Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have once again found themselves in the spotlight, this time for their visit to evacuation centers in Pasadena to support victims of the devastating Los Angeles wildfires.
Meghan claimed, "We were there anonymously. Publicity is the last thing we need right now." However, the timing raised eyebrows, especially with her Netflix series scheduled to premiere on January 15. This so-called "low-key" appearance seemed anything but, prompting sarcastic comparisons to Santa Claus abandoning his red suit for a more inconspicuous look.
In the midst of a disaster that left cities in ashes and thousands displaced, the couple somehow found time for smiling group photos. Meghan appeared to take charge of the session, positioning people with the precision of a professional photographer. Critics noted her demeanor, suggesting it reflected an air of self-importance rather than empathy. Standing on the sidelines, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, wife of California Governor Gavin Newsom, reportedly looked uncomfortable, her expression allegedly betraying her disapproval of the spectacle.
Harry, often referred to as Meghan’s reluctant partner in these endeavors, seemed to struggle through the event, his awkward smile hinting at discomfort. Observers speculated that he might have preferred to remain far from the chaos rather than be part of what some saw as a staged production.
Traditionally, both royals and celebrities tend to wait before visiting disaster zones to avoid disrupting relief efforts. This approach allows for a more thoughtful and helpful presence. Yet patience does not appear to be Meghan's strong suit. Critics argue that her quick appearances, often accompanied by photographers, are less about genuine assistance and more about creating content for social media and holiday cards.
The comparison with historical figures like Queen Elizabeth II was inevitable. The late monarch waited eight days before visiting Aberfan after the mining disaster in 1966, a decision praised for its respect and sensitivity. In contrast, Meghan's approach—showing up less than 36 hours after a school shooting or, in this case, while the flames of the wildfires were still raging—has been criticized for its insensitivity and apparent focus on photo opportunities.
For many, this latest episode is a reminder of Meghan’s pattern of turning crises into opportunities for self-promotion. While genuine philanthropists quietly contribute to relief efforts, Meghan’s publicized actions have raised questions about the authenticity of her intentions. Critics argue that her need to be front and center undermines the gravity of the situation and distracts from the real work being done by volunteers and aid workers.
Harry’s presence during these events often adds to the intrigue. His expressions and body language suggest reluctance, as though he is being roped into scenarios he would rather avoid. This dynamic between the couple—Meghan’s apparent confidence and Harry’s discomfort—continues to draw public scrutiny.
In the end, the visit to the evacuation center served as yet another chapter in the ongoing debate about the couple’s public roles. While Meghan and Harry’s supporters view their actions as well-meaning, their detractors see them as opportunistic. The contrasting opinions highlight a broader conversation about how celebrities can balance genuine philanthropy with their public image.
