Getty
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have found themselves in the spotlight once again, this time facing criticism for their recent plans involving Nigeria, which have been controversially described as a ‘dog and pony show’ by Lady Colin Campbell.
The royal couple’s initiatives, aimed at fostering their philanthropic presence globally, have not been warmly received by all, as evident from Campbell’s remarks during her discussion with host Nana Akua. Lady Colin Campbell, a writer and a socialite known for her outspoken views on the British royal family, expressed her skepticism about the Sussexes’ intentions and actions in a candid interview.
She articulated that the couple’s efforts appeared to be more about their own visibility and image rather than genuine altruistic endeavors. According to Campbell, the initiatives led by Meghan and Harry in Nigeria are overshadowed by their personal branding, detracting from the potential impact of their work. Her comments during the interview focused heavily on the presentation of these initiatives, labeling them as superficial and attention-seeking.
In light of this, she referenced the upcoming Nigeria tour and told the GB News host, “I’m glad that she’s not going, so at least the focus will be on the Invictus Games and the cause, which of course, is the worthwhile cause of the injured veterans.” “As for Nigeria, I think we are heading into very dangerous territory and I think that there is actually a comparable between the quasi-pseudo state royal visit that Harry and Meghan will be embarking upon,” she also said.
“And let us note that they have announced that it is His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex, notwithstanding the fact that he is not allowed to use the title His Royal Highness.” “So from the Nigerian end, this is going to be presented as a pseudo-royal, almost state visit.”
Later on, she also added, “Let us hope that Meghan and Harry’s visit to Nigeria doesn’t turn out to be quite as farcical as the visit of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor to Germany in 1937, because ex-royals who have stepped down from their official position have really no right, and should act and have a duty to actually avoid embarking upon visits of this nature.”
Before concluding she also accused the couple of “begging for trouble” because “Meghan and Harry were given a year to decide they are out – they chose to be out and they should remain out.” “I think if this is a success, it’s going to encourage them to do other visits of that nature. And then we’ll have Harry and Meghan, the American royals, and then we’ll have the Royal Family, the British royals.”
Campbell critiqued the way Meghan and Harry have managed their public persona and charitable activities, suggesting that their actions could be perceived as self-serving. This portrayal feeds into a broader narrative of criticism that the couple has faced since stepping back from their official royal duties and moving to the United States.
Campbell’s use of the phrase “dog and pony show” implies that the projects in Nigeria are more about spectacle than substance, hinting at a lack of depth in the couple’s approach to their philanthropic activities.
This kind of criticism raises questions about the effectiveness and sincerity of celebrity-led humanitarian efforts, particularly when they are carried out by figures who are constantly under media scrutiny like Prince Harry and Meghan. The discussion with Nana Akua provided a platform for Campbell to voice her concerns and observations about the Sussexes’ strategies and their impact on public perceptions.
