Meghan Markle and Prince Harry quit royal duties in 2020, vowing financial independence and a more authentic life under their own control. Five years later, their luxury lifestyle faces fresh scrutiny. A recent magazine profile meant to showcase Meghan’s post-royal bliss has instead drawn accusations of hypocrisy. Critics highlight its staged setting and ironic use of royal titles, undermining claims of a simple, private existence.
A Controlled Glimpse into Post-Royal Life
Late in 2025, Meghan sat for a W Magazine profile in a lavish New York brownstone owned by billionaire cosmetics mogul Victoria Jackson. The shoot featured just one journalist, aiming for an intimate look at her life after stepping back from the monarchy. Reports from Sky News Australia and Town & Country describe the setting as opulent, with Meghan portrayed as thriving in quiet domesticity.
This piece served as Meghan’s bold boast of private fulfillment. She framed her days around family, personal projects, and selective pursuits, far from royal glare. Yet the controlled environment quickly sparked backlash. Detractors, including columnist Jane Moore, labeled it a contrived photo-op, clashing with the couple’s frequent demands for privacy.
The Billionaire Backdrop Fuels Hypocrisy Claims
Victoria Jackson’s properties have hosted key moments in Meghan’s rebranding. The brownstone shoot underscored this reliance, as primary reports confirm the location without detailing rental terms, claims of rent-free stays remain unverified speculation. Meghan has publicly called Jackson her “safe harbor,” crediting her for emotional and logistical support.
Such elite access props up their high-end world, but it invites questions. While Netflix deals faced reported restructuring in 2024-2025, exact financial cuts stay vague without official confirmation. Critics argue this setup contradicts independence narratives, especially when paired with curated media that flaunts wealth.
The Duchess Title Announcement Steals the Show
The profile’s most criticized moment came during the shoot. A house manager announced Meghan’s entrance as “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex,” witnessed only by the journalist. Sky News Australia and W Magazine accounts verify this detail, noting its formality in a billionaire’s private home.
Jane Moore pounced in her column, calling it “hilariously egotistical and breathtakingly hypocritical.” Harry and Meghan have long criticized royal protocols, yet here they leaned into the title for dramatic effect. Social media split sharply: supporters noted its legal status, while opponents decried it as performative privilege. This irony turned the “private life” boast into a lightning rod.
Broader Backlash Over Authenticity and Privilege
The incident exposes tensions in the couple’s post-royal arc. Their media ventures struggle amid public fatigue, with title use persisting despite family rifts. Reliance on figures like Jackson sustains glamour but amplifies perceptions of dependence, not self-reliance.
Public discourse now probes celebrity claims of normalcy. Luxurious, staged profiles jar against privacy pleas and independence goals. Transparent updates on partnerships could help, as could cause-focused work. For now, this backfire highlights the tightrope: actions must match words under relentless scrutiny.
Sources
Sky News Australia – Youtube
X – TOWN&COUNTRY
Facebook – Royal Family News
Facebook – W Magazine
Facebook – Duchess Meghan Markle
YouTube – Sky News Australia