Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
Prince Harry And Meghan Markle quietly launched a new website showcasing their philanthropic work and achievements, prompting both praise and backlash from fans and skeptics.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are back to business with their SussexRoyal.com website, now redirecting users to the newly launched Sussex.com, which features bios for the couple as well as links to their Archewell Foundation and Archewell Productions organizations.
Highlights
- Harry and Meghan launched Sussex.com, showcasing their work and receiving mixed reactions.
- Meghan's bio highlights her as a feminist and human rights champion; Harry's emphasizes his humanitarian efforts.
- Critics and supporters clashed on social media over the couple's use of royal titles and branding.
It would appear that the foundation’s website even got a face-lift, as it now matches the new platform’s dark navy and beige theme.
Moreover, the Sussex.com site offers a news tab that summarizes the pair’s achievements, as per The New York Post.
In fact, it has just posted a new entry featuring a write-up of the prince presenting the Walter Payton NFL Man of the Year to Pittsburgh Steelers defensive tackle Cameron Heyward at the National Football League (NFL) Honors.
The Walter Payton NFL Man of the Year award is presented annually by the NFL, and it honors a player’s commitment to philanthropy and community impact, as well as his excellence on the field.
Visitors logging onto the old website’s URL will now see a pop-up message that reads: “This site was established in 2020 and sets out the work streams of Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex prior to their move to the United States.
“To learn more about the Royal couple and their philanthropic endeavors, click here.”
RELATED:
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s newly launched Sussex.com website prompted both praise and backlash from fans and skeptics
Image credits: Chris Jackson/Getty Images
The couple’s coat of arms appears at the top of the homepage, with text underneath that reads, “The office of Prince Harry & Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”
Meghan’s coat of arms was unveiled in 2018 following her wedding to the 39-year-old prince and reflects her Californian background. According to the BBC, It includes a shield containing the color blue, representing the Pacific Ocean, and rays, symbolizing sunshine.
Prince Harry was gifted his very own coat of arms on his 18th birthday in 2002, Metro explained. His features the Support Arms of the Sovereign right of the United Kingdom, and the left side of his coat of arms has been used for his and Meghan’s joint arms.
The new homepage’s backdrop is represented by the Duke and his 42-year-old wife smiling and cheering at the 2023 Invictus Games, which is reportedly the same image they used for their holiday card last year.
The Invictus Games is an international multi-sport event held for wounded, injured, and sick servicemen and women, both those still serving and veterans.
The couple’s coat of arms appears at the top of the homepage
Image credits: Chris Jackson/Getty Images
Prince Harry’s bio featured on the renewed website calls him a “humanitarian, military veteran, mental health advocate, and environmental campaigner.” It also boasts about his 2023 bombshell memoir, Spare.
Spare received generally mixed reviews from critics, some who praised the British Royal Family member’s openness but were critical of the inclusion of too many personal details. According to Guinness World Records, Spare became “the fastest-selling non-fiction book of all time” on the date of its release.
Meanwhile, Meghan’s bio is noticeably longer than her husband’s, and it identifies her as a “feminist and champion of human rights and gender equity.” It also mentions her role in the hit series Suits, as well as other creative efforts.
From 2011 to 2017, Meghan played her best-known role, Rachel Zane, on the legal drama series.
The couple, who live in Southern California, showcased their philanthropic work and achievements using their royal titles
Image credits: sussex
Both bios refer to their two kids as “Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet” despite Harry and Meghan stepping down as senior members of the royal family in 2020.
The couple had initially agreed to a period of transition before ultimately settling in California, USA. While the duo have retained their titles and positions in the line of succession to the British throne, they are no longer considered working members of the royal family.
Harry and Meghan’s revived bios and website design sparked some divided opinions, with some people expressing their outrage on X (formerly known as Twitter), as a person wrote: “Umm, these two nincompoops do realize they are not ‘Sussex,’ right?
“The gall of buying Sussex.com and including a royal crest, though they hate the royals, is ridiculous.”
Another X user commented: “The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’ Grandiose, arrogant & self-serving.”
You can see what the new website looks like below:
Image credits: sussex
A separate individual chimed in: “If this isn’t an attempt to pre-empt their anticipated removal from the Royal Family website (and other actions), it should be the catalyst to do so. Get on with it.”
Nevertheless, others shared their positive reactions, as a commentator penned: “Meghan outlines all the work she’s done throughout her life. I’m so proud of her for doing this.
“She’s taking control of her life. She doesn’t owe anything to anyone, and she wants you to know that, yes, her children are, in fact, a prince and princess.”
An additional person wrote: “The Sussex.com website is going to make a lot of people cry, and I am here for it.
“However, I am so proud of Harry & Meghan for doing things the way they see fit & having some of the best people working for them. Onwards and Upwards! 2024 is our year to celebrate them!”
Meghan’s bio identifies her as a “feminist and champion of human rights and gender equity”
Image credits: sussex
Meghan, who is of mixed-race heritage with an African-American mother, Doria Ragland, has faced criticism and negative portrayals from some sections of the British tabloid media.
Over the years, some commentators and observers have suggested that some of the coverage she received contained elements of racism or racial bias.
In 2016, when Meghan and Prince Harry had just started dating, The Daily Mail published an article with the headline “Harry’s girl is (almost) straight outta Compton,” referencing Meghan Markle’s mixed-race heritage and upbringing in the diverse neighborhood of Crenshaw in Los Angeles.
In 2019, one year into Meghan and Harry’s marriage, The Sun published a headline that read “Meghan Markle’s exotic heritage revealed,” which some critics argued reduced the former actress’ diverse background to an exotic curiosity, thereby marginalizing her identity.
Prince Harry’s bio calls him a “humanitarian, military veteran, mental health advocate, and environmental campaigner”
Image credits: sussex
In 2021, after moving to the US and following Meghan’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, The Daily Express published an article with the headline: “Meghan’s Oprah claim torn apart as expert exposes major inconsistencies.”
While the headline itself may have not explicitly contained racial bias, critics argued at the time that the tone of the article and its portrayal of Meghan perpetuated negative stereotypes often associated with black women.
The former senior royals’ new website launch follows King Charles’s recent cancer diagnosis, which prompted Prince Harry to fly back to the UK despite their estranged relationship.
Harry was seen arriving at a private terminal at LAX (Los Angeles International Airport, USA) in his black Range Rover ahead of his flight to the UK on February 6.
The Duke of Sussex was personally informed about his father’s diagnosis by the monarch.
Additionally, a source close to Harry had said earlier: “The Duke did speak with his father about his diagnosis. He will be traveling to the UK to see His Majesty in the coming days.”
Critics referred to the newly launched website as a “rebrand” attempt
Poll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Newsletter
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
What do you think ?
Gin 10 months ago
Had to laugh at the comment saying 'I think the people of Sussex would be appalled'. Nope! Doubt many of us even think about the Duke and Duchess much at all, let alone as having anything whatsoever to do with us. There is NO duchy of Sussex and the title was lapsed from 1843 until the Queen bestowed it on Harry and Meghan. It's meaningless in any real terms. It's not as if they actually have any authority, rights or connection with Sussex. It's just a thing royalty do to make themselves seem important in a world which sees them as increasingly irrelevant (and I'm not talking about Harry or Meghan, but all Royalty). It's only really Daily Mail readers who get bothered by things royalty do. Load of old tosh.
Emma S 10 months ago (edited)
This is what I don't understand. They have spent the last four years complaining about the Royal Family at every opportunity through books, interviews, documentaries etc. However they never miss an opportunity to use their titles, which they only got because Harry is the son of the King. If they disliked the institution that much it makes no sense that they'd then keep cashing in on the name, or they'd be upset that Archie and Lilibet weren't entitled to be called Prince and Princess when they were born. No doubt when the King dies (which may not be too long given that he's 75 and has cancer) they'll be moaning about how unfair it all is that they didn't get to play a role in William's coronation.
Featherytoad 10 months ago
Yeah, they are such hypocrites. They kept whining that they just wanted to be left alone and here they are with all their interviews and everything else you mentioned above. They should have pulled a J.D. Salinger and and disappeared after writing the book.
Load More Replies... greenideas 10 months ago
Ah, yes, people donate to their foundation and they get to pass that money on and take credit for "philanthropic work". Of course, since the foundation is registered in Delaware, they can legally keep 95% of any donations. The grift that keeps on giving!
Ron Baza 10 months ago
“since the foundation is registered in Delaware, they can legally keep 95% of any donations”. How much *do* they keep of donations? Because if you don’t know, I’d suggest that your real problem is with US charitable law.
Load More Replies... Gin 10 months ago
Had to laugh at the comment saying 'I think the people of Sussex would be appalled'. Nope! Doubt many of us even think about the Duke and Duchess much at all, let alone as having anything whatsoever to do with us. There is NO duchy of Sussex and the title was lapsed from 1843 until the Queen bestowed it on Harry and Meghan. It's meaningless in any real terms. It's not as if they actually have any authority, rights or connection with Sussex. It's just a thing royalty do to make themselves seem important in a world which sees them as increasingly irrelevant (and I'm not talking about Harry or Meghan, but all Royalty). It's only really Daily Mail readers who get bothered by things royalty do. Load of old tosh.
Emma S 10 months ago (edited)
This is what I don't understand. They have spent the last four years complaining about the Royal Family at every opportunity through books, interviews, documentaries etc. However they never miss an opportunity to use their titles, which they only got because Harry is the son of the King. If they disliked the institution that much it makes no sense that they'd then keep cashing in on the name, or they'd be upset that Archie and Lilibet weren't entitled to be called Prince and Princess when they were born. No doubt when the King dies (which may not be too long given that he's 75 and has cancer) they'll be moaning about how unfair it all is that they didn't get to play a role in William's coronation.
Featherytoad 10 months ago
Yeah, they are such hypocrites. They kept whining that they just wanted to be left alone and here they are with all their interviews and everything else you mentioned above. They should have pulled a J.D. Salinger and and disappeared after writing the book.
Load More Replies... greenideas 10 months ago
Ah, yes, people donate to their foundation and they get to pass that money on and take credit for "philanthropic work". Of course, since the foundation is registered in Delaware, they can legally keep 95% of any donations. The grift that keeps on giving!
Ron Baza 10 months ago
“since the foundation is registered in Delaware, they can legally keep 95% of any donations”. How much *do* they keep of donations? Because if you don’t know, I’d suggest that your real problem is with US charitable law.
Load More Replies... You May Like People Stunned After US And Russian Men Share Views On 100% Financially Supporting Their Partners Teen, 16, Jailed For 12 Years For Attempted Homicide Of 14-Year-Old Boy, Attacked By Mistake "She Raised The Issue Of Male Privilege": Saoirse Ronan Breaks Silence On Viral Dig At Male Joke
Karina Babenok
Karina Babenok
Karina Babenok
Related on Bored Panda
-2
18