Some individuals simply can’t keep up with the rapidly evolving world of media, influence, and public perception. Take Meghan Markle, for instance. To some, she embodies grace under pressure, a modern woman navigating an antiquated institution. To others, she represents something less sincere—an orchestrated effort to construct a compelling public persona. Joe Rogan, known for his unfiltered commentary and sharp eye for media narratives, recently turned his attention to Markle, offering a scathing critique that has since sent ripples across the internet.

During a particularly intense segment on his podcast, Rogan didn’t hold back. He addressed Meghan’s emotional displays on popular platforms, such as her recent appearance on Jaime Kern Lima’s podcast, and openly questioned the authenticity of her tearful moments. Rogan’s view is that these emotionally charged scenes were not spontaneous or heartfelt but rather strategically calculated performances designed to elicit sympathy and shape public opinion.

But Rogan’s critique went much further than one podcast appearance. He delved into Meghan’s rise from Hollywood actress to royal family member, threading a narrative that suggested her path was more tactical than organic. He pointed out her associations with powerful and influential figures, including controversial personalities like Prince Andrew, implying that Meghan’s journey wasn’t accidental—it was meticulously planned.

According to Rogan, Meghan and Prince Harry’s royal titles should be revoked, as he believes their carefully constructed image is nothing more than a façade meant to manipulate the public and maintain relevance. Rogan’s argument is that this image is not only deceptive but potentially harmful, especially when cloaked in the language of vulnerability and trauma.

Sitting in his studio, illuminated by the familiar neon glow, Rogan leaned forward in his leather chair and stared directly into the camera. With a calm yet firm tone, he expressed his doubts. There was something off about Meghan Markle, he insisted. Something that didn’t quite match the public narrative. He didn’t speak from a place of casual gossip; his words were pointed and deliberate, his analysis both precise and unapologetic.

He began with her appearance on Lima’s show, where Meghan presented herself with poise and emotion, her voice breaking at key moments, her expressions seemingly raw. But Rogan wasn’t buying it. He described it as a performance, not a revelation of personal truth. He said watching her felt more like observing a skilled actress than a vulnerable individual recounting personal hardship.

As clips from the interview circulated across social media, reactions varied wildly. To her supporters, Meghan was bravely sharing her experiences in a hostile world. To her critics, she was playing a role, perfectly choreographed and emotionally manipulative. Rogan aligned himself with the latter camp and made his position clear.

He analyzed not just her latest appearance but a series of high-profile moments, including the infamous Oprah Winfrey interview where Meghan spoke about her struggles within the royal family, including mental health challenges and alleged indifference from the monarchy. Rogan replayed these interviews, slowing down the footage to scrutinize her expressions, body language, and vocal inflections. In his view, her movements were too polished, her emotional expressions too perfectly timed to be spontaneous.

Rogan didn’t stop there. He explored Meghan’s career before she became the Duchess of Sussex. Long before royal titles and media storms, she was best known for her role as Rachel Zane on the legal drama Suits. Rogan noted that acting requires mastering the projection of emotion—something Meghan had years of experience with. He argued that her ability to evoke tears and heartfelt emotion in interviews mirrored the skills honed during her acting career. According to Rogan, what the public was witnessing wasn’t real vulnerability but a continuation of a well-rehearsed persona crafted for maximum impact.

The reaction to Rogan’s take was immediate. Social media erupted with both praise and backlash. Hashtags trended overnight, sparking fierce debates about authenticity, fame, and media manipulation. Some felt Rogan was simply saying what many had long suspected but were too afraid to voice.

Others accused him of misogyny and undue harshness toward a woman who had faced intense scrutiny from both the public and the press. Still, Rogan remained focused on his central argument: that Meghan Markle’s public image had been shaped not by chance, but by a deliberate strategy aimed at climbing the social and cultural ladder.

He continued his analysis by examining her lifestyle brand, The TIG, which she launched during her acting years. The blog covered everything from fashion and travel to personal reflections and empowerment messaging. To many, it was a creative outlet. To Rogan, it was a calculated branding tool designed to position Meghan not just as a celebrity, but as a thought leader and influencer. He described the platform as a personal PR engine that allowed her to present herself as sophisticated, philanthropic, and socially conscious—traits that would later serve her well as she transitioned into royalty.

Rogan also questioned the timing and visibility of her humanitarian work. While Meghan’s public speaking at events like the United Nations Women’s Conference and her involvement in charitable missions were praised by her supporters, Rogan saw them as conveniently timed to align with peak media attention. He suggested that these appearances were less about genuine altruism and more about enhancing her public image. According to him, her advocacy often coincided with periods where her media exposure was at its highest, reinforcing the idea that every move was part of a larger, meticulously crafted narrative.

It was during this period of rising influence that Meghan met Prince Harry. Their whirlwind romance captivated the world, and for many, it symbolized a modern fairy tale. But Rogan cast doubt on the spontaneity of their love story. He suggested that the relationship, while perhaps genuine in emotion, also served as the final step in Meghan’s calculated journey from Hollywood to the British royal family.

Their engagement in 2017 and the subsequent wedding ceremony were global spectacles. Meghan’s transition from actress to duchess seemed seamless, and she managed the intense media scrutiny with composure and charm. Yet Rogan argued that even this poise was part of the act, an extension of her training as an actress familiar with the spotlight.

As media attention intensified, Rogan’s assertions took on new relevance. He pointed out how Meghan’s story had evolved—initially a narrative of love and fairy tale romance, and later, one of struggle, victimhood, and survival. In Rogan’s eyes, this shift wasn’t accidental.

It was a masterclass in narrative control. He said Meghan had leveraged public sympathy to rebrand herself and maintain relevance in the cultural conversation. By framing herself as a misunderstood outsider, she was able to command empathy and shield herself from criticism. Her critics were labeled as part of an oppressive system; her supporters were seen as allies in her personal revolution.

Rogan didn’t end his commentary with personal analysis. He cited media articles, replayed interviews, and referenced Meghan’s ties to influential people across industries. He even brought up her association—however loose—with Prince Andrew as part of a broader commentary on the company she kept and the advantages she seemed to gain from those associations.

His conclusion was stark: Meghan Markle, far from being a passive participant in a media storm, was its skilled architect. According to Rogan, her ascent into global prominence wasn’t a happy accident—it was a strategic campaign that capitalized on her strengths as a performer and public figure.

As the conversation about Meghan Markle’s authenticity continues to evolve, one thing remains certain: Joe Rogan has reignited public interest in how we perceive celebrity narratives, especially when they intersect with power, royalty, and media. His critique, whether one agrees with it or not, challenges audiences to look beyond surface-level storytelling and consider the machinery behind public image-making. Meghan’s story—her rise, her struggles, and her ongoing controversies—has become a cultural flashpoint. And Rogan, true to form, has thrown gasoline on the fire. Whether this leads to greater scrutiny or sparks a backlash in her favor remains to be seen. What’s undeniable is that his voice has added fuel to a debate that is far from over.