Kim Karmeghan

Sky News reports breathlessly on the scandal that is Meghan Markle getting abused on social media. My immediate thought is why are members of the royal family using social media? The entire point of the royals is they are not like the plebs, they exist – in theory anyway – on a higher plane. That’s why they get to live in a palace. So what the hell is this?

Earlier this month, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex created their own Instagram account, under the name SussexRoyal. It features professional photographs of their work and has already amassed over four million followers.

However, it has attracted criticism online and some people attacked its branding, which appeared to feature an ‘M’ with a tiara above it.

Yes, famous people will attract nutters wherever they go, and this is especially true for the royals. This is why their public life is carefully managed, or at least it was. Opening an Instagram account is the equivalent of turning up unannounced on the terraces at the local football ground.

An account with over 14,000 followers almost exclusively posts criticism of Meghan, sharing negative news articles and conspiracy theories.

Since when have royals anywhere in any era not been the subject of gossip, speculation, and conspiracy theories by the masses? That’s part of their role, I thought. The difference is that in previous eras they would have risen above it, remaining unaware or at least indifferent to what the peasants were saying about them. My advice to Mr and Mrs Wales is to do the same thing now.

Message boards 4chan and 8chan were found to host orchestrated attacks against Meghan. The sites allow users to post anonymously – without needing to create an account or even pick a username – thus eliminating any threat of accountability.

I’m pretty sure Meghan Markle doesn’t use 4chan, so what Sky are complaining about is that people can get together and say bad things about her. Twenty years ago these conversations would have taken place in a pub, equally anonymously for all practical purposes. Now things have shifted online, but the thing which has really changed is the royals have decided to wade into the social media sewer. As the name suggests, it’s not for the likes of them. They cannot claim a divine right to a life of taxpayer-funded privilege while at the same time demand to be treated equally by the plebs if they’re silly enough to get down among them. The royals need to stay off social media, or quit being royals. Otherwise they might find it’s not just trolls on the internet who take a disliking to them.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

11 thoughts on “Kim Karmeghan

  1. I saw an article about some spud complaining that the “Sussex Royal” name had been taken off him (it was dormant) and reallocated to Meghan. I wonder how the royals manage these things. Is a senior manager summoned to the palace for tea and a chat? Is there a Meghan management committee with security advisors and protocol specialists who discuss her vapid little proposals?

  2. Seems more of a marketing hitch, to me.
    “Earlier this month, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex created their own Instagram account, under the name SussexRoyal.”

    No they didn’t. A Royal finger never touched a Royal keyboard. They have a PR team does this sort of thing. No doubt the idea of a SussexRoyal Instagram account was floated at some meeting, maybe wawas put up to the actual royals at a convenient moment, and up it went. Makes sense. Lot of interest in the couple. There’s going to be pics out there anyway. If they don’t put one up, you can count on someone else will. This way they get to manage the content.
    If their PR people are any good, they’ll have predicted there’ll be a certain amount of negative reaction. There always will be. As long as it isn’t prominent enough to harm the product image it’ll be accepted as a necessary evil.
    Don’t suppose the royals themselves are even aware of it. You reckon they spend their spare moments clicking through Instagram? Or even be bothered if they do. Why would they?

    On the wider issue of social media, it’s a mystery why people with thin skins go on it. But then they’re the sort of people think they’re of interest to other people. Fuck knows why? They expect to be well received because they think of themselves as wonderful people. They find it horrifying when not everyone agrees.

  3. Lots of people claimed that tree-hugging, tampon-envying Charlie boy would be the death of the monarchy, but I suspect he will do a decent job once Liz pegs out.

    It will be his halfwit children and their goggle-eyed cousins who do for the institution.

  4. Looking at a slightly longer time frame I suspect La Meg will, in American fashion, ‘monetize’ her position after the sprog is dropped.
    I look forward to Gwyneth Paltrow type advice on cleaning tiaras in your lady bits for that extra shine, and the like.
    This, together with channeling the better parts of Princess Margaret, the drink, fags, betting and casual debauchery, will gird our Royals for the challenges they may meet in the 21st century.
    Honi soit qui mal y pense.

  5. I’m sorry to differ with the honourable gentleman from Spain, but I think that, while a PR team is certainly in the mix, if it’s the case that the other royals aren’t on Instagram, then…

    You know what, why don’t I check?

    …actually, it turns out William and Kate have an Instagram account too.

    So maybe disregard it, but what I was going to say was that one shouldn’t underestimate the vapidity and craving for attention of an actress, and thus it’s entirely possible that (a) it was her idea, and (b) she really does bother with it personally.

  6. One shouldn’t underestimate the vapidity and craving for attention of a substantial proportion of the public. Majority female. Hence selfies.

  7. Meghan is not a Royal — something which demands the ability to trace one’s ancestry to the nastiest bastard many generations ago who fought, finagled, and killed his way to the top of the greasy pole. Meghan is the equivalent to the long-ago dairymaid. Real Royals used to have fun with the dairymaid — but always on the quiet — and marry another Royal for appearances and preservation of the line. But that was then, and this is now.

  8. I used to not mind Sky News a few years ago, but their left wing bias seems worse than the BBC these days.

    I now struggle to watch more than a few minutes without getting annoyed at their coverage, especially around Brexit.

    Their Ocean Rescue guff just makes them come across as the propaganda arm of Greenpeace.

    Is it just me that’s noticed this or has it always been this bad – maybe I was just more naive and unaware back in the day?

  9. Earlier this month, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex created their own Instagram account, under the name SussexRoyal

    Fake news from the off; they did not create it they used privilege to steal Instagram account “SussexRoyal” from the account owner

    imo snowflake eco-loon Markle deserves any and all factual abuse. Harry should man-up and admit he made a mistake marrying a publicity hungry Kardashian clone. Who will rid HRH Harry of this terrible woman?

    .
    @Sam Vara on April 19, 2019 at 9:25 am

    -1 not using enough does not justify theft

  10. I used to not mind Sky News a few years ago, but their left wing bias seems worse than the BBC these days.

    I now struggle to watch more than a few minutes without getting annoyed at their coverage, especially around Brexit.

    Their Ocean Rescue guff just makes them come across as the propaganda arm of Greenpeace.

    Is it just me that’s noticed this or has it always been this bad – maybe I was just more naive and unaware back in the day?

    I stopped watching Sky news some time ago for the same reasons. I only see BBC News because Mrs BiND insists on recording it and watching at odd times.

    As Tim has noted on many occasions the Economist has gone that way as well.

    It’s getting ever more difficult to get serious news coverage, especially foreign news.

Comments are closed.