Even after years of covering the Duchess of Sussex in particular, I’m still surprised by which stories become multi-day faux-controversies. Like, remember when Meghan wore a red dress to a hospital fundraiser? The Daily Mail ranted about Meghan-in-a-red-dress for weeks, and they were still bringing it up months later. I’ve also been surprised to see just how insane the British press has been over Meghan’s scheduled appearance at a ladies’ retreat in Australia. Like, they are not taking that well at all and it’s been weeks of meltdowns.
Well, the latest multi-day nonsensical controversy is over Meghan posting a sweet Easter video of Archie and Lili running to find their Easter eggs. This video has gotten millions of views, and the British press has been obsessively documenting and analyzing every little thing about and around the video. The Mail seriously did a whole story about how Lili loves going barefoot, just like Meghan, and something something Americans/California/royal protocol! I don’t know, I didn’t read the full story. The larger issue is that the media doesn’t have on-demand access to Archie and Lili and they’re absolutely furious that they can’t simultaneously demand that Meghan show her children’s faces AND demand that Meghan delete her Instagram. Speaking of, here’s an excerpt from the Times’ latest column, “Is this photographic evidence that Meghan is a ‘posturing parent’?” For the love of god.
It used to be, until the 21st century, that bodies carried shame. If there was anything you were going to cover up, it would be a body. A face — unless you were a wanted criminal — was what made us most recognisably and nobly human.
Cut to the Instagram account of the Duchess of Sussex, who has posted two videos of her children in the past week, the first of her son skiing, shot from behind, the second of her children in Easter activities, faces carefully obscured from behind or the side.
… In 2026 the “emoji on child’s face”, or the lesser variant, “child always shot from behind”, trend is many things, and all of them are strange. Parents don’t have to choose between their children having an online or an offline childhood, they can instead broadcast endless “nape” shots of their child’s necks or slap a garish cartoon sticker on their face, done in the name of hypocrisy, or love.
Sierra Tishgart, a journalist, said in a TikTok rant that had nearly 400,000 views that the two crimes of the emoji mask are that it’s ugly and that it’s smug. “It’s visually heinous,” Tishgart argues. “I don’t want to see a heart emoji with legs. And it’s performative in the worst ways. You’re posturing parenting, while you’re also saying, ‘I’m above you, because I vaguely care about privacy.’”
Of course, it started with celebrities, the actress Kristen Bell among the first to plaster a big yellow happy face emoji across her daughter’s family photos, but soon followed by countless others, from Chris Pratt to Gigi Hadid and Blake Lively. Notable that they are all Hollywood royalty: privacy is here wielded as a luxury commodity. They are too rich, too classy and too high status to shill their kids’ faces across social media platforms like the Kardashians or the Beckhams, or us civilians who know a cute photo of any child is a magnet for likes on Facebook.
When I read this kind of sh-t, I always have two thoughts. One, why is it so important to see Archie and Lili’s faces, really? Be honest. Two, why would anyone be offended by Meghan and Harry wanting their kids to have some anonymity given their very real and well-documented security issues? Of course, I always think it’s so sweet whenever Meghan posts anything about her family life. She’s extremely proud of her husband and children, and she’s only sharing a small fraction of their life together.
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, shared a sweet glimpse into her family’s Easter celebrations, with Archie, 6, and Lili, 4, enjoying a magical egg hunt in their expansive Montecito backyard. “Happy Easter!” Meghan wrote in the caption 🐣 #meghanmarkle #princeharry
📽️: meghan pic.twitter.com/O4ueU7YOsq
— HELLO! Canada (@HelloCanada) April 6, 2026
Photos courtesy of Meghan’s Instagram, As Ever’s Instagram.
Is the British media actually nuts? A lot of people who aren’t famous don’t show their kids’ faces on the internet, just for basic security, and because they don’t want the images repurposed for something gross.
They….they know they don’t have to look at anyone’s posts, if they find stickers on faces garish, etc.? Right?! They can simply just…look away.
Do they know how creepy it is to be out here, demanding to see face shots of young children who are complete strangers to them? In an era when we are just beginning to grasp even a little of how many powerful people are willing to dehumanize and sexualize children (and that’s with just a fraction of the Epstein files released), I’d suggest these fools (the Tik Tokker and the Times) think twice before they continue to demand face shots of other people’s kids. Because they are making themselves look a lot worse than any emoji-on-a-neck looks…
Do they demand to see the faces of Eugenie and Beatrice children? Or get upset when Eugenie posts pictures of her sons from behind? …
No, that’s only reserved for Meghan
Omg, the stupidity is endless. And the laziness. So many events to write about in this world and they just sit on their asses churning out the same thing over and over.
😭😭😭😭😭😭😭Look at all of that money we will NEVER make off of selling images of Prince Archie and Princess Lili!!!!!😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
How DARE Harry and Meghan deny us our cash cow!! We were supposed to profit off of them for DECADES!!! How will I pay for my kid’s posh private school now and our second home in Portugal!!!???
😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬
Honestly it’s weird and creepy celebrity or not celebrity to be angry that you can’t see someone’s child’s face, or know what they’re doing. There’s no way to spin that that doesn’t make you seem like you seriously lack boundaries. But when you add in the component of people who have experience death threats, kidnapping threats, overzealous fans, stalkers, and cruel paparazzi it becomes even more disturbing.
The entire premise of this article is that it’s pretentious and bad that you have control over public image, and I think that we should have control over that. I also think it ties into a lot of these people’s ” anti-woke” nonsense. Caring about consent, given children ownership of decision making for themselves and their lives, and letting people know that it’s okay to enforce boundaries and cut people off if they don’t respect them bothers a certain subset of people for some reason. Like not just accepting abuse, especially familial abuse, but abuse from established systems as well is something that they’re really pressed about.
The ones who don’t like the sussexes go in these rants. Why would harry and Meghan want derangers to see the children’s faces.
Come on @Tessa, be fair. We all know that there are books to be written! Every toothless Sussex smile is a protocol violation, and each barefoot photo keeps the queen up at night, posthumously of course, but still. And let’s not forget that when a child runs barefoot exuberantly on grass it blindsides a certain heir into remembering how he already has nephews and nieces who are not related to him by blood. So, have a little pity on a deranger.
Besides the obvious security concerns for their children. Unlike many the Sussexes are allowing their children choices by not showing their faces. The children did not choose their parents so the children’s privacy needs to be protected.
Exactly this! We’re at a point with social media where enough kids have grown up with their baby pictures posted online for a concensus about how they feel about it as adults to form, and for most of them it’s simply about having the choice.
If one day lili and archie want to show the world their baby pics, they can. Their parents are just making sure it’s their choice to make.
Everyone has a choice, scroll on by.
Meghan asked why should she give the BM her children’s pictures.
They have to go to her Instagram and copy the pictures, the same picture in all the tabloids, at the same time.
British media (and/or conservative and/or Murdoch-owned media companies) are desperate to view the Sussex children’s faces because there’s a deranged conspiracy – mostly based on the kids’ red hair – that the children aren’t Meghan’s or Harry’s, born via surrogacy and Meghan faked her pregnancy.
I’m so tired of that shizz. These kids are exactly the mix of Harry and Meghan. We saw her pregnant and she had the moon face and swelling many pregnant women had. Should we say George was rented too? Because he looks like neither parent.
Oh my God, they want to attach shame to these kids’ bodies.
The rota are weeping and raging because they can’t monetize the Sussex family and the left behind royals are pissed that Meghan’s IG shows that living them behind was the best decision Harry and Meghan ever made.
It may be hard to remember now but once upon a time they used to insist that Harry was miserable in the USA and missed his family and by family they always meant Billy and Chuck. For some reason Harry’s family was never his wife and kids. After Meghan’s IG showed glimpses of the Sussexes home life when they refer to Harry’s family they now mean his wife and kids. Meghan’s IG made it real in a way they couldn’t deny and its the same thing for their decision to step back. Every time we see a tranquil shot of their home we are reminded that the Sussexes found peace after escaping Winsor toxicity. This pisses off the Windsors who in true toxic form want to destroy the Sussexes and if they can’t destroy them want to convince people the Sussexes have been destroyed. Meghan’s IG effortlessly thwarts that.
Can’t advertise/sell a Kate’s cuties type calendar with Meghan’s kids coz they can’t see their faces. It’s weird those exist and that there’s a market for them btw.
This is stupid. It’s done to protect their children online. Even regular people hide their children’s faces now. If Meghan didn’t post any pictures of her children the press would be upset about that too.
I remember Tom Markle was clamoring for pictures of his grandchildren (only the younger ones of course). He would never have gotten them from his daughter and son in law. The pictures would be in the Daily Mail the next day had he been listened to.
I always thought a good test would be for her to send him an AI photo of her son and wait how many hours it would be in the cover of the Daily Fail. Boom. Daddy betrayed her again.
So, I’m a big Manchester United fan, with great hopes of us disappointing Billy Idle’s Aston Villa this season. One of our players is Harry Maguire, who’s had a rough few years with in person and online abuse and threats to his safety and family because he was deemed as not being good enough to play for United and England, being too expensive a signing and it’s been horrible. He’s a massively mentally strong man because the abuse he got was absolutely horrendous. I’d assume that for all of these reasons, that, while he’s active on social media, he ALWAYS posts his children’s pictures from behind or faces covered. Because a parent’s job is to keep their children safe. The long-winded point I’m trying to make is that people get this. But a regular English celeb or sports star won’t get the Meghan clicks. These people are disgusting.
Sorry for Harry Macguire. Is it me or the British people the most vicious people in the world? Or was it Murdoch and his News of the World who made them like that? By the way, I finished watching the Rupert Murdoch documentary on Netflix and boy, he’s a very evil man, a true sociopath, and ruined the United States.
These people are seething with jealousy over Meghan’s beautiful instagram reels, her gorgeous happy children whom they cannot access, and her lovely soft life. All of their pathetic whinging is envy and sour grapes.
What a lovely day for them all!! The kids are adorable and making the most of the holiday. Harry and Meghan should be very proud of their lives, both private and public. What good, happy people! I never see the joy and relaxation of the left-behinds, even if they do take a million vacations a year.
OMG what a steaming pile of shite.
“It used to be, until the 21st century, that bodies carried shame.” OK, granting this ridiculous premise for a minute, it used to be, until the 19th century, that slavery was so acceptable a whole civil war was started to keep & expand it. Shall we go back to that?
“Parents don’t have to choose between their children having an online or an offline childhood, they can instead.(choose what to show) in the name of hypocrisy, or love.” What is hypocritical, here, exactly? Explain it to me like I’m a five-year-old who would prefer not to be a social media commodity.
“…a journalist, said in a TikTok rant that had nearly 400,000 views [wow, that makes her an expert, right?? 😂] that it’s… “visually heinous,” and … “performative… You’re saying, ‘I’m above you…’”
So — A) you know you get to choose what to look at, right? Just like I can choose not to look at your ugly TikTok rant! and B) why is a parent making this choice “above you,” ma’am? Are you saying it’s actually a better choice? Kinder? More responsible? But you don’t want to do it, so others shouldn’t either, because it makes you feel guilty for your own choices? Why is that anyone’s problem but yours??
And then the rotting cherry on this pile of crap:
“Of course, it started with celebrities… all Hollywood royalty: privacy is here wielded as a luxury commodity. They are too rich, too classy and too high status to shill their kids’ faces across social media platforms like… us civilians who know a cute photo of any child is a magnet for likes on Facebook.”
And there we have it. Something that is absolutely FREE of charge and available to EVERYONE—the CHOICE to REFRAIN from sharing the faces of children on social media— framed as a LUXURY only for the RICH, who CAN AFFORD NOT TO SHILL FOR LIKES ON FACEBOOK. Oh, wait a minute, so can I, right? That choice is FREE, so I can afford it too!
Oh, but you, “Journalist” TikTokker, do you by chance monetize photos of your children? Do you by chance feel personally attacked that others don’t do exactly as you want to do? Do you on fact speak for an entire tabloid culture that resents not being allowed to monetize OTHER PEOPLE’S CHILDREN?
Why don’t you just say right out loud that you want to go back to the days when you were allowed to literally own other people and use them for your profit and pleasure? Because that’s what we’re talking about. You want the Sussex children, and other celebrity children, enslaved to a media machine that profits others.
Well, guess what, ma’am? It is indeed the 21st century, and slavery is not only illegal, the demand for it has become shameful. And all of you who think this way should indeed be ashamed.
That property is so gorgeous!
I think they’re angry because the video of Lili running reminded people of that famous video of Diana running in a footrace. And we can’t have the partly Black American princess being the inheritor of Diana’s looks.