Why do the British press hate Meghan Markle? The relentlessly negative coverage she and Prince Harry have received over the years contrasts pretty starkly with the glowing praise heaped on Kate Middleton and Prince William. Why are there such double-standards at play?
Certainly, there have been “racial undertones” to the media coverage of Meghan Markle (as well as a tsunami of outright racist abuse on social media). However, is there more to it than that? When Prince Andrew’s relationship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein caused a scandal, he was quietly retired from his royal duties. It seems absurd that so much more attention is now being paid to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepping back from their own duties.
Critics of Meghan and Harry argue they don’t understand “how being a royal works”. They are supposed to keep their mouths shut, not talk about contentious political issues, smile for the cameras, and earn their taxpayer money. They’re certainly not supposed to sue the media for phone hacking or breach of privacy.
However, we shouldn’t forget the context here. Prince Harry’s mother was, in his eyes, hounded to her death by the British tabloids despite playing the game and giving them access. Meghan Markle has seen her relationship with her father raked over and exploited by the press in excruciating detail.
All of this raises a broader question: why does Britain still have a monarchy? How does being a royal “work” in the 21st century? Do monarchs rise above party politics, bringing political stability, respect for tradition and a sense of national pride? Or is an unelected hereditary monarchy an anachronism in a democratic society?
Why does Britain still have a monarchy? And why do the British press hate Meghan Markle? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!