In a surprising move, Meghan Markle has recently signed with talent agency WME for representation of her and Prince Harry’s content creation label, Archwell.
However, it seems that not everyone at WME is thrilled about the new addition to their roster.
Reports suggest that Meghan’s previous diva behavior in the workplace has left some employees disgruntled.
Despite this, the agency’s CEO made the decision to bring her on board.
According to insiders, the first meeting at WME went exactly as expected.
Staff members were instructed to address Meghan by her official titles, such as the Duchess of Sussex or her Royal Highness, and were strictly prohibited from using her first name.
This demand has raised eyebrows, as Americans typically do not use titles in everyday conversation.
It has become a source of embarrassment for many within the agency.
Sources reveal that Meghan’s insistence on being addressed by her titles has only fueled animosity among the WME staff.
While they may comply with her requests to her face, behind her back, some have resorted to using derogatory nicknames.
Despite the tensions, WME sees an opportunity to capitalize on Meghan’s brand and image, with hopes of generating substantial revenue.
It is not uncommon for agencies to take a 10% cut of such deals.
In a similar vein, actress Jamie Lee Curtis took a swipe at Meghan for leveraging her royal title for personal gain while shirking the responsibilities that come with it.
Curtis, known for her roles in films like “Freaky Friday” (2003) and “Knives Out” (2019), is set to receive an Oscar award in 2023.
As the wife of a Baron, she holds the title of Baroness Hayden Guest but chooses not to use it in the United States.
This contrast highlights Meghan’s controversial approach to her own royal status.
Meanwhile, Prince Harry and Meghan have been vocal about their decision to step back from the royal family, citing a toxic environment.
However, they have retained their royal titles, which has raised eyebrows and led to skepticism about their true intentions.
Critics argue that Meghan’s continuous pursuit of financial opportunities using her royal status undermines her credibility.
Royal commentator Daniela Elsa points out the paradox in Harry and Meghan’s behavior.
They openly criticize the royal institution, causing shockwaves among royal reporters and critics alike.
Yet, they continue to leverage their Duke and Duchess titles for lucrative business deals and public appearances aimed at building their brand.
This contradiction calls into question whether they would have secured such lucrative contracts if they were simply known as Mr. and Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor.
The growing divide between the Sussexes’ criticism of the palace and their use of their titles for financial gain is becoming increasingly evident.
Many are left wondering if this disconnect undermines their credibility and the sincerity of their claims.
As the couple ventures further into the world of business and branding, the question remains: Will their titles be enough to sustain their success, or will their actions ultimately speak louder than their royal monikers?