All just ridiculous click-fodder.
Journalists don't have to justify their stories or back them up in anyway. They can write all the shit they like, and they dislike Megan.
'Megan made Kate cry about her wedding'. I mean normal weddings bring high emotions and opinions, never mind one this public and everything else going on at the time. Someone was always going to 'make someone cry' at some point, its hardly high class journalism to guess there were tears behind the scenes!
'Megan is why Kate couldn't go to balmoral'. Really? Not the fact that she had 3 young children on their first day at a new school? Or the fact that they were unlikely (and didn't) make it in time to say bye anyway? It wasn't her grandmother.
'Megan won't come because Kate would have made her sit at the back'. I somehow doubt Kate is that petty, would do something that obvious or have that much say. It's not her coronation. She is not the heir to the throne. Harry is coming to watch his dad, megan is staying behind with the kids, one of whoms birthday it is. They already went several days without seeing the kids when the queen died and they extended their stay. How many mums on mumsnet say they couldn't bear to leave their under 5 year olds to go on a hen party abroad or honeymoon etc? Why is her wanting to stay with the kids so unimaginable?
It's all ridiculous made up nonsense that they know sells.