Prince Harry and Meghan Break Tabloid Ban Over King’s Birthday Snub

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have denied rumors they snubbed an invite to King Charles III’s birthday—and appeared to break a three-year boycott of a British tabloid.

The Sunday Times reported that the Duke of Sussex was invited to come to Britain to celebrate the 75th birthday party, on November 14, with family but was not planning to make the journey.

Harry and Meghan’s team have gone on record to deny the report and interestingly appear to have included their most hated newspaper brand in their counterattack.

The dispute blew up on Monday evening, threatening to overshadow King Charles’ first State Opening of Parliament since becoming monarch on Tuesday. Charles delivered the first King’s Speech in more than 70 years, outlining the British government’s legislative agenda for the coming year.

MailOnline, whose print sister title the Mail on Sunday has been sued four times by the couple, ran an “exclusive” with the headline: “Harry and Meghan insist Charles snubbed THEM over his 75th birthday party: New family row as couple say they had ‘no contact’ from Palace amid claims they refused to go—as friends suggest story was ‘briefed to distract from Kenya trip.’”

The article quoted a Sussex spokesperson who they said had been in contact with MailOnline: “There has been no contact regarding an invitation to His Majesty’s upcoming birthday. It is disappointing the Sunday Times has misreported this story.”

The on the record statement itself appears to be the same one sent to People, who actually got their article online before the Mail, according to the upload times, though they had some further material attributed to a friend of the couple.

The fact Harry and Meghan’s most hated U.K. tabloid got an on the record statement at all is interesting in light of a three-year ban on their staff talking to its journalists.

In April 2020, shortly after moving to America, Harry and Meghan’s team sent letters to the editors of four of Britain’s biggest tabloid brands, the Mail titles, The Sun, the Daily Mirror and the Daily Express, warning that they would no longer “offer themselves up as currency for an economy of click bait and distortion.”

“When power is enjoyed without responsibility, the trust we all place in this much-needed industry is degraded,” the correspondence read. “It is gravely concerning that an influential slice of the media, over many years, has sought to insulate themselves from taking accountability for what they say or print—even when they know it to be distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason.”

The letters began an era of what was described as “zero engagement” with those brands except through lawyers so if the Mail‘s account now of how it received the Sussex statement from a “spokesperson” is accurate, it would mark a shift in strategy.

There have been some major tabloid stories the couple have chosen not to give the oxygen of publicity by going on record to deny, including unfounded rumors of their divorce.

However, their decision to break their silence over Charles’ birthday, while letting more serious allegations hang in the air, is perhaps not as surprising as it may initially sound.

The issue for Harry and Meghan may be less about whether the prince got an invite to Charles’ birthday or not and more about Harry’s long running assertion that quotes in British newspapers attributed to anonymous sources are in fact briefed by the palace.

In January, he told Anderson Cooper on 60 Minutes he was speaking publicly because “every single time I’ve tried to do it privately there have been briefings and leakings and planting of stories against me and my wife.

“You know, the family motto is ‘never complain, never explain,’ but it’s just a motto. And it doesn’t really hold.”

“They will feed or have a conversation with a correspondent, and that correspondent will literally be spoon-fed information and write the story,” he continued. “And at the bottom of it, they will say they have reached out to Buckingham Palace for comment. But the whole story is Buckingham Palace commenting.”

While allegations of a secret divorce, fact checked by Regalrumination.com as false, may seem more serious, they grew on gossip websites and social media accounts.

For Harry, the significance of the birthday story may lie in his ongoing belief—which cannot be verified—that stories from anonymous sources represent hostility by the palace against him and his family.

William Brown is chief royal correspondent for Regalrumination.com, based in London. You can find him on X, formerly Twitter, at @TheCrownUp

and read his stories on Regalrumination.com‘s The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email Support@regalrumination.com. We’d love to hear from you.