This Easter delivered exactly that as Meghan shared a fresh batch of footage appearing to show (we never see their full faces) six-year-old Archie and four-year-old Lilibet enjoying classic holiday fun at home in California. One clip captured the children racing across the lawn during a lively egg hunt, with Lilibet dressed in a pink dress and bunny ears, clutching a plush toy rabbit. Another showed Archie intently decorating Easter eggs, while additional scenes included feeding the chickens and gathering eggs from the coop. The videos were polished, warm and seemingly wholesome.

It all looks touching: a sweet window into family life. But scratch beneath the curated charm and does a deeper cynicism emerge? Here are parents who repeatedly insist on fiercely protecting their children’s privacy, yet are apparently deploying them as promotional tools. By filming from behind or the side and refusing to show their faces, the Sussexes seem to believe they have struck a clever compromise. Critics, however, see it as another marketing tool.

The contradiction is glaring. Whatever happened to the “quiet life” the couple once craved when they stepped back from royal duties and relocated to California? Instead of retreating from the spotlight, they seem addicted to it, using carefully edited snippets of their family life to generate buzz. They might argue that because faces remain hidden, no real invasion of privacy occurs. But surely posting any footage at all turns private family moments into public content, especially if timed to coincide with slow news cycles?

It feels particularly hollow coming from Harry, who has spoken at length about the trauma of his own childhood being exploited by the media. “My connection to privacy, and the lack of it, begins in a different place than most. From birth,” he once declared. He and Meghan might claim they are simply reclaiming control, choosing what to share rather than leaving it to the paparazzi. Yet using young Archie and Lilibet as props, however gently framed, surely risks a version of the very commodification Harry once railed against. Once children enter the public domain, even in blurred or partial form, the appetite for more only grows. True privacy would mean no videos at all.