In a stunning turn of events that’s got royal watchers and Netflix subscribers buzzing with outrage, Meghan Markle is once again at the center of controversy. Sources and critics alike are accusing the Duchess of Sussex of “hijacking” yet another high-profile project – this time, the much-anticipated Netflix documentary series on polo, a sport long associated with her husband, Prince Harry. Titled simply “Polo,” the series was meant to shine a light on the elite world of professional polo players, their grueling competitions, and the behind-the-scenes drama of the sport. But according to insiders, Markle has swooped in, making the entire production revolve around her, despite having no direct involvement in its creation, direction, or original planning. Fans are asking: Why is she even being interviewed? She wasn’t in the original lineup, didn’t write a single line, direct any scenes, or even conceptualize the idea. It seems like she just jumped on board mid-filming, turning what could have been a straightforward sports doc into another platform for her personal brand.
The backlash started brewing even before the series dropped on Netflix in late 2024, but it exploded into full-blown fury after its release. Social media is ablaze with comments from disappointed viewers who feel the documentary lost its focus on the actual polo stars and the sport’s rich history. Instead, episodes reportedly feature extended segments with Markle sharing her thoughts on everything from the “glamour” of polo to her own experiences attending matches – all while the cameras linger on her poised presence. “It’s like she’s the star of the show, but why? Polo is Harry’s thing!” one frustrated X user posted, echoing the sentiments of thousands. This isn’t the first time Markle has been accused of overshadowing projects; critics point to a pattern where she inserts herself into endeavors that were initially independent of her influence, only to reshape them in her image.
To understand the uproar, let’s rewind to the origins of the “Polo” series. Announced in April 2024 as part of the Sussexes’ multi-million-dollar deal with Netflix, the project was pitched as an in-depth look at the U.S. Open Polo Championship, following top players like Nacho Figueras – a close friend of Prince Harry – and delving into the high-stakes world of the “sport of kings.” Harry, an avid polo enthusiast who has played the game since childhood and even founded the Sentebale charity polo matches in Africa, was listed as an executive producer through their Archewell Productions. Early press releases emphasized the series’ focus on the athletes’ dedication, the physical demands of the sport, and its global appeal. There was no mention of Markle in the initial announcements, leading many to believe this would be a passion project for Harry, allowing him to highlight a cause close to his heart without the usual royal family drama.
But as filming progressed, whispers began circulating that Markle had “jumped on” the project. Reports suggest that production was already well underway when she decided to get involved, appearing in interviews and on-camera segments that shifted the narrative. One royal commentator described it as “Meghan making the documentary all about her,” arguing that her presence diluted the core story. “She’s not a polo player, she didn’t plan this, and she certainly didn’t direct it. So why are they interviewing her at length? It feels like a calculated move to boost her visibility,” the expert claimed in a scathing review. This sentiment aligns with broader criticisms of the Sussexes’ Netflix output, which has faced mixed reviews since their bombshell docuseries “Harry & Meghan” in 2022.
Critics haven’t held back in their assessments. The series, which premiered to underwhelming ratings, has been panned for lacking depth on the sport itself, with some episodes feeling more like a lifestyle promo than a sports documentary. “Meghan Markle accused of ‘hijacking all the oxygen in the room’,” blared one headline, pointing to how her commentary segments dominate screen time, often pivoting to discussions about empowerment, family, and even subtle nods to her own brand, American Riviera Orchard. Viewers on platforms like Reddit and X have echoed this, with threads titled “Meghan Ruins Polo Doc” garnering thousands of upvotes. “I tuned in for polo action, not Meghan’s TED Talk,” one commenter lamented. Another added, “Harry’s polo spotlight stolen by Netflix cameras – and guess who’s front and center?”
This isn’t an isolated incident. Markle’s detractors argue it’s part of a larger pattern of “project hijacking.” Take, for example, the couple’s earlier Netflix ventures. Their 2022 docuseries was initially framed as a look at their love story and royal exit, but critics claimed Markle steered it toward her personal grievances, overshadowing Harry’s military background and charitable work. More recently, her solo Netflix lifestyle show, “With Love, Meghan,” faced similar accusations of self-centeredness, with reviewers calling it “ghastly” and blaming her for sucking the life out of collaborative efforts. Even outside Netflix, stories abound: from allegedly dominating Invictus Games events to inserting herself into charity polo matches that were meant to benefit causes like Sentebale. In one particularly pointed incident, Harry was accused of allowing a charity polo fundraiser to be “hijacked” by Netflix cameras, with Markle’s influence cited as a key factor.
Royal experts have weighed in, offering theories on why this keeps happening. Some suggest it’s a strategic PR move to keep the Sussex brand relevant amid declining public interest. “Meghan has a knack for turning any project into a vehicle for her narrative,” said one analyst. “In the case of ‘Polo,’ what started as Harry’s ode to the sport became another chapter in the Meghan show.” Others point to the couple’s production company, Archewell, where decisions are reportedly collaborative but often lean toward Markle’s vision. Insiders claim that during filming, additional scenes were added at her insistence, including interviews where she discusses the “human side” of polo – code, critics say, for making it about her experiences as a spectator and supporter.
The timing couldn’t be worse for the Sussexes, who are already grappling with a string of professional setbacks. Their Netflix deal, once hailed as a game-changer, has produced hits and misses: the polo series joins “Heart of Invictus” and other projects that underperformed. Meanwhile, Markle’s American Riviera Orchard brand has faced its own hurdles, from trademark issues to slow rollout. Accusations of hijacking come at a time when public sympathy for the couple is waning, especially in the UK, where tabloids have been relentless. “Britain is reacting with eye-rolls and sighs,” noted one commentator, describing the polo doc as “lackluster” and another example of the Sussexes’ American exile turning royal traditions into personal profit.
Fans of the Duchess, however, defend her involvement, arguing that as Harry’s partner and a co-producer at Archewell, she has every right to contribute. “Why can’t a wife support her husband’s project?” one supporter tweeted. “This is just more misogynistic bashing.” But even among neutrals, the consensus seems to be that her presence felt forced, detracting from the athletes who should have been the stars. Polo players featured in the series, like Adolfo Cambiaso and Poroto Cambiaso, delivered compelling stories of triumph and hardship, but their narratives were often interrupted by glossy montages featuring the Sussexes.
As the dust settles, questions linger about the future of Archewell’s productions. Will Netflix renew their deal, set to expire soon? And will Markle continue to “jump on” projects, or will she step back to let others shine? For now, the “Polo” controversy serves as a cautionary tale: in the cutthroat world of streaming, even a noble sport can get lost in the shadow of celebrity ego. Royal watchers will be keeping a close eye on the Sussexes’ next move – hoping, perhaps, for a project that stays true to its roots without the drama.
What do you think? Is this fair criticism, or just another round of Markle-bashing? Sound off in the comments below!
