Follow Tom Sykes’ royal reporting at The Royalist on Substack, and get exclusive insight on everything going down behind the palace gates.
The photographs of Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, surprising young patients at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, make me feel a bit queasy.
Of course, anyone who is asked by a hospital to support its annual fundraiser (in this case, the hospital’s “Make March Matter” campaign) should do so. Yet there is something slightly jarring about seeing the images splashed across Instagram—though posted not on Meghan’s own account, but on the hospital’s page, it should be noted.
Meghan, 44, joined the children for a range of creative activities, including painting and crafts. The hospital explained in its caption that “these special moments are a reminder of how powerful creativity can be in fostering joy, connection and healing.”
In another context, that sentiment could easily have come from Catherine, Princess of Wales. She has often spoken about the role creativity can play in healing and wellbeing, particularly in the wake of her own cancer diagnosis. Supporting children in hospital is clearly worthwhile.
And yet it is also the sort of moment that gives ammo to critics if not handled properly.
It recalls, for me, the moment when Prince Andrew was stripped of his military titles and royal patronages; shortly afterwards, his daughter, Princess Beatrice, appeared on a hospital podcast discussing premature babies. Again, there was nothing wrong with the cause itself. But aligning oneself with something emotionally powerful can be a divisive strategy if the individual involved is already polarising. Critics may say that the visit is less about helping the cause and more about boosting the public image of the visitor.
The hospital has been clear in its captions that they value Meghan’s involvement, and clearly believes her visit benefits their program. We should take the hospital at its word.
But where the issue becomes less straightforward is in the context of Meghan’s wider public brand, which appears as chaotic as ever.
Meghan has not previously been especially associated with hospital work or healthcare as a central philanthropic focus. That does not mean she cannot engage in this field, of course, but what brand managers wouldn’t want to see here is a situation where she shows up once (as far as we know, this is her first visit) and is never seen there again.
In the past week alone, there have been several different narratives. First came reports that her lifestyle brand, As Ever, had split from Netflix because she wanted to take it in a more global direction. Then there was the announcement that she will appear at a “girls’ weekend” retreat in Australia, where guests paying thousands of dollars will be able to take photographs with her. Shortly afterwards came news that her documentary project Cookie Queens had secured distribution. And now these hospital photographs have appeared.
Is Meghan positioning herself primarily as a business entrepreneur, a philanthropist, a filmmaker, a lifestyle influencer, a former royal, or a celebrity cameo act whose presence can be monetised through paid appearances? Can she have it all!?
For audiences, it is easier when a public figure presents a clear and coherent narrative about who they are.
Underlying all of this is the broader issue that Queen Elizabeth II identified when she insisted that members of the royal family could not operate on a “half-in, half-out” basis—combining commercial activity with public service and philanthropy in the traditional royal sense. The two models can sit uneasily together. Maintaining a high public profile is essential if you are building a commercial brand, but that same publicity can complicate philanthropic work because every action is interpreted through the lens of personal promotion.
None of this changes the basic fact that Meghan’s celebrity presence clearly brought a moment of happiness to children undergoing treatment. That is something it would be churlish to begrudge them.
Want more royal gossip, scoops and scandal? Click through to follow all Tom Sykes’ reporting at The Royalist on Substack.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.yahoo.com ’
