Why did Prince William & Kate change their social media display-name?

Commission Mcc0093447 RoyAL ROTA BRADFORD

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are just like us, in that they’re bored in lockdown. Their staff is bored too. Which is probably why the Cambridges and their media team decided to change up their social media slightly. For as long as the Cambridges have been on Twitter and Instagram, their handle has been @KensingtonRoyal, and then the social-media-display name was always “Kensington Palace.” This goes along with Charles’ social media too, which is branded with “Clarence House,” his home and office (actually, the bulk of his offices are in St. James’s Palace).

Before Prince Harry married, his activities and announcements were covered by the Kensington Palace social media. When Harry and Meghan first got married, they fell under the KP social media as well. That changed when the Sussexes were “given their own household” in late 2018, and they debuted their new Instagram in the spring of 2019. The Sussexes were great at Instagram and easily grew their follower numbers. That’s when the Cambridges likely started buying bot-followers to compete with the Sussexes’ social media savvy.

Anyway, once the Sussexit happened, part of the negotiations were about social media accounts, bizarrely. I still 100% believe that Prince William insisted that Harry and Meghan should no longer be allowed to use their popular Sussex Royal Instagram. Apparently (this is my theory), William would not be happy with a simple name change, and so H&M will have to launch a new Instagram whenever they launch all of their projects and foundations and such.

Meanwhile, the Cambridges hired the Sussexes’ old social media guy, David Watkins, in April. I’ve been crediting Watkins with William and Kate’s Zoom keenness during the lockdown. I wonder if Watkins was behind the name change too – now all of William and Kate’s social media pages have the display-name of “The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge” rather than Kensington Palace. “People” are already saying that the change makes Will & Kate seem more accessible, and like they’re not running their social media through a huge team (which they are). Is there any secret message here? I don’t think so. I think it’s just simply about Will & Kate staking their claim to these social media handles and saying to the world “this is about the Future King and Future Queen, not the spare and his American wife!”

Oh, and they just published a never-before-seen photo of Kate working on that fakakta garden.

Queen's Christmas broadcast

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visit Ireland, Dublin

kate will ve1

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Zoom, Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

111 Responses to “Why did Prince William & Kate change their social media display-name?”

  1. Eleonor says:

    Why they didn’t publish that photo before?
    I mean it’s cute and it shows her DOING SOMETHING.

    • Sharon Clark says:

      It’s a good photo, and I absolutely want her shirt. I like Kate’s “casual” style way better than her usual looks.

      • Eleonor says:

        I think her casual look is the one near to her real personality. I like it too. And I have a serious case of boots envy she has been wearing for ages.

      • DarlingDiana says:

        She has really good casual style.

      • Rae says:

        I agree. I’d take her casual style over her formal wear choices any day.

    • Fallon says:

      My theory is that the royals have a stockpile of unseen photos that they can deploy at a moment’s notice for when they need good publicity, or to boost publicity for an organization or cause. It’s smart to link an unseen photo to the announcement of the show being digital – everyone loves a new photo like this because we get so few.

      • Nancy says:

        I am 100% on board with this theory.

      • DarlingDiana says:

        I agree Fallon. I bet the sheer number of photos that they get taken is staggering. I’ve often wondered how strange it would be to be able to look at your entire life in millions of photos from strangers, professional photographers, and then your own archive.

    • tempest prognosticator says:

      Good question. It is a great shot of Kate in action. As for the name change, I assume that was Watkins doing his job.

    • Tessa says:

      William is always pursing his lips.

    • yinyang says:

      Nice picture of her helping the lady with the garden, a rare picture as shes’s completely unaware of the camera and has her guards down but I think she likes pictures where she stands out.

    • Lily says:

      Eleanor, I have the same thought: I love her old boots, they are timeless and her weekend casual style is so much better than the polka dot, coatsress, clown ruffles, etc. and fits her perfectly.

  2. Ali says:

    I hope this means when I search for things about Meghan and Harry on Instagram or Twitter that the Cambridges dont pop up as a suggestion.

  3. Nancy says:

    Curious to know the source re: social media accounts being part of the negotiations.

    • Molly says:

      Do you think the Sussexes just decided to stop using it?

      • Becks1 says:

        And closed it and lost all their 10 million followers? Nah. It was definitely part of the negotiations.

      • Nancy says:

        Would still like a source, if possible! Having trouble finding. Thanks!

      • Becks1 says:

        ??? No one was privy to the Sussexit negotiations, you aren’t going to find a direct source, no matter how passive aggressively you go about asking for one.

        but OF COURSE the social media accounts were part of the negotiations. both sides would have been really remiss if they weren’t. Do you honestly NOT believe that was something discussed and negotiated?

      • Nancy says:

        I don’t see how politely asking is passive aggressive. We have other sources that say what was discussed, just wondering where I could find where the social media info came from. If anyone could provide, I’d appreciate. I can’t really find anything either way. Thank you again!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sure Jan, I mean Nancy.

      • Becks1 says:

        Okay. We don’t have any direct sources of ANYTHING that went on. We know that generally things were being discussed, such as their use of the term “royal,” and such (I’m not going back and finding the actual BP statements about this, but they were always pretty vague.)

        We know that Meghan is a planner and dots her Is and crosses her Ts.

        We know that at the end of the day, the Sussexes stated that they would no longer use their Sussex Royal IG, and it was pretty clear they were going to start a new one.

        We also know that the ending of the SR IG is directly related to the fact that they are no longer branding themselves as Sussex Royal, which WAS one of the few things that we heard several times was being discussed/negotiated.

        I’m not sure William told them to completely stop using the account as opposed to a name change, but it just seems logical to those of us who followed this whole thing that their use of social media was part of the discussions. I don’t see why or how it wouldn’t be. So we don’t have a direct quote, AFAIK, saying “their social media was part of the negotiations.” But when you look at the bigger picture, it just makes sense.

        https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a31959675/meghan-markle-prince-harry-sussexroyal-instagram-stop/

      • DarlingDiana says:

        I think using it became untenable when they agreed not to use “royal” in any money making endeavors. I don’t know what they will go with instead or if Archewell will cover both philanthropy and business or if those things will overlap.

    • Molly says:

      @Nancy. I’m not making any assumption about your politics but your phrasing sounds like Trump.

      “Have trouble finding. Thanks!” Lol. Peak passive-aggressive Karen.

      So, if we could provide you with a transcript, what happens then?

      • Nancy says:

        Hi all – not really sure where these insults are coming from but I was honestly just wondering where this was discussed. Thanks.

      • Molly says:

        I tried having a discussion with you and so did Becks1 and you just shrugged it off with a clipped, ” Would still like a source if possible! Having trouble finding. Thanks!” That was rude and yes, passive-aggressive. Do you want to give your opinion on what you think happened?

      • Nahema says:

        I don’t get where all the hate for Nancy is coming from. It’s perfectly legitimate to ask for sources and to want to fact check.

        Trump is totally different because there seems to always be multiple sources to confirm accusations but he deliberately makes out they don’t exist in the hope that everyone will be too lazy to check.

      • Nancy says:

        Just keeping things short and sweet and not engaging with what I saw as snide questions. My opinion is that not many people would find a brief response rude and passive-aggressive.

      • Molly says:

        It’s not hate. Let’s not be over-the-top here.

        @Nancy. You thought we were being rude or snide to you and replied rudely. You’re asking people for something and I wouldn’t even email someone on my team in that way when asking for help with something. The comments are a discussion. It’s reasonable that we want to know your opinion.

      • Nancy says:

        Comparing my words to Trump’s is a bit of a reach. We’re strangers, I was being succinct because I didn’t want to engage in what were actual rude responses to my original polite request. Thanks.

      • Molly says:

        People asking you what you thought is not being rude to you. We were engaging with you and people keep trying to have a discussion with you. You still haven’t shared what you think of any of this

        Also, I’m not assuming your politics. Requesting something in a clipped way but with exclamation points reminds me of some of Trump’s tweets which tend to be quite rude.

        But at this point I feel like you don’t want to talk about the topic and people have made the effort, so until that happens, I’m done.

      • Nancy says:

        Your responses were rude and veered toward snide. I’m well aware of the commenters who jump on people for questioning things. Thanks for being done, me too!

      • xo says:

        “you aren’t going to find a direct source, no matter how passive aggressively you go about asking for one.” – Becks1

        WAS an unnecessarily rude response to Nancy’s rather innocuous question.

    • June says:

      Deleted for repetitiveness.

    • June says:

      @Becks, we know that there were negotiations about what they could use in their brand building, particularly using Royal so I don’t doubt that social media handles would be part of this. Why are we saying “William told them” though? I’m in no way a William fan (lol), just wondering about that part.

      • Becks1 says:

        @June I don’t know about that part – about William insisting that they start a new IG (Kaiser says that is just her theory.)

        But, I can see it happening, given what we know about how jealous KP was of the Sussex Royal followers and the popularity of their IG. I can see him being so petty and spiteful that he said “its not enough that you change the name. START A WHOLE NEW ONE.” And honestly I think they probably shrugged and said “okay.”

      • BayTampaBay says:

        I think it was like paying back the 2.4 million. The offered to back the 2.4 million so there would be no questions about their integrity. I think they decided on new social media for the same reason: If we have to change the name, we might as well make a clean break and just start from scratch. This is my theory.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay – that’s more in line with my personal opinion. I “can” see William stamping his foot and saying it all has to go, but I can also see the Sussexes just closing it after they had to change the name, because now whatever they do next will be just them, no one can say they are trading on their past as working royals.

  4. February Pisces says:

    When harry and Meghan left haters and trolls were complaining about them using Sussex Royal, mostly because of the royal part. They are still the duke and duchess of Sussex, so I guess if they had that for their social media, there wouldn’t be the same issue. Maybe the Cambridge’s are thinking along the same lines.

  5. Becks1 says:

    The garden really is the gift that keeps on giving for Kate. And I agree with others that they should have released this photo last year, rather than photo ops of her in ugly dresses wandering around the garden and talking about log chairs or whatever.

    I’m sure there was a reason for the change – my guess is that it’s considered more accessible, since “Kensington Palace” sends a reminder with every post that….they live in a palace.

    • Nic919 says:

      A photo showing her do some work one year ago when people have been noting how much she hasn’t left the house for things like food banks as compared to Sophie. Almost like someone is scanning comments made here. Hmmm.

    • Chrissy says:

      Yeah, they’re just like us!

    • Belli says:

      Has anything been milked as much as that garden by now?

      And yes, this is a better photo than most that were released last year!

      • Becks1 says:

        Well she did get a lot of mileage out of that struggle survey…..

      • notasugarhere says:

        Which has been shelved in the face of COVID-19. Convenient after all the online comments about how pointless the survey was, not limited to the UK, useless data. Quinn was the one who came up with the Broken Britain scheme. Now that she’s left the sinking ship, we may see a very slow death to the BB idea.

      • Prayer Warrior says:

        @notassugarhere….I never was clear what exactly Broken Britain was ever meant to be, or whether the survey was supposed to be part of solving and repairing the broken bits. What I am very clear on is all kinds of announcements get made, with very little of substance to back them up. That’s why I consider them lazy, because they don’t seem to follow through and/or they take credit for other people’s good works

      • Sid says:

        The sad part about dropping the survey is that the whole Early Years thing could be pretty useful for parents at home now with their toddlers and little kids. How hard would it be to consult her team of experts for ideas on activities parents can do with their little ones, then maybe put up a video each week of her and one of the children doing something?

      • Lady D says:

        LOL @Sid. You just gave them next week’s project.

    • Tessa says:

      She does not deserve the credit for those gardens, Landscape architects designed and did the real work, she just posed in the garden.

    • February Pisces says:

      Kate is clearly proud of that one day she worked a year ago. She has to keep reminding people about it.

      • Molly says:

        “Take pictures! I want the world to see that their hands-on Duchess digs in and gets her hands dirty!”

        I wonder if she stated longer than she did for her Huffington Post engagement. She actually probably did because she seemed to genuinely enjoy this.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The Daily Fail commentariat is ganging up on Cain & Unable. Read three DM stories yesterday about them and 90% of the comments were very negative.

        Their laziness is much resented and many who live in East Anglia were calling BS on William 20m hours per week working for East Anglian Air Ambulance. People supposedly “In the know” said it was more like 20 hours a month and when he did show up it was a hindrance to the true professional as he was just in the way. On commenter described it as “Just like the first day of reception (kindergarten) each day he showed up because he (Cain) was never up-to-date on anything because he does not take the ongoing training”.

      • Molly says:

        @BayTampaBay. I think that’s why William’s pay was reported as secretly donated. He could work as much as 20 hours a week but we know at one point he took a month off around Christmas. The position was already made just for him. I question whether he had a structured salary seeing as he seemed to come and go as he liked.

      • February Pisces says:

        @btb I’m surprised he even did 20 hours a month. I think his time in the air ambulance was to excuse him from royal duties, his royal duties were an excuse to ditch on the air ambulance, and wasn’t he supposedly living away from Kate and George at the time because of work? Where the hell was he all that time???

      • notasugarhere says:

        It was his co-workers at EAAA that leaked the info to a reporter. Right after, a William insider was handed the job of EAAA director. Leaks about how little William was working at EAAA stopped after that.

      • February Pisces says:

        @notasugarhere I remember his co-workers leaked how awful he was too. I can’t remember exactly what they said but he was basically a miserable person. It’s funny cos people who were in the army with harry literally rave about how down to earth he is and how much of a great guy he is.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @February Pisces – According to the comments I read BTL of one Daily Faily article, William never worked a full 8 hour shift the whole time he was supposedly employed by EAAA.

        BTL comments in the same Daily Fail article also accused William of trying to take credit for work done for EACH which was actually originated and spearheaded by David and Rose Rocksavage-Cholmondeley. Again, WARNING! WARNING!: This reposted gossip comes from the commentariat of The Daily Fail

      • Nic919 says:

        I would be curious to know if those comments about Willy’s real work load at the EEAA get deleted. If he was such an asset they would have taken him back to help in heartbeat. They didn’t.

    • Becks1 says:

      Okay I’ve been thinking about it and new theory – by switching the title like that they are putting less emphasis on “Kensington” and more emphasis on their titles. Wonder if this is preparation for becoming Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and then Prince/ss of Wales?

      • Mary says:

        Or like preparation for moving house? Maybe they like the Zoom life so much they want to stay at Anmer?!

      • Becks1 says:

        Oooh @Mary that’s a good theory too. This is their way of making Kensington Palace their workplace and Anmer Hall their full time home (again.)

    • kyliegirl says:

      It is really incredible how much they keep pushing this garden. It’s like she was the first royal to ever help with a design at the Chelsea Flower show. Harry designed a garden with Sentebale several years ago and didn’t get this much coverage. He worked on it with help from Charles. I guess if you don’t have much to promote you have to use what you got. Also, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge is totally personal. I think they just need to remind people who they are.

      • Nic919 says:

        Can anyone even visit these gardens during the pandemic? They weren’t on public property last time I checked. All this PR and access is even more restricted than ever.

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Well, I’ve been proven wrong. I didn’t think it was possible for the Cambridges to milk the flower show any more than they already had. That cow had dried up, died, and decomposed. And yet, here we are.

  6. Molly says:

    Will and Kate’s petty shenanigans were covered in the NY Times. That will never stop being funny to me.

    Behold the FFK and FFQ!

    • February Pisces says:

      That’s has just reminded me, that maybe they are trying to distance themselves from the KP handle because of the bad press from the New York Times article. They somehow are hoping their followers are stupid enough to think they are talking about another account.

  7. Pearl Grey says:

    It’s possible they are just going into the photo vault to keep their feed active during this lockdown whilst tying it in to the Chelsea Flower Show and showing Kate “at work”. They maybe want their official titles on the account to make it easier to attract more followers.

    I also think it’s possible the Sussexes might just change the name of their Instagram when they relaunch, hence why it hasn’t been deleted. I don’t see why they would have to start a new account from scratch.

    • Kkat says:

      Really they could delete past posts and rename it while still keeping the followers.
      then have an army of moderators to delete/ban the asshats commenting on the ig posts

  8. Em says:

    Probably because most people don’t know Kensingtonpalace is their personal account hence the stagnation of their twitter account and miraculous growth of their Instagram? Or to remove the palace appear humble “look I don’t live in a palace“ or they got wind that the duke and duchess of Sussex were setting up their own accounts on twitter?

  9. Jumpingthesnark says:

    Change to Normal Bill and Katie Keen??? Sounds like a plan!

  10. 10KTurtle says:

    Were they going to live at Kensington Palace forever? Using their own titles makes more sense to me. @KensingtonRoyal sounds like where you’d go for pictures of the building.

    • Becks1 says:

      I think currently, the plan is for them to live in KP until William becomes king.

      • notasugarhere says:

        That’s what we were told when 7 million in taxpayer funds were spent on Apartment 1A. Which they proceeded to leave empty when they ran to Amner for 3+ years. Taxpayers are not only facing the huge bill for BP, but now around 80 million for Clarence House restoration too.

      • Sofia says:

        @NOTA Then Charles can just stay at Clarence as it is and avoid the millions in repairs. If the Cambridges plan to stay at KP when they’re PPoW there’s no point spending millions on Clarence House only for it to stay empty for 10+ years or so.

        Unless Charles can’t absolutely live there anymore and he needs the repairs done. If so I would get the cost lower and do only the necessary repairs. Charles might not be there for long anyways

      • aang says:

        Not British and staunchly anti-royal but my understanding is that the properties mentioned are not privately owned. They are owned by the crown so if the monarchy were abolished the properties would revert to public ownership. If that is the case I see no reason not to keep them in good repair. It is always cheaper to do upkeep on a rolling basis than to wait for damage to be done by leaks or weak foundations or structural issues. Also toxic materials in old buildings can cause health issues when they start to degrade. But that is the real estate investor in me talking. And yes I include Frogmore, I don’t see why the repairs should be paid for privately if the repairs increased the value of publicly owned property so this isn’t some veiled swipe at anyone. It seems like an investment in the cultural heritage of the nation.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @aang – I have been saying the same thing for months regarding Frogmore cottage. The building was falling apart and almost uninhabitable. Why the Sussexes are expected to pay for renovations on a historic property OWNED by the Crown Estates and why the agreed to pay makes no sense to me.

        Since they are no longer Senior Working Royals paying rent makes sense if they want to maintain possession/ occupancy of the property as a home in the UK.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Charles is trying to stay at Clarence House and Windsor, and not move to BP at all when king. Him trying to cling to Clarence House is costing the taxpayers extra.

      • Bella says:

        @ aang & BayTampaBay

        + 1
        I am livid that the offer to pay for the renovation of Frogmore Cottage was accepted and will only be mollified if it turns out H&M have a long-term lease in exchange. I understand why they offered to pay, it was like the £2.4 million was worth it to them to get the RR off their backs, but still! And surely it’s better to have the property lived in, even if only for part of the year.
        However, I disagree that they should pay a commercial rent. They have paid for the bathrooms and kitchen and all the other fixtures and fittings. Plus the market for *that* house is tiny – only members of the Queen’s family or household or old retainers would ever be offered that house because of where it is. All that is worth a hefty discount.

      • Nic919 says:

        Charles should agree to give over BP to the government. Most of them don’t like living there anyway and it could be used as government offices, similar to other locations in the area.

      • Becks1 says:

        And if no one lived at BP, presumably it could be open to the public more and bring in additional revenue that way.

        @Bella I agree with you re Frogmore. I think its ridiculous that H&M offered to pay back the renovations and it was accepted, since my understanding is the place needed the renovations ANYWAY. If they paid for everything additional themselves, then what difference does it make to the British taxpayer? I mean I can understand being ticked that money was spent to renovate something that is now not being used full time, but the money was going to be spent regardless. And its worth pointing out one of the reasons they needed Frogmore was because they had to move out of their Cotswolds home due to the press intrusion.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Bella – Do not forget that since early 1980s Galen & Hilary Weston have a held a leasehold granted by the Crown Estates on Fort Belvedere. Fort Belvedere was the last UK private residence of the Duke of Windsor.

        QEII and the Crown Estates can (and do) do whatever they want. Remember the 2.0 million BPS that supposed to be spent on Buck House renovations but was spent on Apartment 1A Kensington Palace for the Cambridges. Many very-very rich people, who could easily pass muster with QEII and The Crown Estates, would pay well above market rent to live at Frogmore Cottage.

        Also, if and when the Sussexs pay back renovation cost of Frogmore Cottage, the money is not going to the British Exchequer (i.e taxpayer or for use by the NHS) but back to The Crown Estates for QEII to spend however she pleases.

  11. Cosmo says:

    Why are there never any articles or pictures of William. He is the future King so there should be much more attention by the BM on him. Why is he not jealous of Keen getting the media attention. Maybe he keeps a low profile for fear what the media might write about his truths.

    • yinyang says:

      Welfare Willy likes to live off the publicity of the woman around him, first his mother, The Queen, Kate, now Meghan. Easy breezy.

    • DarlingDiana says:

      IMO, the ladies, both Kate and Meghan, bring more traffic and that is why the press concentrates on them. No way William and Harry would create the Stanning and vitriol that either of these women do by just existing.

      • Prayer Warrior says:

        Oh, I think Harry would still create the ‘stanning’ and I think William would still create the vitriol if their women did not exist. The women are used as distractions is all…and their fashion, though DoC is losing us because her “style” has turned into something no ‘normal’ woman would wear (well, maybe in the ’80′s because one of my professional pictures is me in a fuschia blouse with a pussy bow, but not now, in the 2020′s..)

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Kate & Meghan play very well to the Yank-USA audience made up primarily of women and fashion bloggers like TLo-The Fug Girls who are only really interested in designer frocks, designer shoes, designer bags and jewelry from The Royal Collection. William and Harry dress like mid-level accounting office managers most of the time.

      • DarlingDiana says:

        @Prayer Warrior,
        I really don’t see that, tbh. Both Princes had their fans prior to either getting married but it was not mean-spirited. Even then, it was easier for rags to comment on their girlfriends clothes, suitability, etc.
        Like BayTampaBay noted, William and Harry are hardly fashion trendsetters. I’m not even saying that they could be. Men’s fashion is dry compared to their female counterparts.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @DarlingDiana – Neither Harry or William can compare-compete fashion wise with Prince Carl Philip of Sweden (aka Duke of Värmland), King Felipe VI of Spain or even their own father, the future Charles III. Carl Philip, Felipe and Charles are pretty spiffy dressers IMPO.

        Must add: I respect the hell out of the Duchess of Värmland for taking a nurse’s assistant course, passing said course and doing REAL work on the REAL front lines of the virus war.

  12. Talie says:

    my minor conspiracy theory is that maybe they got wind that Kensington Palace gets name-checked a lot in Finding Freedom and they don’t want that name associated with their brand going forward. I can see the book saying a lot of “courtiers at Kensingston Palace did so and so…or leaked this and that.”

    • Harper says:

      Omid can easily do a search and replace in the document for Kensington Palace and replace it with “the Cambridges’ staff” and voila! their dirty deeds still get exposed. The book isn’t due out until August so no problem there.

      However, maybe the court documents say Kensington Palace repeatedly and it’s the right time to distance themselves. I imagine there are a lot of discussions on how to combat the bad light the trial may shed on them.

    • Molly says:

      Harry has avoided mentioning his family and has mostly focused on the courtiers. Distancing themselves so that they are the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge separate from Kensington Palace sources in name if not in reality could be part of the reason.

      Reporters would also be more reluctant to say staffers for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge rather than Kensington Palace sources.

    • DarlingDiana says:

      I doubt anything that they do would prevent whatever hoopla Omid’s book is going to cause. That said, I don’t think it’s going to be an attack on the BRF except in the mildest terms. I expect a treatise on the Meghan and Harry love story and plans for the future.

  13. Sofia says:

    As for name change I think it’s just to make it more “personal”. “Kensignton Palace” sounds a bit too “general” and “official”. “The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge” seems a bit more “personal” – as personal as you can get with the royal family.

  14. Amelie says:

    How much you wanna bet they eventually change their social media usernames to @CambridgeRoyal or something along those lines? If they’re using Meghan and Harry’s old social media strategist, I have a strong suspicion this will happen at some point. It makes more sense to use Cambridge branding than Kensington Palace branding. Most people don’t know where they live and just know their royal titles.

  15. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Whatever. Still as boring as sawdust regardless of what their social media handles are.

  16. Awkward symphony says:

    I dont think this is a big deal! They have a long time before they’re made P & POW so they’re probably just updating the account as they changed their profile picture recently.

    I want to know if the keenbridges have enough time to do this why aren’t they going out to help chuck pick some vegetables?? As future heir to duchy farms, NormalBill should be out inspecting+helping farmers as they’re probably getting £££ still from these farms.

  17. Lily says:

    I think the reason behind the change is that the queen might not resume her functions because of covid19. Prince Charles will be changing titles and so willnot & watie might be changing upgrading titles too. Hence, if they dont make it the duke & duchess of Cambridge now, they wouldn’t be able to change it after without being perceived as petty. In other words, going from kensington palace to a new title isn’t feasible. But! From kensington palace to duke & duchess of cambridge to whatever else has a better flow and doesn’t seem so snobbish and attention whoring.

  18. FashionMaven says:

    I wonder if they changed the name so that H&M won’t be able to do a handle like that for their @Archewell handle, or have one that says The Duke & Duchess of Sussex. It’s a pre-emptive strike to make things harder for H&M.

    That’s my crackpot theory.

    I think it’s also that they want to appear more relatable like the Sussexes. They’re going through the motions, but they can’t fake real authenticity.

    Sometimes I wonder if they realize that their jealousy of the Sussexes and never coming out publicly to defend them will forever follow them and taint what they do? They coulda had the whole Squad supporting them, but they stupid.

  19. Becks1 says:

    deleted

Commenting Guidelines

Celebitchy aims to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment