London, UK – A storm of outrage has erupted around Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, following the controversial launch of her new wine venture, “As Ever,” on what would have been Princess Diana’s birthday. Critics have slammed the move as “sickening” and “crass,” particularly given the tragic circumstances of Diana’s death involving a drunk driver, and the wine’s potent 14.5% alcohol content. This latest alleged misstep comes amidst escalating public concern for the Princess of Wales, Catherine, who made her first public appearance after a health scare, and alarming reports of Prince Harry’s deteriorating well-being.

The confluence of these events has painted a stark picture of contrasting royal narratives: one of quiet resilience and duty, and another of relentless self-promotion, often perceived as tone-deaf and insensitive.

The ‘Sickening’ Rosé: Meghan’s Diana ‘Tribute’ Under Fire

Meghan Markle’s decision to unveil her new wine range on Diana’s birthday has provoked a furious backlash. Despite claims from her team that the launch was a “tribute” to the late Princess, commentators are struggling to reconcile this narrative with the tragic irony of Diana’s death.

“Princess Diana passed away from a drunk driver,” one commentator passionately reminded viewers, questioning, “Does Megan not understand or is she doing this on purpose?” The fact that the wine boasts a high alcohol content, along with an alleged briefing to Hello! magazine touting it as a “tribute” because “Diana’s the English Rose” and the wine is a Rosé, has been widely condemned as “gross” and “sickening.”

Furthermore, the timing of the launch on the Fourth of July weekend in the United States, known for its high incidence of car accidents and DUIs, has been labelled “completely tone-deaf to Americans.” A panellist shared a deeply personal anecdote of a friend who died on July 4th due to drunk driving, underscoring the insensitivity of the product’s release during a period of heightened risk. The mandatory purchase of a minimum of three bottles for $90 has also drawn fire, branded as “greedy” and “encouraging binge drinking,” further alienating a public already wary of the Sussexes’ commercial ventures.

Catherine’s Triumphant Return: A Beacon of Hope Amidst Royal Turmoil

In stark contrast to the controversy surrounding the Duchess of Sussex, the day offered a much-needed moment of joy and relief for royal watchers: Catherine, the Princess of Wales, made her first public appearance in recent hours following a health scare that saw her withdraw from Royal Ascot. Arriving at a hospital in Colchester, the Princess joined patients and staff at the Royal Horticultural Society’s well-being garden to plant roses named in her honour.

Her appearance was hailed as “absolutely gorgeous” and “glowing.” Despite appearing “still very slight,” her presence and engagement were precisely “what we needed and wanted to see today.” Panellists expressed immense relief, describing her return as “magical” and “beautiful,” emphasising her “genuine” and “authentic” demeanour.

The Princess’s visit was intended to “celebrate the incredible healing power of nature” and raise awareness about its role in “supporting our mental, physical, and spiritual well-being.” Experts lauded her decision to navigate her recovery at her “own pace,” setting a powerful example for countless others battling serious illnesses, particularly those undergoing chemotherapy. Her candid acknowledgment that recovery “doesn’t stop once the treatment is over” and that it’s a “new normal” resonated deeply, offering comfort and normalisation to those who often feel pressured to “snap back” immediately.

Harry’s Downward Spiral: A ‘Painful’ Public Display

While Catherine radiated resilience, Prince Harry’s recent public appearances have fueled growing alarm. His attendance at a Nexus conference in New York was described as a “painful to watch” spectacle, with Harry appearing dishevelled, “slurring,” “mumbling,” and his “eyes very dilated.” Commentators likened his address to that of an “HR executive giving a speech to a whole load of gathered staff members who really don’t want to be there,” highlighting a distinct lack of “buzz” around his presence.

The distressing footage led to accusations that Harry is “definitely spiraling out of control” and is “not a well man.” Concerns were raised about who allowed him to appear on stage in such a state, with a chilling suggestion that Meghan might be exploiting his vulnerability for financial gain. “She needs him earning the money,” one panellist remarked, speculating that such public displays could even be “needed for the divorce,” echoing the contentious Amber Heard case.

The content of Harry’s speech, featuring platitudes like “the longer that we are on planet Earth, the more experience we have,” was ridiculed as “insane” and meaningless. Critics asserted that Harry was “very successful when he was seen and not heard,” and that his current struggles are a direct consequence of Meghan’s influence. “Megan did this to him,” it was unequivocally stated, with the consensus being: “Megan is the problem.”

‘Scam Jam’ and Tacky Tactics: The ‘As Ever’ Empire Unravels

The wine launch is merely the latest in a series of what critics are calling Meghan Markle’s “scams.” The “As Ever” brand, intended to be a lifestyle empire, has faced continuous scrutiny. The infamous “apricot spread,” initially hailed as an artisanal product “crafted in her own home kitchen,” was later revealed to be produced in a factory 2,000 miles away. This alleged deception, coupled with a “scarcity strategy” that frustrates consumers and disappoints the “Sussex Squad,” is undermining the brand’s credibility.

The Duchess is accused of “polluting the environment” by transporting products thousands of miles and “wasting everyone’s time.” Her insistence on using her royal title to “push crappy product” is seen as a betrayal of the late Queen’s wishes and a “total scam.”

Furthermore, the quality of “As Ever” products has been questioned, with critics claiming they are “cheap and tacky stuff” typically associated with TV tie-ins rather than genuine luxury. The absence of authentic customer posts on social media for her “Scam Jam” has further fuelled speculation that sales figures are being inflated through “murky business” involving “bots” and “trolls” linked to the Sussex Squad. Despite Meghan’s public distancing, her failure to condemn such activities implies tacit approval, as “she knows that these nutters… have been paid by certain agencies.”

The contrasting narratives of the Princess of Wales and the Duchess of Sussex continue to captivate and divide public opinion. While Catherine embodies quiet strength and dedication, Meghan’s commercial ventures and public appearances are increasingly scrutinised for their perceived insensitivity and alleged deceptive practices. As Prince Harry’s well-being becomes a growing concern, the question remains: how much more will the Sussex brand attempt to monetise the royal connection, and at what cost to the individuals involved and the broader perception of the Royal Family?