Would you believe that there are people in the British media *still* complaining about the Duchess of Sussex’s family photos on Instagram? The latest is from Celia Walden, also known as “Piers Morgan’s wife.” Walden devoted a long-winded, bilious column to Meghan’s IG posts celebrating Princess Lili’s fourth birthday. Meghan posted artsy black-and-white photos of Lili, where her back was to the camera or her face was mostly obscured. Then Meghan posted the Disneyland photos, which are still causing emergency editorial meetings over there. They were unprepared for the Disneyland pics because they had to order the global supply of smelling salts to recover from Meghan’s pregnant-dance video. In the Disneyland pics, Lili and Archie’s faces are once again obscured, this time through “hearts.” Well, Celia Walden has had enough! She knows that Meghan will soon post her children’s faces online, and until then, Walden is going to mock her in anticipation! A truly terrible excerpt:

Capitalising on your kids is a slippery slope for public figures – and Meghan is hurtling down it. “I give it a year until the Burberry Kids campaign,” a girlfriend messaged me back in March, after the Duchess was accused of using Archie and Lilibet as “clickbait” in an “act of desperation” to promote her new online shop, dubbed “Meghan’s Mall”. Because we’re all thinking the same thing. Because she’s tried everything else. And because, despite her being born in LA, a recent poll revealed that only four in 10 Americans hold a favourable view of Meghan. So, actually, a year may be a stretch.

Let’s not forget that Meghan will be being goaded into using the children by every member of her professional entourage, certainly those taking a percentage of Sussex, Inc. She may (correctly) be thinking that she can’t win, having been criticised (unfairly, in my view) for refusing to pose on the steps of the hospital when she gave birth to Archie in 2019. She will definitely be overwhelmingly proud of her growing children, in the way every mother yielding to the impulse of showing yet another relative stranger a picture of their child is. And the cynical marketeers are right: those kids could very well be the answer to everything.

First, they give Meghan the “relatability” factor she has always lacked, partly by being very beautiful, and partly by making a series of bad judgment calls from the start. These poor judgment calls extend right up to the present day, to choosing to play a little ol’ homebody making pasta sauce on screen in an all-white outfit. Not something any mother in the history of pasta sauce has ever done. But motherhood is the great unifier, and Gen Z were reportedly delighted by the video of her “Baby Momma Dance”. Why? Because it was “real” and showed the 43-year-old to be just as “fun”, “goofy”, and “normal” as every mum-to-be. So you can expect plenty more where that came from.

Second, the children will keep her “relevant”. And yes, that word comes with dollar signs attached, but it’s about far more than that. In a world where attention spans are gnat-like and celebrities aren’t always – how can I put this? – endowed with a whole range of talents that will ensure their longevity, remaining relevant is a constant battle and children useful tools. When those children are royal, they go from being useful to invaluable.

Third, and perhaps of particular importance to the Sussexes, if you have philanthropic pretensions and want to be perceived as having gravitas, children are an enormous asset. An endless array of worthy causes can be attached to kids, and in Meghan and Harry’s case, that personal touch, that banal parenting anecdote, will always get you immediate, global attention.

[From The Telegraph]

Walden’s reasons for “why Meghan will eventually show her kids’ faces” are: 1) Meghan is beautiful and people hate beautiful women unless they’re moms; 2) The kids are the only thing keeping Meghan relevant and 3) Meghan will have to remind everyone that she’s a mother constantly so that charities will be interested in her. What are we even doing here, Celia Walden? The “relevancy” issue is the funniest to me, because just in the past year, we’ve seen an entire national media throw weeks-long tantrums over “Meghan wearing a red dress” and “Meghan dancing while pregnant” and “Meghan selling jam.” Everything Meghan does, says or posts is relevant to these people, because they’re completely obsessed with her to the point of lunacy.

The third part is fascinating though, right? As I read “An endless array of worthy causes can be attached to kids, and in Meghan and Harry’s case, that personal touch, that banal parenting anecdote, will always get you immediate, global attention,” all I could think about was how often Prince William and Kate bring up their kids for no reason (“Charlotte likes music” or “George would love this”). Not to mention, Kate’s whole Early Years nonsense is some vague busywork based on the fact that she’s a mother. In fact, this whole thing reads like a temper tantrum from the British media that Archie and Lili are still so elusive to them. They’re mad that they can’t profit from the Sussex kids, like they profit from the Wales kids, who have always been much too accessible to the media (imo).

Photos courtesy of Meghan’s IG.