To the shock of no one, Meghan Markle’s podcast was canceled. It was reportedly so bad that even Taylor Swift turned down an interview. We wouldn’t be ragging so much on the former royals, but they keep reinserting themselves into the spotlight. All their past public relations forays have been disasters, with allegations that racism and the feeling of being muzzled drove them from the British Royal Family. In the process, Markle has ruined the relationship Harry once had with William, the heir apparent. The former actress not knowing what she was getting into is entirely her fault. The royals aren’t a family but an institution, and the rules and protocols are stringent. Yet, they’re a suffering couple living off millions of dollars, to say nothing of the $10 million inheritance Harry cashed in on to buy a mansion in California.
Meghan Markle's $20 Million Spotify Grift Is One Of The Greatest Heists Of All Time https://t.co/srlsNZucx4 pic.twitter.com/3DO0n8iSfl
— Barstool Sports (@barstoolsports) June 19, 2023
Are they muzzled? They whined to Oprah Winfrey, a media empress, when they split from the family. They want privacy but want to keep the cameras on them, the latest eye-roll-worthy story coming from New York where the paparazzi chased after them for hours. It was described as a high-speed pursuit, which drew skepticism from the mayor’s office. No one cares about rich ex-members of the royal family. We all have real-life problems to cater to daily, not the incessant whining of two individuals who might be suffering from mental illness. South Park grilled these two alive, which reportedly triggered Ms. Markle. Too bad; both were asking for it. But this now-dead podcast is another cringeworthy episode in the lives of these damaged persons: the interviews weren’t even conducted by her allegedly (via NY Post):
Just after Spotify’s breakup with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, a new report alleges that Markle’s interviews for her “Archetypes” podcast were not conducted by her.
Podnews reported that some of the show’s interviews were done by members of the duchess’s staff — and audio of her voice asking the questions was clipped in later.
The Post has reached out to representatives for Markle and Archewell Audio for comment.
The revelations come shortly after Spotify and Archewell said in a joint statement to The Post that they have “mutually agreed to part ways and are proud of the series we made together.”
A source previously told The Post that the Archewell media company launched by Harry, 38, and Markle, 41, didn’t produce enough content to receive the full payout of the $20 million deal they agreed to in 2020.
Did she fake it? Yes and no. Markle interviewed her celebrity guests, but everyone else got the audio soundbite splice treatment. As Kate Rosenfield noted, the larger issue for why this was a dumpster fire project circles back to Markle: you cannot use your guests’ stories to tell something about yourself. That’s why this podcast imploded (via UnHerd):
The Archetypes post-mortem has included damning allegations about Meghan’s lack of involvement, including that she pawned off the actual interviewing onto a producer and then recorded herself asking the questions later. Andy Cohen, host of The Real Housewives, who appeared in the final “binary breaking” episode (so-called because, unlike previous episodes, this one had men in it), has described this as “an insane rumor”; from the perspective of a famous person, like him, it is. It’s very clear, listening to the podcast, that Meghan did indeed interview her celebrity guests. It’s equally clear, however, that these are the only guests she talked to.
The academics, journalists, or even just less-famous celebrities whose voices are included on Archetypes were apparently pre-recorded with a producer, with Meghan’s reactions spliced in afterward — sometimes with unintentionally hilarious results. “I mean, isn’t that all so interesting?” Meghan coos, after a lengthy diatribe from the episode’s featured professor about “women and femmes and minoritised people” and “normative social constructs and normative social patterns”. (If by “interesting” you mean “indecipherable”, then yes, very.) And yet, the podcast needs these voices, not only to give it the gloss of a serious exploration of its subject matter, but to counteract the substanceless quality of Meghan’s interviews with fellow celebs.
[…]
The problem, in the end, is not Meghan’s story. It’s Meghan herself.
[…]
It’s no surprise that Meghan was drawn to the idea of podcasting, the dream of a conversation over which she has total control. But for Archetypes to work, its host would have had to recognise that the point of interviewing other people is to tell their stories, not to use them as a vehicle for telling, and retelling, your own. But even Meghan’s dialogues with celebrity guests have a funny way of circling back to become all about Meghan herself — her Cinderella story, her identity struggles and her yearning to be affirmed and accepted, first by Hollywood and then by the Royals.
And here, though evidently without meaning to, the podcast does manage to fulfil its promise on one front: if you were looking for a 12-hour portrait of the archetypal narcissist, you could not do better than this.
Will South Park do another episode about this?