Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have made their next move as they launched a brand new site while keeping with their Sussex brand.
The couple have ditched the website they previously used as part of the working royal family and got to work on a new set-up that’s a lot more personalised and announces they are “shaping the future”.
Their Sussex.com page claims the duo are “shaping the future through business and philanthropy” and says they are doing so through their Archewell Foundation and Archewell Productions, as well as their patronages, ventures and organisations they both support as a pair and individually.
It reads: “The Duke and Duchess are committed to their mission: Show Up, Do Good. They hold the value that charitable work should not simply be ‘a handout, but rather a hand held’. The couple also created Archewell Productions to produce content programming that informs, elevates and inspires.”
The promo team does a great job for Harry and Meghan but, frankly, the claims are ridiculously OTT coming from a couple nowhere near the top of the “influential” list who still depend on their “titles” for their “celebrity”.
Looking at this from the American perspective, before the royal entered her life, Meghan was doing just fine with her adult life. Suits was a hit in the US, and Meghan and other costars were shaping their own careers.
She was also engaging in a few non-profit organizations. Not to mention she was stylish, attractive, bright, and engaging all on her own.
I am almost sorry she and Harry got together, although I like Harry. She would have done well without any influential royalty…in any case, he’s lost the shiny title, and they are both enjoying a happy, more mentally happy adult life in the US together with their children…who, by the way ,prince and princess titles don’t really carry much weight here in the US.
The messages are that for a woman you must be beautiful to be successful. For a man you mst be rich or famous in some way to be successful. The other 99.999% are failures. More things change more they stay the same.
I was about to say the same thing - as you say Meghan was well known before she met Harry. She doesn’t need him to be a celebrity.
He doesn’t need her because of the way the British fawn over their royalty, at least he isn’t the Duke of Windsor, even though he is as unpopular just being royal is enough to keep their tabloids and commentators happy to report about his goings on (as this forum demonstrates).
There is absolutely no reason for these non-working royals to carry on using their titles – not least with an entire website dedicated to telling the world that they are much, much more than mere royalty.
“Humanitarian, military veteran, mental health advocate and environmental campaigner,” Harry, we are told, has “dedicated his adult life to advancing causes that he is passionate about and that advance permanent change for people and places”.
Meghan, meanwhile, is a “feminist and champion of human rights and gender equity” with a “lifelong advocacy for women and girls”. Wow. So while Harry only started his philanthropy in adulthood, Meghan was doing it as a baby. Impressive.
She is also apparently a “major advocate” for “family care”, which may come as a surprise to her estranged father and the rest of the Markle family she doesn’t appear to have cared much about in years.
Meghan’s description as “one of the most influential women in the world” is rather more lofty. The evidence for this claim appears to be that the author of the children’s picture book, The Bench, featured in Time magazine’s most influential people, the Financial Times’s 25 most influential women, Variety Power of Women, and British Vogue’s Vogue 25 – although not, curiously, the final issue by outgoing editor Edward Enninful, published last week, featuring 40 female “legends”. Ouch.
The summary goes to great lengths (588 words to Harry’s 340) to remind everyone that she is a great deal more than just his wife.
Meghan’s podcast Archetypes is mentioned in its capacity as being Number One in 47 countries – not as a one-hit wonder that was axed after one season. Unsurprisingly, the word “grifter”, which was used to describe the pair by Spotify mogul Bill Simmons, doesn’t feature on the website at all.
For most of the British press H&M are the cash cows that keep them in print. If they can’t find anything to write, they create an issue. The British public regularly dine on the fodder directed at the family, with many simply jumping in the band wagon of bashing the Sussex’s. Glad they left. Hope they get their monies worth out of the title.