A new royal book claims there is a power struggle between King Charles and Prince William.
Author Omid Scobie told BI that people are too distracted by Harry and Meghan to notice.
Some royal watchers are up in arms about Scobie's claim.
It's been almost four years since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle walked away from royal duties, and stories about the couple's life in California still regularly make the news.
But the media and the public's preoccupation with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex means they often fail to notice other significant royal scandals, including Prince William and King Charles' power struggle, according to royal author Omid Scobie.
Scobie and Carolyn Durand co-wrote "Finding Freedom," a biography about Harry and Meghan, which was released in 2020. Scobie's second book, "Endgame," was released on Tuesday and chronicles the royal family's fight for relevancy in the aftermath of Queen Elizabeth II's death.
In the book, Scobie writes that Charles and William, who is first in line to the throne, "tussle for the spotlight" and the rivalry between them has "only heightened" since Charles became king in 2022.
Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace did not respond to requests for comment regarding Scobie's book.
Scobie wrote that William gave his first interview since becoming the Prince of Wales to The Sunday Times, which was published in the newspaper one day after King Charles' first Trooping the Colour parade in June, "essentially wiping any coverage of the special moment off the front page."
Scobie said this rivalry explains why the pair have been at few joint royal engagements recently. At the time of writing, William and Charles were last photographed together with Kate Middleton and Queen Camilla during South Korea's President Yoon Suk Yeol's state visit on November 21.
"I think we spend so much time — by we, I just mean the general media landscape — focusing on really petty dramas and fictionalized stuff about Harry and Meghan that we sometimes miss the big story that's sort of playing out under our noses," Scobie told Business Insider ahead of the book's release.
"And I've really noticed this kind of growing divide between Charles and William," Scobie said.
He added that this is something that has been observed by his royal contacts, including those who "knew the monarch well."
Speaking to BI, royal commentator Jack Royston said there may be some truth to Scobie's claim, noting that William will likely be trying to carve his own legacy independent from Charles.
"William now has a finite amount of time available during which he has greater political freedom to craft a legacy before he becomes king, at which point he must be fastidiously neutral," Royston, chief royal correspondent at Newsweek, told BI.
"There may well be competitiveness here from William," he added.
The book has faced criticism from royal watchers
Speaking to the Daily Mail's royal editor Rebecca English, anonymous sources said to be friends of William said many of the book's claims are false.
"It's one thing writing a critique of the Royal Family. That's freedom of expression. But it's another thing to peddle conspiracy theories dressed up as fact," one source said, according to the Daily Mail.
Meanwhile, the book has faced criticism from journalists on the royal beat.
Richard Fitzwilliams, a royal commentator and former editor of "The International Who's Who," told BI he disagrees with Scobie's claims that Charles and Williams are in a rift.
While the two royals have "different styles" when it comes to their roles, this isn't an indication that there is bad blood between them, Fitzwilliams said.
"Scobie's theme, that William is ambitious and wants the role of king, is simply part of the theme of a book which seeks to undermine the monarchy," he added.
Writing in a review for The Telegraph, arts and entertainment editor Anita Singh said the book is an "utterly one-sided affair" and "devoid of insight."
Nonetheless, Scobie said he anticipated criticism, writing in the book that parts of it will "burn my bridges for good."
"Someone said to me really early on in this process, they said to tell a good story, you've got to shine a light in the darkest places and not give an F while you're doing it," Scobie previously told BI. "So that's kind of the approach to this one."
The book's release hasn't been seamless
The Dutch translation of "Endgame" was removed from bookstores in the Netherlands on Tuesday after it reportedly named a royal-family member said to have made racially insensitive comments about Meghan and Harry's son Archie's skin tone, a claim first mentioned during the Sussexes' televised interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021.
In a follow-up story, The Telegraph's Victoria Ward reported that another chapter of the Dutch version of the book suggested that a second royal had participated in the conversation. Rick Evers, a Dutch journalist who read the translated edition, told "Good Morning Britain" that the mention of the second royal's involvement is "a little bit vague."
The publishing house behind the Dutch version of "Endgame," Xander, confirmed to BI that it had been "temporarily" pulled "due to an error" and would return to shelves in the Netherlands on December 8.
In interviews since the mishap, Scobie has maintained that no version of the book has included the names of the individuals in question. He also wrote in the English version of "Endgame" that he knew the identities of two people involved in conversations about Archie's skin tone, but he didn't name them for legal purposes.
Buckingham Palace declined BI's previous request for comment on the matter specifically.
Read the original article on Business Insider