Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Blasted as 'Very Bitter and Unhappy People', Slammed for 'Guns Blazing' Attacks

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were accused this week of being 'very bitter and unhappy people' in a scathing television interview in the UK, where royal commentator Kinsey Schofield told GB News the couple's latest public display of affection on social media was 'too late' to win back the British public. Her remarks reignited the long‑running row over how Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chose to leave royal life and how they have presented that story since.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepped back as working royals in 2020 and moved to the United States with their young son Archie, later welcoming daughter Lilibet there. In the years that followed they gave a series of high‑profile interviews, signed media deals and fronted projects that criticised the palace and the wider royal machinery, from allegations in the Oprah Winfrey broadcast to Harry's memoir Spare. That pattern has shaped how many in Britain now interpret even their softer, family‑focused content.

Prince Harry and Meghan's Anniversary Posts Under Scrutiny

The immediate trigger for the latest round of criticism was what, on the surface, looked like a simple anniversary celebration. Marking eight years of marriage, Meghan returned to Instagram with a handful of posts celebrating her relationship with Harry.

Alongside two images on her feed, she shared a video to her story that showed the prince walking into a room carrying a cake, said to be the same flavour as their 2018 wedding cake, while the couple's two children could be heard in the background wishing a happy anniversary to their 'mama and papa.'

To some followers it was an intimate, carefully staged glimpse of domestic life in California. To Schofield, it was something more calculated. Speaking to GB News, she argued that the material was designed to send a message not just to fans but to sceptics who have grown weary of the couple's complaints.

According to her reading, the point of the footage was to show the world that Harry and Meghan remain deeply in love and united as a family, in the hope that this might soften public attitudes. She framed it as 'an attempt to win back the public's affection' after years of what she regards as confrontational media interventions.

Schofield's core complaint was not that they posted at all, but that the tone comes, in her view, far too late. She suggested that if the Sussexes had led with 'lovey‑dovey philanthropy' and low‑key charity work, and only later aired grievances about palace life, they might have retained wider sympathy.

Instead, she argued, they 'came out guns blazing' with negative accounts of their time inside the royal fold. 'Because they came out guns blazing and they were so negative at the start, we are having a hard time forgiving them for that,' she said. As a result, she added, many now struggle to see anything other than 'very bitter and unhappy people' whenever the couple surface.

None of this has been addressed publicly by Harry and Meghan themselves. Their anniversary posts were not accompanied by commentary about their royal relatives or the UK, and any suggestion that they were strategically crafted to shift opinion remains, for now, an interpretation rather than a confirmed intent.

From Windsor Fairytale to 'Marmite' Couple

While Schofield focused on the present mood, another royal watcher chose to look back at how different things were when Harry and Meghan first married. Katie Nicholl, royal expert and royal editor at Vanity Fair, told The Royals Uncensored podcast that the atmosphere around the couple's 2018 wedding at Windsor Castle was one of broad national support.

She recalled that Britain had largely embraced the match between a popular prince and a successful, biracial American actress entering the royal family. In her telling, newspapers and broadcasters were, at that stage, broadly enthusiastic. 'It makes me cross when people say Britain wasn't behind the wedding because we were as a country, as a nation and actually the press was behind them,' she said.

That collective memory is part of why Nicholl finds the current estrangement hard to watch. She described it as 'quite sad how it's all sort of un‑spiralled here in Britain for them', casting Harry and Meghan as 'like marmite' figures who sharply divide opinion. For her, the fact that the couple rarely come back to the UK and 'don't feel welcome here' sits in painful contrast to the warm scenes in Windsor that played out on global television only eight years ago.

The distance is not just emotional. The Sussexes physically relocated to North America in 2020, first to Canada and then to California, stepping away from royal duties and public funding. The move, dubbed 'Megxit' at the time, was sold as a bid for privacy and independence. Yet every new project, from documentaries to podcasts, has kept them firmly in the public gaze, particularly when family tensions are aired.

That tension lies at the heart of the current dispute over their image. To sympathetic observers, Harry and Meghan are a couple who tried to modernise the monarchy, ran into a brick wall of tradition and hostility, and have been punished for speaking honestly about it. To critics like Schofield, they are two people who took enormous goodwill and burned through it with what she regards as relentless attacks.

What both sides seem to agree on is that something has broken between the Sussexes and the country that once lined the Long Walk in Windsor to cheer them. Whether a carefully framed anniversary cake and the sound of two young voices saying 'mama and papa' can do anything to mend that rupture is, at the very least, an open question.