Or King Archie?
2 Likes
I don’t think either of them sound right, really…not being mean, but…its like “pretend” names…!
1 Like
Gosh no! Even King Archibald…makes me cringe.
1 Like
Especially if he had that gene which causes early alopecia … King Archibald the bald?
2 Likes
Noooooo!
1 Like
Well, this has some precedent - remember Archibald, bald, bald, King of the Jews, Jews, Jews - the little ‘two ball’ or skipping ditty we used to sing at school? 
1 Like
Our little ditty was
Nebuchadnezzar, King of the Jews
Bought his wife a pair of shoes …
Although Harry and Meghan’s children have automatically become a Prince and Princess when their Grandad became King, has anybody confirmed they are actually going to use their titles?
I kind of expect they won’t be using them.
2 Likes
William and Katherine, I really loved watching them talking to the crowds, they appear to me so genuine greeting the public. Meghan appears to me so false and she looked thoroughly uncomfortable and I don’t feel a bit sorry for her, she’s brought all this on herself. William and Harry conducted themselves well, if I were William I would have felt like punching him lol.
I can’t wait for Harry & Meg to sod off back to the States.
I do wish William was going to be our King but I guess he will be one day.
I hope Charles does his mother proud, it remains to be seen
I couldn’t believe how thin Meghan’s legs were. Kate has very slim ones, but Meg’s were way thinner. 
1 Like
Do you not think so? Meghan made a big fuss when she found that Archie would not automatically get the title of Prince when he was born. She clearly didn’t understand the protocol, the conventions laid down by King George V that stated grandchildren of the monarch would automatically receive royal titles, but great grandchildren would not.
I would think she will be delighted for her children to use those titles now.
1 Like
Yes, I reckon she’ll be changing her mind on being part of the royal family now her harry is the brother to the heir. She’ll be building bridges back to buckingham, you wait and see 
3 Likes
Yes exactly Pixie, she won’t turn down this opportunity for glory by association.
1 Like
Now Archie and Lillibet are prince and princess will Charles ( or British tax payer ) have to provide security ? This was an issue with H and M during the interview with Oprah
I was basing my opinion on things that Harry has said in interviews in the past but he may have changed his mind since then.
I don’t know either Harry or Meghan so I have no idea what either of them will be thinking about titles for their children, unless they make a statement about it themselves.
Although what they choose to do doesn’t have much bearing on how the public perceive Charles III as the new King - I think Charles in his first speech made it clear that Harry and Meghan will continue building their lives outside the Royal Family “Firm” and won’t be getting involved in Royal duties.
1 Like
I don’t dislike Charles I just don’t think we need a king anymore.
However he does seemed to shrivelled up and gone frumpy.
1 Like
What century are we living in when a couple of tacky hangers on are offended by the lack of HRH ?
I think we are living in a century of poor journalism, when newspaper editors and journalists tap into public opinion and manipulate opinion by feeding us stories about our favourite “heroes” and “villains”
Fairy stories rely on black & white heroes and villains - the main characters are either all good or all bad.
It’s rare that real life people are like that, so most of the newspaper outlets which report gossip about the Royal Family as “news” will go out of their way to find or create stories which portray their current “villain” in a bad light and, just for good measure, they try to minimise any news about any good thing they have done by reporting it in a way which uses negative or mocking language and by including reminders of all the bad things about them which they have previously reported on.
I have seen the press do this to different members of the royal family at different times - it’s like an infectious disease, once one media outlet starts doing it, the others follow suit - and the more outraged the public get, the more they share the stories with other folk, so the journalists look for bad stories to report to keep them fired up.
I have seen newspaper journalists and press photographers who are now retired being interviewed in documentaries and openly admitting their editors used to tell them to go out and “find stories” which makes X looks bad or puts “Y” in a favourable light. Some have also admitted that the stories weren’t always true or that their source wasn’t very reliable - but if you are not naming names and keep the source and narrative vague enough, without the kind of facts which can be checked, how can anyone check if it’s true.
And, of course, now they have social media to help them. Having fired up the crowd with “palace backstairs gossip” from “un-named sources”, the newspapers can now pick up any comments from Twitter and report them as “News”, even though they have never been fact-checked and they are often just an opinion of someone who knows no more about the truth of the situation than the general public does.
Then, when another member of the RF blots their copy book and the press decide it may be more lucrative to hound them instead, they shift focus - if it suits their purpose, they can even turn yesterday’s “villain” into today’s “hero” or vice-versa.
I remember one retired press guy saying that his editor had instructed him to go for stories to make Princess Anne look bad, then after a long time of doing this, the Editor called him in and told him he’d decided it was time to give her a break and could the journalist now look for stories to put her in a favourable light - so much for unbiased reporting of “News”!
That is why I discount the gossip in the newspapers when they use headlines like
“**X is furious about Y”
then in smaller text, “a source said”
I am suspicious and cautious when the Press use phrases like
“it has been reported”
“it has been claimed”
“an unnamed source has told us”
I take all this stuff with a pinch of salt and only believe the bits that can be factually verified or are backed up by a named source who is in a position to verify it.
5 Likes
I like about Charles that he obviously did not object to the Russians not being invited to his mother’s funeral.
1 Like
I accept that rubbish tabloids make things up but all the credibility of H and M went out of the window with the Oprah interview.
1 Like
I agree Boot! The press is just trying to make money, so they use any story to sell papers or get people to read their online reports.
What amazed me is that many journalists like to do bad stories on the royals, whether they are accurate or not, but they have had to watch what they say following the death of the queen, because so many of the public have queued for hours to show their respect…and some may have been their readers!