Amid a heartfelt wedding anniversary post, Meghan Markle faces a fresh wave of baseless conspiracy theories questioning her pregnancies, highlighting ongoing misogyny and misinformation targeting high-profile women in the royal family.
Online conspiracy theories surrounding Meghan Markle's pregnancies have gained renewed traction, leading to fresh waves of trolling and harassment. The Duchess of Sussex recently shared a heartfelt Instagram collage to mark her seventh wedding anniversary with Prince Harry, featuring intimate glimpses from their life together, including Prince Harry cradling a newborn Archie. However, this celebration was overshadowed by a lingering obsession among conspiracy theorists, who have pushed unfounded narratives alleging that Meghan faked her pregnancies.
Among the images, one particularly stirred the pot—a photograph of Meghan showcasing her bare bump during her pregnancy with Archie, alongside a sonogram. Critics, many of whom have never met Meghan, dubbed her bump "too shiny" and claimed it appeared "transparent." Others claimed that the sonogram bore no hospital information, prompting theories that the Duchess had employed a surrogate and was deceiving the public about her motherhood. These bizarre claims exemplify a pattern of misogyny directed at public women, especially those in high-profile roles.
Speaking to a broader audience about these unfounded allegations, Meghan addressed them in a recent interview with Vogue, where she stressed the importance of normalising discussions about women's health. She pointed out that such baseless accusations not only demean her experiences but also propagate misinformation that can harm others. Meghan's narrative echoes the widespread concern about the impact of online misinformation, especially on social media platforms like Twitter and YouTube, which have both disseminated and amplified these falsehoods.
Compounding her challenges, Meghan's half-sister, Samantha Markle, has also contributed to the discourse, adding fuel to the fire of speculation about Meghan's family dynamics and health experiences. As the conversation around her pregnancies continued to swirl, critics have highlighted historical parallels—a legacy of distrust aimed at women in royal circles, with unfounded claims echoing through time. Past generations have faced similar scrutiny over their childbearing capabilities, suggesting that these conspiracy theories are not just isolated phenomena but rather part of a systemic pattern.
Despite the outrage these theories have generated, royal observers and biographers have frequently questioned the timelines and authenticity of Meghan's pregnancies. Instances of legal actions taken by Meghan against media outlets for publishing inaccuracies add another layer to this tumultuous narrative; these confrontations illustrate the persistent battle against misinformation that public figures like her endure.
As new works, like royal biographer Omid Scobie's book, provoke further waves of scandalous claims, it becomes clear that these notions are not only baseless but deeply rooted in a problematic culture that questions women's autonomy and experience. As public interest grows, the necessity for a compassionate dialogue around such issues has never been more urgent, challenging both the media and the public to reconsider their approaches to discussing women's health and experiences.
In the face of this relentless online scrutiny, the need to support those targeted by such unfounded and damaging narratives is essential for fostering a more understanding and respectful public discourse.
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative appears to be a recent development, with the Express article dated May 24, 2025. However, similar conspiracy theories regarding Meghan Markle's pregnancies have been circulating since at least 2022. ([businessinsider.com](https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-internet-conspiracies-2022-9?utm_source=openai)) The Express article may be republishing older content with updated information, which could affect its freshness score. Additionally, the Express is known for republishing content across various platforms, which may indicate recycled material. ([express.co.uk](https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1456253/meghan-markle-news-royal-baby-pregnancy-conspiracy-theory-duchess-sussex-spt?utm_source=openai)) The presence of a press release suggests a high freshness score, but the recycling of older material warrants caution. The earliest known publication date of similar content is September 20, 2022. ([businessinsider.com](https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-internet-conspiracies-2022-9?utm_source=openai)) The Express article includes updated data but recycles older material, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged. ([express.co.uk](https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1636000/meghan-markle-baby-conspiracy-queen-elizabeth-ii-royal-family-spt?utm_source=openai))
Quotes check
Score:
6
Notes:
The article includes direct quotes from Meghan Markle addressing the conspiracy theories. However, these quotes have appeared in previous publications, such as her interview with Vogue in 2022. ([vogue.com](https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-misogynistic-public-shaming?utm_source=openai)) The wording of the quotes varies slightly across sources, indicating potential reuse or paraphrasing. No online matches were found for some of the quotes, suggesting they may be original or exclusive content.
Source reliability
Score:
5
Notes:
The narrative originates from the Express, a UK tabloid known for sensationalist reporting. While it is a reputable organisation, its history of publishing recycled content and sensational headlines raises concerns about the reliability of the information presented. The Express has previously published similar content, which may indicate a pattern of recycling material. ([express.co.uk](https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1456253/meghan-markle-news-royal-baby-pregnancy-conspiracy-theory-duchess-sussex-spt?utm_source=openai))
Plausability check
Score:
4
Notes:
The article discusses conspiracy theories alleging that Meghan Markle faked her pregnancies, a claim that has been widely debunked. The presence of updated data does not necessarily validate the plausibility of the claims. The Express article includes updated data but recycles older material, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged. ([express.co.uk](https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1636000/meghan-markle-baby-conspiracy-queen-elizabeth-ii-royal-family-spt?utm_source=openai)) The tone of the article is unusually dramatic, and the structure includes excessive or off-topic detail unrelated to the claim, which may be a distraction tactic. The language and tone feel inconsistent with typical corporate or official language, raising further concerns about the plausibility of the claims.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): FAIL
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative presents recycled content from previous publications, with quotes that have appeared elsewhere and a source known for sensationalist reporting. The plausibility of the claims is low, and the article's tone and structure raise further concerns. Given these factors, the overall assessment is a 'FAIL' with high confidence.