Fact check: What were the sources of the surrogate rumors surrounding Meghan Markle's pregnancies?

1. Summary of the results

The surrogate rumors surrounding Meghan Markle's pregnancies originated from multiple sources and evolved through various channels of speculation and conspiracy theories.

Initial triggers for the rumors included:

• Inconsistencies around Archie's birth location - Reports that Meghan intended to give birth at home in Frogmore Cottage but instead delivered at Portland Hospital in London, with the couple returning to Frogmore just two hours after birth ^[1]
• Internet speculation about fake pregnancy - Claims that Meghan was using prosthetics to simulate a baby bump ^[2]
• A viral "twerking" video during her pregnancy that conspiracy theorists used as "evidence" of a fake pregnancy, though medical experts explained the visible lump was likely cardiotocography equipment ^[3]

Key propagators of these theories were:

• A small group of women including Sadie Quinlan and Samantha Markle who created doctored images and promoted conspiracies in private chat groups before spreading them to Twitter and other social media platforms ^[4]
• Some tabloid writers and royal correspondents who interacted with conspiracy promoters on Twitter, inadvertently boosting the theories ^[4]
• An alleged woman tied to surrogacy who claimed to speak out, though specific details were not provided ^[5]

The rumors resurfaced during Meghan's second pregnancy with Lilibet and were further amplified when Netflix's Harry & Meghan documentary series launched ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses reveal several important contextual factors missing from typical discussions of these rumors:

Racial and social dynamics:

• The rumors may stem from racial bias and unfamiliarity with how pregnancy appears on women of color ^[6]
• Meghan's status as both a woman of color and royal family member created a unique target for speculation ^[6]

Royal tradition vs. modern transparency:

• The royal family's historical tradition of hiding pregnancies contrasted with Meghan's more open, modern approach to showing her pregnancy, potentially contributing to speculation ^[6]

Psychological projection:

• The rumors may reflect people's own fears, hopes, and uncertainties about fertility and status, with Meghan serving as a "vacuum" for these projected emotions ^[6]

Fabricated evidence:

• Fake screenshots of alleged Kensington Palace announcements about surrogacy were created and circulated, though fact-checkers found no evidence these tweets ever existed ^[7]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself is relatively neutral, simply asking about the sources of the rumors. However, the analyses reveal significant misinformation within the rumor ecosystem itself:

Documented false claims include:

• Fabricated social media posts attributed to official royal accounts that never existed ^[7]
• Doctored images created specifically to support conspiracy theories ^[4]
• Misinterpretation of medical equipment visible in pregnancy videos as "evidence" of fake pregnancy ^[3]

Amplification bias:

• Social media platforms' failure to effectively counter misinformation allowed debunked theories to continue spreading and gaining "tens of thousands of views" ^[3]
• The couple's silence in response to speculation may have inadvertently intensified rumors and put their public credibility at risk ^[5]

The analyses demonstrate that these rumors were largely baseless conspiracy theories that gained traction through coordinated misinformation campaigns rather than legitimate concerns or evidence.