Remember when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Oprah interview was about to air on a specific date, and the Windsors organized a full smear campaign to drop in the days just before the interview? It was as obvious as it was stupid. Well, something similar is happening right now, only now I think the Windsors were just better at hiding their fingerprints, or maybe the Windsors are not the main ones behind this current thing. Harry will be in London for his long-awaited trial against News Group Newspapers. So a very special Vanity Fair cover story was organized, full of new variations on all of those years-old Windsor/royalist media talking points. The timing suggests yet another major piece of advance work to distract from whatever will come out in the NGN trial, just as they hoped to kneecap Meghan before the Oprah interview aired. To make matters even more bizarre, The Times of London ran a story about the Vanity Fair fallout. The Times is owned by NGN/the Murdochs.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are understood to have dismissed allegations against them reported in a Vanity Fair article that sources close to the couple described as distressing. In a cover article published on Friday and titled “American Hustle”, the magazine set out what life was like “Inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Big Business Ambitions, 5 Years After Their Royal Exit”.
The claims included comments from their neighbours in Montecito, California, who said that the duke and duchess had ruined the quiet and neighbourliness of the area by “bringing more attention” to the wealthy town, despite it already being home to other celebrities. However, friends of the Sussexes point to recent comments made by another neighbour, the actress Sharon Stone, who said that Meghan and Harry waved to people in the street.
Stone told Hello! magazine: “They’re a part of our community, they’ve become a giving, caring, participating part of our community. They’re not here to be like ‘Would you like to kiss my butt?’”
The latest article by Vanity Fair has proved to be difficult reading for the Sussexes. It speculated on rumours about the couple’s marriage and whether Meghan had been approached to write a “post-divorce” book. It also adds, however, that divorce was not on the horizon, quoting sources saying that “their love is real” and “they are hot for each other”. Yet the jibes about their work may prove the hardest to shake off.
Sources close to the Sussexes said that previous employees had gone on record in the past to dispute the claims made in the article.
The Sussexes declined to be interviewed for the Vanity Fair article and did not respond to a request to comment when approached by The Times.
“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are understood to have dismissed allegations against them” and then use that “dismissal” as an excuse to reprint some of the accusations. As I said in my coverage of the VF story, I think some of the Spotify-specific stories were partially accurate, but it was a choice to put the Spotify issue under such a microscope. The angle of the VF piece was to lean into all of the tabloid reports/agendas of the British tabloids and newspapers, some of which are owned by the Murdochs. I also think that much like the smears advanced ahead of the Oprah interview, the point of the timing is to distract from the bigger thing (in this case, the NGN trial) but also put Harry and Meghan in a position where they can’t defend themselves immediately because they’re focused on the bigger thing. A “dismissal” today doesn’t mean they’ll always be so dismissive, at least that’s what I hope.
Photos courtesy of Instar, Avalon Red.
