British commentators have completely run out of insults for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, so their current cycle is “mocking Harry and Meghan for earning money.” As in, hahaha, Harry and Meghan work for a living, gotcha! That was the gist of a recent storyline about Harry specifically, because he traveled to Toronto on Monday to make a paid appearance at a realtors’ convention. The commentary was “he needs the money” and “the upkeep on his mansion caused him to take a paid gig!” They’re mocking him because he isn’t funded by British taxpayers and he’s not a slumlord trapping seniors in freezing duchy tenements. Well, an alleged “source” close to the Sussexes spoke to the Daily Mail to clap back on this “haha, the Sussexes work for a living, how gauche” argument.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ‘have to make money’ to survive – unlike the royals back in Britain, a pro-Sussex source has claimed after they were accused of hypocrisy. The staunch defence of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex came after their own charity released a report saying young people around the world want role models who are not ‘driven by profit’. The official Archewell Foundation document also criticised ‘inauthentic’ online influencers and declared that ‘true leadership is not about money or followers’.

Meghan and Harry’s critics have pointed out that their deals with Netflix and Spotify since 2020 were worth at least $120million (£90m) alone. Meghan has also relaunched her Instagram account and used it to promote her Netflix shows and As Ever lifestyle brand. But she denies being an influencer, calling herself an ‘entrepreneur and a female founder’. Along with lucrative speaking events and other well-paid business roles, the cash has allowed the Sussexes to settle in a $14million Montecito mansion with their two young children.

‘That they have to make money is a moot point’, a Sussex insider has said in their defence, adding pointedly: ‘We all do, unless you’re a member of the institution (the Royal Family)’.

Newsweek has said that the Sussexes’ ‘pivot to authenticity’ causes them a major problem and that it leaves them open to claims of hypocrisy. The publication’s Chief Royal Correspondent, Jack Royston, wrote that Archewell’s own findings ‘chime with numerous major criticisms of the couple throughout their post-royal lives’. He wrote: ‘The findings are striking but make difficult reading alongside the facts of the first five years of Harry and Meghan’s US lives, which saw them sign multimillion-dollar deals for content creation.’

But a source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has launched a staunch defence of them and their motives. The insider said the couple’s decision to accumulate wealth after Megxit has allowed them financial independence from the Royal Family and to ‘give a disproportionate amount of their wealth’ to good causes.

‘To cast all young people as though they would take umbrage with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for making money, is just an oversimplified assessment of who they are as people and what I think that report is trying to say,’ the source described by Newsweek as being ‘sympathetic to the Sussex position’ said.

‘Young people, as it relates to the brands and the things that they associate with or feel an affinity to, are largely driven by activism. It’s why young people love Ben and Jerry’s. It’s why young people love Patagonia. It’s why young people love activist-driven brands and if you were to look at Harry and Meghan as an activist-driven brand, which I would argue they are, they focus on showing up, doing good and handing over a disproportionate amount of their wealth compared to the average Joe to good causes’.

A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment.

[From The Daily Mail]

Ah, yes, Harry and Meghan are hypocrites for… making an honest living through a production company, book deals, paid speeches, a food-and-lifestyle brand and investments in start-ups. Hypocrisy! How can you make money AND give some of it to charity, amirite? Why do they need to pay for a mansion and security when they could live in a dilapidated shack funded by British taxpayers??? These critics don’t have the good sense god gave a goose.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.