There were not any U.S. media backlash against the decision of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to step down as senior members of the royal family. Settling into their new life in Canada to raise their child and away from the spotlight, Americans were most of the time sympathetic to the couple.
Americans understood that they needed time and space because Markle was American.
However, one journalist -- together with the rest of the other media members and royal fans -- have turned their backs on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Put simply, they were not happy about the two attending a JP Morgan event last week and rubbing elbows with billionaires instead of focusing on their charities.
Prince Harry and Meghan were criticized for selling their goods and services "to the highest bidder," which has been even more highlighted when a video of Prince Harry pleading the Disney CEO to hire his wife to become a voiceover actress re-surfaced recently.
Maureen Callahan of the New York Post made her readers realize that perhaps for appearances' sake, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should have held out a little longer. But they did not.
In her opinion-article entitled "It didn't take long for Harry and Meghan to prove they are hypocrites," she called the royals a bunch of "freeloaders." She said they are cashing in on their royal identity without having to perform duties required for them to do and be criticized for not even pretending to live up to their green credentials.
"And since decamping Britain, they've been freeloading, staying indefinitely at a $14 million Vancouver mansion and Serena Williams' Palm Beach estate during a recent trip to Florida," Callahan wrote.
Callahan then mentioned what she felt about Prince Harry allegedly cashing in millions to talk about someone's death, particularly his mother, Princess Diana, who died when the Prince was only 12 years old.
"But for the right price, he'll dredge up all that deeply personal emotional chaos, held sacred for decades, to a room full of global powerbrokers - despite zero chance any of it will elucidate or ameliorate a single real-world problem," the journalist wrote.
Speaking about Princess Diana's work to change the public's attitude toward AIDS, Callahan stated how the princess used her profile to fuel important activism.
"She was doing things no royal had ever done - handhold and hug and kiss those dying from the disease."
Callahan also mentioned that the late Princess of Wales would never exploit her royal credentials to make a profitable brand like SussexRoyal.
"SussexRoyal?! Diana would never."
For her, Prince Harry is just another "hustler" wanting to make a "buck." She added that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex showed "no scruples, no self-awareness, and no shame," quickly running away from their royal duties because they could not handle it.
In addition, Columnist Piers Morgan wrote on The Daily Mail that Prince Harry wants to "become a royal Kardashian" while keeping his wife happy.
Morgan wrote that while the readers thought that a $500,000 star-studded baby shower in NY and $3 million in refurbishing a house were inappropriate, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were busy urging people on their Twitter account to pay more attention to poor people.
Morgan was the first to slam the Duke and Duchess' appearance at the JP Morgan summit in an article. He said that while the couple claimed they quit the royal family for "peace, privacy and time," they just wanted the "freedom to exploit Diana's death for millions of dollars from environment-destroying bankers."