Duchess Meghan’s GMA interview was just a Disney promo for ‘Elephant’

Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, attend a roundtable discussion on gender equality!

As much as I wanted a Zoom interview with Duchess Meghan this morning on Good Morning America, I’m happy that it wasn’t that. GMA had been airing a hype-commercial about how they were carrying a new interview with Duchess Meghan, but “new” is a relative term. It was new to us in that we have never seen it. It was not new in the sense that the “interview” was filmed last year as part of a behind-the-scenes hype thing for Disney’s Elephant, the documentary Meghan narrated. Here you go:

It’s fine. It is what it is: a Disney promotion on the network owned by Disney. But it did make me wonder if and how Meghan (especially) will give her “first interview,” post-royal. I’m sure there was a plan in place before the virus changed everything. So what’s the new plan? An exclusive with at least one network, one would assume. 60 Minutes? 20/20? Dateline? I still wonder.

Meghan Markle launches the Smart Works capsule collection

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, WENN and Avalon Red.

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

66 Responses to “Duchess Meghan’s GMA interview was just a Disney promo for ‘Elephant’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Lol. I love how WRONG the British tabloids got this. Again. It was just a promo. Lolol.

    • Ruby_Woo says:

      Really? Were they bitching about this? What were they saying (I try not to following them because they enrage me so much, lol).

  2. Melissa says:

    All dressed up and no tea to sip.

    I think we knew this is what the ‘interview’ was going to be and who doesn’t love an elephant?

  3. Becklu says:

    The documentary looks really interesting, (I won’t pay for Disney Plus) but looks good and I do love elephants. I think she is really good at voice over work she has a nice public speaking voice.

    • Natalee says:

      Lol it’s a Disney Naturr documentary. It’s really just a cute thing for kids to watch with their parents. And it was cute. Elephants are cute.

    • Becks1 says:

      It was really cute. It’s not a super hard-hitting documentary, because that’s not really the point of Disney Nature – DN is more about teaching via a family story – so the animals have names, there’s a lot of personalization etc – but it was really good.

  4. Seraphina says:

    It really was made into something else by the haters.

    What does stand out to me, is that she is polished and well spoken. And it just hits home what a gem the BRF is missing – and all their fault.

  5. Amy says:

    LOVE elephants. I am not adding another streaming service but I bet this is good. I think this is an interesting project that plays on her skills well, she is a great public speaker which is not easy for a lot of people so I am glad she is picking things that highlight that.

    Question and it may be stupid but is she a formal royal? I thought they were still royal just not working? Am i wrong on this?

    • Sofia says:

      What’s your definition of royal? A member of the royal family? If so yes. But if your definition of a royal is someone who gets taxpayer funding and does duties on behalf of the queen then no she’s not

      • MEL says:

        So by your definition Beatrice and Eugenie are not royals.

      • Amy says:

        OK you need to calm down a bit- not loving the attacks. However, in the video the GMA anchor said former royal and I thought they were still royal so I was clarifying. I am not attacking Harry and Meghan by asking this question.

      • Sofia says:

        @Mel I didn’t say that. I simply asked Amy what her opinion of royal was.

        @Amy: it was not an attack. I was simply just asking what your own definition was because people have different definitions.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Royals are anyone with an “HRH” title. Despite what people may think, the “HRH” title is not restricted to “senior royals” or “working royals” (those were excuses
        made up to justify not calling Harry and Meghan “HRH”); rather, that title is given at will/whim of the monarch.

        So yes, Eugenie and Beatrice are “royal,” and Peter and Zara are not. Prince and Princess Michael are royal, and little Archie and Edward’s kids are not.

        This is a summary of the various statuses of the royal family:

        (1) Royalty. The “HRH” members are all royalty. Whether they work hard, or not at all, if they are “HRH” they are members of the “royal family.” The title is not tied to how much they work, or whether they are “senior royals.” It’s usually assigned at birth or marriage, but it can be given or taken away at the will of the monarch. Once the “HRH” title is gone, they are no longer royal.

        (2) Peerage. These are the Dukes, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, Baron. They could also be royal, but most are not. For example, the Duke of Glouster is a prince and a “HRH” so he is royalty. But the Duke of Devonshire is not royal.

        (3) Commoners. Not a royal and not a peer.

        William is royal and so are all of his kids. They all are “HRH” and have royal status.

        Anne is a royal, but her children are commoners. They do not have royal status, and they are not peers.

        Edward is royal, but his children are not royal. But unlike Anne, they are not commoners either. Edward is also an earl, and his children have the “rank” assigned to the children of earls. So his son James, who is not HRH and therefore not royal, holds the title Viscount Severn and is a peer.

        But none of that affects their position in line for the throne — even Anne’s commoner children are in line. The “HRH” status and titles, or not, have no bearing on their place in succession.

      • Becks1 says:

        To tag onto what MrsKrabapple was saying – Edward’s children could have been HRH. They were entitled to it (grandchildren in the male line of the monarch.) They said at their marriage (? or at Louise’s birth) that their children would be styled as the children of an Earl (which is Edward’s title) and would not be HRH. So that was a bit unusual.

        William’s children were NOT entitled to HRH, but the Queen changed the rules and issued new letters patent before George’s birth so they are all HRH. (or else they would have been HRH Prince George, and then Lady Charlotte and Lord Louis.) That made sense because when Charles becomes king, they would be entitled to HRH anyway. (my personal opinion – this same deal was offered to Harry and Meghan for Archie – to make him HRH from birth – and they said no.)

    • Bella says:

      Hi, Amy
      They are both royal – he is royal by virtue of his birth (as is Archie) and Meghan is by marriage to Harry. The HRH styling is in the gift of the monarch so she could take it away, but she hasn’t, and they have said they will not use it. This has created confusion, but essentially Prince Harry is still Prince Harry, Meghan could call herself Princess Harry/Henry of Sussex (but yuck) and they are still Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Earl and Countess of Dumbarton and Baron and Lady Kilkeel.

      • Sofia says:

        @Bella: IIRC Harry is not Prince Henry of Sussex. The bit after the “of” is dependent on your father’s highest title, not your own. So Harry is in fact “Prince Henry of Wales” and Meghan is “Princess Henry of Wales” as Wales is Harry’s father’s highest title.

        If Archie’s parents choose to have Archie be HRH (they won’t by hypothetical) he would be “Prince Archie of Sussex” as Sussex is his father’s highest title. And should Archie have a wife she would be “Princess Archie of Sussex”

      • Amy says:

        Thank you Bella- so the ABC person was just wrong in the clip that makes sense.

    • CarbnFtprnt says:

      American anchors get their talking points from the UK media. when H&M said they were stepping down BM deliberately pushed it that they were stripped of everything. I think the American media dont care enuf to spedn anytime trying to understand the royal family

  6. Sofia says:

    I mean we all knew there would be no tea and that it was pre recorded. Or at least people were saying it.

  7. Lilly says:

    I know im gonna be burnt by this but why do we accept the fact that harry got her this gig because of his privilige? I mean lets call them out too.

    • Sofia says:

      What’s their to call out? All royals get the opportunities they get because of who they are. What they do with them and how much effort they put into them is what distinguishes them from each other

    • Mumbles says:

      We saw the video of that actually happening, so yes, you’re correct.

      That said she is an actor and this is in her wheelhouse so she is qualified for the job. But had she not been Duchess of Suffolk and just “formerly of USA Network’s ‘Suits’” she would not have gotten the gig.

      And yeah I’m going get burnt on this along with you.

      • Sofia says:

        Mumbles, that video was a fake

      • Beach Dreams says:

        You’re going to get burnt because you constantly push tinhatter stories and try to present them as facts. But yes, keep playing the victim 🙄

      • Lizzie says:

        The ‘gig’ was for done for charity. Only thing to call out is good works by them as usual.

      • MsIam says:

        @Mumbles and @Lilly seriously? It was a fundraiser for that Elephant organization. And would Kate and Will have been on with Mary Berry if not for their “privilege”. Good lord!

      • Mtec says:

        @Mumbles @Lilly
        And Will and Kate being royals don’t get them anything ? They do voice over projects for charity too. Are you guys out there judging them for their privilege as well?

        Like others have mentioned, Harry didn’t ask Bob Iger to get Meghan a job do voice over, this documentary, with Meghan’s involvement, was already in the works since 2017 if I read correctly. The producers of it, Not Bob Iger, approached Meghan for it because of her and Harry’s work with elephant conservation. Bob Iger himself said Harry didn’t ask him for a job for his wife.

        I think y’all are reaching wayyy to hard to find fault with Meghan for doing something for a charity! My gosh 🤦🏽‍♀️

      • It’s been proven that that video was doctored and that is not what Harry said, but you just go on sprouting that RR BS, Mumbles.

      • AGreatDane says:

        She had been involved in animal conservation efforts before she met Harry (it was one of the things they bonded over) and had an agent and PR firm and friendship with high profile celebs so she could have gotten the narration role either way, just like Natalie Portman got the one for dolphins and Benedict Cumberbatch got one for penguins and the list goes on…

    • Melissa says:

      I won’t come at you with a fork, but I’m not really sure what to call them out for. Presumably most of us network within our jobs and daily lives and take advantage of what privileges’ we are afforded to get things done or get ahead. The stated intention is to eventually become financially independent, this particular event funded a charity, but presumably they are going to need to make money so that Charlie doesn’t have to keep paying the bills. Of COURSE they are going to use their connections to make that happen, just like most of us do on a daily basis…they just have better connections and name recognition than most.

      ETA: @ Mumbles — I agree that the title got the gig, I just don’t see anything wrong with using the title to get the gig…if that makes any sense.

    • MEL says:

      Then you thoroughly deserve to be burnt because Harry did not get her this “gig.” The directors of the film were the ones that reached out to her because she and Harry were working with EWB director, Micheal Chase, who was also involved in the film. Disney CEO was not involved in the nitty gritty negotiation of this. How is it even a gig if it earns her nothing?

    • Flamingo says:

      You’re on the wrong website for that. Meghan had a steady C-List career before she met Harry. She was probably more well known for her blog/ influencing than for acting. I wouldn’t say that Harry necessarily got her this job, but her new increased name recognition probably did. I think she did a really good job narrating a documentary for children. Her voiceover seemed enthusiastic and age appropriate to me.

      • norah says:

        i dont know what your issue is with meghan but calling her c list shows your bias. she was a working actress as well as being known for the tig and lots of charity work even before she met harry. grow up

    • Sid says:

      I wouldn’t say that “we” have accepted that. The production team stated that they are the ones who approached Meghan about doing this, way before that red carpet video that people twisted around.

    • Bella says:

      @Mumbles and Lilly
      The film-makers have explained how it came about that Meghan was asked to track the documentary.

      Bob Iger has also stated explicitly that Harry was telling him about the voiceover gig, *not* asking him for it that night at the theatre.
      “Did you know she’s doing the voiceover?” is very similar to
      “Did you know she does voiceover?”

      Your interpretation goes against the facts. Why do you set such store by it?

    • Ruby_Woo says:

      Even if he did, what’s so bad about that? Why does that need to be called out. If my partner, mum, sister, friend, whoever had connections and got me a better job opportunity, I would take it!

      She could be using her connections to take millions from UAE or Hong Kong billionaires/ millionaires or having access to parties hosted by paedophiles like the other royals. But she’s using her platform to narrate a nature doc.

      And you can have all the connections in the world, but you have to actually be good at what you do. You could argue that the York girls or Sophie Wessex get gigs cos of their dad/ husband. But their projects do not get anywhere near as much coverage/ interest as Meghan’s.

      • Bella says:

        That’s absolutely true, Ruby-Woo.

        It just winds me up when people are stubborn about admitting they’ve got something wrong, which is the as here.

    • Olenna says:

      @Lilly, why do you not believe that the Duchess could’ve been approached for this “gig” based on her own merits? Do you think Disney would waste it’s money paying the film and research crew for several of years of hard work only to hire a narrator that wouldn’t give the film its just do? Her narration was excellent, and the film has done well WRT viewership. But, you want to believe her husband had enough influence for Disney to disregard its bottom-line. It always help the conversation here if one thinks before commenting.

      • CarbnFtprnt says:

        Funny that after the tabloids admitted the story was fake, some people still wants to keep on push him. Wonder if ppl who feel the need to call Meghan a-z list actress realize it shows their jealousy? What matters is that she was a making steady income and no doubt way more than they ever made

    • Korra says:

      Harry and Meghan lived privileged lives and would probably have the self-awareness to admit that. But what is the harm in her using connections to land this gig? Even if it were not her, the studio would have approached another privileged actor to do this gig (Natalie Portman did the voiceover for the other documentary that was bundled with this rollout.) She is not taking away gigs from struggling actors. So why does she or Harry need to be called out in this instance?

      • norah says:

        by that logic prince charles uses his privilege to get other celebs to help him in his own charity work. why isnt he called out for that? or what the cambridges who get to edit magazines or hang around mary berry etc/ why again is meghan not allowed to use every advantage given to her?

  8. LindaS says:

    I doubt she is going to give a post royal exit interview. Why would she? I think they will just get on with their plans when that is allowed as the pandemic clears.

    • Iknow says:

      100% agree.

    • Elisa says:

      THIS! She is way too smart to do that,…would just be more fodder for the tabs….

    • Bella says:

      I would bet my house that she never ever ever does a tell-all. Ever.

    • Ruby_Woo says:

      All I know is, that the tabloids and RF alike are petrified if does a tell-all interview. They are worried she may actually confirm the bullying… they do not question whether she is actually telling the truth. Just worried she might actually confirm it and start spilling tea.

      • Thirtynine says:

        I too, don’t think she’ll ever do a tell all. If and when she interviews it will be in the context of her work, like all her speeches. I do think we’ll find out more behind the scenes info in different ways, but it will never be from Meghan.

    • CarbnFtprnt says:

      Claiming Meghan is oing to do a tell all is just another way for the tabloids to denigrate her. they want to say Meghan is no diff from Fergie and Sophie willing to sell out the RF for the right price.

  9. February Pisces says:

    Aww I love elephants especially the baby elephants they are so playful. Meghan looks really good in this promo. Haters will be seething to see her thrive.

  10. ShazBot says:

    This movie is great, my kids really enjoyed it. And her voice over is totally fine, it’s not terrible and it doesn’t take over the story.

    I do love that she wears basic looks a lot (like her crisp, white shirts) so that the conversation isn’t so much about what she’s wearing.

  11. OriginalLala says:

    Elephants are awesome and we could all be better stewards of this planet and its inhabitants. I don’t think she will be doing a tell-all interview, she seems too classy for that.

    • MsIam says:

      I agree, Meghan seems to have put it behind her for now. She’s looking ahead and not back. However, with the lawsuit still pending I’m sure her attorneys have told not to comment on anything related to the BRF.

    • Melissa says:

      If a tell-all ever happens, it will be after financial independence has been achieved. I am sure there are things they very much want to say and records they want to set straight, I am equally sure that silence on anything BRF was the price of ongoing financial support.

  12. Bella says:

    I’ve seen the documentary. It is very engaging, beautifully filmed, breathtaking at times and addresses key issues about the survival of elephants as a species through a gripping narrative. The script is a little cheesy in parts, and it anthropomorphises the elephant “characters”, (it is produced by Disney, after all) but M’s vocal quality is lovely – warm and clear. This film was aimed at children under 12, so a must-watch if you have kids, but also enjoyable and informative for anyone – I thought I knew a lot about elephants, but there was quite a lot in there that was new to me.

    Listening to Meghan, my feeling was that she was at her best in the more serious sections. She has a natural authority to her voice. I would love to hear her narrating something challenging about or aimed at adults.

    • booboocita says:

      My thoughts exactly. She’s a former actress, so of course she can convey a line with conviction and feeling. But the segments in which she narrated more serious or profound ideas really gave her an opportunity to shine. I hope she does more documentary work.

    • Mtec says:

      I agree @Bella. It was lovely and nice to watch something uplifting during this time of crisis. I don’t know about you, but the constant flow of info about coronavirus (specially the fake or contradictory ones) really take a toll on my mental health. And I actually liked that they anthropomorphized the elephants. I made me fell invested in their journey, specially during the dangerous situations they face, and even laughed and cried at times. It was super cute, and it serves as a good way to get children to care about Elephants even more. I think Disney and Meghan did a great job. Oh! And if you liked it I would recommend the Dolphin one Natalie Portman voiced as well!

      • Bella says:

        Same, same, Mtec.

        I did cringe a bit now and again, but I had tears in my eyes a couple of times as well! And when Jomo and Shani were surrounded by lions in the night, I was shouting at the screen, “Don’t do this to me, Disney! If anything happens to Jomo, I swear to God, I’ll storm Disneyland Paris…!” You get the idea.

        And Shani facing down the older elephant near the end gave me chills.

        And yes, I did watch Dolphin Reef, which was also beautifully filmed and Natalie Portman’s voiceover was excellent.

        Two instant classics for the Disney Nature brand.

      • Mtec says:

        “ when Jomo and Shani were surrounded by lions in the night, I was shouting at the screen, “Don’t do this to me, Disney!” —LOLL @Bella, iI had the same reaction!! Hahaha

        My heart was also beating so hard while they waded through the crocodile waters!!

  13. TheOriginalMia says:

    I doubt we’ll get a post-Sussexit interview. There’s no need for it. There’s no need for them to spill the tea. We all know what occurred. They’ve said all they wanted to say in their SA documentary.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Agree. Don’t know why everyone wants them to do some sort of throw everyone under the bus takedown. They have enough on their plates right now.

  14. L4frimaire says:

    I don’t think Meghan or Harry will give any type of substantive interview until after their court cases are decided and pandemic restrictions ease. I’m sure we’ll get little blurbs here and there on what they are doing, but too much going on that’s up in the air. They may not even say anything until the one year review. What more do we need that we haven’t seen already. I don’t think they’ll talk about how the sausage was made. They seem like they just want all this behind them and want to move forward with their lives.

  15. kells-bells says:

    This isn’t shocking.
    She narrated a Disney doc and is doing press for it – which is the norm.
    Elephants are magic as is she – I can’t wait to watch!

  16. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    I think the the movie did a good job of showing people how difficult an elephant’s life is, and what these magnificent creatures have to go through to survive in a harsh climate (even without the threat from hunters, which is a whole different issue). The world will be a lesser place once the elephants are gone.

  17. Haha says:

    These movies are great and so important. Good for her, go Meghan! I really admire that she did this. We need more powerful people to speak out on conservation. It’s so sad how these animals are treated.