Prince Harry is following his mother's playbook. But there are a few key differences.

By now, it's abundantly clear that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are not ones to go quietly. 

Since resigning as working royals and moving to North America in 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been vocal about the forces that saw them flee.

There was what is now known simply as The Oprah Interview, in which the couple shared their story publicly for the first time. The 2021 tell-all special included accusations that a senior member of the Royal Family expressed "concerns" about what their son Archie's skin colour would be, and that 'the institution' offered no support when Meghan was experiencing suicidal thoughts amid mounting public and media scrutiny.

That was followed in October this year by the announcement that Prince Harry is due to release a tell-all biography, pointedly titled, Spare (a reference to the phrase 'the heir and the spare', used to describe siblings in the line of succession).

And last week came the first half of the Netflix series, Harry and Meghan. The six-part documentary recounted the story of their courtship beginning in mid-2016 and what they experienced since. It featured interviews with the couple, their friends and family (well, Meghan's at least), and key commentators, as well as footage and photos taken by the couple themselves.

Read more: "They’ve been in on it." The 8 biggest revelations from Netflix's Harry and Meghan.

All of it is an effort by the Sussexes to share their version of events, events which have been detailed and dissected on countless platforms around the world. 

"Books were written about our story from people I don’t know," Meghan said in the opening episode. "Doesn’t it make more sense to hear it from us?"

Watch: The trailer for Harry and Meghan, the tell-all Netflix series.

In throwing open the gates of a notoriously private institution, the Duke and Duchess are echoing the strategy of Harry's late mother, Princess Diana.

After her separation from Prince Charles in 1992, Diana gave 'The Panorama Interview', in which she raised many of the same challenges: from her struggle dealing with media attention, to her mental ill-health and suicidal ideation, as well as the toll of public duty and her feelings of isolation within the Royal Family.

She acknowledged that despite the wishes of the Palace she "won't go quietly", that she would "fight to the end".

The interview was described at the time as "the scoop of the century". Never before had a senior royal spoken so openly about life behind the Palace gates.

Of course, it has since emerged that the means by which journalist Martin Bashir secured the interview were ethically dubious, to say the least. Bashir had mocked up fake bank statements that appeared to show that trusted palace insiders were being paid by News International to leak information about the Princess. This, bolstered by rumours of surveillance by Mi5, helped persuade the Princess' brother to encourage her to go on camera.

As Prince Harry said in his Netflix series, "I think we all know she was deceived into giving the interview, but at the same time, she spoke the truth of her experience."

She did that too via a ghostwritten biography by journalist Andrew Morton. Her involvement in Diana: Her True Story, which became an international bestseller, remained a secret until after her death in a car crash in 1997.

As the man whom Diana trusted to tell her story, Morton is well aware of what it means for a senior royal to speak their truth. Yet, speaking to Mamamia, he expressed less sympathy for the young couple's approach.

While he said the Sussexes are "certainly following [Harry's] mother's playbook", there are key distinctions. For one, proximity to the crown.

"Harry is fifth in line to the throne; Diana was the future queen. And that's a big difference. When the future queen is saying that her husband, the future king, isn't fit to be king, then that's a story," he told Mamamia's No Filter podcast. "When you've got the fifth in line to the throne complaining about the media, that's not really a story — it's just a complaint."

Secondly, he argued, the Sussexes went in hard from the off, which likely backfired.

"Diana kept her distance from the media for best part for 10 years until she started working with me," he said. "Meghan went nuclear very quickly. When there was a little bit of criticism of her, she got six of her friends to speak to People magazine, basically making out the positive side of Meghan.

"Well, you know, when you do that, then you open yourself up to the next question of let's have a look at these people, let's have a look at what they're saying. So there is a sense that she was going by a Hollywood playbook as opposed to a royal playbook."

Listen to Andrew Morton's full interview with Holly Wainwright on No Filter.

Morton does have sympathy for Prince Harry, though. 

He acknowledges that the Duke was a victim of the particularly "pernicious" behaviour of British tabloid media, including having his phone hacked by the now-defunct News of the World tabloid newspaper. But he argues that Harry's apparent disgust about the 'you scratch my back'-style agreement between the Palace and the press is absurdly futile, that it's not all as sinister and toxic as he suggests.

"I think that's just so much nonsense, quite frankly," he said. "I mean, you know, certain journalists have a good relationship with Camilla, for example. Certain other journalists have a good relationship with press secretaries. These things just emerge."

Morton described his own technique of approaching members of the staff at royal functions in pursuit of a story.

"It's called journalism, and it's ridiculous to complain about," Morton said.

Still, the Prince is not the first in his family to do so. And it's hard to imagine that he'll be the last.

For more No Filter, go to mamamia.com.au/podcasts/no-filter.

Feature image: Getty

Want to get the most out of your day? Take our survey now to go in the running to win a $50 gift voucher!