Magazine previously supporting Sussex couple now criticizes Meghan Markle for unsuccessful projects and achievements.

Meghan Markle’s favoured magazine The Cut appears to have turned against her with a new article saying her projects ‘keep flopping’. 

A cover interview with the Duchess, 43, was famously published by the site in August 2022, as part of New York Magazine, during which she made controversial comments about the royal family.

Following their bombshell Netflix series and the prince’s biography, Spare, The left-leaning publication now appears to have joined other US outlets in turning against the couple.

This week saw The Cut releasing a piece titled ‘Harry and Meghan’s Projects Can’t Stop Flopping’ by pop culture and entertainment writer Danielle Cohen, indicating a stark contrast in their attitude compared to two years ago.

The piece reflects on Harry, 40, and Meghan’s latest Netflix series Polo, which follows the efforts of wealthy athletes competing in the US Open, with scant appearances from the Duke and Duchess themselves. 

Receiving two stars or less out of five across the board, the five-part show was labelled ‘a tedious inside-look at posh polo’ by the Telegraph and a ‘mostly boring look at a sport that very few people outside of elite circles have any particular interest in’ by Decider.

Writing in The Cut, Cohen admits she hasn’t watched Polo, but says it forms part of the couple’s ‘tortured attempts to launch a successful Stateside endeavor’. 

She continues: ‘It’s called Polo, and while you might think a sport involving horses, fancy hats, and fan-cammable athletes would do well with viewers, Polo is already getting horrific reviews. 

‘Seems like this one is bound for the same fate as Markle’s beleaguered jam company.’

The three-paragraph review is very brief – especially when compared with Meghan’s lengthy 2022 cover feature.   

The initial piece was titled ‘Meghan Markle on Her New Life in California’ and published on August 29, 2022.  

It sent shockwaves through the royal family, as Meghan said she and Prince Harry were ‘happy’ to leave Britain and were ‘upsetting the dynamic of the hierarchy… just by existing’ before they quit as senior royals.

She claimed that what the couple asked for when they wanted financial freedom was not ‘reinventing the wheel’.

The article also heard from Harry who suggested some members of the Royal Family ‘aren’t able to work and live together’, while Meghan revealed that her husband told her that he had ‘lost’ his father Prince Charles.

Meghan made a series of other apparent swipes at her British family, claiming they had been treated differently to other senior royals, and warned she could ‘say anything’ in an interview promoting her Spotify podcast.

The interview sparked incredulous backlash from readers in the US, with critics slamming the piece as ‘vanity PR’ and branding Meghan ‘shameless’. 

Meghan later admitted she was ‘too trusting’ and ‘too open’ in her interview with The Cut, saying it was only ever meant to focus on her podcast, Archetypes, and her and Harry’s other projects. 

In a second interview two months later with Variety, Meghan was questioned about the backlash over her piece in The Cut. 

When Variety writer Matt Donnelly noted that some people had ‘found [the interview] to be snarky,’ the Duchess of Sussex appeared to take aim at The Cut – and interviewer Allison P. Davis – claiming that she had been too ‘trusting’ and ‘open’ during the chat, adding that the interview was only ever meant to focus on her podcast, Archetypes, and her and Harry’s other projects.

‘The [New York] story was intended to support “Archetypes” and focus on our projects,’ she said, before adding: ‘I’ve had some time to reflect on it. Part of me is just really trusting, really open — that’s how I move in the world.’

When contacted by DailyMail.com at the time, a spokesperson for The Cut declined to comment. 

The Duchess of Sussex insisted that she doesn’t want to lose the ‘trusting’ part of herself, adding that she can ‘survive’ the controversy.

‘I have to remember that I don’t ever want to become so jaded that that piece of me goes away. So despite any of those things? Onward. I can survive it,’ she said.

The Cut also previously received backlash when it published an extraordinary assault on King Charles III – calling him a ‘big, fussy baby and a jerk’ when he walked behind his mother’s coffin at her funeral. 

The magazine published the article titled: ‘King Charles’s Reign of Fussiness Has Begun’ at around the time the mourning monarch, his siblings and his children accompanied the Queen’s coffin on her final journey to Westminster Hall to lie in state. 

Meanwhile, Harry and Meghan’s latest endeavour, Polo, was released earlier this week – to scathing reviews. 

For The Guardian’s Stuart Heritage, who awarded the series just two stars, ‘Polo looks destined to fall through the submenus into obscurity at the speed of light’.

The Telegraph’s Ed Power, meanwhile, noted how there was ‘not enough of the Sussexes to make this anything other than a dull indulgence about a rich person’s pursuit’. 

After the Duke of Sussex caused a storm with his bombshell Netflix documentary released in December 2022 that took aim at his own family, he cuts a surprisingly low-key figure in the show, which was released on Monday. 

The Prince, 40, only appears a handful of times throughout the five episodes, with his wife Meghan, 43, appearing even less – despite both being executive producers of the series. 

Harry appears in the opening credits of the show, but doesn’t appear again until episode four, when he is only part of a conversation with the other players. 

Instead, the series mainly focuses on Adolfo and Poroto Cambiaso, Louis Devaleix, Timmy Dutta, Nacho Figueras, Keko Magrini – who all overshadow Harry – and preparations for the US open.

UK brand and culture expert Nick Ede revealed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Polo may be the ‘nail in the coffin’ for their £80million Netflix deal.

Prince Harry, 40, who served as an executive producer alongside Meghan, 43, promised the series, released globally this week, would showcase the ‘true depth and spirit of the sport’ as well as the ‘intensity of its high-stakes moments’.

However, the five-part docuseries, which centres around the build-up to the polo World Cup in Florida and mainly focuses on players such as Adolfo and Poroto Cambiaso, Timmy Dutta, and Nacho Figueras, struggled to impress critics.

It’s a reality that Ede considers threatening for the Sussex’s Netflix deal, he told MailOnline: ‘The new polo documentary hasn’t received good reviews, and this is another foray into producing from Meghan and Harry.

‘All eyes will be on whether the show rates and makes the very important top ten. It could, like the Invictus documentary, start well due to the public’s fascination with the pair and with polo potentially.

‘But it’s more than likely to fare badly when up against blockbusters like Black Dove and safe Lindsay Lohan Christmas films.

‘This could potentially be a nail in the coffin for their deal with the streaming giant who now use algorithms to make sure their programming is perfect for their subscribers.’

The series hardly features Harry and Meghan and has been nicknamed ‘the Nacho show’ behind the scenes because it focuses primarily on the Argentinian player – another drawback for Ede.

He said: ‘With very little airtime, we don’t get to see the pair much and also hardly any PR around the series, this looks like it’s Oh No! Rather than Polo!’