Quick Insights
- Stassi Schroeder, a former Vanderpump Rules star, publicly criticized Meghan Markle for not including her in a PR gifting list for Markle’s lifestyle brand, As Ever.
- Schroeder, once a vocal supporter of Markle, expressed her frustration on her podcast, claiming the snub was the “last straw” in their one-sided relationship.
- The reality star accused Markle of dismissing her due to her reality TV background, suggesting Markle views her as a “lowly reality person.”
- Schroeder unfollowed Markle on Instagram and vowed to boycott her Netflix show, With Love, Meghan, signaling a dramatic shift from fan to critic.
- The incident has reignited discussions about Markle’s relationships with former supporters, including past fallouts with figures like Jessica Mulroney.
- Public reactions are mixed, with some viewing Schroeder’s response as an overreaction, while others see it as highlighting Markle’s perceived lack of appreciation for her fans.
What Are the Basic Facts of the Story?
Stassi Schroeder, a 37-year-old reality television personality known for her role on Bravo’s Vanderpump Rules, recently made headlines by publicly denouncing Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, on her podcast, The One Where Stassi Is Still Drunk w/ Taylor Strecker, aired on September 10, 2025. Schroeder’s grievance stems from being excluded from a promotional gifting campaign for Markle’s lifestyle brand, As Ever, which sent PR packages to other influencers, including The Toast podcast hosts Claudia and Jackie Oshry. Schroeder, who described herself as Markle’s “number one fan,” expressed deep frustration, stating she had defended Markle when few others did, including through social media posts and outreach via her own PR team. She claimed that Markle’s failure to acknowledge her support reflects a dismissive attitude toward her reality TV background. Schroeder went as far as unfollowing Markle on Instagram during the podcast and declared she would no longer watch Markle’s Netflix series, With Love, Meghan, or discuss her publicly. The reality star also labeled Markle a “control freak” who focuses on her critics rather than her supporters, accusing her of trying to “control the narrative.”
The fallout has drawn significant attention due to Schroeder’s high-profile status and her previous vocal support for Markle. Reports indicate that Markle, 44, sent PR packages to influencers like Kris Jenner and Mindy Kaling to promote As Ever, which sells products like marmalade, flower sprinkles, and wines. Schroeder’s exclusion from this list, despite her public admiration, prompted her to speculate that Markle views her as less worthy due to her reality TV roots. The podcast episode, co-hosted by Taylor Strecker, amplified the issue, with Strecker echoing Schroeder’s sentiments about Markle’s lack of fan appreciation. The story has been covered by outlets like Yahoo, Daily Mail, and Express, reflecting its traction in celebrity news circles. This incident marks another chapter in Markle’s complex relationship with public figures, as she has faced similar criticisms from former allies in the past. The public nature of Schroeder’s reaction has sparked debates about entitlement, fan expectations, and Markle’s approach to her public image.
What Is the Context Behind This Public Dispute?
Meghan Markle’s journey from actress to royal to lifestyle entrepreneur has been marked by intense public scrutiny and shifting alliances. Before marrying Prince Harry in 2018, Markle was best known for her role on the legal drama Suits, but her transition into the British royal family brought unprecedented attention. After stepping back from royal duties in 2020, Markle and Harry relocated to Montecito, California, where they launched various media and business ventures, including the Netflix series With Love, Meghan, and the As Ever lifestyle brand. These moves have positioned Markle as a polarizing figure, admired by some for her independence and criticized by others for her perceived aloofness or strategic distancing from former associates. The Schroeder incident is not an isolated case; Markle has faced public fallouts with other former supporters, such as Canadian stylist Jessica Mulroney, who was reportedly “distraught” after Markle distanced herself following Mulroney’s 2020 controversy over a “tone-deaf” comment about white privilege. Similarly, Made in Chelsea star Millie Mackintosh claimed in 2023 that Markle “cut her dead” after she began dating Harry, suggesting a pattern of severed ties.
Schroeder’s reaction must also be understood within the context of reality television culture, where public personas are often built on relatability and fan engagement. As a Bravo star, Schroeder has cultivated a following through her candidness and accessibility, which contrasts with Markle’s more curated, private approach to public life. The PR gifting snub, while seemingly trivial, taps into broader themes of influencer culture, where receiving promotional items is often seen as a marker of status or validation. Schroeder’s claim that Markle is “stuck in 2017” and dismissive of reality TV personalities may reflect a clash between Markle’s past as an actress and her current identity as a duchess and entrepreneur. Additionally, Markle’s As Ever brand and Netflix show have faced criticism for being out of touch, with some commentators arguing that her lifestyle content feels unattainable or overly polished. This incident highlights the challenges Markle faces in managing her public image while navigating the expectations of fans and influencers in a highly visible, social media-driven world.
What Are the Key Arguments and Perspectives?
Schroeder’s public rant has sparked a range of reactions, reflecting differing views on celebrity relationships, fan entitlement, and Markle’s public persona. From Schroeder’s perspective, her exclusion from the As Ever PR list is a personal slight, especially given her history of defending Markle against critics. She argues that Markle’s decision to send gifts to influencers who have questioned her, like the Oshry sisters, shows a lack of appreciation for loyal supporters. Schroeder’s co-host, Taylor Strecker, reinforced this view, stating that Markle’s actions demonstrate a “bold example of a lack of fan appreciation.” Some fans and commentators on platforms like X have echoed this sentiment, viewing Schroeder’s reaction as justified given her vocal support for Markle. They argue that Markle’s selective engagement with influencers who have been critical, rather than those who have been supportive, suggests a strategic attempt to win over detractors at the expense of loyal fans. This perspective frames Markle as calculating and dismissive, reinforcing criticisms that she prioritizes image control over genuine relationships.
On the other hand, critics of Schroeder argue that her reaction is an overreach, reflecting an entitlement often seen in influencer culture. They contend that Markle is not obligated to send PR packages to every supporter, regardless of their public profile. Some outlets, like Refinery29, have defended Markle, suggesting that the backlash she faces, including from Schroeder, is often rooted in unfair expectations or underlying biases, such as race or class. These defenders argue that Markle’s lifestyle brand and show are meant to be aspirational, not a personal outreach to every fan. Others point out that Schroeder’s decision to unfollow Markle and boycott her show may be more about generating publicity for herself than a genuine grievance. The broader public discourse also includes skepticism about Markle’s intentions, with some X posts accusing her of lacking gratitude or authenticity in her interactions. This divide highlights a tension between celebrity accessibility and the curated distance Markle maintains, as well as the role of social media in amplifying personal grievances into public controversies.
What Are the Ethical and Social Implications?
The Schroeder-Markle fallout raises ethical questions about the expectations placed on public figures and the dynamics of fan-celebrity relationships in the digital age. From an ethical standpoint, Schroeder’s public airing of her grievances could be seen as a breach of decorum, turning a private disappointment into a public spectacle. Her decision to unfollow Markle and declare a boycott on her podcast amplifies the issue, potentially pressuring Markle to respond or adjust her PR strategy. This raises questions about whether public figures owe fans personal acknowledgment or reciprocity, especially when those fans are themselves celebrities seeking validation. Conversely, Markle’s apparent selective engagement with influencers could be viewed as a strategic choice that prioritizes business interests over personal relationships, which some might argue is ethically questionable if it alienates loyal supporters. The incident also touches on the ethics of influencer culture, where public displays of loyalty or criticism are often tied to personal gain, such as increased visibility or social media clout.
Socially, this controversy underscores the complexities of Markle’s public image as a Black woman navigating fame, royalty, and entrepreneurship. Commentators like Leslie Gray Streeter, writing for The Baltimore Banner, have argued that criticism of Markle often carries undertones of racism and classism, expecting her to “make herself smaller” to fit societal norms. Schroeder’s accusation that Markle views her as a “lowly reality person” highlights a perceived hierarchy in celebrity culture, where reality TV stars are often seen as less legitimate than actors or royals. This incident also reflects broader societal tensions around authenticity and privilege, as Markle’s aspirational lifestyle brand contrasts with the relatability expected of reality stars like Schroeder. The public’s fascination with this feud, amplified by social media, reveals how quickly personal disputes can escalate into cultural flashpoints, fueling debates about loyalty, entitlement, and the pressures of public life. Ultimately, the controversy illustrates the challenges of maintaining authenticity in a world where every action is scrutinized and monetized.
What Does This Mean for the Future?
The fallout between Schroeder and Markle could have lasting implications for both their public images and the broader influencer landscape. For Markle, this incident may prompt a reassessment of her PR strategy, particularly how she engages with supporters and critics. If she continues to prioritize influencers who have been critical, as Schroeder alleges, it could alienate other loyal fans, further polarizing her public perception. Her Netflix show and As Ever brand are already under scrutiny for being out of touch, and additional public disputes could harm their commercial success. However, Markle’s decision to maintain distance from certain supporters may also reflect a deliberate choice to protect her privacy and brand integrity, especially given past security concerns, such as paparazzi intrusions. The controversy could push her to clarify her approach to fan engagement, possibly through more inclusive PR campaigns or public statements addressing the criticism. Alternatively, she may double down on her current strategy, focusing on high-profile endorsements to elevate her brand’s prestige.
For Schroeder, the public rant could bolster her visibility among reality TV fans but risks painting her as petty or overly sensitive. Her decision to frame the snub as a personal betrayal may resonate with some audiences but could also backfire, as critics argue she overreacted to a minor slight. The incident also highlights the precarious nature of influencer culture, where public support for a celebrity can quickly turn to criticism when expectations are unmet. In the broader context, this dispute may fuel discussions about the evolving role of influencers in shaping celebrity narratives, as well as the pressures on public figures to navigate personal and professional relationships in the public eye. As social media continues to amplify such conflicts, similar controversies are likely to arise, challenging celebrities to balance accessibility with strategic branding. For Markle, maintaining her fan base while managing her image as a duchess and entrepreneur will remain a delicate task.
Conclusion and Key Lessons
The public fallout between Stassi Schroeder and Meghan Markle underscores the complexities of celebrity relationships in the age of social media and influencer culture. Schroeder’s vocal criticism, sparked by her exclusion from Markle’s As Ever PR gifting list, highlights the expectations fans and influencers place on public figures, as well as the personal stakes involved in public support. Markle’s apparent dismissal of Schroeder, whether intentional or not, has reignited debates about her approach to fan engagement and her broader public image. The incident reflects broader tensions in celebrity culture, where authenticity, accessibility, and strategic branding often clash. It also reveals how quickly personal grievances can escalate into public controversies, fueled by platforms like podcasts and social media.
Key lessons from this story include the importance of clear communication in managing public relationships and the risks of alienating supporters in a highly visible environment. For Markle, the controversy suggests a need to balance her curated image with genuine engagement to maintain her fan base. For Schroeder, it highlights the dangers of publicizing personal disappointments, which can invite both support and backlash. The incident also serves as a reminder of the cultural and social dynamics at play in criticisms of Markle, including issues of race, class, and privilege. Moving forward, both figures will need to navigate these challenges carefully to preserve their public standing. Ultimately, this dispute illustrates the power of social media to amplify personal conflicts and the ongoing struggle for celebrities to meet diverse expectations in a polarized world.