared far less concerned about privacy than originally claimed.
Their contradictory behaviour reached peak satire when American animated series South Park brutally parodied the couple in February 2023, portraying them as attention-seeking celebrities embarking on a “Worldwide Privacy Tour” whilst holding signs reading “We want our privacy!” and “Stop looking at us!”
The Oprah Interview That Changed Everything
Nowhere was the privacy contradiction more evident than during Harry and Meghan’s explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021. The couple made serious allegations against the Royal Family, including claims that an unnamed member had speculated about their son Archie’s skin colour in what they described as a racist manner.
The interview saw Meghan discuss her mental health struggles openly whilst living as a working royal. She spoke about feeling trapped and unsupported by the institution, painting a picture of isolation within palace walls.
Royal author Tom Quinn, who has written extensively about the monarchy, attempts to explain this paradox in his analysis. “If Meghan really wanted to be a private person, all she needed to do was go back to America and keep quiet – but what Meghan wants is privacy combined with world fame,” he claims.
South Park’s Savage Satire Strikes a Nerve
The contradictions reached mainstream consciousness when South Park dedicated an entire episode to mocking the couple’s perceived hypocrisy. The Worldwide Privacy Tour” aired on 15 February 2023, featuring the fictional “Prince of Canada” and his wife seeking privacy whilst simultaneously promoting a book called “Waaagh” – a clear parody of Harry’s memoir “Spare.
The episode showed the cartoon couple appearing on “Good Morning Canada” holding protest signs whilst chanting “We want privacy!” In one particularly cutting scene, a character remarks: “Some people might say that your Instagram-loving bitch wife actually doesn’t want her privacy.”
Reports later emerged that Meghan was “upset and overwhelmed” by the episode, though a spokesperson for the couple dismissed claims they planned to sue as “frankly nonsense” and “totally baseless, boring reports.
Expert Analysis of the Privacy Paradox
Quinn exposes what he sees as a fundamental flaw in Meghan’s approach, particularly regarding her Oprah interview where she was encouraged to speak “her truth.” He warns: “Well, if we all have our own versions of the truth then there is no truth. Speaking ‘my truth’ is just a way of ennobling what is after all just one person’s opinion.”
The royal author draws uncomfortable parallels with past royal dramas, noting: “Their decisions to use the media to air their complaints about the family has frightening echoes of Charles and Diana turning to television to wash their dirty linen in public.”
However, Quinn acknowledges that “Meghan and Harry have gone much further because they exposed themselves to forensic examination.”
A More Sympathetic View
Despite his criticism, Quinn attempts to paint a more nuanced picture of the Duchess, describing her as “both sinned against and sinning.” He acknowledges: “It is true that she genuinely wants to do good in the world even if the British find her ‘Californian therapy speak’ embarrassing and insincere.”
He adds: “But it is also true that Meghan is a powerful personality determined to get her way. To use Harry’s own phrase, ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.’ And Harry should know.”
Quinn suggests that “Meghan does seem to decide to a larger extent what she and her husband do and where they go. She does believe that the Royal Family did not give her what she needed, and that the family should have listened to her and changed to suit her.”
The Financial Motivation Behind ‘Megxit’
Royal author Valentine Low offers another perspective in his book “Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown,” suggesting financial motivations played a crucial role in the couple’s departure. Low claims it was Meghan’s “yearning to monetise her royal title” that ultimately led to their complete withdrawal from royal duties.
During negotiations about finding a middle ground, various scenarios were explored, from “having a month or a year to do their own thing” to “spending most of their time privately but doing a select number of royal activities.”
The crucial caveat was that continuing any royal duties would mean adhering to “normal rules about royal behaviour,” which crucially meant they could not “act or take decisions in order to gain financially.”
Low writes: “Some suspected that in the end she wanted to make money. And the only way she was going to do that was by leaving her royal life behind and going back to America.”
Media Ventures Continue to Mount
Since stepping down as working royals, the couple have embarked on numerous media projects that seem to contradict their stated desire for privacy. These include their Netflix documentary series “Harry & Meghan,” Harry’s tell-all memoir “Spare,” and Meghan’s upcoming lifestyle series “With Love, Meghan.
The couple signed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify worth millions, though their Spotify partnership ended after producing just one podcast series. Each new project brings fresh scrutiny and reinforces the perception of hypocrisy highlighted by South Park.
Royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith told Newsweek that Harry and Meghan are “constantly violating their own privacy” with their various interviews and projects. She noted the irony of their “obsession for privacy” whilst simultaneously publicising their experiences.
The Royal Family’s Response
Throughout the various revelations and accusations, the Royal Family has maintained its traditional “never complain, never explain” approach. Queen Elizabeth II issued a rare statement after the Oprah interview, diplomatically noting that whilst “recollections may vary,” Harry and Meghan would always remain “much loved family members.
Prince William has largely ignored questions about his brother’s claims during royal engagements, a strategy Bedell Smith describes as wise. “I would be stunned if William were to write any kind of a book that would, for example, try to counter what Harry has written and said,” she observed.
The Lasting Impact
The privacy paradox has fundamentally damaged Harry and Meghan’s credibility in both Britain and America. South Park’s mockery demonstrated that even in their adopted homeland, the contradiction between seeking privacy whilst courting publicity has not gone unnoticed.
Quinn’s analysis suggests this was perhaps inevitable given Meghan’s background and ambitions. He claims she viewed herself as a “moderniser by nature” and “someone who wanted to get things done and change the status quo,” which clashed with centuries-old royal protocols.
The author concludes that Meghan “felt constrained by protocol” and wasn’t accustomed to the restrictions of royal life. This fundamental incompatibility between her desires for both privacy and fame, combined with financial independence, created an impossible situation.
As Meghan prepares to launch her new Netflix series focusing on lifestyle content, the privacy debate shows no signs of abating. Each new venture reinforces the perception that privacy was never truly the goal, but rather freedom from royal constraints whilst maintaining the lucrative Sussex brand.
The couple’s journey from seeking privacy to becoming some of the world’s most visible celebrities serves as a cautionary tale about the impossibility of having one’s cake and eating it too – even for a prince and his Hollywood princess.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
Image Credit (Shortened):
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on Christmas Day 2017 (going to church at Sandringham) – by Mark Jones, licensed under CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
