Meghan's awkward night out at Netflix party: From an 'exaggerated' show of friendship with the boss's wife to dress code clash with star of the event Carey Mulligan ⁠0%

By Maanya Sachdeva⁠0%

4/13/2026, 10:04:27 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 20 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Fundamental Attribution Error, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 34% saturation with 247 hits. Analysis detected 1,927 faulty-reasoning hits from 727 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of ⁠0% (0 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.

Meghan Markle put on an 'exaggerated' show of friendship with the wife of Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos at a party in Montecito this weekend, a body language expert has claimed. 
Rumours have swirled of a rift with Netflix after the Sussexes multi-million dollar deal with the streamer ended earlier this year, and Mr Sarandos unfollowed Meghan's personal account and her lifestyle company As Ever on Instagram. 
However, the Duchess, 44, was all smiles as she held hands with his wife Nicole Avant before wrapping her in a tight hug at the Beef Season Two Tastemaker event in California. 
It was one of several awkward moments for the Duchess, 44, at the party where she wore an almost identical dress to the star of the event, Carey Mulligan, while the majority of the other guests stuck to a monochrome dress code. 
'Meghan's exaggerated, displayed attachment rituals here look aimed at showing there is no "beef" between her and Netflix,' body language expert Judi James said of her 'prolonged' hug with Nicole Avant. 
The gesture appeared 'especially penned in underlined, bold italics' as Meghan 'performs to showcase her "bestie" to the camera'. 
Highlighting how Meghan's torso is 'facing inward close and her arms are wrapped around Nicole in an entwined and prolonged hug' that 'signals emotional dependency and intensity' between lifelong friends, Ms James added. 
'The way the Sarandoses continue their "couples" posing in the lineup makes it look almost as though Meghan is photo-bombing their pose,' she said. 
'They adopt a tight, smiling, mirrored pose of couples' unity, leaving Harry and Meghan to their side, but Meghan appears to want to share the affection, still having hold of Nicole's hand here.' 
Ms James pointed out Meghan's 'umbilical hand clasp' with Nicole, as she added the 'tight grip' appears to suggest the Duchess is seeking 'further support and encouragement from Nicole'. 
'As a gesture, it could give the impression of someone needily seeking extra support with camera-shyness, although that could hardly be the case for Meghan,' Ms James said. 
On Saturday night, Meghan and Prince Harry joined several A-listers, including Orlando Bloom, Katy Perry, Riverdale star Charles Melton and British actress Carey Mulligan, at the Montecito launch party for season two of Netflix hit Beef. 
Melton and Mulligan both star in the popular drama that returns to screens on April 16. 
After photos from the event were shared online, some fans questioned whether Meghan had 'disregarded' the event's dress code when they noticed she was one of two guests wearing green amid a sea of black and white outfits. 
One person wrote: 'I'd believe it was a mistake if it wasn't THAT colour. 
That's not a normal colour, and she never wears colour either, but the time she chooses to it just happens to be this really unique colour, the star of the party chooses?' 
Another said: 'This could be one of Markle's biggest faux pas to date (and there have been very many).' 
A third said Meghan's green dress was the reason she wasn't in any of the group photos from the event. 
Meghan and Harry's appearance at the event came after Mr Sarandos quietly unfollowed the Duchess and her lifestyle company As Ever on Instagram - around the same time her brand was purged by the streamer, the Daily Mail revealed last month. 
Netflix's boss was one of the first big names to follow Meghan when she returned to social media at the start of 2025. 
In March last year, her lifestyle business's Instagram account launched, first as American Riviera Orchard and then as Ever, which Sarandos added to his list of around 450 accounts he follows. 
But he unfollowed both Meghan and As Ever around February time - as did his creative chief, Bela Bajaria. 
Both have been extremely positive about Meghan previously, with Sarandos calling her 'the rock star' as recently as last spring. 
Mr Sarandos' wife Nicole does still follow Meghan on Instagram - but not As Ever. 
A Netflix source previously told the Daily Mail: 'Nicole and Meghan are still friends.' 
Mr Sarandos has been co-CEO of Netflix since 2020, after being promoted from Chief Content Officer. 
He has been with Netflix since March 2000. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 31.1%Maanya Sachdeva: 4.3%Daily Mail: 3.7%Confirmation Bias31.1%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 1.7%Daily Mail: 1.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 11.4%Maanya Sachdeva: 3.3%Daily Mail: 3.5%Availability Heuristic11.4%This article: 7.7%Maanya Sachdeva: 1.0%Daily Mail: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic7.7%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.3%Daily Mail: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.7%Daily Mail: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.9%Maanya Sachdeva: 6.9%Daily Mail: 9.1%Framing Effect10.9%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.1%Daily Mail: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 2.4%Daily Mail: 2.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.5%Daily Mail: 1.2%Pessimism Bias6.5%This article: 34.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 8.9%Daily Mail: 12.8%Negativity Bias34.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.5%Daily Mail: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 27.1%Maanya Sachdeva: 2.5%Daily Mail: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error27.1%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.2%Daily Mail: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Maanya Sachdeva: 5.0%Daily Mail: 4.6%Halo Effect8.1%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.5%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Maanya Sachdeva: 1.7%Daily Mail: 1.6%Recency Bias7.6%This article: 3.2%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.5%Daily Mail: 0.5%Primacy Effect3.2%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.3%Daily Mail: 1.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.8%Maanya Sachdeva: 4.5%Daily Mail: 4.0%Appeal to Authority18.8%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.3%Daily Mail: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.4%Daily Mail: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 25.2%Maanya Sachdeva: 5.3%Daily Mail: 4.3%Hasty Generalization25.2%This article: 5.6%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.6%Red Herring5.6%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 1.7%Daily Mail: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 2.6%Daily Mail: 7.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 3.9%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.6%Begging the Question3.9%This article: 16.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 3.7%Daily Mail: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)16.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.3%Daily Mail: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.5%Maanya Sachdeva: 2.6%Daily Mail: 3.1%Anecdotal6.5%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 17.9%Maanya Sachdeva: 2.5%Daily Mail: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)17.9%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.2%Daily Mail: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.7%Maanya Sachdeva: 4.7%Daily Mail: 3.8%Unattributed Quote7.7%This article: 8.1%Maanya Sachdeva: 1.5%Daily Mail: 1.7%Quote-first Misdirection8.1%This article: 8.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 7.6%Daily Mail: 9.2%Biased Writer Voice8.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.6%Daily Mail: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 0.0%Daily Mail: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Maanya Sachdeva: 10.5%Daily Mail: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

727 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker27%attributed speech530writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageJudi James • 31 words • 100.0% coverageJudi James • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJudi James • 33 words • 0.0% coverageJudi James • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJudi James • 33 words • 0.0% coverageJudi James • 29 words • 0.0% coverageJudi James • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Judi James

100%flagged-word coverage
197 attributed words100% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Quote-first Misdirection+10.5 ptsWriter: 5.3%Judi James: 15.7%15.7%Unattributed Quote+8.9 ptsWriter: 5.3%Judi James: 14.2%14.2%Biased Writer Voice-10.9 ptsWriter: 10.9%Judi James: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.