There are editorial choices, and then there are editorial choices that practically write the commentary for you. On Friday morning, several British newspapers put Prince Andrew prominently on their front pages after the High Court confirmed that search warrants used to raid his homes had been unlawfully obtained. The Daily Express, Daily Mirror, Sun and Daily Star all featured the development prominently.
The Daily Mail went in a noticeably different direction. Its front page carried a large photograph of Meghan Sussex embracing Nobel Peace Prize laureate Malala Yousafzai outside Claridge’s, directing readers to two more pages about their “cosy Claridge’s tea.” Online, the Mail went even further, turning Meghan’s outing into a major homepage story under the headline: “Meghan steps into the limelight: Duchess leaves Claridge’s wearing £28,000 outfit accompanied by Malala Yousafzai after afternoon tea.”
Meanwhile, Andrew remained under an active police investigation. Priorities.
Meghan Had Tea With Malala. That Was Apparently an Exclusive
Meghan and Malala were photographed leaving Claridge’s after spending time together at the Mayfair hotel. We reported the outing and noted that the pair already knew one another: Meghan, Prince Harry and Malala previously worked together for International Day of the Girl in 2020, discussing the importance of girls’ education.
It is an interesting celebrity sighting. Meghan has returned to Britain, Malala is one of the world’s most recognisable education activists, and naturally people are interested in seeing them together. But the Mail did not simply report that two famous women met for tea.
It brought out the calculator and began pocket-watching Meghan, itemising her outfit down to the coat, trousers, sweater, shoes and jewellery. The Mail repeatedly foregrounded the cost of Meghan’s clothes, valuing the same outfit at between £25,000 and £28,000 across its coverage and making the price tag almost as prominent as the fact she was dining with Malala Yousafzai.
And once again I find myself asking: why? Meghan is not a working member of the Royal Family. British taxpayers are not funding her wardrobe. If she wants to spend five figures of money she and her husband earn on clothes, then that is primarily a matter for Meghan, her accountant and whoever sold her the coat. Yet the Mail repeatedly treats the contents of her wardrobe as though the public has some financial stake in them. We do not.
The contrast is hard to miss. When the Mail covers Meghan, the emphasis repeatedly falls on cost, calculation and suspicion, what she spent, how photographs “land,” whether an appearance was planned. Similar coverage of Kate Middleton often frames expensive jewellery and designer fashion through sentiment, heritage and glamour. The prices are still there, but the tone changes completely. Readers can look at the headlines side by side and judge that difference for themselves.
Meanwhile, Andrew Was Facing a Rather Different Story
On Thursday, Thames Valley Police accepted that the warrants used to search Andrew’s Sandringham residence and former Windsor home were unlawful. The High Court quashed them because police had obtained them under the wrong legal provision.
Unsurprisingly, the King’s brother, who continues to receive private financial support from Charles and lives on the Sandringham estate, has now secured a significant ruling, with the High Court quashing the warrants after Thames Valley Police accepted they were unlawful. If you are surprised that Andrew continues to benefit from extraordinary institutional support, you have not been paying attention.
But this ruling does not end the investigation. Thames Valley Police says its investigation into alleged misconduct in public office remains ongoing. The case concerns allegations that Andrew shared sensitive or confidential government information with Jeffrey Epstein while serving as Britain’s special representative for international trade and investment between 2001 and 2011. Andrew has not been charged and denies wrongdoing.
So, to put the two stories beside each other: One concerns a privately funded woman having tea with a Nobel Peace Prize winner while wearing expensive clothes.
The other concerns a former senior royal, Jeffrey Epstein, alleged misuse of government information, an ongoing police investigation and search warrants that the High Court has now quashed. Yet Meghan’s trousers apparently required extensive forensic examination too.
Meghan Is Too Valuable to the Mail to Leave Alone
There may also be a much less mysterious explanation for the obsession: Meghan generates engagement.
Our review of 38 recent stories in the Daily Mail’s royal coverage found approximately 48,000 displayed comments. Thirteen Meghan-focused articles accounted for roughly 26,500 of them, about 55 percent.
Her As Ever Advent calendar generated around 4,000 comments. Footage involving Lilibet generated about 3,600. Articles about Meghan’s products, jewellery, home and public appearances repeatedly attracted thousands more.
Harry’s recent discussion of depression and grief went even further, reaching approximately 9,700 comments. Those numbers do not tell us how many people read each article, and comments are not the same thing as page views. But they do tell us that the Mail’s readership becomes extraordinarily animated whenever Meghan or Harry appears.
That makes the relationship rather fascinating. The paper can criticise Meghan endlessly while simultaneously depending on her to supply fashion stories, lifestyle stories, business stories, royal stories and thousands upon thousands of comments. The outrage is not just editorial material. It is content inventory.
Related Stories
The Front Page Tells Its Own Story
Perhaps the most revealing part of all this is that Meghan did almost nothing. She had afternoon tea with a friend. Yet she still produced photographs, a front-page teaser, a £28,000 wardrobe calculation, an “exclusive,” thousands of comments and another round of discussion about whether she is too visible, too wealthy, too calculated or somehow simultaneously desperate for attention and suspiciously good at avoiding it.
Meanwhile, Andrew’s legal battle concerns an investigation into alleged conduct while he occupied an official government role, a position that came with extraordinary access unavailable to ordinary citizens.
The ongoing investigation matters; how long is another conversation entirely. Meghan’s coat does not matter nearly as much. But judging from the Daily Mail’s front page, you would be forgiven for wondering which story it finds more useful. And perhaps that is the real story here: the Mail may dislike Meghan, but it certainly knows her value.
Discover more from Feminegra
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I love Duchess Meghan for wearing her £28,000😊 outfit to tea with Malala. She works hard for her money, so the racist British tabloids can f-ck off.
I didn’t read the article so I can’t confirm it but I assume they didn’t price up the cost of Malala’s outfit although the only explanations they could possibly give for that, given that both women are ‘private citizens’, would reveal their targeting of Meghan in ways they usually would prefer plausible deniability for ie that her outfits are interesting and trendsetting, that they try to focus hatred on her as a rich person, that it is *they* and not she who monetise her connection to the Royal Family and her existence on this Earth, that they continue to treat her as a senior working member of the Royal Family whose activities and spending warrant public scrutiny…. They usually also include the price of her endlessly reworn jewellery and her engagement ring (they don’t for Kate) to boost it.