Meghan Markle’s problem was her ‘naivety about the Royal Family’ – ‘Could have been Diana’

Meghan Markle would 'lose title' in Presidency run says expert

When you subscribe we will use the information you provide to send you these newsletters.Sometimes they’ll include recommendations for other related newsletters or services we offer.Our Privacy Notice explains more about how we use your data, and your rights.You can unsubscribe at any time.

Meghan Markle opened up what it was like joining the Royal Family in her recent sit down chat with Oprah, where the Duchess revealed she was unaware she had to curtesy to the Queen and had to hastily learn the national anthem. As a result, a US journalist has criticised Meghan for assuming royal life would echo celebrity culture.

Writing an opinion piece for US magazine The Atlantic, Caitlin Flanagan said: “Part of Meghan’s problem was her naivety about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture.”

When chatting to Oprah, Meghan said she had been completely unaware she would have to curtsy when meeting the Queen.

Ahead of their first meeting, the Duchess revealed Harry asked her: “Do you know how to curtsy?”

Recalling this, Meghan said: “I thought genuinely that was what happens outside I thought that was part of the fanfare.

“I didn’t think that was what happens inside. And I said, ‘But it’s you’re grandmother,’ and he said, ‘It’s the Queen.'”

She added: “That was really the first moment that the penny dropped.”

Meghan later told Oprah, “I hadn’t known a lot about the family”, and said she had to quickly learn the lyrics to ‘God Save the Queen’.

During her opinion piece, Ms Flanagan also attacked Meghan’s understanding of the Royal Family’s relationship with the press.

The Duchess said she was upset when the palace refused to give a public statement rectifying claims she had made Kate cry ahead of her wedding.

JUST IN: Meghan and Harry make calculated move to breach royal confidentiality

Ms Flanagan said: “Meghan suggested during the two-hour interview that one of the chief acts of cruelty perpetrated against the couple had been the palace’s refusal to ‘protect’ them from the lies of the press.

“It did not seem to occur to her that the palace has no ability to protect its members from the tabloids and that a story as inconsequential as tears shed over a flower girl’s dress was best starved of oxygen, not inflamed by correction.”

Ms Flanagan also claimed Meghan could have followed in the footsteps of Princess Diana to effect real change.

She said: “She [Meghan] could have been Diana talking about leading from the heart, about the way that unchecked suffering can hollow you out.”

DON’T MISS:
Meghan savaged for ‘playing race card’ – ‘Despicable’ [DETAILS]
Royal Family LIVE: Queen’s ‘anger’ exposed – dig spotted in statement [BLOG]
Prince Harry ‘was quite right’ with ‘trapped’ jab at royals [INSIGHT]

During the Sussexes’ sit down interview with Oprah, Harry said the tabloid press was a “large part” of the reason the couple decided to leave the UK.

He said: “The UK is not bigoted, the UK press is bigoted, specifically the tabloids.”

He added: “But unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society.”

The UK’s Society of Editors immediately issued a rebuttal to the couple’s claim and denied the British press was racist or bigoted.

It said: “The UK media is not bigoted and will not be swayed from its vital role holding the rich and powerful to account following the attack on the press by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”

But the statement prompted a backlash, from members of the public and prominent British journalists.

It led to Ian Murray stepping down as executive director of the industry body to allow it to “rebuild its reputation”.

The Society of Editors later released a further statement saying the initial comments “did not reflect what we all know: that there is a lot of work to be done in the media to improve diversity and inclusion”.

Source: Read Full Article