Prince Harry, Meghan Markle's actions 'defy' their own narrative

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are accused of undermining their own credibility with their latest actions, despite recent setbacks in the UK.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are allegedly contradicting their own narrative by thrusting themselves back into the spotlight with their UK move — a decision that is once again attracting intense media attention.

Despite their constant pleas for privacy, the Sussexes stand accused of fueling the very "publicity machine" they claim to despise.

On the other hand, royal experts argue that as global public figures, a normal private life is now simply impossible for them.

"Members of the public know who they are. The idea that they can live a normal, ‘private’ life is sadly not realistic," a source added.

Kinsey Schofield claimed that the "private citizen" guidance just means that they do not represent the king.

"Being a private citizen does not mean you're anonymous. It simply means you don't represent the king. The jobs you accept and the responsibilities you take, you take them on as yourself, not the crown," Schofield began.

The expert went on to explain, "In my opinion, you can't repeatedly feed the publicity machine and then complain about a lack of privacy."

Schofield drew a comparison between Princess Anne's children – Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips. 

The Princess Royal is the late Queen's only daughter and the sister of King Charles. She chose not to give her two kids royal titles at birth.

"They're recognizable, have commercial interests, attend major royal family events, but they do not represent the monarch, yet they have both successfully built lives outside of the working institution," she added.

Urging the Sussexes to follow in their footsteps, Schofield said: "Harry and Meghan could pursue a quieter life, a life like Zara and Peter.

"They choose not to. In my opinion, you can't repeatedly feed the publicity machine and then complain about a lack of privacy."

Schofield also supported the British monarch's stance on the California-based couple, arguing that the King’s clarification was necessary as Harry and Markle’s public profile has become increasingly intertwined with the controversies surrounding them.

Schofield continued, "And after years of feuds, lawsuits and relationships that deteriorate, I think it's fair to ask how much of the Sussex's enormous public profile today is driven by admiration and how much is driven by controversy, which is precisely why the king has every reason to make their status crystal clear."

Ian Pelham Turner, royal broadcaster, disagrees with Charles's stance on labeling his son and his wife as private citizens.

"Harry is the son of a king. He has prominence in Britain. Thus, whether William likes it or not the king should decide not to weakly disenfranchise his second son," Turner said.

The expert shared his opinion on the matter, saying: "He is a billionaire with vast fortunes. Pay for his son’s full security rather than looking like an Ebenezer Scrooge after."