Duchess Meghan lost her chance to be a British citizen, oh no you guys

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex at the US Open Tennis

Last week, the one-year anniversary of the Sussexit announcement came and went with little new information. I mean, what is there to say? The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are living happily in Montecito, they’ve been steadily building their empire for months in plain sight, they’re working on their Archewell foundation and every time they breathe, there are blaring headlines in the UK tabloids about how the palace was “blind-sided.” Of course, those same outlets were trying to make old stories into controversies around the anniversary, like this mess:

Meghan Markle has officially missed her chance to become a UK citizen… for now, DailyMail.com can reveal. The Duchess of Sussex had fully intended to become a Brit after marrying Prince Harry in May 2018 in a spectacular wedding at Windsor Castle. She was required to live in the UK for a minimum of three years before applying for citizenship and legally qualifying for a British passport. And at the time Kensington Palace confirmed the former Suits actress intended to apply.

However, her and Harry’s shock Megxit announcement in January 2020 saw the plans hit the skids. Under strict Home Office rules the Duchess, who first moved to London on November 21, 2017, could have begun her citizenship application three years later on November 21, 2020. But the jet-setting Duchess was also required to limit the total number of days she spent outside of the UK in that time to less than 270 – something she failed to do. Now any future application would be delayed and would involve a move back to the UK.

[From The Daily Mail]

I’m starting to feel slightly sorry for these poor unhinged lunatics. They’re still banging their head against the wall, wailing about how Meghan lost her chance to be a citizen. When it was clear one year ago that she was abandoning plans to seek British citizenship and she was quite happy with her American citizenship, thank you very much. I would also assume that once the Biden administration comes in, Harry will apply for American citizenship. And THAT will be a big deal in the UK press too.

In other “duh” news, the Times had a story about how Harry & Meghan “have abandoned social media and will no longer use platforms such as Twitter or Facebook.” They were never on Twitter, for what it’s worth, and I still completely believe that Prince William forced them to give up the SussexRoyal Instagram. Anyway, a source close to Harry and Meghan said they had “no plans” to use social media for their new Archewell Foundation and were “very unlikely” to return to platforms in a personal capacity. Also: “the couple are understood to have become disillusioned by the ‘hate’ they encountered on social media. Meghan has spoken about the ‘almost unsurvivable’ experience of online trolling.” So… no Archewell Instagram? No H&M Instagram? I know why they’re doing that, but I still think it’s a mistake. They should get back on Instagram and just turn off the comments. It would really allow them to release information on their own terms and you know Meghan is itching to get back to ‘gramming.

Photos courtesy of Backgrid.

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

118 Responses to “Duchess Meghan lost her chance to be a British citizen, oh no you guys”

  1. mynameispearl says:

    Does anyone know if you gain American citizenship, do you retain the citizenship of your birth? I’m assuming you would wouldnt you?

    • Sofia says:

      Both the US/UK allow dual citizenship

    • Melissa says:

      Yes, you can be a dual citizen.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      This is a complicated question. US naturalization law disfavours dual citizenship, but the US cannot stop other countries from recognizing someone as its citizen. Section 215 of the Immigration and Nationality Act also mandates that US citizens must enter the US after foreign travel with a US passport.

      Technically, when a person naturalizes to US citizenship, s/he swears an oath of allegiance to the US and formally renounces all other citizenships. Some countries will refuse to recognize dual nationality for its citizens who naturalize to US citizenship. Others, like the UK, do not consider the oath of allegiance to render someone no longer a subject (check it out – UK “citizens” are literally referred to as “subjects” in their passports) and will continue to recognize him/her as a UK citizen.

      Harry is a special case though. Since he has a diplomatic status, he must formally renounce this first before he can even get a green card. Even then, I seriously doubt he will ever be permitted to naturalize to US citizenship.

      • Sofia says:

        Do you know where in the passports UK citizens are referred to as “subjects” because I’m curious now! Because I just checked mine and I can’t seem to find it anywhere (I’ve probably seemed to have missed it)

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        I believe there is a paragraph about her Majesty asking other countries to let her subject pass and treat him/her accordingly on one of the early pages. I always found that line quite amusing – the Queen asking other countries to treat her subject well!

      • Sofia says:

        @Bearcatlawyer: it’s there but not /quite/ in the same way you’re thinking so you’re not entirely right. Here it is, typed up from my own passport:

        “Her Britannic Majesty’s Secretary of State requests and requires in the name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary”

        So no talk of subjects and referring to UK citizens as her subjects. The closest to it is it saying that the Secretary of State is acting upon the wishes of the Queen.

      • ElleE says:

        @bearcatlawyer Gracias for taking the time to explain this. I am going to be thinking about “UK “citizens” are literally referred to as “subjects” in their passports” for a bit.

        It was so offensive when members of the current administration referred to US citizens as “consumers” in the context of PPP loans and vaccine distribution. Words matter.

      • Sofia says:

        @ellee it isn’t true. Please see my post above where I literally copy and paste what is written in our passports and nowhere is subjects mentioned

      • GrnieWnie says:

        I’m a dual citizen, the US doesn’t make it hard to be dual. I never renounced anything in order to naturalize. The US only makes it hard for you to renounce your American citizenship, my God, that is a chore.

        You aren’t pressured into giving up your other citizenship unless you’re in the military or working in some other capacity that requires a security clearance. Even then, they don’t just pressure everyone. Nobody asked me to give up my original nationality; they just denied me security clearances lol.

        Harry will probably just apply for a green card on the basis of marriage to an American. He won’t need to give anything up and he also won’t be acting in a diplomatic status for either the UK or the US (even if that were true, it wouldn’t be the basis for denying him US citizenship after 7 years on a green card. Having a single nationality would just be the basis for employment as a diplomat). He can also just apply for a work/business visa, given all his dealings here.

        UK citizens are subjects bc the UK is literally the United Kingdom. Subjects=subjects of the queen. This is really just an administrative designation, not a meaningful one (not in this century).

        Countries like China refuse to recognize dual nationality bc they have an extremely traditional notion of citizenship. Doesn’t really have anything to do with how Western countries understand it.

    • Anony83 says:

      I mean, there are lots of dual-citizens in the US/UK but here’s my question, this has not come up in A WHILE but I feel like when the US was founded that aristocracy had to give up their titles to get US citizenship. And, can you BE in line for the throne as a dual citizen?

      I’d have to do some old-ass caselaw research I suppose to find out the metes and bounds of the limits, but I am almost certain that the US requires you to renounce foreign titles to be a US citizen.

      • Guest says:

        You don’t have to give up your titles you just have to express a willingness to. The N-400 contains a question about that and you have to tick the box saying that you’d be willing to renounce any foreign titles and allegiances. Same with the citizenship question. You do not have to give up prior citizenships you just have to swear loyalty to the US and express a willingness, through ticking another box and swearing an oath, to prioritize that loyalty above any others. Signed, a practicing US immigration attorney.

      • mynameispearl says:

        And if Harry doesn’t give up his citizenship say, would Archie have dual citizenship? I’m thinking of Boris Johnson who was born in the USA but gave his US citizenship up for tax reasons I think. I’d be wanting to retain rights of citizenship in as many places as possible just to keep my options open when I was older lol

        I’m from NI so have dual Irish/British citizenship but I feel like living in GB would be an option even if you were an Irish citizen only. At least the Irish passport is an EU passport too though which is good :)

      • Anony83 says:

        Guest – interesting – my googling on it was just getting me a mix of articles from when they got married and obscure crap about the aristocracy.

        mynameispearl – I’m fairly certain that Archie is already entitled to dual-citizenship – that’s pretty standard – I have several friends who picked up dual-citizenship in various European countries on the same basis for the EU passport (though Ireland’s rules are obviously more flexible than most places.)

    • Drea says:

      I’m a dual citizen (triple actually). It’s a gray area like bearcat states above.

      In my swearing in ceremony for the US, I had to raise my right hand and state some such that I wouldn’t put any country above the US and would renounce all other foreign citizenships, titles, etc. But the US has no jurisdiction over other countries and telling them what to do, and the other countries in citizens of don’t require renunciation. And I absolutely will not do that on my own accord for the US. I have been a proud citizen, I applied when I was 18 so I could vote and really be engaged in our country. But make no mistake, if sh*t really goes down, I’m out. I realize that’s a huge privilege.

      • Jezebel's Lacefront says:

        …and that’s where the issue lies. “If shit goes down, I’m out.” Sounds like a fair-weather citizen to be honest.

      • Drea says:

        I love this country but I wasn’t born here, so I won’t pretend that my ultimate allegiance lives and dies here. The whole “America is Number 1!” Espoused by both liberals and conservatives alike irks the ever loving crap out of me, because most Americans don’t realize that other places aren’t taking second place for funsies.

        That being said, I fight/campaign/vote for better policies in this country because I want it to be a good and happy place to live for all citizens.

        And, if sh*t goes down, and when I say that I mean really goes down, I want to be there helping and getting others across the border to somewhere safe.

        Take it as you will.

      • Drea says:

        And let me add, I get that it is HOME for a lot of people. Not only have they built their own lives, but all of their family members are here, they have ancestors here, they have stories and history and etc.

        I’m honestly a bit envious of that. And I’m glad people are protective of their heritage. But heritage is complicated. You can’t expect that same outlook from an immigrant. Hell, even natural born citizens have complicated relationships with their heritage. America hasn’t been the kindest to its own citizens, to say the absolute least.

        But I have empathy for that, and I want better for all those people. So, here I am, fighting for a better place.

      • Isabella says:

        Welcome,Drea. You sound like a great citizen

      • BnLurkN4eva says:

        @Drea I completely get where you are coming from and I also understand @Jezebel’s Lacefront point of view as well. If you were born here and this is the only home you know, for the most part you have no choice but to die here. On the other hand immigrants to this country come here, not because they don’t love their own country, but because America promises opportunities that their country don’t provide. It’s one thing to fight to keep that promise for oneself and others, but if it’s going down in flames and your only chance of survival is returning to a place where you can at least survive, it’s human to do just that. @Drea, I think @Jezebel’s Lacefront is speaking to if there’s no hope left and all there is left is survival. That’s literally the MAIN reason people immigrate from their birth home to another place. Given the climate mess we’ve gotten ourselves into, it’s a possibility that many people will find they will have no choice but to leave places in the coming decades.

      • Sunnee says:

        I’m also dual citizen and yes, I would leave if shit goes down. My husband, whose family has been here 400 years, has applied for citizenship to my county. He is a descendant of slaves and of Puritans. He is extremely disappointed in how things are going. We are under no delusions that these Trump attackers will stop. As long as he lives and breathes they will put him above the interest of this country. And the violence against the government and POC will most likely escalate. As people of color we are afraid for our adult children too. They are automatically citizens of my country.

      • Drea says:

        Thanks @Isabella,

        And @BNL, I totally understand there are many viewpoints and thought processes on immigration and citizenship. I’ve talked with many people who take issue with dual citizenship as a concept. It’s a unique position to be in, being a citizen of more than one country. It’s a bit of an identity crisis to be honest. Never truly belonging wholly to either, never wholly accepted by either. And this one opinion is by no means the monolith opinion of immigrants.

        My dad came here for a job opportunity, and brought the family, so we were lucky in that we weren’t escaping anything. Lots of friends of mine can’t say the same.

        I recognize that this gives me a huge privilege as well. I truly do.

      • GrnieWnie says:

        oh wah to everyone saying “what a bad citizen.” Guess what, we are all still citizens of our home countries, too. Do you think people there are judging us for naturalizing in the US? Wrap your brains around DUAL citizenship–it isn’t one or the other. It’s literally both. Nobody need force themselves to get flushed down the toilet with the rest of the country when they have other options.

      • PixiePaperdroll says:

        I have dual citizenship by birth (born in Canada to a pair of Americans) and having a foreign birth certification AND no naturalization papers is a giant pain in the ass. But CBP is way nicer about it than USBP.

    • Andrea says:

      I am an American and soon to be Canadian. I can be dual, hold dual passports, and be dual citizens. The caveat: The IRS makes you file with them every year wherever you make money and you are taxed heavily after you make a certain amount so that they can try to force you back to the US or abdicate. It is ridiculous and only 1 other country in the world does it.

      • Drea says:

        Yea, if I ever left the US, I would renounce.

      • Jaded says:

        Unfortunately if you decide to officially renounce you’re on the hook for government charges of US$2,350. Mr. Jaded has dual American/Canadian citizenship and after getting tired of having to file really complicated tax paperwork every year he looked into giving up his US citizenship and voila…they jam you for a hefty fee to do it.

      • Drea says:

        @Jaded I mean, it’s no surprise.

        Is it just the hassle for you guys or is it worth it in the long run to pay that fee?

      • GrnieWnie says:

        @Jaded it is a pain but hey, you can claim Social Security AND the Canada Pension Plan at the same time.

  2. Persephone says:

    Yeah…seriously doubt she’s sad over this.

    • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

      I’m sure she’s crying big tears.

      Of relief, ‘cos Baby will NOT be put in the corner, but she WILL go back on HER terms!

      As for Harry, I think he’ll go for permanent resident status eventually. I don’t think he’ll go for citizenship. Archie IS an American citizen by birth (as he has one parent who is a citizen), and as he was born in England WILL have dual citizenship. (I’m pretty sure that is how it works).

      • Mercury says:

        Not true. The law was changed in 1983. If one parent is a British citizen, baby is too – has nothing to do with being born in the UK. I was born in the UK after 1983 but I am not a citizen as neither of my parents are UK citizens

      • Ponytail says:

        I agree with Mercury – the law changed in 1983, although yes, it was the case before (I was born a British citizen, even though neither of my parents were British at the time).

    • L4frimaire says:

      I think Meghan equates her time in the UK to being in a gulag, so not sure she wants to have that passport, especially now that they are no longer part of the EU. Not many benefits now. Of course, never say never. Who knows what will happen once pandemic restrictions lift and if they decide to actually divide their time between both countries. As for Harry getting US citizenship, lol, that’s not happening anytime soon, it takes a few years.

  3. Eleonor says:

    No blue passport !
    She must be devastated.

    • Brittney B says:

      My US passport is blue…

      • heygingersnaps says:

        It’s because during the brexit campaign, changing the colour of the passport from the EU burgundy passport and reverting to the old UK blue passport was one of the “advantages” of splitting from the EU (lol)

      • Anony83 says:

        All US passports are blue, so we’ve gotcha there.

        Also, I could have sworn UK passports were burgundy. (Oh I see, it’s going blue after Brexit, that seems silly, the burgundy is nice.)

  4. BearcatLawyer says:

    It is doubtful Harry will ever naturalize to US citizenship. He would have to give up all of his titles and swear an oath allegiance to the US. I do not see Parliament or Petty Betty allowing that to happen.

    • steph says:

      Can you explain how Petty Betty or Parliament has actual power to stop him if he did choose seek American citizenship? And him throwing out his titles, how did that work? His titles have no meaning here as they are British titles. Would he be banned from using them in the UK under UK law?

      • BearcatLawyer says:

        My understanding is that Harry has diplomatic status and travels on a diplomatic passport. In order to get a green card in the US, he would have to renounce his diplomatic privileges and obtain a regular U.K. passport. I am no expert on British law, but I seriously doubt Petty Betty and Parliament would allow him to renounce his diplomatic status and especially to lose his diplomatic immunity. I also am unsure how the U.K. would treat him if he renounced all of his titles to become a US citizen, but I suspect Petty Betty would rather proactively take them away than allow Harry to give them up through an oath of allegiance.

        Then again, they cannot really stop him from filling out the USCIS paperwork. But I imagine that if he did that without permission, he knows the optics would be very bad.

      • Myra says:

        Harry may already have an ordinary passport. Since his status has changed and he no longer represents the royal family when abroad, he likely travels as other ordinary citizens.

    • Jegede says:

      Harry will never renounce his British citizenship.

      Never.

      He’ll likely go for permanent residency.

    • Sandra says:

      I doubt that Harry will choose to become a US citizen. He rejected his family, not his country. They are here in the US because Meghan is American and to be near her Mom.

      • PrincessK says:

        Exactly.

      • tcbc says:

        Will it still be his country after 10 years or so? Honestly, I think people are being very naive about this. His home (the one he bought with his own/his own family money) is in California. His wife and child are there. Perhaps if they have another child, that one too, will be there. He will be like any other immigrant who moves to the US, except famous. You still love your old country but you (usually) become a citizen of the one you’re living in. Eventually, the tax issues alone will probably make the decision for him.

        I think he will wait until after the queen dies/Charles takes the throne, or until George is old enough to knock Andrew out of any official role that would be caused by his departure.

      • L4frimaire says:

        @tcbc, I know people who’ve lived here for 30+ years who still have green cards and haven’t become US citizens. One of my best friends came to this country when she was three, and only became a citizen in her 40s because of Trump. I think if the BRF strips his title, I could see him getting dual citizenship. He’s still young, has been in the US less than a year. There is no rush.

  5. Harla says:

    She’s using her 100 million from Netflix to wipe away her tears….of laughter 😂

  6. Sofia says:

    1) Yeah anyone who thought Meghan was actively pursuing British Citizenship in 2020/2021 was wrong (I swear I mean that in a nicer way lol). As for Harry, I don’t think he’ll pursue American citizenship. Green card/permanent residency yes but not an actual citizenship. Never say never though.

    2) I’m not upset about the Instagram stuff. I mean would I like one? Sure. But I also understand why they don’t want one. They may feel differently as time passes but they also don’t really /need/ it as almost everything they do becomes news anyways. Plus by posting information directly on the organisation’s own socials, they’re driving traffic and benefiting the organisation directly as it makes people look at their post instead of seeing Harry and Meghan’s.

    • Ginger says:

      I have no clue if they will have SM again. Maybe not a personal account but one for their foundation. Whatever they decide, I am fine with.

  7. Lauren says:

    They were literally counting the days so that they could publish this idiotic article. They really are that ex.

    • Britt says:

      They’re crazy. It’s like they don’t get the constant attacks, trolling and abuse aren’t getting them nowhere. Harry and Meghan don’t care anymore and aren’t obligated too. It’s like them trying to hang on to a slippery fish. The only thing they’re getting is blocking, no access and lawsuits.

      • SomeChick says:

        And clicks/views. Altho since there really is no new news, even that may well be falling off.

        I can’t see Harry going for citizenship while TQ still lives, if at all. He doesn’t need it unless he wants to vote.

  8. Britt says:

    That media is so bothered by the fact that Harry and Meghan want nothing to do with them. They really despise the fact that America is embracing them, Trump lost and they’ve lost out to a bigger media platform. The day Harry becomes an American citizen, which I fully believe will happen, they’ll lose it for real. Also, the social media nonsense. This is another means of attacking their credibility because if they do get an account, they’ll be called hypocrites and you can also detect anger because them not having a social media means no new content they can troll under. I can’t see how it would be a bad thing considering their stalkers do enough promotion for them anyway. Either way, the attacks are tired and they need to move on.

  9. Melissa says:

    Are US immigration records public? I’m dying to see what last name Harry is using. He’s Henry, Duke of Sussex on legal docs in the UK, but that’s not a name you can use in the US. I assume he’ll use Mountbatten-Windsor like Archie, but I’m dying for confirmation lol!

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      Sorry, immigration files files are protected by the Privacy Act.

    • Züri says:

      I believe not for 40 years and the government can exercise discretion to retain the classified status of any document it wants.

    • steph says:

      He used Wales when he was in the military so I was surprised Archie was Mountbatten Windsor. Can we read into that in a gossipy way? Lol
      But yeah, I’m going to assume it’s the same name as Archie or all three would have different names.

      • Sofia says:

        I don’t think it’s a massive deal lol. Edward and Sophie’s kids go by Mountbatten-Windsor (or Windsor at the very least)

      • steph says:

        @sofia, what about untitled children of the Yorks? Will the last name still be a royal one? Or their father’s? I don’t think Andrew is going to allow his grandchildren to be untitled so this a hypothetical.

      • Sofia says:

        @Steph: Beatrice and Eugenie use the last name York (unless they’ve taken their husband’s last name). Eugenie’s kids will be *first name* Brooksbank and Beatrice’s kids will be *first name* Mapelli Mozzi

      • Sydney says:

        He used Wales because he didn’t have his own title. Yes it’s still his father’s tire but eventually that it will go to William and his family they will be the Wales. I’m sure he and Meghan uses the same last name as Archie on legal documents.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        Poor Archie…As a former teacher, I can just imagine him as a 4-5 yr. old having to learn how to spell/write that long last name as a Kindergartener, and try and FIT IT in a testing form on state school tests! That is one mouthful for a little one to handle 😊

      • Becks1 says:

        @TheOG – that’s what I always think about when it comes to that last name, LOL. How unwieldy for school!

        Lady Louise tends to be referred to as Lady Louise Windsor, so I wonder if Archie will be referred to the same way, or if the Windsor will drop off and he’ll be Archie Mountbatten?

      • Nic919 says:

        All male line descendants of the Queen who don’t have titles are to be referred to as Mountbatten Windsor as per the privy council order of 1960.

        It was Windsor until Philip pushed for Mountbatten to be added. So Harry isn’t doing anything controversial with Archie’s last name. We just haven’t run into non titled children of male Windsors until now.

      • Maevo says:

        It would be cool for Archie if they just used his middle name and he went by Archie Harrison.

      • Oh says:

        If H&M had a girl, What would be her last name? Mountbatten-Windsor (the same as Archie) or just Windsor?

      • Sofia says:

        @Oh: Same last name as Archie.

      • tcbc says:

        Even this is not certain anymore. I wonder if the RRs realize that. If they push for title stripping, what’s to stop Harry and Megan from changing their last names altogether? People with less abusive families do it. They could be Raglands or Spencers, or just Windsors. (I would drop the Mountbatten, it’s the kind of prissy nonsense the toffs think is so important so the rage it would generate would be fun.)

  10. JT says:

    Is the Times a reliable source for H&M? They have sources for the royals, but I think this should be taken with a grain of salt in regards to Harry and Meghan. I also believe they should get back on instagram. For now with the pandemic, releasing info through other outlets is working, but when things get back to normal I think it will be tedious. And what about their Netflix projects? They will need a means to promote them, as well as Archewell, and their speaking engagements. They’ll need to consolidate all of those things in one place, not have people visit several different sites to get information on their projects. Maybe for charity they’ll keep allowing those organizations to release info, but for their own projects I think they’ll need instagram or something.

    • ABritGuest says:

      A Sussex spokesperson said the Times report about them abandoning social media is just speculation & that they don’t currently have a SM account so can’t quit what they don’t have.

      The timing of the Times article was very suspicious seeing as they haven’t been on SM for ages. Their focus has been on improving digital spaces so I wouldn’t be surprised if they did have a SM account for Archewell eventually perhaps when there are more tools to help against organised trolling they saw with Sussex royal.

      I think the article was only published yesterday to align with the right wing press complaining about Trump being banned from various social media sites. the Times’ editorial was about SM giants restricting freedom of speech. They probably want it to look like people having an issue with SM aren’t just on the right.

      • WallEnder says:

        Exactly this. Someone posted clips on twitter of a BBC show where they implied that H&M quit twitter (which they were not on) in solidarity with Trump

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “The timing of the Times article was very suspicious seeing as they haven’t been on SM for ages.”

        This is just like the Daily Fail running another article today on Eugenie & Jack “leaving” Frogmore Cottage when I believe they left Frogmore Cottage weeks ago.

        I just want to things: 1. I want the one-year review of the Sussexes over and done with as the longer the wait goes on the more money the Daily Fail makes off the Sussexes and 2. I want the real and complete details on what really went down with Eugenie, Jack & Frogmore Cottage.

    • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

      Whatever they promote from their Netflix deal will be done ON the Netflix platform (ie: Netflix’s Twitter etc). No need for H&M to have their “own”. As a poster said above, like with their charities, posting on their host’s/charity’s/business’ site drives traffic to THAT site, which is where H&M *want* the focus. Not on themselves “personally”.

      Just my opinion, for the whopping two cents it’s worth ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 😊

      • Becks1 says:

        Right, or Netflix will come up with their own IG handle (for example, for Bridgerton, Netflix’s IG promotes it, as well as the IG account BridgertonNetflix or something along those lines, AND Shondaland promotes it. so for Archewell, you could conceivably have the first two, but not the third, and it would still be promoted.)

      • FC says:

        This. Each project they do on Netflix will get its own handle, and mega promotion from Netflix (and networks like NBC, CBS, etc. during promo time). I could even see Meg doing an IG takeover of one of those show handles to provide a behind-the-scenes look at the shooting of the film/show. There are lots of ways to promote without a personal handle.

        Also I LOVE what they’re doing with their charities — allowing their socials to “break” H&M news like the Christmas card, using every bit of their celebrity to divert the focus to the charity.

      • JT says:

        Of course Netflix will promote H&M’s projects as they do with all of their shows. Many actors and directors also use their own social media to promote their projects as well, such as Chris hemsworth or Ava duvernay, who use their own platforms to speak about their work. But Harry and Meghan don’t just have Netflix, they have archewell as well as any of their speaking engagements they will have once things settle. I think it would be nice to have all of their work in one place to see and even look back on for reference. For example all of their various zooms and conferences they’ve done this past year are on several different pages, when people look back on them they have to search different organizations to find them. It doesn’t even have to be on SM, they could build something into archewell for people to catch up. They did their last instagram so well it think it would be a shame to give it up.

    • Kalana says:

      The Times is a Murdoch paper. Three Murdoch publications, the Times, The NY Post, and the Sun, have focused on trashing the Sussexes and embiggening the Cambridges. More of William’s Tory connections?

      The Times hasn’t been reliable since the tiara story in 2018 which still stands out as a senior member of the Palace having enough pull to get what should be a respectable paper to publish a story that clearly didn’t make sense -and that’s how they justified it too, as their source being senior enough so whatever even though it made no sense. Senior members of the palace can use the press to lie without any factchecking or pushback from the press.

      Roya had an article pulled down because it wasn’t true and Harry pushed back so she’s also not reliable. The Cambridges are still salty about the Sussex Royal Instagram and being outed by the NY Times for buying bots so I could see them feeding this to the Times. If the Sussexes made a decision like this, Omid would back this up and he hasn’t.

    • PrincessK says:

      I comment on The Times and when it comes to comments about the Sussexes, it is almost as bad and nasty as the comments on the Fail. Out of hundreds of comments I am amongst just a handful of Sussex supporters. Bashing them is a national sport and when I read the comments I can tell that they have been getting their information from the Fail which has been successfully brainwashed them.

      The Times is really following the Fail with all kinds of silly click bait stories about the Sussexes. Why they chose an old story about social media and put it on the front page, beggars belief. The readers keep crying out that they don’t want to read about Harry and Meghan but keep coming back for more. It is nothing else but click bait because Harry and Meghan ‘sell’.

      When the Sussexes do return to the UK, you can bet that the media will go absolutely crazy after over a year of being apart from the couple they seem not to be able to live without.

  11. Rapunzel says:

    Meanwhile, in Montecito, Meg reads the article over her morning oatmeal latte, turns to Harry, points to the headline. They both shrug and go back to planning their Netflix docs and Spotify podcast.

    • Britt says:

      Lol. They aren’t sitting crying and worrying about social media because their stalkers and bitter exes do the promotion for them. You don’t have to worry about something trending when Piers Morgan will rant about it constantly. They’ll be just fine.

  12. Lemons says:

    I’ve had a sort of social media sabbatical where I haven’t posted anything on Facebook or Instagram in about one year. Outside of Reddit and Celebitchy which leads me to Twitter at times, I’m really not that active on social media which has become very toxic for me whether it’s the “keeping up with the joneses” mentality or a politically toxic wasteland.

    Let me tell you, emotionally not being on social media has been great. I’m stressed about other things, but I’m not stressed by seeing what others have been doing. I’m just doing what I can do in my little corner of the world/my world.

    I imagine that Harry and Meghan feel the same way. They’re able to disconnect and focus on what matters to them without feeling the additional negativity social media adds to their lives. While it can be a tool, I find that without having a business to promote on social media, it brings more negativity than positivity to my life.

    • Merricat says:

      Me, too, Lemons. I quit Facebook because Zuckerberg is an evil MF, and it turned out to be so great for my spirit, I am never going back. Never been on Twitter, and only sometimes on Instagram. Good enough.

    • steph says:

      I would like to make a suggestion: use your time off from SM to go hard curating it. For example, my explore page on IG will only show me 4 things: Supernatural (tv show) content, Les Twins ( world’s best dancers), animals, and babies. It’s like that bc outside of my real life friends it’s the only thing I interact with.
      Go on Twitter and build your banned words/ topics list. Then go and follow subjects and ppl you know cover topics you are interested in. Like if you like royal topics follow the staff here and #sussexsquad (that’s firmly team h&m so you don’t get the hate stuff).
      I have no help for Facebook. I’ve given up on it. Just stay off.
      But, if you work on it, SM can become a place of respite.
      One last thing: just don’t open the comments on anyone/ topic with a large following. You are guaranteed to meet trolls.

  13. Amy Bee says:

    Later reports in ET and Sky News refuted the Times story regarding social media. They point out that Harry and Meghan never had a twitter or Facebook account to quit and that any talk about quitting social media was speculation at this point. I believe that part of the Sandringham agreement was that they give up their Instagram account and not open one during the one year review. Their stance has always been that they see the benefits of social media but they want to make it safer for people to use. Yesterday, the British media was trying some weird gymnastics to tie Trump being banned by social media companies to Harry and Meghan allegedly quitting social media. We’ll have to wait and see if they decided to have a social media account or not. The problem is now, if they do open one the British press will say that they’re hypocrites because they wanted privacy and that according to the Times they had quit social media.

    I hoping that at the end of the one year review, that Harry and Meghan puts out a statement saying what they’re intentions are and that clears up these tabloid stories of the last year.

  14. gemcat says:

    the only downside to this is not having the same citizenships as your child. That was one of the reasons I stayed longer, made sure to get in the right amount of days, in my second country. So that if my child (who was granted that citizenship by birth) wants to eventually move there I can too (for the purposes of being near possible grandkids etc). That said, its not likely as big of an issue here, but with so much uncertainty in the US I’d personally hedge all my citizenship-bets, especially early on to not have to re-do the process later. So while I understand where she is coming from, I’m not sure I’d make the same call..but yeah, I don’t exactly have any Netflix or podcast deals..heh

    • Sofia says:

      But she does have the same citizenship as her child even if it’s just half of it ;) Archie is both an American and UK citizen.

      • gemcat says:

        ha, yes I see what you’re saying @Sofia but thats also why I wrote citizenships in plural.
        I have the same two (seperate sides of the world) citizenships that my child does, and can’t understand giving that option up.
        That is not to say I don’t respect her decision, I just can’t really relate to it. But then again, that is at least in part my white privilege talking, and also her/them easily having the means to apply some other time

    • goofpuff says:

      Then that would mean that Harry would have to get US citizenship to match his child in addition to Megan getting UK citizenship. I don’t think Megan having UK citizenship now that they’ve stepped down from royal duties is necessary.

      • gemcat says:

        Yeah its interesting I didn’t flip it back onto Harry isn’t it, but maybe that was just me subconsciously going meh about dads in general.. a tad bit harsh and not meant as a reflection on Harry at all. Anyways, I guess I was thinking that as long as you are connected to a place through your children, at least personally I would want to become a citizen so that I could vote there (and have rights to live there in the future like I said above.) Technically it applies across the board, I just have no experience in being a dad so..

  15. Millennial says:

    The tabloids make it sound like she can never become a UK citizen. That’s not true , she just would have to start her clock over if they ever moved back. Which they might, never say never.

  16. GrnieWnie says:

    I mean, who cares about UK citizenship now that it no longer grants you access to the EU?

  17. Sydney says:

    Meghan doesn’t need a official account to be on the gram she could already be on there going by another name if she wanted to. Many celebrities have “fake accounts” that they use to post their real thoughts and post pictures on private accounts.

  18. BnLurkN4eva says:

    There is a response to that times article that calls that story speculative meaning, the times made up the story like so many UK media do when it comes to Harry and Meghan. I believe they will return to social media when they are ready and likely after some changes are made to make the platforms less hostile. I believe we are about to see some changes where misinformation is concerned and perhaps more punitive actions will be taken towards trolling and tracking bots.

    I actually like the way Harry and Meghan have been letting the charities announced their interactions with H/M and letting their spokes people report directly to credible news sources whatever news there is to share. They really don’t need social media at this time when their website is effective and I assume it can also be used for announcements. Also, they collected emails from followers so I imagine that will allow them to communicate via a newsletter if they choose.

  19. Louise177 says:

    “It would really allow them to release information on their own terms and you know Meghan is itching to get back to ‘gramming.” I doubt Meghan is dying to get back on social media. Otherwise they would have done something when they updated the Archewell website. The can still post on their website and give info to their charities. I think they liked doing it to raise awareness.
    The stories about Meghan and Harry are weird. The press is acting like they are begging to get back into the family. You would think moving, buying a house, making business deals, not trying for British citizenship would be huge red flags that they aren’t coming back and don’t care about it.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Yeah, I agree. I don’t think Meghan is eager to go back to social media. Why would she after the personal and racist attacks she received since getting with Harry? If they do open an Instagram account, she won’t be the one managing it.

  20. L4frimaire says:

    There seems to be a recent spate of silly Sussex stories in the British tabloids,just taking old news and trying to make it happen again. There were a bunch today as well. It seems like the anniversary of them stepping back came and went without fanfare because of the news of the attempted coup in DC continues to dominate the news, as it should. I’m sure that frustrated a lot of royal reporters and now it’s stale news. I think they are, rightfully holding off on social media right now. They themselves said it was a bit of an exaggeration they were never returning. They just have other things to focus on. They have a whole communications team and a podcast and the Archewell site. We’re not going to get cute photos and dresses on Instagram, or candid little pics of Archie. That’s what wanting them on social media is about, getting glimpses into their personal lives. Maybe they really just don’t want to be on it right now and like having an extended break from it. Jennifer Aniston never had social media until she did that AppleTV show. I don’t get the impression they miss Instagram all that much.

    • L4frimaire says:

      Also, considering how they have spoken out many times about how toxic certain aspects of social media are, worked with Stop the Hate, there are whole YouTube channels dedicated to hating on Meghan and spreading lies and actual conspiracy theories about her, I think I’ll give them a pass if they decide to opt out a little bit longer. This and the fact that a lot of what happened in D.C. last week was spread on social media,with the President actually spreading these election lies and QAnon conspiracies, and using his Twitter to encourage this coup. I just don’t see what the big deal is about them not having Twitter. What if they just want to launch their projects, get on with their work and really just be private citizens. Remember Meghan said at times the harassment and attacks felt almost unsurvivable. We don’t know what they’re feeling and how difficult it really was for them, seeing this constant hatred. Even if they just turned off the comments, their posts would just be screen shotted and picked apart and attacked in another forum. Look out how Oprah’s little crown emoji set off everyone. They just want to be free of all that for now. Just because we are hungry for news of them, doesn’t mean we’re entitled to it.

  21. Amelie says:

    The Sussexes have been relying on the charities they work with to release information and pictures of their events and I think it’s worked to their benefit. The power is with the organizations and therefore the media (specifically British media) has no choice but to base their reporting on the social media posts of the charities and give them credit for the pictures. Therefore, the charities get direct media coverage and their posts get so much engagement because of it. The only reason we got access to the Sussexes holiday card this year was because the Mayhew (the animal shelter) released it (I’m sure the Sussexes gave them their blessing). I really don’t think Meghan misses Instagram. She was getting death threats and so many racist attacks directed at her AND her child. And if you pay attention, the social media posts she is featured in by the charities she works with get a LOT of vitriolic comments directed at her. However, since it’s not her social media account, she doesn’t have to worry about it or deal with it anymore.

  22. Larisa says:

    I do not believe Harry is eligible for citizenship already. I mean, he will be eventually, but not yet.

  23. GuestwithCat says:

    I like the fact they are off social media and we have to read their web site or charity sites or listen to their podcasts to hear from them. It makes them more mysterious, lol. I think it really does give them just the right exposure for now.

    If I’m feeling lazy, I just come here and the Celebitchy site aggregates all the most interesting news about them daily.

    I know what Meghan means when she says it felt unsurvivable at times. There was a period of attacks around the time of her pregnancy where the hatred and negative energy, especially from her father and Samantha, directed at her was so intense, I felt if that were me I’d just want to die and be done with it. She had such a deep well of positive energy to have come through that and given birth to a healthy thriving baby. It should have been the most serene and joyous time for both of them. The BRF and British media stole that serenity from them.

    I think there were kind British people they met, as well as commonwealth citizens who sustained them. I’m sure it heartened them to see the Sussex Squad and see the incredible response to their charitable endeavors. But they can still have that and now not have to put up with the BRF and BM shenanigans. So I don’t think Meghan has any compelling drive to gain British citizenship.

    Let’s see what happens in a few years, though.

    • ABritGuest says:

      And not only did she have her father being the worse but the press was reporting that firm employees were speculating on her marriage& calling her names. People in royal circles leaked various gossip for that Tatler profile. A month before she was due to give birth a senior royal was reportedly calling her a degree wife. Who knows what else was happening behind the scenes.

      People really did the most, presumably to drive Meghan out. It was very cruel& they must have been very paranoid about who they could trust.

  24. Reece says:

    ” I would also assume that once the Biden administration comes in, Harry will apply for American citizenship. And THAT will be a big deal in the UK press too.”

    I’m so hoping for this solely because of the delicious meltdown!

  25. JanetDR says:

    The title on this is so perfect! Love it.

  26. Lizzie says:

    ‘Britain lost its chance for Meghan to be a British citizen.’ Fixed it.

  27. blunt talker says:

    I am relieved the Sussexes are not on social media-I as an ordinary citizen do not have the right to know every detail of their lives-I’m cool with that-I would not want my personal life and business strewn on social media to be dissected and dragged through the mud to satisfy vile minded people-This way gives them time and peace to pursue projects and charities that interest them-God bless the Sussex family.

Commenting Guidelines

Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment