No matter how much Meghan Markle seems to try her best or give back to the community, her actions often end up being scrutinized and twisted into a negative light. This raises an intriguing question: can Meghan ever truly do anything right in the public eye?
As someone who has been openly critical of Meghan Markle, I have to admit that this question deserves exploration. There’s an argument to be made that Meghan’s public image was irreparably damaged five years ago when she and Prince Harry made the decision to step back from royal duties—a move now widely referred to as "Megxit." That pivotal decision has not only clouded public perception of Meghan but has also cast a long shadow over the rest of her life.
It seems many people no longer trust her, a situation that is partly of her own making. Nevertheless, the relentless criticism Meghan faces online is noteworthy. Surprisingly, even Harry doesn’t attract as much attention as Meghan, with most of the ire directed squarely at her.
If Meghan had made different decisions in the past, perhaps she would be viewed as a more respected figure today. However, she now finds herself as a polarizing figure—some might even say the "bane of existence" for much of the public, both in the United States and abroad.
This situation serves as a cautionary tale: our actions and decisions have lasting consequences. Regardless of one’s intentions, if the public perceives those actions negatively, it becomes the individual's responsibility to address and amend the situation.
Recently, Meghan and Harry’s public appearances have drawn significant backlash. One such event involved their visit to disaster-stricken areas in Los Angeles. While it’s entirely possible that their intentions were genuine and altruistic, certain choices they made—such as removing their masks in full view of a news crew—gave the impression of a publicity stunt.
This perception was reinforced by comments from Justine Bateman, who described Meghan and Harry as "disaster tourists." Bateman, who is not typically involved in royal commentary, criticized the couple’s behavior, comparing them to “ambulance chasers” and labeling their actions as a “repulsive photo op.”
Part of the issue lies in Meghan’s Hollywood background. Having transitioned from an actress to a member of the royal family, and then back to a Hollywood-adjacent life, she struggles to escape the perception that her actions are driven by self-interest. By leaving the royal family to return to a life closer to her previous career, Meghan reinforced the idea that she prioritizes Hollywood-style image-building over royal duty.
This stigma is further amplified by the public's existing skepticism toward celebrities. Many see Hollywood figures as being primarily motivated by fame and wealth, and Meghan’s actions often play into that narrative, whether intentionally or not.
Criticism of Meghan and Harry’s recent actions has been widespread. An article in Spiked noted that Los Angeles—already grappling with devastating wildfires—did not need the added spectacle of Meghan and Harry’s visit. The article sarcastically lamented the plight of those who lost their homes only to find themselves in the background of a royal photo-op.
Instead of visiting disaster zones, many argue the couple could have quietly donated and stayed home. The perception that they used a tragedy for personal gain only reinforces the public’s negative opinion of them.
Ultimately, Meghan Markle’s experience highlights the importance of aligning actions with public expectations. Whether fair or not, public figures like Meghan and Harry are held to exceptionally high standards. Missteps—perceived or real—can have long-lasting effects on their reputations.
Perhaps the lesson for Meghan, and for all of us, is that good intentions alone are not always enough. Public figures must be acutely aware of how their actions are perceived and be willing to adjust course when necessary.
Let’s dive into some of the latest reactions surrounding Meghan Markle and Prince Harry. Comedian Andrew Lawrence took to social media, jokingly stating, "If my house was on fire and this woman turned up, I'd run back inside and lock the door." While meant to be humorous, it reflects the widespread frustration many feel about Meghan and Harry’s public actions.
Additionally, The Babylon Bee had a satirical take on the situation, with a headline suggesting that Meghan Markle proudly announced that Harry would be transitioning to "Princess Harriet." It’s a playful jab at Harry’s apparent lack of autonomy in his relationship with Meghan, a sentiment many share. This comedic angle highlights how the couple’s actions are often ridiculed, which only adds to their growing list of detractors.
As if their 2025 couldn’t get any worse, Meghan and Harry found themselves criticized yet again, this time for a controversial photo op during the wildfires in Los Angeles. The Toronto Sun called it a "repulsive photo op," and others echoed the sentiment. Media personality Megyn Kelly also weighed in, calling their actions "absolutely disgusting."
In her rant, Kelly described the couple as "absolute cretans," accusing them of inserting themselves into the devastation for no other reason than to get their faces back on camera. According to Kelly, the couple’s actions were designed to improve their image, with Meghan and Harry seemingly thinking that they were needed in Los Angeles when, in reality, they were simply using the disaster for publicity.
The irony of it all, according to Kelly, is that while Harry and Meghan were once royal family members expected to appear during national tragedies, they no longer hold that title. In America, Kelly pointed out, they are not viewed as "royalty," and many Americans are growing tired of their antics.
The couple’s decision to stage a photo op at the wildfires—removing their masks for the cameras—seemed like an obvious publicity stunt. They could have easily contributed behind the scenes, making donations and offering help without drawing attention to themselves. Instead, they chose to make sure they were seen by the media. This level of self-promotion is hard to ignore, and many people are calling them out for it.
To make matters worse, Harry and Meghan’s public displays are seen as insulting by many. As one observer put it, the people of Los Angeles have suffered enough, and they don’t need the Duchess of "Scamalot" flaunting expensive jewelry in front of the cameras while pretending to empathize with disaster victims.
It’s not that celebrities can’t help during tragedies, but it’s the way they do it that matters. Take Elon Musk, for instance. Musk has been donating Cybertrucks, Teslas, and other resources to disaster recovery efforts. Unlike Meghan and Harry, Musk doesn’t need to stage a photo op to draw attention to his donations. His companies have the infrastructure to make a real impact on the ground, and that’s why he’s respected for it.
Meghan and Harry, on the other hand, have yet to prove their ability to make a meaningful difference beyond media attention. They struggle to even produce a decent documentary, let alone offer anything on the scale of a multi-billion-dollar corporation.
The backlash against Meghan and Harry has reached a fever pitch, with many calling them "disaster tourists" for their recent actions. It’s clear they are upset by this labeling, with sources close to the couple stating that they find it offensive for anyone to think their visit was merely a photo opportunity.
Despite these claims, Meghan and Harry are not immune to the criticism. While Meghan was born and raised in Los Angeles, she doesn’t currently live there, and the distance between her home and the disaster area makes their public display even more questionable.
In the end, it’s hard to escape the fact that their actions often seem self-serving, and people are growing increasingly weary of it.
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have certainly been in the spotlight recently, and not always in a positive way. The couple has faced significant backlash for their actions surrounding the recent wildfires in California. While Meghan insists that she’s deeply affected by the destruction, there’s growing criticism that their visit was little more than a publicity stunt.
Meghan has been quick to defend herself, stating that she and Harry are not just tourists in this situation. According to her, their hearts are "completely broken" by the devastation caused by the fires, and they have invested considerable time and resources into helping. They’ve donated essential supplies, volunteered their time, and offered support. However, there’s a major issue with these claims: much of their supposed "volunteering" occurred only after the media began covering their involvement. It’s hard to believe that they could have dedicated "countless hours" when their visit took place days after the event had already unfolded.
This pattern of exaggerating their efforts has become a common criticism of Meghan. Whether it’s her public statements or the way she gives speeches, her tendency to embellish and inflate details often leads people to question the credibility of her actions. It’s a strategy that may have worked at first, but it’s starting to backfire.
In response to the criticism, Meghan explained in an interview with People magazine that delaying the release of her show, With Love Meghan, was an obvious decision. She couldn’t imagine launching a show centered on joy and hosting while so many people in her home state of California had lost their homes. Yet, this justification doesn’t seem to sit well with many people. Why focus solely on California when there are disasters happening elsewhere? After all, people in North Carolina and other states are also struggling, but we don’t see Meghan speaking out for them.
It seems that by postponing her show, Meghan is trying to distance herself from the criticism of her actions. But it’s hard to avoid the perception that she’s using the wildfires as a way to boost her own image. It feels like she’s trying to gain sympathy while not truly engaging with the larger issues at play.
Another issue that’s come up is the brief duration of Meghan and Harry’s visit. Contrary to reports that their visit lasted only 17 minutes, Meghan’s team claimed that they spent an entire day volunteering in Pasadena. They served meals with World Central Kitchen, helped distribute supplies, and met with families impacted by the fires. While this sounds commendable, it still feels like their visit was heavily choreographed for media attention, particularly when their visit was announced to the press beforehand.
There’s also something about their actions that rubs people the wrong way. Even when they are trying to do something good, their timing and motivations seem to be off. Many feel that they are more concerned with controlling their public image than with actually helping.
The reality is that Harry and Meghan have created a public image for themselves that’s difficult to change. Their attempt to shape how people perceive them has failed in some key ways. The couple wants to be seen as caring and philanthropic, but when the public perception doesn’t align with that, it’s a clear indication that something is wrong with their communication strategy.
Meghan’s relationship with the public has always been rocky, and it only worsened after Megxit. Her decision to step away from royal duties was a turning point, and ever since, she has struggled to maintain a positive image. Unfortunately for her, it’s hard to recover from that, especially when decisions like these continue to damage her reputation.
Tessa Dunlop, a commentator, sums up the situation perfectly: "Megan has made a habit of terrible timing at the best and worst of times." Her visit to the wildfire-affected areas has been labeled as a "disaster tourist" move, and many believe she only made the trip for the photo ops. The media, including stars like Justine Bateman, have been quick to call out the couple’s actions as distasteful, accusing them of taking advantage of the tragedy for personal gain.
Despite Meghan growing up in California, the visit was widely seen as inauthentic, especially given her history of questionable decisions and lack of a strong connection to the community she was trying to help. She has cultivated a reputation for being somewhat detached from reality, and her actions here have only reinforced that.
Ultimately, the way Meghan and Harry present themselves to the world isn’t resonating with the public. They are frequently seen as self-serving, and their attempts to change that narrative are falling short. Whether it’s through their wildfires visit or the launch of Meghan’s show, their efforts seem to come across as poorly timed and driven more by image than by genuine concern for others.
While some may argue that they’re simply trying to do good in a difficult situation, it’s hard to ignore the overwhelming criticism they continue to face. It’s clear that, for Harry and Meghan, their public relations strategy needs a serious overhaul if they ever hope to regain the trust of the public.
Meghan Markle’s attempts to keep herself in the spotlight seem to always be met with controversy. Take the super-stylized, retro trailer for The American Riviera Orchard brand, which, frankly, we're still not sure will even exist. This brand launch, which she unveiled at Eclipse, was just one example of Meghan's efforts to stay relevant — even when it feels like she’s missing the mark.
Then there’s the fiasco with last year’s Princess Diana Legacy Awards, where Harry and Meghan tried to honor the memory of Harry’s late mother. Personally, I’m not entirely sold on that gesture. It felt like Meghan was trying to make her own headlines while the media was focused on Kate’s trending presence. Meghan seemed desperate to show up everywhere, but it didn’t quite have the same impact. Meanwhile, the Princess of Wales made her own impressive appearance at Tripping the Color, even while battling cancer, which overshadowed Meghan’s efforts.
And once again, it comes down to timing. Meghan's actions always seem to align with major events that would naturally steal the spotlight. Whether it’s showcasing her Riviera dog biscuits or jam, or trying to get attention when Kate is already making headlines, it often feels like Meghan is doing everything she can to overshadow her sister-in-law. Eventually, people start to notice when someone is playing the game a little too obviously.
One of Meghan's critical flaws seems to be her belief that people don’t notice these patterns. She treats the public like we don’t remember what’s happened in the past, but we do. We see the repetition, the timing, the competition. If you keep pushing for the spotlight in ways that feel disingenuous, it’s bound to backfire. The public isn’t foolish, and treating us as though we are only diminishes her credibility.
Now, for those less tuned into the minutiae of royal life, this might sound like nitpicking. It could seem like we’re just criticizing Meghan for the sake of it, but it’s deeper than that. The truth lies somewhere in between. Meghan’s efforts to combine self-promotion with charity work can be seen as harmless or even beneficial. Her visit to the Los Angeles areas of Altadena and Pasadena on January 10th, for instance, likely pleased some residents. The couple's walkabout was reminiscent of the Queen and Prince William’s visit to the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster, where their appearance made a huge positive impact. It was a timely appearance that left a lasting impression, upstaging then-Prime Minister Theresa May.
However, there’s an important distinction to make here. The Queen and Prince William were full-time working royals, deeply involved in their roles and responsibilities. Their visit wasn’t about self-promotion or personal gain; it was part of their duty. This is where Meghan and Harry’s efforts often miss the mark. Unlike the Queen or William, they’ve taken themselves out of the royal framework, which leaves their actions open to more scrutiny.
At the end of the day, it’s all about timing and intentions. If Meghan and Harry want to be seen as genuine and charitable, they need to be careful about how they present themselves. People will notice if it looks like they’re always in the public eye for the wrong reasons.
For centuries, royalty has been associated with public service. Royals routinely engage in diplomatic handshakes, public appearances, and acts of charity, all while reinforcing the power and prestige of the monarchy. Whether in Spain, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, or the Netherlands, royal families all follow a similar pattern of service to the state. This is the essence of the monarchy—standing as a figurehead while keeping any personal interests in check for the greater good.
But when Harry and Meghan chose to step away from their royal duties in 2020, they broke this long-established tradition. Harry was adamant that their commitment to service wouldn’t end just because they were leaving the royal family. He insisted that they could still lead lives of service without relying on royal funding. However, their path forward, as we've seen, involved building a lifestyle centered on celebrity, residing in Montecito, California, and funding their new life through business ventures.
The Sussexes' approach includes both a philanthropic image through their Archewell Foundation and personal ventures, like their celebrity-driven tours and media deals. Recently, they've been encouraging others to open their homes and help during crises, such as the fire-stricken districts of Los Angeles. Yet, some critics view these pleas as unnecessary, as if the people of California don't already know about such disasters. It feels like Meghan is pointing out the obvious, and it raises doubts about her true intentions.
This hybrid identity—part philanthropist, part celebrity—often trips up Meghan's efforts at genuine charity. She first made a name for herself as an actress, working her way up in Hollywood. Yet now, her image has expanded into something grander: a philanthropic influencer, a “queen” of causes. Unfortunately, this doesn't quite resonate with the public. It seems disingenuous to promote a life of service when the foundation of that life was built on personal gain. You can’t serve both money and altruism without coming off as a fraud. They simply don’t mix—like oil and water.
Harry, in contrast, might get away with this shift in lifestyle, especially considering his family connections and the historical precedent of figures like the Duke of Windsor, who gave up the throne but was still considered a prince. Meghan's situation is trickier. She married into royalty but rejected the life and duties that came with it. She has maintained her Duchess title but chooses to pursue a life centered on money, sometimes cloaking it in philanthropy. This lack of alignment raises suspicions that their charitable efforts may be more about building their brand than making a genuine impact.
No matter how much they claim to be driven by charitable goals, there’s always the underlying question: is it really about helping others, or is it about building the Sussex brand? Meghan, in particular, often comes across as someone who left a life of service to pursue personal ambition. Even more so than Harry, it seems that Meghan wanted the California lifestyle and all the benefits it brought. It’s hard to separate her actions from the belief that she’s seeking fame, influence, and financial gain.
That’s where Meghan’s biggest challenge lies: she has built a reputation of putting her own desires first. Whether or not she intended it, people will always wonder if her actions have a hidden agenda, be it for PR, political influence, or other connections. This is a problem of her own making. The decision to step away from the royal family—what some have dubbed "Megxit"—was hers. And each subsequent step has reinforced the public's worst assumptions about what she and Harry are really after.
Even when they do something that seems genuinely charitable, there’s always a lingering doubt. They left a life that was centered on true service, only to embrace a lifestyle driven by material gain. It’s hard for people to take their charitable efforts seriously when the foundation of their current life was built on leaving the monarchy for personal benefit. You can’t serve both greed and charity at the same time—it’s just not possible.
Meghan would likely have a better public image if she simply acknowledged that she’s in it for the money. People would respect her honesty more than the current facade she’s trying to maintain. But she keeps trying to play the role of a deep, intellectual philanthropist, and it's backfiring. This constant push for a perfect image is damaging her brand and reputation. If she were more open about her intentions, she might find a way to salvage some of her public standing. But as it stands, Meghan’s decisions have set her on a path where she can never fully regain the trust of the public.
“Megxit” will follow her for the rest of her life. People will always wonder if she’s acting in good faith or if there’s some hidden motive. Even when they try to do something for others, it’s hard to believe them because of their past actions. Every time they speak out, whether on Oprah or through Netflix documentaries, they seem to tarnish their reputations further. The choices they made, and the way they’ve handled their exit from the royal family, have left them in a tough spot.
Meanwhile, Catherine, the Princess of Wales, continues to earn respect and admiration, not because she seeks it, but because of her genuine commitment to others. She doesn’t seek to elevate herself; she uplifts others. She is dedicated to her family, to the monarchy, and to the people she serves. And while she’s faced her own challenges, including a recent cancer diagnosis, she continues to show grace and humility in everything she does. In contrast, Meghan's public image, built on pride and personal gain, will always be overshadowed by the perception of selfishness.
Meghan Markle has made her own bed, and now she has to lie in it. Whether she can recover from this or not depends on the decisions she makes moving forward. But at this point, it's hard to see how she can ever fully regain the public's trust. Perhaps, the best option would be for Meghan to embrace a more honest approach. But until she does, the shadow of "Megxit" will continue to loom over her, and her brand will likely never achieve the success she envisions.
