Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have stirred the pot yet again during their recent trip to Colombia.
While they were busy salsa dancing and enjoying the local culture, some serious questions are being raised about their handling of the press coverage surrounding their visit.
It seems that their attempts to manage the narrative have led to more scrutiny than ever before.
As part of their royal tour, Meghan and Harry had Bianca Bentoncourt, a digital culture editor at Harper’s Bazaar, follow them closely.
Bentoncourt was responsible for crafting bulletins that highlighted their activities, but the reports coming out were overwhelmingly flattering.
Critics are quick to point out that this raises eyebrows about the authenticity of the coverage.
Was it really an independent journalist’s perspective, or were the Sussexes pulling the strings behind the scenes?
The glowing reports circulated by their PR team conveniently omitted some less favorable moments, including Meghan’s infamous dish soap story.
This anecdote has been widely discredited, yet it continues to resurface in her speeches.
The fact that only one journalist without a traditional news background was chosen for the tour has fueled speculation that the couple is trying to micromanage how they’re portrayed in the media.
The Daily Mail, often known for its critical stance towards the Sussexes, sent its own reporter, Nick Pisa, to cover the trip.
His account of Meghan’s comments echoed those from Bentoncourt, but he pointed out the inconsistencies surrounding her well-known story about changing a sexist commercial at just 11 years old.
This tale has been met with skepticism, especially after fact-checkers could not verify its accuracy.
Further complicating matters, Meghan’s father, Thomas Markle, weighed in on the narrative.
He clarified that while Meghan did write letters as part of a school project, the portrayal of her single-handedly changing the ad seemed exaggerated.
It appears that the more you dig into this story, the murkier it becomes, raising serious doubts about its validity.
Amid the controversy, Bentoncourt defended her reporting, stating that her focus was on creating content relevant to Harper’s Bazaar readers.
She claimed that she did not intend to cover every statement made during the events.
However, critics argue that it’s suspicious that no critical details were included, particularly when Meghan repeated her dish soap anecdote yet again.
In another surprising twist, Meghan chose not to mention Princess Catherine during her discussions about strong women.
Given that Catherine is often seen as a symbol of strength within the royal family, many found this omission glaring.
Some speculate that acknowledging her sister-in-law might have led to accusations of exploitation, making it a tricky situation for Meghan.
On a lighter note, Meghan did showcase her Spanish skills during the tour, which garnered mixed reactions online.
While some mocked her proficiency, others noted that she did hold her own in conversations.
Her efforts were commendable, even if she wasn’t perfect.
It’s a small victory amid a whirlwind of criticism.
However, the highlight of the trip may have been the couple’s salsa dance, which appeared staged rather than spontaneous.
As they twirled and embraced, cameras were clearly present, capturing every moment.
This led to further skepticism about the authenticity of their interactions.
Were they genuinely enjoying each other’s company, or was it all for show?
Many observers are left scratching their heads about the purpose of their visit to Colombia.
Critics argue that the couple’s presence seemed more like a celebrity spectacle than a meaningful engagement.
The Afro-Colombian Women’s Summit, which they attended, has been criticized for potentially using the Sussexes to divert attention from pressing national issues.
The media coverage surrounding Meghan and Harry’s trip has sparked outrage among some who believe the couple is misusing their platform.
With significant expenses incurred for security and logistics, many question whether their presence truly benefited Colombia.
Critics argue that the funds could have been better allocated to address the country’s real needs.
As the dust settles on this controversial visit, it’s clear that Meghan and Harry continue to navigate a complex relationship with the media and public perception.
Their attempts to curate their image may be backfiring, leaving them more scrutinized than ever.
The world watches closely as they strive for privacy while simultaneously seeking the limelight.
