Of course I don’t expect the media to put everything online. But there are articles online about royals that you really wonder about: why have they been published at all. British media for example can go nuts when it is about writing about royalty, especially their own. I am certain many of the articles we read online in British newspapers and magazines will never appear in the paper version. Unfortunately it doesn’t seem to be a problem to place them online. Do we really need such a huge amount of online articles when the quality is that bad? I myself would prefer less articles, but with a better quality. I am unfortunately not rich enough to take an expensive subscription to all the newspapers I am interested in.
I wonder last week on Twitter what irritates people most when reading these British articles and it apparently wasn’t too difficult to come up with a list of topics. Here are some of the things that we thought were very irritating to read all the time! It is not that it is always wrong to read about it, but it can be overdone. I’d love to hear your opinion and learn about the things that you dislike most.
1. Articles telling the reader “This is why …” and “What you should know …”. Mostly being followed by lots of nonsense and information that is not at all interesting, or well known by most people who read the stuff. They’re often full of mistakes anyway.
2. The articles constantly repeating the same stuff over and over again. It does happen often – OK, I have a good memory – that articles are simply updated and posted again. Do these online media really think we’re stupid?
3. Royals (and the people they meet) breaking protocol and rules. We don’t live in the Middle Ages anymore! Yes, of course there is royal protocol and there are some rules, but even royals don’t have to follow every single old-fashioned rule anymore. Times are changing and even Queen Elizabeth II will understand that.
4. Royal Fury! Should we really believe that Queen Elizabeth II becomes furious every time one of the other royals does something in a different way she would have done it herself. If a royal really has done a very stupid thing, OK, but usually it is just laughable to write something like that.
5. You’re media, so could you please be so kind to identify royals on photos correctly when they are all gathering for bigger events? It is clear not everybody is known, but sometimes the identifications are ridiculous.
6. The royals ‘brave the rain’, when they just need to be outside for a few seconds. Think of all the fans waiting in all weather conditions for hours. Often these fans are outside much longer than the media too.
7. Is it really necessary to compare Catherine, The Duchess of Cambridge, with any other female royal in the world? These royals often have been around longer than Kate, so please give us a break! They really don’t need her to inspire them. Maybe she could even do with some advice from their side once in a while, not necessarily when it comes to style? They are all, like Kate, individual people, who do their job their own way and look the way they want to look.
8. I am sure Kate, nor Meghan Markle, will be very happy being compared with their late mother-in-law Princess Diana all the time. They are individuals with their own taste and interests. A dress Kate or Meghan wears doesn’t have to be compared with one of Diana’s just because the colour or model is the same. Most of the time the clothing don’t even look alike.
9. Meghan and Catherine do have lovely hair, but is it really necessary to act as if they’re advertising for shampoo? And yes, it is nice to know which designers they wear, but really, there is more you can write about one of their engagements than “she did wear this”. Royals are more than people looking good.
10. By now about the whole world knows that The Duchess of Cambridge is expecting her third child. Is it really necessary to write in an article tens of times “pregnant Kate” and “showing off her bump”? We have at least four more months to go … unfortunately!
I just want to point out this article by no means is meant to attack the established British royalty journalists, who usually do a great job.