PR expert says the couple’s public messaging lacks clear alignment
Meghan Markle and Harry are once again facing scrutiny over how their public image lines up with their work. Their recent visit to Jordan has drawn mixed reactions, with critics pointing to what they see as a mismatch between the Duke of Sussex’s humanitarian efforts and Meghan Markle’s expanding lifestyle brand.
PR and branding expert Renae Smith, founder of The Atticism, recently shared her perspective on the issue while speaking to the Daily Express. According to Smith, the core problem is a lack of alignment in the couple’s public narrative.
The Jordan trip was carried out alongside teams from the World Health Organization, focusing on frontline health and mental health programmes. During their visit, the pair also met staff from World Central Kitchen in Amman, where the organisation is coordinating food relief efforts for Gaza.
Despite the humanitarian focus of the visit, Smith believes the couple’s broader messaging still feels divided.
“If Harry is doing humanitarian travel and Meghan is scaling a commercial lifestyle brand, those two narratives need to feel complementary, not parallel,” she explained.
In her view, successful public figures who balance business ventures with charitable causes usually connect the two in a clear and meaningful way. Without that link, the activities can appear disconnected and even compete for attention.
Smith suggested the couple may now be operating in very different spaces and that it could be more effective to treat those paths separately rather than trying to merge them.
Toward the end of her comments, she also addressed what it would take to shift public perception. According to Smith, any effort to change the narrative would require something more substantial.
She noted that meaningful change typically comes from measurable impact, a strong storyline, or a defining moment that stands out amid constant media coverage.
In her assessment, the Jordan visit did not deliver any of those elements.
Instead, Smith described the trip as “casually competent,” but said it lacked the strategic impact needed to reshape how the couple’s work is viewed.
