The public’s fascination with Diana, Princess of Wales, has a striking parallel to the complex and often negative perception of the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle. While Diana garnered unwavering adulation that bordered on hysteria, Meghan’s experience has been marked by a contrasting shadow of criticism and disapproval.
For many years, Diana was celebrated in a manner that captivated the public’s imagination. Clive James famously described his infatuation with her, likening her presence to that of a “burning angel,” illuminating the intensity of public sentiment. In stark contrast, Meghan’s public image is viewed as a darker counterpart to the brightness associated with Diana.
In 2019 alone, during what many considered the initial phase of Meghan’s new life, she was mentioned in negative news articles 21,100 times across various media outlets, according to Brandwatch, a data analysis firm. This figure indicates that Meghan faced approximately five times more negative press than Catherine, Princess of Wales, who was the subject of around 4,300 negative stories in the same year.
While it is understandable to harbor disdain for figures like Prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor due to his controversial associations, it is perplexing why the general public would hold such strong negative feelings toward Harry and Meghan. Their personal choices should not significantly impact anyone outside their immediate circle; those who disagree with their endeavors can simply choose not to engage with their projects.
Yet, even eight years post-wedding, the couple continues to attract negative media attention, particularly during their private visit to Australia. Their attempts to achieve financial independence through various commercial ventures, including a memoir and a wellness seminar, seem to provoke an outpouring of public resentment that feels disproportionate to the nature of their activities.
This intense backlash raises questions about whether the animosity directed at Meghan signifies deeper societal issues, similar to how the overwhelming public grief following Diana’s death unveiled hidden facets of British identity. Christopher Hitchens remarked on the extraordinary sentiment surrounding Diana’s passing, suggesting that she became a figure of almost mythic status, symbolizing a shift in the national consciousness.
Meghan, too, has been relegated to a role of a scapegoat, standing in stark contrast to the veneration that Diana received. The French-American philosopher René Girard posited that societies often unite through shared violence, necessitating the periodic sacrifice of a victim to alleviate communal tensions. Meghan embodies this scapegoat archetype, straddling the line between inclusion and exclusion within the royal family and society at large.
To fulfill the scapegoat role, an individual must breach societal norms, as seen in narratives suggesting Meghan led Harry away from his family. Furthermore, the collective vilification of Meghan is reflected in the significant amount of negative press coverage she receives, which seems excessively harsh compared to her actual conduct.
The hostility directed toward Meghan and Harry coincides with a time of significant anxiety in British and Australian society, marked by Brexit, the pandemic, and rising concerns about national identity and trust in institutions. Meghan specifically faces accusations of “wokeness,” which further entrench her position within ongoing cultural debates.
In media narratives, Meghan has been scapegoated as the cause of the monarchy’s challenges, Harry’s estrangement from his family, and a sense of loss or corruption within the royal institution. The discomfort surrounding her wedding, including the choice of an American preacher and a gospel choir, underscores the resistance to her influence.
Girard’s theory of scapegoating highlights the disproportionate response to perceived transgressions, where the punishment far exceeds the alleged offense. This phenomenon is exemplified in Meghan’s experience, where the public’s ongoing hostility seems to persist well beyond any rational basis for grievance.
It is a tragic reality for someone who began her journey as a princess to find herself maligned as a scapegoat. The momentum of public opinion often becomes self-perpetuating, making it challenging to halt the cycle of vilification.
The media plays a significant role in this dynamic, thriving on outrage and sensationalism. Meghan has become a prime target for such narratives, and as long as the public remains engaged in this cycle, the scapegoating will likely continue.
Ultimately, the duality of being portrayed as both saintly and sinister denies the complexity of individuals like Diana and Meghan. Reducing them to simplistic archetypes obscures their humanity; Meghan is not a villain, and Diana was not a divine figure. The nature of parasocial relationships reveals more about societal dynamics than about the individuals involved.
Brigid Delaney, the author of five books including “The Seeker and the Sage,” shares her insights on topics of cultural significance, with her writings available on Substack at the Chaos Era.
