Meghan And Eugenie Gave Birth At The Same Hospital. Why Are The Headlines So Different?

Princess Eugenie's new arrival - a baby boy now eleventh in line to the throne - is a welcome piece of good news at a difficult time. Eugenie announced the news with a post on Instagram and an official statement via Buckingham Palace. The resulting headlines expressed the usual levels of excitement and kind wishes. But there has also been a noticeable change in the way in which the birth of Eugenie's son and that of the Duchess of Sussex has been reported.

Both Archie and Eugenie's as-yet-unnamed child were born at The Portland, an exclusive and expensive hospital popular with celebrities. In recent years, most royal children have been born at St Mary's. The Mirror notes this connection between Meghan and Eugenie, drawing attention to a specific difference in the way this was revealed.

'While both royal women gave birth at the same location, there was one big difference in their approach - Eugenie made the location public,' the piece writes. 'Meghan and Harry desperately tried to keep the place of Archie's birth secret, and it was only revealed when they had to write it on his birth certificate.'

Aside from implying that Harry and Meghan were leading some form of secret conspiracy rather than attempting to maintain a level of privacy around their newborn son, it seems to suggest that Eugenie should be applauded for revealing what her relatives did not. It's yet another example of how Harry and Meghan just can't win. They are condemned if they do, condemned if they don't.

Let's look at the headlines. Type in 'Meghan Markle Portland' and scroll through the options. The Sun offers 'Inside "Meghan Markle’s £20k maternity ward" at Portland Hospital.' The Express writes: 'Meghan Markle was taken to £15k hospital: Why was Portland Hospital dash kept BIG SECRET?' The Mirror wrote: 'Inside Meghan Markle's luxury "£20k labour ward" that serves champagne and lobster.'

And Eugenie? Type in 'Princess Eugenie Portland' and you find much more straight, concise headlines like 'Princess Eugenie gives brith to baby boy': the hospital is an afterthought in most cases.

So, why was Meghan's venue of such interest? Naturally, since Harry is higher up the line of succession than Eugenie, the public appetite for detail is greater. An increased glare seems vaguely reasonable: we have been raised to care about Harry more than we care about Eugenie because he is the son of the future king. But the headlines, and this new report's specific reference to Meghan's attempt at privacy versus Eugenie's forthright announcement, makes it clear that other issues are afoot.

The pieces about Meghan focus on money which, I would argue, pushes the cruel narrative that she is materialistic, tacky, or 'new money'. Such accusations have always dogged her. She was criticised for closing her own car door and for attending a lavish baby shower that was paid for by friends. It speaks to the prejudice that she faces as a so-called commoner, an American and a woman of colour.

As for the privacy? Many media outlets are so angry that Harry and Meghan dared to request an atom of privacy - a desire that, of course, saw them leave the country last year - that they will use it as a rod with which to beat them at any possible opportunity.

So please do celebrate the birth of a new royal baby. We've got to take the joys wherever they come at the moment. But if you are raising a glass for a new mum when you did not do so before, or if you had harsh words for Meghan that you are not using for Eugenie, then it might be worth thinking about why.

READ MORE: Here Are All The Royal Baby Debuts Of Recent Years