Duchess Meghan on Twitter: ‘I’m not part of any of that. I don’t look at it’

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends a panel discussionPhoto: Albert Nieboer / Netherlands OUT / Point de Vue OUT

I’m still enjoying the quotes from the Duchess of Sussex’s International Women’s Day panel discussion. Meghan talked about feminism and the need to include boys and men in feminism and feminist conversations. She talked about the need for a global feminism, which is a pretty radical idea in practice, if we’re being honest. Thankfully, she also gave us some interesting quotes about whether she pays attention to social media:

Meghan Markle has a proven track record of social media savvy — but these days, she says she avoids at least one social media platform entirely. During a panel discussion for International Women’s Day at King’s College London on Friday, the Duchess of Sussex was asked if she looks at Twitter.

“My personal decision is to not to feed into negativity and be more cause-driven, action-based,” she said. “For me it’s a tricky one, because I’m not part of any of that. I don’t look at it. Sorry, no. For me that is my personal preference. But I do read The Economist.“ (The panel discussion was moderated by Anne McElvoy, senior editor of The Economist.)

She added that she seeks out “journalism that’s really covering things that are going to make an impact, which we talked about backstage. We were talking about Tanzania and the article The Economist just did. Things like that, that are really talking about how the role of women is really shifting and changing. That’s key. Focus your energy there and not on the stuff that is perhaps muddling you.”

[From People]

In the past, I’ve called bulls–t on Meghan a few times, like when she pretended to not know anything about Harry’s family in the engagement interview, remember that? She chooses to lie very carefully – she doesn’t want to look superficial, like the kind of woman who, say, paid attention to royal gossip about Princess Diana in the ‘90s, or the kind of woman who keeps an eye on what people are saying about her online. Trust me, she’s aware of the Twitter haters. I’m not saying she’s obsessively checking Twitter or anything like that. But she sees what some people say some of the time. She’s aware. She’s just pretending to not engage with that element because she doesn’t want to give them the satisfaction, and because she knows that if she says the online hate campaigns bug her, she’ll be attacked even more.

Meanwhile, Meghan is losing another aide. Amy Pickerill serves as assistant private secretary to Meghan, and many believed Pickerill would be moving up to a bigger position in the months to come. All we know is that it was Pickerill’s decision, and she handed in her notice and she plans to move overseas. Amy worked for the Kensington Palace communications office before Meghan came around, and it’s said that Harry hand-picked Amy to work with Meghan. I’m sure people are already theorizing about how “Duchess Difficult” dawn-texted another employee to death, but the vibe I’m getting is just that Pickerill was done with royal work and maybe she had better personal or professional options out of the country? I also think that Meghan and Harry are trying to hire some new people, people who have never worked for the Cambridges, people who have no divided loyalties.

Britain's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex takes part in a panel discussion convened by the Queen's Commonwealth Trust to mark International Women's Day in London on March 8, 2019.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

102 Responses to “Duchess Meghan on Twitter: ‘I’m not part of any of that. I don’t look at it’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Erinn says:

    I mean, I don’t tweet. I had a small stint back in the day where I had Leann Rhimes block me (I wasn’t being an asshat or anything either) but it was like a 5 month span of interest. I don’t ever check anything other than the odd political account on occasion. I just never liked the platform.

    • Oh No says:

      This comment made my morning, lol

    • Becks1 says:

      LOLOLOLOLOL.

    • mint says:

      If you see it on camera, she says it like its beneath her and THAT is ridiculous! Pre royal family she was very active on social media. She even had that stupid lifestyle blog. That was a big as if moment

      • Reese. says:

        Not just pre Harry, she is still on Twitter and social media via Kensington Palace. Kensington Palace and the other royals must realise there is value to these social media platforms or they wouldn’t be on it.

      • Ader says:

        Nah. That’s Lainey’s take. What I saw was a woman who was standing her ground and saying, “Pfft. Have you seen what they are saying about me on there!? No thanks.” This whole: “She’s acting like she’s better than us” narrative is likely rooted in something insidious and problematic (uppity, et cetera….).

      • MA says:

        @Ader – agreed. People are projecting.

      • Caity Didn’t says:

        Twitter is beneath us all.

        I never look at it either. It’s a cesspool and not worth the time.

      • jan90067 says:

        I think it depends on what you use Twitter for. I’m on there for Celebitchy and Kaiser (esp. when the awards shows are going on lol), and political pundits. That’s pretty much my entire feed. I don’t really follow other “celebrities” (just like Carl & Rob Reiner, unless they’re politically posting, and Duncan Jones (‘cos I’m a big Bowie fan), I don’t follow “foodies” or any of that other stuff. And pretty much all I post is political (except for the occasional comment to CB and Kaiser).

        So, yes, it CAN be a cesspool, just like FB (which I don’t use) and other mediums. Depends on how and what you use it for.

    • Ash says:

      I have used Twitter the least of all my social handles. I just don’t enjoy it although I did connect with Dane Cook and Andrea Roth on there and that was really cool. Both super nice people and I am a fan of both. I do use Facebook and ig but had avoided FB for almost 2 years before having my son. It depressed me, I felt like every time I scrolled, I was seeing happiness and fakeness. People seemed to mask their authenticity. In turn I turned to Instagram which I love because I can connect with people all over the world and however i am feeling, I can find relatable material just by searching a hashtag. I solely use FB now for family and friends to share pics of my son and check in on people I love and care about.
      I hate to be rude but since she’ll never read this and having recently had a baby, I find her bump holding nauseating. Maybe it’s just me but I don’t feel like I’ve known anyone with a public platform hold their bump so much and often. I mean at this point it’s almost as if she feels the baby will fall out if she stands and doesn’t hang tight. It’s clear she’s pregnant. I’m sure she’s an excited first time mom and maybe I am just a sad person but my son was a miracle baby and I never held my bump which I know is not natural as most mom do but this is over the top. I also am in relapse of an eating disorder and since I am real when it comes to my life, I will say that I felt disgusting pregnant and now looking back am ashamed of that because I was not and so many women feel so beautiful but I just didn’t. (Don’t worry, I was in remission during my pregnancy but did live off of salads, chicken, pasta, garlic mashed potatoes and pickles.)

      • Tina says:

        @Ash – very few people, even those in the public eye, receive the level of death threats and threats to her personal safety that Meghan does. Holding her bump is almost certainly a subconsciously protective mechanism. (In other words, give her a break).

      • jan90067 says:

        It could also be that it’s just a very active baby, and as she is very short-waisted, baby is pressing on certain organs that bothers her. Her touch can be soothing to calm her child. We don’t know! And as such, while YOU may not like it or want to do it, it’s not OUR business for ANY woman who chooses to.

        @Ash, I’m so sorry your pregnancy was so hard for you. I wish you success in your recovery, and hope you and your baby are, and will always be happy and healthy!

  2. Brunswickstoval says:

    I can’t get my head around Twitter. I waste enough time on instagram and Facebook I don’t need another one to check.

    • Mel M says:

      I don’t tweet or check twitter at all. The only way I know about tweets are from here or other news outlets that publish them for a story. I spend the most time on IG and hardly ever go on FB anymore because my relatives are maga lunatics. I don’t see how you can spend time on all of these platforms at once. I believe her because she’s obviously busy so why waste any down time engaging in that anyway.

  3. runcmc says:

    I’m a Meghan fan to a fault and I think she’s absolutely amazing. But also at some point it really *does* start looking suspicious that they’re losing so many aides. The same thing happened when Will/Kate first got married and I remember it being reported back then that they were extremely difficult to work with too. What’s the normal turnover for royal staff? I’m assuming not much since it’s so noteworthy that the younger royals are hemorrhaging staff…

    • LL says:

      I agree RunC. I was wondering if anyone else was thinking that too.

    • Peg says:

      How many aides are you talking about?
      I’m sure Meghan is sad to see Amy go, but this is the right time, now Meghan will be going on maternity leave.
      When Samantha leaves that will be another big story, although it was stated she was going to work with Meghan for six months, and is staying on until the baby arrives.
      It is a know fact that the salaries are the greatest working for the Royal family and some use it as a stepping stone to get better paying jobs.

    • Becks1 says:

      I get your general point, but I think here it seems normal. I doubt Meghan is SO difficult to work for that Amy Pickerill has to move overseas to escape, you know? If she was leaving and going to work for Princess Anne or something I would be more inclined to say that H&M may have a staff retention issue. But it sounds like Amy is just moving on with her life.

    • Sam says:

      Samantha Cohen-She was planning to retire and was said to be temporary from the start
      Melissa-who knows about that one but since she went from being a PA to being a weekend nanny
      Elf-Was planning to leave before Harry and Meghan got engaged
      The female RPO-left the police force entirely
      And now Amy is leaving(the whole KP team) to go abroad
      How are any of these suspicious? Sounds like people moving on with their own lives

      • Jan says:

        And ELF and Amy are married so it’s entirely possible they are just over the royal thing and want to do something else with their lives.

    • Leyton says:

      I don’t think so.

      Samantha was never permanent. She’s actually stayed on longer than her 6month assignment.

      The Melissa chick is someone we’ve never confirmed actually worked for Meghan specifically.

      Amy, while I’m so sad to see her go, is moving overseas.

      None of these situations have anything to do with Meghan or even Harry personally- just seems like the circumstance. They’re newly married and I don’t think they’ve gotten around to any permanent staffing- everyone has just been assigned to help them.

    • Lexa says:

      I think the criticism of Meghan being hard to work with is overblown, especially as Melissa is the only one to leak that she’s difficult. I was surprised when Sir David left, but maybe he felt done after 10 years and the timing had nothing to do with Meghan. They clearly like Samantha Cohen but they haven’t been able to find a replacement for her, or hire separate private secretaries for Harry and Meghan in all this time, even knowing she didn’t want to stay on. Or are the Cambridge’s unusual in having one each?

      Serious question: Did Will and Kate really lose a number of key staff within a year of marriage? I think that’s what’s arching brows and causing people to question and sensationalize this. That, and a number of “palace sources” claiming they do their own thing and don’t take much advice from staff. I know the Cambridge’s lost a housekeeper in 2017-Ish because she felt that the job demands became too high as they were spending more time at KP and the married gardener and housekeeper because of Carole supposedly interfering or Kate doing too much and not letting the staff do their jobs, and I think they lost a senior PPO very early on?

      • Princessk says:

        I thought it was cook or somebody who didn’t want to work in between two royal homes.

    • sid says:

      In every picture or video I’ve seen of Amy when she is out with Meghan during engagements, she looks quite happy and almost proud of Meghan. I’m guessing she just got a better offer somewhere else.

    • FH says:

      i think a big issue has to do with the fact the royal jobs don’t pay that well plus there are so many restrictions on what you can and can’t do so my theory is that people use this as a starter job and then move on when a better opportunity opens up. Also when your an assistant to a non-royal celebrity you get all the free goodies which you don’t with the royal

    • MA says:

      Others have already explained how the media has distorted the truth of Meghan’s staff turnover but I’ll just point out that turnover for all royal staff for all royals is very high (long hours, low pay)–you just don’t hear about it because anything related to Meghan makes international news. There’s an excerpt from Diana’s biography, where it’s mentioned that she got a honeymoon phase from the media but soon after the wedding, she was blamed for expensive clothes, high staff turnover, changing Charles. Sound familiar? This is nothing new.

  4. Alexandria says:

    Yeah I find FB and IG enough. I’m on FB for some news and for my relatives. I take a break off IG once in a while because it’s not good for my self esteem.

    • Maria says:

      I totally agree about Insta. Everyone always looks happy, healthy, and always on holiday. No one ever looks stressed!

  5. Abby says:

    I don’t understand twitter at all,signed up in uni based on something my room mate said.my account has been dormant for the past 7 years.it just seems like too much work

  6. Lucy2 says:

    I hope that’s true that she’s not paying attention to it. I can’t imagine some of the awful stuff said about her on there.

  7. Embee says:

    I believe her. Twitter can get pretty hysterical and I’m sure it’s essier to leave it. I started checking Twitter more in the past year or so. Of the three platforms it appeals to me most from the perspective of functionality: i like to read words and pictures are less interesting to me. I’d put the three platforms on a continuum of mostly text (Twitter) to 50/50 (FB) to mostly pics (IG). Twitter seems to get the most heated because words. But if you cull your timeline carefully you can avoid a lot of the trash

  8. KNMC says:

    Given that KP is hiring a troll hunter to crack down on negative posts and track users who criticize the DoS, I’m just not buying it. I suspect both she and Harry follow what’s said on numerous social media platforms – not compulsively, but watchfully.

    • Bren says:

      Meghan has friends that are active on social media and they probably give her a general idea of the vitriol. I believe she stays away from social media.

    • Peg says:

      In Meghan’s old interviews before she met Harry, she said she did not go on Twitter, too much negativity.
      The same way she said she said she reads the Economist, and someone on Twitter posted pictures of her at airports with the magazine in her handbag.
      The Moderater at the conference is a senior editor at the Economist, of course she retweeted the photo.
      Even Netflix got in to the act, saying no need to “Google” it and gave the name of the show Meghan spoke about.

    • Mia says:

      the ones who hate her are vicious and seem to stan for the other daughter Meghan doesn’t know. one wanted to start a gofund page to fly to the UK and harass her at events. Another wanted to physically pull at her stomach, not believing she’s pregnant. I just don’t understand why give this much energy to someone who can’t stand?

    • MA says:

      More likely is that staff monitor social media for threats and inform Harry and Meghan about them. So Meghan’s aware of the negativity generally but for her own mental health is staying away.

  9. Harla says:

    She never said she didn’t know “anything “ about Harry, she said she didn’t know much about him. Frankly before W&K’s wedding I wasn’t a royal follower either so yeah I can believe it.

    • MA says:

      +1 Seriously, this narrative needs to stop. She literally said she didn’t know “MUCH” about him. Why do people keep distorting this? She obviously knew who he was, she just wasn’t a royal watcher/follower. I believe her. She mentions W&K’s wedding very briefly in a Tig post, as a segue to a larger topic. And there’s a Hello magazine interview where she was asked “William or Harry?” — and she had this puzzled look, like she thought it was a dumb question and couldn’t care less. She said “I don’t know” and the interviewer answered “Harry” for her.

  10. Chef Grace says:

    She seems grounded enough to be honest about not checking in on Twitter. It can be a shit show for celebrities. I share recipes and cat stuff. Follow my fave things. For me it is fun. But I do see alot of Twitter stalkers that make me wonder how they are still allowed access to the internet. Scary creatures.

    • Carrie says:

      I like it for history, archaeology, economy etc., and it’s excellent for feminist sources of balance and reason. Twitter quality is dependent on how a person uses it. It’s educational. I don’t get into toxic streams or negativity. Museums, libraries, art worldwide… it’s an incredibly good platform to get outside your own world and bubble.

      ETA: literature! I forgot. It’s a wealth of good content.

      • Nikki says:

        I totally agree that it all depends on how you use it (Twitter). I use it as a news aggregator of sorts and use it to follow certain pop,e who always link to interesting stories, news articles etc. From that point of view, it’s excellent….people like Paul Krugman, David Farenholdt and David Milliband, as well as Ronan Farrow (and so many more) are always linking to noteworthy stuff and I find it hard to get all that info from such varied sources anywhere else….

  11. Becks1 says:

    I’ve been getting sucked into twitter more and more recently, and I’ll say that there are some really extreme and scary Kate fans , and there are some extreme Meghan fans as well. I used to find it amusing and now its less so. Some people devote way too much time to these women on twitter (as I comment on yet another royal post, ha.)

    I think twitter can be really useful for breaking news, or for updates from a press conference or something, and I really enjoy it during an awards show or the like. I also think it can be confusing and overwhelming, so if someone says they’re not on twitter, I don’t blame them. I usually check it a few times a week and sometimes I get sucked in and sometimes I’m just browsing my feed for 5 minutes and that’s it. I enjoy it (sometimes) but I feel like it is perfectly possible to be current and up to date on things and not be on twitter.

    So basically, I can believe that Meghan doesn’t go on twitter. Someone from KP is though and someone is tracking the overall comments aimed at Meghan, so she probably doesn’t have to be on it to know what’s happening.

    • Molly says:

      If I were Meghan (or Kate), I’d NEVER go on twitter. I’m obsessed with it, but no one is saying mean things about random me. But if the world was constantly writing hateful things about me there, no way would I visit.

  12. SV says:

    Are we still changing Meghan’s actual words where she said she didn’t know “much” about Harry to “anything.”. What happened to reading and listening comphrension? These aren’t synonyms. As for Twitter that’s totally believable. If she had said she didn’t check Instagram that would be a different story.

    • Olenna says:

      Thank you for clarifying what Meghan actually said, and ITA about her not wasting time on Twitter. I wouldn’t doubt that she is using every spare minute of her day to educate herself about her duties and charities, and for self-improvement and wellness. There’s enough negativity being generated elsewhere that there’s no need to further imply she’s untruthful or evasive about her own personal business.

  13. Piper says:

    I disagree Kaiser. When Meghan agreed to marry Harry, she agreed to stop acting, owning her own business incl IG tig and social media. She did all that. Plus, I follow pretty big fandoms with Stars who don’t use twitter also for this very reason… when you’re the subject of such enormous villication, I don’t think she’s lying at all. The bigger reason I believe she’s being honest, she knows her sister is on twitter leading hate groups against her and the person who knows how awful and hatefilled Samantha and greedy Thomas can be more than us, is Meghan. Now, does she get updated on social media from her team. Yes, it allows her to stay updated without having to actually sss it but Meghan’s personality doesn’t seem like one who could just laugh off all the disturbing things said about her without taking it all personally, avoidance is safe mentally for her, especially if all she sees from her Comm Team is the worst of the worst threats and security issues – Id avoid the app as well plus Meghan was always pre Harry more of a Ig girl, where she could talk and it’s no way to dialogue now safely. I believe her mainly for Self Preservation reasons at best.

    Regarding security, People Mag has been on it lately. Giving up the unfiltered, less dramatic versions of Meghan news to combat DM/Sun versions of fake news. Amy’s moves on to bigger and better plus Amy and Meghan grew close. Less dramatic then how the British press want to position it as hard as they try. Also, for clarity… Samantha was never permanent, Security guard was retiring all together to move on… so Melissa was the only surprise departure who’s now a nanny, so after 6mos she realized the role was more work than she intended… she was new and Meghan was new with lots of expectations and a batty father, lots of pressure.

    • MA says:

      Good point. There’s a reason why very few of the biggest A-listers are on social media (see the Clooneys, Brad & Angelina, etc.). At least those who aren’t politicians/former politcians.

  14. perplexed says:

    I believe her. Her public relations team might give her a general idea of what’s going on since it’s necessary to know what public mood/sentiment is , but I can’t imagine her actually sitting around looking at it. She has a busy life and for a busy person being on Twitter can be a time-suck. Twitter is like falling down a rabbit-hole where after 2 hours you’re screaming at yourself “What did I do?” It makes you feel miserable and depressed, It’s different from Instagram where you can post lengthy messages and archive the photos and kind of “create” something for your “fans.”

    She also seems like an organized person with good time-management skills. I feel as though Twitter and celebrity gossip blogs would make an organized person’s mind twitch. They’d constantly think about all the time they’re wasting. Spending time on Twitter is wasteful from an organization perspective, and I just can’t see someone like her doing it. Twitter can serve a useful purpose if used the right way — but I don’t know if a lot of people actually use it in a constructive manner.

  15. IlsaLund says:

    I believe her. She most likely has staff to keep her informed. Why waste time on Twitter.

    Did anyone see Audra McDonald’s statement supporting Meghan? I love Audra.

    https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a26774838/audra-mcdonald-defends-meghan-markle-online-abuse-trolls/

    • MA says:

      Yes! It was great. But it’s a pity that the majority of the famous people who have taken up the burden of standing up for Meghan/calling out misogynoir have been black women (as usual). Where are all those white feminists in Hollywood/the media?

  16. Peg says:

    I would go as far to say, she even got Harry to stop reading the negative stories, because the Royal reporters were wondering how Harry would act towards them on the trip to Morocco, because they wrote so much BS about his wife.
    To their shock he acted normal, so that Yoga and Meditation is working.
    Yes Meghan’s sister has maybe over fifty Twitter accounts and follows people that hate Meghan. Every appearance Meghan makes she post nasty tweets about, she is like a broken record, screeching.

  17. Eva says:

    I believe her and I salute her. Once you start to read that stuff it’s hard to stop. Many people just make a decision to never read any discussions about themselves or to stay away from certain platforms altogether. It’s better to not know everything that’s being said about you.

  18. Liz says:

    She might not look at it, but via that telegraph article, someone on her staff is paying twitter bots to post positive things about her, so…

    • MissyS. says:

      The person who wrote that article hates on Meghan constantly. At this point, I don’t read articles from royal reporters because most of them are biased and write clickbait stories. The truth is both Meghan and Kate have obsessive fans who spend all day posting about them.

    • MA says:

      Are…are you saying that you actually believe that?

    • Lily says:

      That isn’t what that article said tho. And what is more, the so-called expert they hired even said it could also just be overzealous fans. I mean the article showed a CLEAR lack of understanding of fandom/stan culture. I know real life public figures who post on twitter or retweet easily in the thousands a year.

      That article trying to stretch very thin evidence to feed into an agenda Camilla Tominey has been pushing for awhile against Meghan. It shows that the royal reporters truly do not understand the younger, more diverse demographics of this newest generation of royal followers brought in by Meghan.

  19. Dee Kay says:

    I skimmed Lainey’s screed against Meghan’s saying she doesn’t look at Twitter and I honestly don’t understand the doubt. If I were being dragged night and day somewhere I would never, ever go there. Meghan’s reaction is basically, “Hell no, the haters are hating there and I don’t need any of that in my life.” It’s totally understandable to me that she would be staying far, far away from social media right now. Look, if she were still an actress on Suits then I’m sure she would participate, but as Duchess of Sussex she’s a target of so much racist/sexist speech on SM that if she wants to take a five-year break, or a forever break, from all of that, that seems logical.

    • Marigold says:

      I saw Lainey’s take as more that Meghan sounded snobby and honestly, I agree. We would never let her response to that question slide with anyone else.

      • Lolo says:

        I agree I thought Lainey’s take on it seemed pretty accurate. Also the Sussexes ARE responding and engaging friendly media to spread their message and counteract the negativity so to pretend you just have no idea about any of it because you would NEVER look is disingenuous to say the least. It’s not the end of the world or anything but I also don’t think it’s wrong to side eye this one.

      • perplexed says:

        I don’t think it’s snobby if she’s the actual subject of posts. It’d be like a celebrity forcing themselves to read a story about themselves as a subject in The National Enquirer. It wouldn’t make sense to participate, unless you hate your own mental health.

        I mean, yeah, you could try to be egalitarian, but then you’d probably meet the fate of Amy Winehouse. There’s nothing wrong with self-preservation.

        If someone is writing about me, I don’t think I should have to force myself to sound “nice” about it so other people can feel better about being on Twitter (I am, and I don’t take her answer personally. Of course, as a participant, I can see the downsides as much as the upsides. I do feel like I’ve wasted some time unnecessarily on any social forum, even though I sometimes can’t restrain myself). Sometimes a more assertive and declarative answer in a particular instance like this where her family are acting out against her isn’t wrong. Maybe her sister and brother are weeping somewhere as they type on their Twitter.

      • Kebbie says:

        @Perplexed The question wasn’t whether she reads what people tweet about her though, right? It was just if she ever goes on Twitter. The fact that she used to have a twitter account, but responded by basically laughing at the idea that she would ever look at Twitter was bizarre, IMO. It would’ve been more believable if she just said she used to but finds she’s happier or more fulfilled without social media in her life now.

      • perplexed says:

        I assume she was answering in the present moment. At the present moment, I believe that she wouldn’t. Given that she’s heavily pregnant right now, it seems wise to avoid the platform rather than find a problem on social media that would likely send someone who is the subject of posts to seek assistance from a psychiatrist. Honestly, I would laugh at Twitter too if I had a sibling on there constantly posting weird gossip about me.
        Who the heck wants to go out on social media and see their sister rounding up individuals to attack me? That’s next level weird. And if I had to laugh at the suggestion that I’m on it, I likely would.

        If she laughed at Instagram, I’d find that hot because we know she was on it quite frequently with selfies. But even people who post on Twitter (like myself) find ourselves fatigued by that particular forum, so any criticism of Twitter never truly strikes me as odd. It is a place where people are more off the grid than usual. I also think it’s a platform that people tire of more easily after trying it out. Facebook and Instagram seem to have people constantly coming back to them, but Twitter seems to create a kind of inertia where after you’ve seen the hoopla you’re less likely to want to come back. So, since as I said, she’s answering as to the present moment, I find her answer fine.

      • Carrie says:

        Sounds like Lainey has been cut off from inside track and isn’t happy about it. Good for Meghan. Don’t feed the trolls. She’s due any day to have her baby. I’m so happy for her and Harry.

      • perplexed says:

        Correction to previous post:

        I should have said “odd” instead of hot.

        “If she laughed at Instagram, I’d find that ODD because we know she was on it quite frequently with selfies.”

    • MA says:

      +1 Dee Kay

    • A says:

      I watched the clip and thought she sounded fine for most of it, but the “sorry, no” definitely had a tone. Also, I really don’t believe that she has no idea about what’s happening on twitter. She may not spend hours going down a rabbit hole of hater comments, but for sure she wants to know what is being said and is trying to manage her image.

      She seems like she’s always putting on a performance – even at the wedding, I didn’t see any emotion from her that felt authentic.

  20. charfromdarock@yahoo.ca says:

    I don’t blame her. Twitter can be a cesspool. I have a trigger happy block and report button finger.

    I was attacked once on twitter for retweeting a reminder about an event about the Violence Against Women Day we have in Canada each December 6. Newfoundland twitter had my back and had the troll outed and blocked before I even fully realized what was happening.

    It was really upsetting and I can’t imagine having the volume of negativity and hate directed towards me on a daily basis.

  21. Skwinkee says:

    Good on her!

    I don’t twattle and I have never been able to take instagram seriously (the hashtags! It seems so contrived to me it can’t be real). And in November of last year I was having a hard time so I got off Facebook.

    And I’m happy! I feel so much better about life. I miss out on some things, but overall I’m not comparing my life to anyone else’s as much and just existing.

    There is one group I really miss, but that’s it.

  22. HeyThere! says:

    I have a different spin on this: it’s not that MM is difficult, or rather any more difficult than any other royal, but when you pair the low income/high profile job position, then add you can get moved from house to house, that is A LOT of Royal personalities and drama to deal with. Just because someone doesn’t mesh well with MM doesn’t mean they don’t like her! Some people just don’t vibe, especially if they preferred the house they were in before. Change is hard, and add low income/high profile job…..hello high turnover rates. I’m just guessing?

    • MA says:

      There’s high turnover among all royal staff. Also like…my own office had a lot of turnover the past year but it’s because of things like: pregnancy, moving residence, changing career to a new field, wanting a pay raise/promotion. It’s just magnified because it’s Meghan.

  23. Jaded says:

    She’s got way bigger and better things to do than waste time reading about herself on social media.

  24. hashtagwhat says:

    I am with those who agree with Lainey’s take. Lainey is solidly in the bag for Meghan (the Mulroney connection and all), so if she is expressing skepticism here, then it’s warranted IMO. I actually can’t believe that anyone is falling for Meghan’s “I don’t go on twitter.” Are you kidding me? She’s a social media animal. A tiger doesn’t change his/her stripes. The worst was that, if you watch the video, she followed it up with, “but I do read the Economist, I’ll give you that.” This is why I find it so hard to warm to her, because she just seems so full of it. I know Im going to get killed for saying this, but Meghan does something that seems great, then comes out with something that just rings so false. Do you know how many people in the world read the Economist AND read twitter? Hell, the Economist is even ON TWITTER! It’s not either/or. As Lainey said, she over-performed. And that makes you wonder, what else is a performance?

    • perplexed says:

      “but I do read the Economist, I’ll give you that.” I have to admit this part does sound a little snooty.

      But I thought the Twitter thing could have been a slam on her sister, which I don’t mind.

      • MA says:

        @perplexed, the context of that comment is that she was being interviewed by an editor for the Economist.

    • Peg says:

      And yes she reads the Economist, they’re pictures to prove it, the moderator was from the Economist. In old interviews with her she said she did not read tabloids, but read the Economist, National Geographic and a third magazine, that i can’t recall.
      This not the first time she said this about not reading Twitter, it’s her personal choice, you have to really hate yourself to read nasty comments about yourself.
      What does lamey know? I’m sure Meghan is losing sleep, knowing that you never warm up to her.

      • Hashtagwhat says:

        The point is, she used to BE on Twitter and the royal family is on Twitter, so she’s suddenly above it? And I don’t doubt she reads the Economist, as anyone with a passing grasp of English might’ve gleaned from my pointing out that you can read both twitter AND the Economist.

        And personal Peg, I’m on a gossip site, so of course I don’t think Meg is losing sleep over my opinion of her. This is a place for useless opinions. You, however, seem to be taking it personally.

        Oh, and Lamey. Good one.

      • Olenna says:

        @Peg,
        Everything you said, +1. I also think Miss Lainey may be feeling a little green when she writes about Meghan and I imagine she gets very little info to spin from their mutual acquaintances. Meghan’s real friends know the deal with gossip and the press.

      • Hashtagwhat says:

        Olenna, are you serious with this comment? You think Lainey is jealous????? This only serves to reinforce how utterly childish some of the defenses of Meghan have gotten. Lainey is not a FRIEND of Meghan, she is a seasoned gossip columnist who has several TV gigs, a weekly podcast, a bestselling memoir, a popular daily gossip blog, and who employs several full-time writers and producers who they themselves are quite accomplished in Canada’s creative communities. To say nothing of her actual gossip PROWESS which is to say she actually breaks some effing news. Please sit down with tween crap like “Meghan’s real friends know the deal with gossip and the press.” What does that even mean?

        This site used to trade in real analysis. Have we been taken over by high school ride or dies?

      • Olenna says:

        @Hashtagwhat, there is no excuse for the tone of your comments to me or the insults, implied or otherwise, especially as I was not addressing you. But, since you want to come at me like a mad girl from RG or RD, then let me set you straight. I never said she was a friend of Meghan’s, but they do have mutual acquaintances. And, unless you know Lainey personally, you’re no more certain about who or what she knows than the rest of us. Further, there’s no good excuse (other than to sell gossip) for Lainey to even comment on Meghan’s past or present social media use. We can all see what she did or hasn’t done on Twitter, etc. Lastly, as far as her creds and notoriety (or lack thereof), I couldn’t care less. But, if anyone should take a seat, it is you with your incessant defense of all the reasons why you don’t like Meghan, and I have no more time for anything else you have say. So, carry on with arguing with yourself or trashing me if you feel like it. You’ll get no more attention from me.

      • jules says:

        Omg. Cray.

      • Hashtagwhat says:

        I don’t even know how to respond to your nonsense, Olenna. Have a nice night.

      • Jaded says:

        Jebuz Hashtagwhat…who pissed in your Captain Crunch this morning? Of course she’s not reading all the filthy, malicious and race-baiting crap on Twitter. She’s got better things to do and is doing them. Quit picking fights.

      • hashtagwhat says:

        You’re accusing me of picking fights because I called bullshit like Kaiser did? And then had the temerity to actually back it up with an actual argument. Sorry, who is picking fights? Oh, you geniuses, going on about pissing in cornflakes.

        You do understand that if you took Olenna’s genius argument “no one knows but her friends” and applied it to YOUR genius argument “of course she’s not reading all the filthy, malicious, and race-baiting crap…”, then those two completely empty broadsides would basically just cancel each other out in an epic storm of stupidity right? Olenna says no one knows her. You say of course she’s not doing this, which implies you do. Im just trying to analyze a situation with what we’ve got, i.e. the video and public information about Lainey. You ladies brought in the jealousy and the cornflakes and all the other absurdity.

        Often wrong, never in doubt you two.

    • MA says:

      @hashtagwhat – Did you realize that the reason Meghan singled out the Economist was because the moderator of the panel is an editor for the Economist? She didn’t just randomly pull that out of thin air to be pretentious (though people may think that people who read the Economist are pretentious). Her reaction was “Are you serious? Why would I be on social media and expose myself to the racist and hateful comments, criticism, and conspiracy theories out there?” She emphasized that it was a personal preference not to expose herself to the negativity out there, she didn’t make a generalized statement that “no one should be on Twitter.” You’ve gotta admit that amount of hate she receives is 100 times worse than anything a regular person does and 5 times worse than even a regular celebrity. Would it be that crazy to believe that W & K also don’t go on Twitter?

      Being someone who actually had social media in the past to promote her businesses, she obviously doesn’t denigrate the value of social media. It’s just that she’s in a position now that personally going on there (and exposing herself to the magnitude of hate out there) is not only unnecessary but laughable.

      • hashtagwhat says:

        Yes, I did realize that. No tone here, honestly. Just trying to answer your question. That doesn’t at all change my take on the situation, which is again, just my take. I happen to agree with Lainey and Kaiser on this one. I don’t know why that’s incurred so much blowback. I absolutely believe that Meghan reads the Economist–that wasn’t my point. I just think it rings false that she doesn’t bother with twitter. She does absolutely gets heaps of b.s., but she is also supremely concerned with her image, and much of a celebrity’s image is shaped through social media.

      • MA says:

        @hashtagwhat – Ok, wasn’t sure if everyone was aware of the Economist editor part (also no “tone” was meant in my comment either). I just wanted to provide context to people who might think that Meghan just randomly did a pretentious name drop.

        So Kaiser said that Meghan is “aware” of the Twitter haters and knows what’s being said about her. I think we all agree on that point but in different ways. Kaiser seems to think that Meghan is aware of it because peruses Twitter every once in a while. I think that Meghan is aware of it because (A) aides are monitoring and have to make her aware of certain types of attacks (B) friends are concerned and have discussed it with her because the tinhats infest their SM too, (C) lawyers and security have been consulted with for specific threats and claims. Also, she experienced the explosion of hate when her relationship with Harry was revealed. I have no trouble believing that Meghan’s not on Twitter at all because it would be devastating, as it likely was before she deleted her SM.

        I forced myself to quit some SM sites a while back because I realized that it was having a bad effect on my health. I don’t engage with it at all even though I used to be obsessed. That’s why I can easily believe that someone who faces a million times more hate than I could ever dream of also made the same decision for similar reasons.

        The thing is that you seem to think that it’s absolutely BS that she’s not on Twitter and the blowback likely comes from you saying there’s no possible way that Meghan could be honest about that. Do you also think that William and Kate have secret accounts? Somehow I can’t imagine it. ALL of the royals care about their image but the majority of them choose to live insulated within their bubbles so that they can enjoy their privileged lives with as little intrusion as possible.

        Also, the narrative that Meghan is always performing is tiresome and only applied to this former B/C list actress and not really to any other actress, not even much better actresses (at least not to the extent it’s said about Meghan).

        (Side note – I disagree that Lainey is solidly in the bag for Meghan. Lainey always views Meghan’s actions as calculated, whether she’s “praising” them or not. IMO this is problematic because then Meghan is always conniving and is never allowed to just BE. Lainey always calls out the explicitly racist attacks, which is great, but also…something I don’t give brownie points for because it’s the bare minimum any feminist should do).

        /end essay

  25. Maxie says:

    I’m starting to think the Royals are a bit cheap and the aides can get better money elsewhere for less work and much less pressure. They work for them for a bit, network their ass off and then find that big money, little work job elsewhere.

  26. Bunny says:

    I believe her 100%.

    She’s a disciplined person from all I’ve read, and with a family full of malignant narcissistic abusers, she’s no doubt used to putting people on “ignore” for her own sanity. It is a coping mechanism for those who come from backgrounds of abuse.

    This makes complete sense to me, as someone who has excised abusive family members from my life and doesn’t ever look back.

    It is probably really easy to avoid Twitter, since a lot of it is time-shifted with her in the UK, and so many tweeters in the United States. It is old news by the time she’d see it, so why bother?

    • Peg says:

      The woman is pregnant, she is not as stupid as people would like you to believe.
      She don’t have to wait for Doctors to tell her avoid stress and stressors(family).

    • jamie says:

      It is probably really easy to avoid Twitter, since a lot of it is time-shifted with her in the UK, and so many tweeters in the United States.

      – Uh you know that people outside of the US tweet and that most of the world’s population lives outside the US, right…

  27. Lucia says:

    I’m on Twitter. It’s my go to platform. But people can be horrendous on there. Even I can be horrendous to others on certain topics. I can’t blame Meghan one bit for avoiding Twitter.

  28. RoyalBlue says:

    I think she avoids twitter and social media for her sanity. I would if I were her. I have had twitter for 10 years now and probably tweeted 5 times. FB is my main platform. I have IG but don’t understand why lol.

  29. perplexed says:

    Twitter is a platform that people tire of easily unless you use it for career-related purposes. In that sense, I think what she says about being action-based, etc makes sense in the context of her current life. Since Twitter is a time suck, maybe some gossip columnists get offended by the idea that what they’re doing on Twitter is more or less wasting people’s time. What she says cuts at a reality that perhaps they don’t want fo face. But what she’s saying isn’t really nonsensical if you’ve been sucked down the time management hole of Twitter while slurping down a box of Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream.

  30. Karen says:

    Very happy for the world to be looking up the skirt though…

  31. JadedBrit says:

    I believe her.
    I know the plural of anecdote is not data, but in my own personal experience – Twitter enables the worst, as well as the best, of humanity to mount a virtual soapbox.
    I used to Tweet fairly regularly, connecting with the most fascinating, interesting people – from Historians to ambassadors, cricketers to other writers. And then, one day, I made the “mistake” of questioning the fiscal policies of the Opposition in the UK.
    The level of vitriol was astounding. I’m pretty thick skinned, so can cope with most insults – I think, in a perverse way, having c-PTSD ‘helps’, inasmuch as you’re able to disassociate yourself so thoroughly from invective. But then one Tweeter told me to “take a shower”. Anyone else who is Jewish will know what that means, and how that can break through any layer of self-protection like a punch to the gut.
    And I’m only a writer, who guards their privacy (I probably share more with my fellow CBers than anyone else because, as I commented last week, we’re a community of shared experiences, whose anonymity allows us to be unguarded and mutually supportive) and identity fiercely. I’m not in the public eye in any way whatsoever, metaphorically or literally (agoraphobia). I’m certainly not a Duchess who’s fast-becoming one of the best-known women in the world.
    The sheer hatred that the woman has had to face is breathtaking. And must be absolutely terrifying. The threats, the slurs, the slander, the fabrications, the racism. Given even the Daily Heil comments about her, I would – in her position – also stay resolutely away from social media. Because as we know, the Palace has had to clamp down on the sheer insanity littering their social media, including threats upon her life.
    It took one comment for me to shut my Twitter account, and I have no desire to go down that rabbit hole ever again. And she receives negative comments in the millions. Every single day. Kudos to her for maintaining both strength and dignity.

  32. Weaver says:

    Lainey is so weird about Meghan. She picks out the most minor things and writes a dissertation on them. Like a lot of the royal reporters her analysis hinges on the fact that Meghan was an actress so therefore everything she says and does is a performance. This is such a lazy perspective.

    I can believe that someone who is actively getting death threats would avoid Twitter. Why does Lainey find it unbelievable that Meghan no longer checks out Twitter?

    • Chickita says:

      What Lainey and Kaiser and commenters here running with the Lainey version of things is the very first part of her response as to avoiding Twitter “it’s much safer that way”.