Meghan Markle’s recent Bloomberg interview, which has sparked quite a reaction online. During a casual chat with Emily Chang, Meghan reportedly introduced herself as “Meghan Sussex” instead of using her actual legal name. That raised eyebrows, because in reality, her legal name is Rachel Meghan Markle.
The article points out that Meghan has been inconsistent about how she wants to be addressed. At times, she pushes back when people call her “Meghan Markle,” insisting she’s “Sussex” now. But legally, titles don’t work like that. For example, “Sussex” is not a surname—it’s the name of a county in England, and a dukedom given to her and Prince Harry. Official documents, like passports, don’t recognize royal titles in the U.S., which means her American passport still says Markle. Source
Critics argue that Meghan’s approach to names and titles feels more like branding than reality. By insisting on “Meghan Sussex,” she seems to be clinging tightly to her royal connection, despite living outside of royal life. The article even suggests that without the title, she risks being seen as just “Rachel Meghan Markle, former actress from Suits,” which may explain why she’s so attached to the royal label.
The author also highlights Meghan’s contradictions: on one hand, she’s claimed not to fully understand titles as an American, but on the other hand, she has publicly spoken about titles when discussing her children. This back-and-forth has left some people questioning whether she’s being genuine or simply trying to control her image.
Overall, the controversy shows how something as small as a name can turn into a PR headache. Meghan’s choice of words in interviews gives her critics more fuel, and it brings up a bigger question: is she focused on building her own identity, or still relying on the royal brand to stay relevant?
