Let's not deny Harry and Meghan are keeping the royals relevant

Want LBC stories before everyone else? Set us as your Preferred Source on Google

At the time of writing, the Sussexes occupy the entire top five most-read stories on the Express, and, for once, these are all stories that are as genuine as they get for The Firm.

Not long ago, a grasping-at-straws ‘Palace source suggests Harry is seeking new kind of role,’ would have carried a website I worked for over the weekend.

But this week, we have been treated to an overwhelming abundance of stories, what Colin Farrell in Minority Report would have called a suspicious “orgy of evidence”:

• Meghan’s phone number made public after she is added to a mum’s WhatsApp group,
• Archie and Lilibet pulled from school after two days due to security concerns,
• Uganda withdraws from and then returns to Invictus Games, with Harry being the reason for both,
• And then there is the publicity the famously media-shy pair have brought on themselves, sharing unseen pictures for Harry’s birthday and footage of their dog walks.

For any Harry and Meghan story, you can reliably multiply the original by four or five for every “reaction” and “breaks their silence after revelation” type piece.

Going back to the Express, which I am just using as a case study, I counted 20 news stories, four (negative) opinion pieces and a live blog all about Harry and Meghan in one day.

But the coverage is understandable and makes perfect business sense. It’s like the news version of when Adele, Calvin Harris or Michael Jackson used to release an album and six or seven of the singles were in the top ten.

People complain of overload, but just like how radio stations would play what sold, news outlets are only responding to demand.

An Ipsos poll (published, where else, in the Express) showed a 22% favourability rating of the Sussexes. I’m surprised it’s that high.

I have met people who would probably vote for a party whose only policy was to put Harry and Meghan into exile in somewhere far more remote than Montecito or Sandringham.

But these same people are watching the Netflix special, reading the articles, buying a copy of Spare, if only to enrage themselves further.

I don’t think Harry and Meghan are bad people. There are some in their own families who have a greater reason to be labelled as black sheep.

But they are also not particularly good royals in the traditional sense. They do not uphold values of maintaining a quiet dignity, of not explaining or apologising.

Instead of abiding by a code of stiffness, they moan, ask to be left alone, and then broadcast their lives.

They complain about the impact of social media but share a very airbrushed version of their day-to-day, both on Instagram and Netflix.

But let’s not pretend Harry and Meghan are nothing but absolute box office. They are keeping the Royal family relevant.

Sure, Princess Anne, Prince Edward, and even King Charles might fit the brief. But nobody wants to read that they have visited a sheep fair or opened a university campus.

Harry and Meghan, on the other hand, have created such a love-to-hate brand that they are never out of the same press they have tried to escape, regulate and sue.

They have accidentally blundered into creating a publicity masterclass and PR disaster at the same time.

_______________

William Mata is a writer and SEO editor for LBC

LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.

To contact us, email opinion@lbc.co.uk