Duchess Meghan ‘is actively looking for representation,’ either a manager or an agent

Sussex Ireland visit

Nearly everyone working in Hollywood has some kind of agent or representation. Actors have agents, obviously, but so do directors, writers and producers. If they don’t have an agent, they have a manager who helps them negotiate deals and helps them keep up with whatever projects are being pitched, and everything else. I would assume that the Duchess of Sussex had an agent and a manager before she was married, back when she was Meghan Markle. I would guess that she simply let them go when she moved to England and got engaged. Well, I guess she didn’t want to go back to her old people? Us Weekly reports that Meghan is looking for new representation:

Is Meghan Markle ready for her close-up? The retired actress has indicated that she is considering a return to the Hollywood spotlight after stepping down from the British royal family with Prince Harry.

“Meghan is actively looking for representation. She has begun outreach,” a source tells Us Weekly exclusively, as first revealed on Us‘ “Hot Hollywood” podcast. “It can be a manager or an agent, but she’s reaching out to people to find someone to represent her for future professional projects.”

Harry, 35, first raised eyebrows in July 2019 when he informed Disney CEO Bob Iger at the Lion King premiere in London that Meghan, 38, “does voiceovers.” He then gestured toward the Suits alum, who was speaking with Beyoncé and Jay-Z nearby at the time, and said, “She’s really interested.” Iger, 68, seemed game, telling the prince, “Sure. We’d love to try.”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also spoke with The Lion King director Jon Favreau at the event. During their conversation, Meghan joked, “That’s really why we’re here — to pitch.”

Less than six months later, The Times of London reported that the former Deal or No Deal briefcase model signed a voiceover deal with Disney in return for a donation to Elephants Without Borders, a charitable organization dedicated to conserving wildlife and natural resources.

[From Us Weekly]

I saw those videos of Harry “pitching” Meghan as a voiceover actress, and the part where they met Jon Favreau was clearly a joke between everyone involved. As for Harry’s conversation with Bob Iger… it was an odd moment, I have to admit, but it worked out fine if it was just for charity. Anyway, I’m sure all of the haters are up in arms about how Duchess Meg is going to get a Suits spinoff or something, but it’s like I said in the beginning – everybody has an agent or manager. If Harry and Meghan are looking to start their own production company – which is what I believe they’ll do – they’ll have a manager or agent to help them along as producers. And even if Meghan is looking for an Apple+ pilot to relaunch her acting career, what of it?

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex in Ireland

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

117 Responses to “Duchess Meghan ‘is actively looking for representation,’ either a manager or an agent”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Becks1 says:

    are people surprised by this? I don’t think she’s going to return to acting per se, but I can see them starting a production company or something and producing documentaries or specials related to various causes.

    Also, do they still have Sara Latham and their Sussex Royal staff or are they all going to be replaced?

    • Seraphina says:

      Ohhhh Becks, nice. I love that idea.

    • sickofcleaning says:

      I wonder how that might go considering Edward gave that path a go and had to step back due to conflict in the family.

      • Nic919 says:

        Edward’s issue was getting the royals involved in that dumb royal showdown event, which was massively ridiculed. Also, the Sophie selling access to the royals scandal early on also played a huge factor in them dropping it all.

        With Harry and Meghan not being considered working royals anymore, this shouldn’t be an issue. She can’t do any worse than a milk commercial anyway b

      • Mich says:

        Edward was also said to have showed up at Eton with pockets of cash to try to pay William’s classmates to participate in his projects. He crossed way into the realm of tacky.

    • Nic919 says:

      I suspect they will go the obama route and do a production company about important issues.

      I wouldn’t take anything US weekly as real, but she may want someone to negotiate contracts, so I assume some type of lawyer will be helping in that area.

      Also calling her a former Deal or No Deal briefcase model is a huge red flag.

    • Erinn says:

      The voiceover thing was the weirdest part of all of this to me. They need to work, so the agent part doesn’t seem strange.

      HAS she done any voice over work?

    • I agree with Kaiser, Becks1 and Nic919. This is a non-story. Just another run at trashing Meghan. I love how they always bring in the Deal or No Deal gig in their reporting. As if no other actor in the history of acting ever did a gig like this or a commercial. Meg Ryan got her start in daytime soaps; Tom Hanks dressed as a woman in a very bad, running gag of a sitcom early in his career. Dustin Hoffman has stated that the plot point in Tootsie where he got fired for the way he played a tomato is a true story about his early acting career that Pollack put in the script. I could go on and on. Anything to trash Meghan and keep getting clicks using her name.

      • Soupie says:

        Aw I loved that silly Bosom Buddies sitcom JA! I do wonder how well it would hold up today. Some don’t, which is sad.

    • lunchcoma says:

      That makes complete sense. I don’t think she’s going back to acting, either, but making documentaries is an area where celebrity and activism can cross over. The Obamas’ Netflix deal may be the inspiration.

    • lunchcoma says:

      That makes complete sense. I don’t think she’s going back to acting, either, but making documentaries is an area where celebrity and activism can cross over. The Obamas’ Netflix deal may be the inspiration.

  2. BlueSky says:

    I don’t see her going back to acting. When all this happened I imagined that they would look to start their own production company where they would produce programs or documentaries highlighting the charities they are involved in or support. If that is the route, they will need to have people who have experience with doing this.

  3. aquarius64 says:

    Looking for an agent for paying acting gigs may be a catch 22. Meghan can get an agent but the job would be dismissed as stunt casting. Any reviews of her work would be scrutinized.

  4. WingKingdom says:

    Well they have to do something if they’re going to be financially independent. They can’t just support charities without supporting themselves.

    • (TheOG)@jan90067 says:

      Di said, in an interview, she was leaving the bulk of her divorce settlement for Harry, as William will have the Duchies (first Cornwall, then Lancaster) to support himself, and Harry will have to make more of his own way. Also, both boys were left money from TQM when she passed (which has been invested, wisely, I’m sure), and you can bet there will be more when TQ and PP pass. I don’t think they’ll hurt for money.

      Will they live in “Buckingham Palace” style? Doubtful. But is it highly doubtful they’d want that anyway.

      • Amy Too says:

        And money makes money. So all that money he got 20 years ago or whatever, has likely doubled by now. Huge amounts of money make huge amounts of money. So even if they never made any additional money ever again, their investments will give them money to live off.

        And whatever expenses they have, because this is another thing people like to be “concerned” about, like a big old mansion in Canada, or whatever, can be financed. They don’t have to pay $15 million all in cash right now. Rich people also have mortgages.

      • Agreed AmyToo. I used to work for someone who is extremely wealthy. Money makes money, they all cut deals, get discounts and freebies constantly on everything it takes to live a large life. It’s almost an exclusive club. Friends loan houses, designers and other businesses constantly send them product. This thinking that the Sussexes are going to have to live in one house and 9 to 5 it is erroneous. They will travel between multiple residents, utilize friends and business vacation homes, planes, etc. The rich always protect the principle; it is one of the ways they stay rich (if they are smart). That said, I also think they will work very hard within their Foundation framework and do much good — just like my ex-boss does.

  5. harlequin says:

    Hope she doesn’t go back to acting – she wasn’t a particularly compelling actress in suits

    • Mumbles says:

      Slate did a piece a few weeks ago interviewing anonymous casting agents who agreed with you.

      As for how they will support themselves….he has an inheritance from Granny and Princess Di of approximately $40 million. A 5 percent return on that is $2 million a year. If they can’t hobble by on that, I don’t know what to say.

      • Paula says:

        But where does this 40 Millionen Number come from? Somehow I believe that they all have much less then this. Diana who had 20 Millionen back then from her divorce, struggled to keep her lifestyle up and felt she had to hang out with people like Dodi to get protected by their security. Why do we assume Harry, who got half of what she had plus some inheritance from his great grandmother, can just finance the royal lifestyle?

      • Becks1 says:

        I think Harry and William each got 10 million from Diana, but they didn’t have access to it until they were 25 or 30 (I think before then they just got interest from it?) so if Harry’s 10 million was well invested, as I’m sure it was, then it might have grown considerably since he was so young when she died.

        and its also widely reported that Harry got a significant inheritance from the queen mother because he wasn’t going to be king and have access to the same money as William. But I’m not sure the numbers on that.

        So while the 40 million seems high to me, I wouldn’t be surprised if he has around 20 million of personal wealth, that he hasn’t really had to touch over the past 2 decades.

      • Eyfalia says:

        A royal lifestyle? Why would these two even want a royal lifestyle? They don’t give me that impression as if they are keen to live in a big house full of servants. They never said anything about wanting a royal lifestyle. The others of the royal family want this lifestyle, all the favours and the curtsies and the a$$kissing, but not Harry and Meghan.

      • BabsORIG says:

        Prince Harry worked for 20 years as an army officer and was a commander before he retired from the army. For all those 10 years, she was being paid, just like any other soldier. My guess is all that money was invested. So let’s s not try to act like Harry has never earned any money of his own sweat.

      • carmen says:

        BabsORIG – are you sure about 20 years? That seems a bit long. Regardless, he has money in the bank

      • RoyalBlue says:

        And I think he has a lot more than that. The money from lady Di and the queen mum was bequeathed to him, but let’s not forget that these folks have money in trusts that they are the beneficiaries of. Harry has tons of cash that we will never ever hear about. Will he file tax returns now?

      • Nahema says:

        Harry was supposedly in the army for 10 years (not 20 @BabsOrig) although I find it hard to believe he was really working full time for that 10 years. I remember his active service though.

        I doubt they have £40 million between them. That would surely mean they hadn’t been spending anything while earning? It’s hard to say whether Harry was living entirely off of his dads funds or dipping into his own.

        Either way, if Meghan starting acting again, she’s giving the press the perfect ammo. She had a massive career boost due to her husband, she’ll get roles she would never have been considered for previously and then they’ll rip apart any work she does.

      • Dee says:

        $1,000 invested in Amazon in ’97 would be worth $1.3 million in August 2018. if anyone has a spare time machine, I’d like to borrow it. Seriously, with good investment and a diversified portfolio, Harry money should’ve more than doubled.

    • Ariela says:

      Of course she’s not. She probably considers it beneath her now.

    • theothercleo says:

      I agree. And I’m actually not sure she’d disagree. I always felt like acting is just one of the many things she’s interested in and that she knows she’s an ok actress who can handle a part like Rachel but not a more challenging one. I think she had fun and made a lot of money with Suits but that she moved on to another stage of her life. She always had side projects even as an actress (The tig, her social and philantropic work). I would not be suprised to learn that, even before Harry, she considered moving on from acting post-suits.

      • carmen says:

        I agree theothercleo. Meghan has been working since her teens and clearly seems to be the type who has to keep busy. Her past accomplishments and obvious work ethic are testimony to that.

    • S says:

      Agreed I watched most of Suits shortly after it came out she was dating Harry. While I found the show light and relatively easy to watch (i.e. it can be on in background without worrying I am missing something important) she was by far the weakest link…

    • JulieCarr says:

      Yeah, I can’t see her going back to acting for that reason. She’s not terrible, but she’s not particularly good either, and most of her personality and presence just disappears on-screen. She has ‘it’ in real life, but not as an actress.

      I’m sure there’d be huge interest in her acting at first, but once people see that she’s not very compelling as an actress I think it would only serve to damage her brand long-term.

  6. Nina says:

    Does she really need to search for someone?
    She and Harry must have so many propositions.
    I’m sure she won’t struggle.She just don’t want to accept everything

  7. Jane says:

    Can we all agree that the press knows jacks**t about what this couples plans are at the moment and is just throwing out red meat to rile up the haters.

    • HK9 says:


    • YaGotMe says:

      It’s the same publication as the other Duchess article today, I’m sure both write ups are pure fiction.

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      DING DING DING! Yuuuup.

    • Cosmo says:

      Yes. They aren’t going to tell anyone in the press what they are doing. Let’s wait to hear it from them. These are just more stories to bash them.

    • morrigan01 says:

      If In Touch, US Weekly, In Style or any other US mags like that write anything, they sure as hell don’t know anything. They are the same mags that insisted Meghan was pregnant almost every other week before she and Harry got married. Oh, and that Meghan and Kate were BFFs and all that nonsense.

      They are just glossier version of the National Enquirer. That’s all.

      • PrincessK says:

        Yes, and every week they are looking for sensational headlines, which encourage their gormless readers to keep buying the rubbish.

  8. DaisyBuchanan says:

    Us Weekly has become little more than the US version of the Daily Mail, which constantly beat the tired “Hollywood Actress / Lifestyle” drum as an attempted insult to Meghan, yet schmooze all over Kate and William fraternizing at the BAFTAs. The “source” is probably another know-nothing palace courtier making a wild-ass guess.

  9. Bren says:

    Good for Meghan. I don’t think she will return to acting, but earning an income is a necessity to ensure the royal family can’t control them financially. Meghan seems too independent to be boxed in by an archaic institution.

  10. RoyalBlue says:

    It makes sense they would need an agent if they wish to promote their charities or if they are producing documentaries. I think she may end up in front of the camera and/or lend her voice if it’s a documentary. But no, she is not lining up an agent to get a part on broadway or prime time tv.

  11. Nev says:

    Go on Duchess.

  12. ira says:

    I have said it before and I will say it again, I want to see her back to acting! She was really good as Rachel Zane. And if she really enjoyed working as an actor and at the same time doing charity work, why not?
    Angelina Jolie still act in several movies and it never stop her doing humanitarian project.

    • Poolmom says:

      You are seriously comparing her to Angelina Jolie? She was never anywhere in that league. She was not well known or accomplished in the USA let alone globally. Her claim to worldwide fame is marrying into the British Royal Family.

      • kerwood says:

        @Poolmom, and that was her biggest crime, wasn’t it? Marrying into the royal family. She’s going to have to pay for the rest of her life for committing the capital crime of having a prince fall in love with her.

    • Marcia says:

      Lol Meghan is a lovely person and an okay non-lead tv actress but Angelina Jolie is a movie star.

      • Kosmos says:

        I think that Meghan is a very average actress. Angelina has more experience, but I’ve never much liked her films for some reason. She has never reached top star status. Meghan never will.

    • Lady D says:

      I think the OP is pointing out that both women acted and maintained charity endeavors at the same time, not that she is an actress in AJ’s class. I actually don’t know what kind of actress Meghan is, I’ve never watched her, but I do recall someone here saying that her show was second only to GoT in viewership.

      • Fallon says:

        @LadyD, I had never heard of Suits before she started dating Harry, and neither had anyone I knew. I highly doubt her show was anywhere even close to GoT numbers, but would be interested in seeing comparisons. Seems to me she would have been much more well-known if it was that popular.

      • Guest says:

        Suits was 2nd in cable ratings next to GOT – although GOT did have a LOT more viewers. Maybe it just wasn’t your demographic.

      • ira says:

        This. Thank you @lady d

  13. LindaS says:

    Did anyone really think she wanted a private out of the spotlight lifestyle? Harry wants to live a normal lifestyle. What does normal mean to him? Is normal living life as millionaires and having celebrities as friends. Or is normal going to a 9 to 5 job and struggling to make ends meet like a large part of the population. I think for both of them its the former.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Where did they say that? It’s a bit more complex and nuanced than that, as we all know. Harry has released many a statement and given interviews about what his issues are, especially in regard to their relations with the British press. We have a lot of documentation on this so those who say otherwise are being deliberately obtuse. Don’t assume your version of normal tracks with that of people who are constantly in the public eye, especially since birth.

  14. Goal Digger says:

    Maybe she will finally get to be a bond girl like she wanted before! Haha

  15. GuestOne says:

    1. That Disney video that circulated with subtitles added was doctored by a hate-troll.
    2. This and the Duchess Kate story posted today sound like fan fiction. Doubt many know of Sussexes plans& this is clickbait as it’s a hot story right now. Also a U.K. editor told Daily Beast that the Sussexes had been treated with kids gloves because of the palace but now the gloves were off so I expect a lot to be thrown out there
    3. I doubt she will return to acting. I was a suits fan. She was an average actor but she’s really good at the philanthropy/humanitarian side. So my bet is that will be her focus & hope she can link up with the U.N. again

    • Describing the press treatment before they stepped down as “kid gloves” treatment Is pure BullS***. Also, didn’t the press also push out the story that Meghan was busy hiring this sort of management and spending all her time in meetings when she was SUPPOSED to be having a quiet Thanksgiving/Christmas break with Harry. I remember reading headlines then that are very similar to this one.

      • GuestOne says:

        Yes it was a laughable comment that they had been treated with kids gloves.

        And good point that they had those ‘Meghan is secretly meeting with people for their foundation’ etc before it was leaked they had been in Canada during the 6 week break. Think lots of stories are being recycled. I guess things like the impeachment& Brexit are too boring for the masses

    • PrincessK says:

      Kid gloves??? LMAO…..where did you get that from, and where have you been these past three years??

  16. Kathy Kack says:

    Some of you totally forget Harry has an estimated forture of around $20+ MILLION DOLLARS!
    They do not need to work. They are because they want to make a difference in the world.

    • Marcia says:

      That 20 million dollars will go fast if they keep the lifestyle Harry is used to

      • (TheOG)@jan90067 says:

        It wouldn’t be the “lifestyle” per se, but the security costs, both in the type/location of the home/grounds, and the personal bodyguards/security they would need to employ for each of them and their child(ren).

      • A says:

        People who are that rich don’t run out of money like that. Their money makes money. The RF has always had access to the best financial advice. You can bet that Harry has a sizeable fortune that he’s managing quite smartly.

      • PrincessK says:

        Yes, the money will go fast if they have to pay for security and staff. They need to make money.

  17. Awkward symphony says:

    This another attempt to vilify Meghan and portray her as “calculating social climbing” nonsense😐
    The only “acting” she’s doing is the voiceover for her elephant charity. The tabloids are DESPERATE to BULLY her and are out of leaks after they left the palace. There are other working royals but none of them is scrutinised like Meghan. I mean do you guys know about Sophie Winkleman who’s the wife of lord frederick Windsor and she still gets to attend the trooping of colour balcony whilst also being a working actress!

  18. Valiantly Varnished says:

    I think we should take stories like this with a tiniest grain of salt possible. Because the truth is NO ONE in Meghan and Harry’s inner circle is talking about their plans. And any stories about what they may be doing are all conjecture because the UK press (and People which apparently now functions as the US arm of UK media) have no clue but still want to make money off of Meghan.
    Having said all that Meghan seeking an agent or manager doesn’t mean she’s going back to acting. If she and Harry and looking to move into the media space they will NEED representation. That’s just how it goes. Meghan herself said that she was ready to close that chapter of her life (acting) and I think she still feels that way.

    • L84Tea says:

      This. When I saw the words “seeking management”, my first thought was ‘well, of course they are’. If they want to do the sort of work they are wanting to get into ( I reeeeally hope they make some documentaries about humanitarian causes), they absolutely have to have some sort of management representing them. This is a common sense issue that is trying to be spun as a “bad” thing. Puh-leeze.

  19. Mich says:

    Good for her. She is likely being inundated with offers – speaking, writing, production deals, charity requests, etc. – and needs someone to be the point person.

  20. Harla says:

    I think it’s a great idea for the Sussex’s to get some representation for their future endeavours. This representation will be able to help them navigate the various offers, will focus solely on them without worrying about palace politics, upstaging/outshining anyone else, I imagine that this freedom must feel lovely for them!

  21. Ramona Q. says:

    Of course she’s going to act again! She never planned to quit it permanently. She’s a royal now- she’ll make 8-figure movie salaries immediately. She’s gone from C to A list. And good, don’t give up your art for anyone.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Sure, whatever. Lots of people have agents, not just actors. As stated above, speaking engagements, book deals, production deals etc. You think they’ll have time to sort through every proposal and offer by themselves? So much bitterness and disappointment in someone wanting to actually earn their own money.

    • morrigan01 says:

      Lots of people have representation and managers who are not actors. Every professional writers from Stephen King to JK Rowling for example. *Athletes* have managers and agents or didn’t you ever watch the movie Jerry Maguire? Even some retired politicians like the Obamas have managements and agents, mostly for when it comes to their book deals.

      She’s not going to act again. No matter how many times people like you keeps saying she is.

      • Your cousin Vinny says:

        And yet, we heard over and over again how Harry was never going to leave the BRF. Stranger things have happened. I would not be surprised at all if we see her on screen again. I don’t know why people are getting so heated about this.

      • morrigan01 says:

        @Your cousin Vinny she’s almost 40. It sucks, but most actresses taper off from working once they hit 40. Meghan herself was already talking, BEFORE she met Harry, about what she was going to focus on after her show was over, and activism was clearly the direction she was already talking about going. Hense things like her UN work.

        Meghan grew up in and knows the industry. She knew once she hit 40 the rolls would start to dry up.

        People who said Harry would never leave the Royal Family, frankly, were never paying attention to the things Harry was saying about wanting to leave even before he met Meghan. I myself knew they were going to leave, and even argued that they would when others kept saying he wouldn’t, I just didn’t count on it being this soon.

        She isn’t going to act again, not like she used to. She and people in the industry know damn well it would just be stunt casting to cast her to act in anything anymore. (Voice over work doesn’t count.) I’m not heated, I just happen to know how these things work . . . not to mention having actually *listened* to the things both Harry and Meghan were saying even before they met each other.

  22. kerwood says:

    Did Meghan’s marriage certificate include a bill of sale making her the property not just of the royal family but of the general public as well? Whatever this woman chooses to do, it’s HER FUCKING CHOICE.

    Last time I checked being an actor was not a criminal act. It’s an honourable profession just like any other. Members of the British royal family have engaged in some of the tackiest ventures with some of the sleaziest people imaginable for profit, with not a single whimper.

    The job of a manager is to act as a filter. Offers of jobs and business ventures come to the manager’s office and are investigated before being presented to the client. When the Sussexes were part of the royal family, their office acted as their manager. Now that they are no longer affiliated with the royal family, it makes sense for them to hire somebody to do this job.

    I really wonder what people expect Meghan to do. The royal family has made it clear that they don’t want her or her child. According to the tabloids, Piers Morgan and several posters here, the British taxpayers don’t want to pay their expenses. So many people criticize the Sussexes for NOT working for a living but it seems they think they have the right to decide HOW the Sussexes support themselves. I honestly think that these people won’t be happy until they see the Sussex family suffer.

    The Sussex family is living quietly right now. They’re not bothering anybody. The people who hate them seem to be suffering from some kind of sick obsession. The Sussex family don’t owe anybody ANYTHING. Why not just leave them alone?

    • Lady D says:


    • Guest with Cat says:

      Well said, Kerwood. I don’t understand people’s intensity of hatred and desire to see this family fail at life. She wore Givenchy and Duchessed while black and ghosted an abusive toxic father. And for that, people want her to live as a pauper the rest of her life? The world has gone insane.

    • Thank you Kerwood. You took the thoughts right out of my head. Well said. 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 Also, this instant worldwide media feed we all live with now seems to have encouraged the public that everything has to be immediate. We need to take the Sussexes at their word: they are working on setting up their Foundation, they hope to roll it out in the spring, they want to and are working toward financial independence. The security issue is complicated. I’m sure there are serious threats against them. Their security is going to be worked out privately because any info about their security operations opens an avenue of threat. None of their goals can be accomplished overnight, it is going to take time because it’s complicated. Let’s all give them a break and relax.

      • Tashiro says:

        Agreed 🙂 I know they’re going through a lot emotionally right now. Despite everything I think they made the very difficult but right decisions. I’m rooting for them.

    • Gingerbee says:

      Kerwood, great summary.

    • THEREALME says:

      Agree with some of what you said. It is her life and she can do what she wants. However, the problem is always money. If someone pays for your way then they think they own you. In this case the money for security and the money from Charles. I am not saying they don’t need it. But no one wants to pay for it. If they are not working or living in the UK than British citizens do not want to pick up the tab and Canadians have made clear they do not want to either. It’s millions of dollars. And if Charles is still giving money he will think he has some control. I think the rub is that everyone is fine with them leaving the royal family and doing their own thing but leave it all behind the titles, the duke titles, the money and the security and no one would care at all. And they don’t have to give up the titles its their choice but as long as they have them there will be criticism. As well any public figure gets the gossip on how they should run their life. Taylor Swift, Kate Middleton, etc. , right down to how they should wear their hair. It’s part of the territory.

      • Smices says:

        Whatever money they get from Charles is between them and Charles. And they have no need to leave behind their titles. The receipt of a title is in no way tied to whether they are working royals or not. The York girls are private citizens and still have their titles. The Wessexes were initially private citizens and still received the Wessex title at their marriage. The security issue has not been announced yet so no one know how that will be worked out.

      • Parvati says:

        No, the critics would still care. Because …racism.
        The level of hand wringing over their security costs and fear of “our taxes will be misused” is an example. No such concern for anyone else in the royal household -but because Harry married a bi-racial woman, he must be stripped of everything (because suddenly there is huge concern re tax payer money).

        Speaking of money, I want the BRF to pay back everything they stole from the colonies. The Indian subcontinent, the “jewel in the crown” was far wealthier than Queen Elizabeth’s England. Then came the East India company traders, begging and pleading for trading opportunities in India and China. China said no, but Emperor Jahangir gave in. Two centuries later, Indian subcontinent is reeling under poverty, partitioned into three pieces, and dealing with over 12 million permanent refugees. Return our jewels, our money, and shut the f***up about evil immigrants. Abolish this cruel and worthless monarchy.

      • THEREALME says:

        So……I agree they don’t have to give up their titles. No one said they have too. Agreed the duchess of York just started a duchess line of bedding and things like that. Tacky as far as I am concerned. So if they keep them they can expect much the same type of press. As well I don’t think that the York girls have millions in security costs in their average every day life or receive millions from Charles? Not sure so correct me if I am wrong. And the York girls have the same risks as Harry as they are granddaughters to the queen. If people are paying for something for you expect criticism and control that is how the world works. If a taxpayer pays for your security then they can demand where you can and can’t go because they are paying for it. It’s just life. So for their sakes to become truly independent they need to give it all up. It’s like saying that you are independent from your parents but they pay your rent and they pay your insurance. That is not true independence and as long as they do that they can control you.

    • DarlingDiana says:

      The thing is that even they do not want to be left alone. To be ignored wouldn’t financially benefit them or any causes they espouse. They need the attention. That is not being snarky at all because the BRF itself and all celebrity philanthropists that use their positions to raise awareness have got to have attention to do that.
      If you mean people should not criticize them….that is unrealistic. The BRF gets criticized, celebrities get criticized, high profile people of any industry (like Bezos or Gates) get criticized, and everyday men and women that get brought into the public eye through happenstance get criticized. Being criticized is kind of like an equalizer. It happens to everyone on some scale.

  23. Harla says:

    Quick question…everyone bangs on about security and security costs for the Sussex’s but many movie stars pay for their own security. For instance when Brad and Angelina were together, they had security for them and their 6 kids so if they could cover those costs wouldn’t Harry and Meghan manage to as well?

    • Guest says:

      They require a different level of security because of their close ties to the queen. They need their security to be tied into UK intellegence because they are legitimate targets for terrorists. And that is very expensive. Private security companies can’t do that for them.

      • PrincessK says:

        Yes, the level of security provided by the Royal Protection Squad is really in the top drawer, and difficult to replicate.

        Of course the downside is that these Royal Protection Squad bodyguards can also act as spies, the reason why Diana didn’t want them hanging around her and ditched them. A bit of a conundrum really.

  24. Sparky says:

    What this article says is that Meghan is looking for representation. They phrased it in such a way that implied she was returning to acting without specifically saying so.

  25. boobra says:

    i somehow see her going to producing/directing doccies about humanitarian issues close to her heart, much like Angelina Jolie’s philanthropic works and causes. Meghan will be able to work on her own terms and reflect views that are not so hindered by Royal bureaucracy and red tape. i wish them both the best in whatever endeavors they undertake

  26. L4frimaire says:

    I think some of these lame stories are just to keep this story alive in the US press because it’s losing a bit of interest and traction over here. Wasn’t Meghan supposedly meeting with her former manager over the 6 week break? US magazine doesn’t know anything much and god forbid they actually do something that makes them be “ financially independent”. I keep thinking there will be broadcast deals for Invictus, sponsorships and things like documentaries and production deals, as well as things related to the foundation. It won’t be so obvious.

  27. Grant says:

    To me, she is a superhero. So I would love to see her front-center in the MCU!

  28. Mar says:

    To be honest , I love Megan, but she’s not a good actress, at least on Suites I didn’t think so.

  29. HeyThere! says:

    I woman who is ambitious will always be painted as selfish and evil. I do not understand?! Let this woman live her life for Pete’s sake. She is a kind, caring human who wants to do what she wants to do. I will never in my life understand the hate she gets. She literally feeds the homeless, uplifts many, many non-for profit organizations and all she gets is hate?! PLUS she did all this BEFORE she even met Prince Harry!!

    Side note: I hope she has a restraining order on Pierce Morgan because he is insane. I hate that there is no way to stop him bad mouthing her.

  30. A says:

    I don’t think she wants to make a return to acting. She probably has other stuff she wants to do that’ll need an agent, but people will definitely use this as a way to start yelling about how she’s just “sooooo Hollywood!!!!!” and how that discounts her for the RF.

    • yinyang says:

      They are trying to make the “outsider” as different from the british royal family as possible. If the’re quiet, she is brash. If they’re frugal, she is excessive, if they’re appropriate she is vulgar. They love to push the narrative that the rest of the world isn’t as pleasant and smart as them, how insufferable.

  31. M.A.F. says:

    Quoting US Weekly is now on par with quoting the National Enquirer or In Touch. We know US Weekly went through a by-out over a year ago so why are we still referencing their stories?

  32. Samanthalous says:

    She could bring in some modeling or spokesperson contracts, she could do fashion or beauty. I think she wants to try to be like Angie but no action movies.

  33. Jumpingthesnark says:

    Of course she’s looking for an agent, for people working in those industries, it is standard to have an agent. And she wants to work. Here is where the BRF gets their collective panties in a wad though, being a working person is seen as “lesser than” by them, and thus they and the media portray her as tacky or lower class. I don’t think going out and working for a living makes a person tacky or lower class. And don’t the brits want the Sussex’s completely off the payroll? Well, they’re gonna have to work to do that. You can’t have it both ways.

  34. morrigan01 says:

    I don’t believe this. You know why? Because it was reprotered before and *after* the wedding that Meghan had kept her agent/manager that she already had.

    Like, that was one of the things the courtiers supposedly hated about her – that she kept her American management. So which is it tabloids?

    So yeah, unless I see this reported in Variety or Hollywood Reporter, I don’t believe it. I can believe she already has her same manager/agent and never dropped them anyway though. It frankly makes more sense that she hadn’t. Maybe Harry’s looking for representation, unless he and Meghan have already decided (and IMO they have) to both be represented by her same agent/manager she already had.

    Oh, what I CAN also believe is that one of the big management firms, like CAA is probably trying to woo her and Harry to sign with them. Unless she was already signed with them that is (I don’t think she was/is though).

  35. Well-Wisher says:

    The Duchess of Sussex plans would not be disclosed by the stated source.

  36. missskitttin says:

    If this same attention was dedicated to Prince Randy Andy this media space wasted on him would be much more useful.

  37. GuestOne says:

    @TheRealMe Andrew pays for Eugenie’s& Beatrice’s security which likely means the Queen pays for it- I’m assuming out of her ‘private funds’. Harry&Meghan’s risk profile is probably higher than theirs as they are lower profile& were never working royals, he’s a target for serving in Afghanistan, and they are likely far right/white supremacist targets too.

    I don’t see anybody saying of former politicians, diplomats etc that have taxpayer funded security that the public must dictate their movements so I don’t understand the argument here. At the end of the day their public roles representing the monarchy& HMG came with certain risks that requires a certain level of protection.

    • THEREALME says:

      Yes remember when Melanie Trump stayed in New York people were furious about that and the cost. As well Trumps many golf games make people very angry because they cost so much. As well Canadians complained about Trudeau and the cost of his trips. So yes people complain all the time about travel and protection costs for people who the tax payer pays for. And rightly so it’s to be expected. If you pay you have the right to voice your opinion. If you are correct that serving in the army brings risks after you have completed your mission then a lot of civilians need government protection. Just saying that they are no more special than the queens other grandchildren they should all receive ewual money and protection.

      • GuestOne says:

        Yes I’ve seen people complain about Trumps golf trips etc- are there petitions about restricting his golf trips etc?

        My point was also focused on former politicians etc. In the U.K. it’s just come out that Teresa May has received £400k in speaking engagements since stepping down as prime minister but I don’t see anybody saying she should cover her own security or where she’s allowed to go. Prince Andrew is not a working royal& is secured by the Met police but hardly any comment on his arrangements. Interesting that taxpayers concerns only comes up with certain folks.

        I have already explained why Harry& Meghan are more of a security risk than some of the Queen’s lower profile grandchildren& this is assessed by the relevant authorities accordingly.

        I agree former soldiers should receive more duty of care from governments but an ordinary soldier is less of a useful target to terror groups than a soldier who is also a famous Prince. As I said it’s their roles which lends itself to the security they require.

        This has just become a talking point because the press want the Sussexes vulnerable.

  38. Coffee says:

    Non-story. Shes not going to act and she wasn’t even that great to start with.

    Theres a reason she started Tigg… she was moving into lifestyle stuff, as most actresses do once the roles dry up. And most likely instagram ads. All influencers do it cuz it pays bills. Each post has the potential of earning 10K. If she does it now, she could probably earn millions.

    Also, people keep saying charity work was her focus pre-harry. I’d like to remind folks that ALL actresses And actors do charity work to leverage their popularity in a positive way. That said, Charity work does not pay bills. Ask Angelina Jolie. She has been the most successful at being a humanitarian as an actress in recent memory. Even she said that being an actress gives her the financial
    Freedom to continue her humanitarian efforts.

    • morrigan01 says:

      Eh. SOME go into lifestyle stuff. If Meghan hadn’t married Harry, she very likely would have continued with The Tig. And given her degree in International Relations (along with Theater), as well as her internship in Argentina and wanting to be a diplomat, she was likely always going to be involved in charity and politics – she was starting to dip her toe into the latter bit with things like her UN involvement, though I don’t think she would have done something like run for office or the like. But IMO charity/politics was never just an image thing for her.

      But now she doesn’t have to do lifestyle blogging to pay the bills, like she might have once continued doing. Production/Production Company. More actresses have started forming their own, than have in the past, and she and Harry are just right to get into that sphere. Hell, how do you think Kobe Bryant ended up winning an Oscar. He started a production company (and was looking to start a studio). Producing films, documentaries, books, etc., will “pay the bills” fine, while they also continue with their charity endeavors.

  39. CK says:

    I wouldn’t mind it. She wasn’t spectacular in Suits, but few actors hone their craft after their first big project. There’s always the chance that she improves or she gets the right role.