Richard Kay: Maybe Queen Elizabeth is hard of hearing & she misheard ‘Lilibet’?

Queen Elizabeth II plants Duke of Edinburgh rose

As we discussed yesterday, the name of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s baby girl has caused nothing but drama over in Dusty Saltine Island. There are grown men weeping in the streets of London because Harry gave his daughter the nickname of the Queen. Instead of coming out and saying why they’re really mad – the fact that a little multiracial girl is named after the Queen – the commentators and courtiers have created an increasingly complicated set of lies about why they’re mad. They’re mad because Harry didn’t tell the Queen! Actually, he did. They’re mad because Harry didn’t tell the Queen about Lilibet Diana’s name! Actually, he did. They’re mad that Harry didn’t seek the Queen’s permission! Actually, he did. Well, they don’t believe Harry. And they’re contorting themselves into pretzels to defend their racist reporting. Richard Kay at the Daily Mail had coverage which… is pretty funny, all things considered. Some highlights:

Interesting how the courtiers will do anything to divide the family: The row will do nothing to improve transatlantic relations between the duke and duchess and the rest of the Royal Family. And the naming of baby Lilibet, whose arrival was initially heralded as an olive branch after months of upheaval, was being seen as yet another stumbling block. It is certainly ironic that something that observers thought would draw the couple closer towards the royals might actually end up pushing them further away.

The BBC is concerned: There is no doubt that the issue has caused disquiet at the Palace. And the row also comes at a sensitive time for the BBC in the wake of the devastating inquiry into how Martin Bashir secured his Panorama interview with Princess Diana. As a BBC insider told me yesterday: ‘Any story involving the royals is being handled with extreme sensitivity and triple checked.’ It may be significant, therefore, that the BBC’s report of its story about the naming remained on its website and the reporter’s tweet citing a Buckingham Palace source also remained ‘live’, despite the angry denunciations.

Now palace sources are surprisingly quiet? The Palace itself was refusing to be drawn on the matter and would not offer a comment on whether the BBC version of events was true.

The Queen was left with no room to maneuver: The statement has done little to dispel the views of some within the Palace that if the first the Queen knew of Harry’s intentions to name his daughter Lilibet was after her birth, it left her with little room for manoeuvre. [Harry’s statement] says that it is Harry’s ‘hope’ to name his daughter Lilibet. This is not the same as seeking his grandmother’s permission – and make no mistake, the Queen is very particular about the names given to her great-grandchildren. The closer they are to the throne, the closer she takes an interest. When Prince George was born in 2013, Prince William had to secure the express permission of his grandmother. And this was not done in some last-minute telephone call but was, rather, the subject of a face-to-face conversation. She was happy to approve, of course, because George was the name of her beloved father.

And the Sussexes aren’t even going to call her Lilibet! Another aspect baffling courtiers was why, having chosen the name Lilibet in honour of the Queen, the couple intend to call their daughter Lili – something Harry’s grandmother was never known by. ‘It might even suggest that they don’t actually much like the name Lilibet anyway,’ says one long-standing Palace figure.

Maybe the Queen is hard of hearing??? Meanwhile, there is the issue of how the Queen received the news from Harry in California. If it was over the phone, might this have been problematic? Most people of 95 no longer have perfect-pitch hearing and on a long-distance line there is ample room for a misunderstanding or two. After all, ‘Elizabeth’ and ‘Lilibet’ – unless carefully annunciated – do not sound so dissimilar, especially when said at speed. Only two people, or more likely three, know the complete truth of the situation: the Queen, her grandson and his wife.

The courtiers got themselves into this drama: As one observer put it: ‘Briefings and counter-briefings about the name of a royal baby is not a good look for the House of Windsor.’

[From The Daily Mail]

While there are those in the British media suggesting that the Queen somehow authorized her courtiers to tell the BBC that Harry did not “ask” permission to use her nickname, I still tend to believe that the courtiers are the ones who f–ked up. I think this is all palace intrigue, and evidence of the power struggles between Clarence House (the soft regency of Prince Charles) and Buckingham Palace (the courtiers used to dictating to and about the Queen). I think the Queen and Harry speak on the phone quite regularly and that pisses off the courtiers in CH and BP, because the Queen doesn’t reveal to them what was said. So they continue with their regular bullsh-t, attacking the Sussexes. And Harry called them out. But when you’ve got commentators like Richard Kay saying it’s all some big misunderstanding because Liz might be hard of hearing… you know that people have lost the plot. What a clownshow the Firm is these days. “F–k it, maybe the Queen is half-deaf?” Amateur Hour.

Note by Celebitchy: Sign up for our mailing list and get the top 8 stories about the ridiculous controversy over Lilibet Diana’s name! I only send one email a day after lunch.

Queen Elizabeth II plants Duke of Edinburgh rose

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

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

234 Responses to “Richard Kay: Maybe Queen Elizabeth is hard of hearing & she misheard ‘Lilibet’?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. lanne says:

    It’s funny to watch them scramble to save face. But everyone knows that they tried to damage the reputation of a baby when other scandals go unspoken. The British royal family is a place where it’s worse to be an infant named after the Queen than a pedophile, a serial cheater, or a grifter who sells out his country. Okay, got it.

    • ElleE says:

      @Lanne “damage the reputation of a baby” Nail on head – F around and find out guys. Harry has been training for this fight since Afghanistan.

      While the Rota were dreaming up anti-American headlines, gaming out if saying “Baby Compton has arrived!” was too overtly racist, given the Oprah exposure, Harry’s law firm has been researching and hiring. I would plant paralegals, to pose as baristas near the Pall Mall ,to better over hear those careless, gimlet-eyed barristers that represent the idiots on Fleet Street, operating under the old rules…all going down.

    • I think Richard Kaye is finally scraping the bottom of the Sussex smear campaign cesspool! How desperate is it to actually print that the Queen may have heard the word wrong?

    • Anne Marie says:

      At this point, the bigger story is how clueless and janky the Palace and the British media are. The fact that every day it’s a new twist — “they didn’t tell her! wait, they didn’t ask her! no, she didn’t hear correctly! Erm, they didn’t put it in writing!” makes it so obvious that they can’t tell their a**hole from their elbow. The world is laughing AT you, House of Windsor Leakers/British Media, not WITH you.

      • JRT says:

        Oh, you forgot the Sussexes didn’t have a face to face with the TQ like Baldamort did for George’s name prior to his birth.

    • Christine says:

      Your comment is perfection. Pedophile vs. Baby? Apparently the royal family is more into pedophile. Got it.

  2. PEARL GREY says:

    Now they’re out here calling this woman deaf and senile. Yet it’s Meghan and Harry who are disrespecting the Queen. Let me grab some popcorn because the royal rota is so ghetto right now.

    • Myra says:

      They will insult the queen just so they can be racist against a baby. I want to say I’m shocked by the deplorable behaviours of all involved but honestly I’m not. I am shocked that the palace are happy to show its pettiness and incompetence to the world. I know local community centres operating with more competence than that.

      • Cecilia says:

        I know harry said that the queen isn’t fully in control and i believe him to a certain extent. At the end of the day she IS the boss. How she hasn’t fired half of her staff by now, i truly don’t understand. I don’t care what i might think of my future (grand) daughter in law. Never will i ever allow my name to be used as a stick to beat her with,ESPECIALLY during pregnancy and postpartum.

      • Lorelei says:

        ITA. She must know that Edward Young is there to carry out CHARLES’S agenda, so why doesn’t she give him the boot and choose someone she can trust?

        If this is how out of control they’re acting while the Queen is not only still alive but *not* at all senile, how much worse will they get after she passes?? If this is them keeping themselves in check out of “respect for the Queen,” god only knows how off the rails this sh!tshow will go once she’s gone and they don’t have to feign respect anymore.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Lorelei its going to be interesting because it works both ways. If the past few years have been a preview of the shitshow that will be Charles’ reign, and they’re just barely holding it together out of “respect for the queen….”

        well the past few months have just been a preview of what Harry can say, and he’s only not out of respect for the queen and his family in general. When she goes, my guess is his respect for his family goes as well and the gloves will come off. harry will drop the name of the person concerned about Archie’s skin color as he rides off into the Montecito sunset.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        This is an institution where a royal doctor took it upon himself to euthanize a king to make sure that his death would be announced by the more respectable morning papers rather than the tabloid afternoon papers. With the implicit consent of Queen Mary and the Prince of Wales (the later Edward VIII/Duke of Windsor).

        George V wasn’t the sharpest knife in the box and neither was his reckless son Edward VIII. His other son George VI is said to have had a certain degree of imposter complex about his role as monarch and Elizabeth II is famously non-confrontational, burying her head in the sand until things have already gone off the rails. This has certainly created an environment where the institutional machinery (senior staff, etc.) can assume more power than they ought to have and manipulate and manage a weak-willed monarch who also isn’t particularly intelligent. The rot goes back more than a century.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        Cecilia
        The queen is a figurehead with her son acting as a “soft regent” and a staff that actively works against her to help others (Charles/William). And the queen has always been a different leader coming from a different time. She’s the last of that kind in that family. The sense of duty is lost on the rest. Not including Harry of course.

      • PrincessK says:

        Just as the royals are trapped by the media, they are also trapped by their courtiers. If you read any book or watch any film about the British royals over the past 500 years or more, you need to pay attention to the influence of courtiers and palace insiders, how they have shaped the destiny of monarchs. Little has changed.

        The Queen knows what is going on but her first duty has never been to her children and grandchildren but the survival of the monarchy. She depends on these palace officials to keep her secrets. The palace officials are furious that the Sussexes by speaking out have revealed some of the worms within the House of Windsor and these revelations have been carried around the world damaging the profile of senior royals.

        Palace officials worked hard to improve Charles popularity after Diana and they are also trying very hard by enlisting help of the Fail and the Telegraph by trying to turn the dull grey Cambridge’s into an exciting prospect for the future. When the Sussexes were in the U.K. global attention was on them, and then an inside campaign was launched to cut them down, which has now backfired. These officials are now livid and are failing to admit that their tactics have been disastrous and continue to believe that they can still undermine the Sussexes even though they are living in America.

        The Queen depends on the loyalty of these people for her survival and the survival of the monarchy. Britain is now led by a populist government and there is an increase in racism in the country and so the palace officials will say that the majority in the country support the way the Palace is going, even with people wanting the Sussexes to lose their titles. British people don’t like the increasing visibility of non white people who they feel are threatening the way traditional institutions are run, and so no matter how nasty the British monarchy behaves they will turn a blind eye and defend it against people who they see as wanting to change the British way of life.

        So the Queen will never come out publicly to support Harry over this for fear of going against her advisers. But we may some way down the line see some sign of support from her.

        However Charles and William will have much bigger problems on their hands, as some people are just waiting for the Queen to pass before they really start spilling the beans……

    • Golly Gee says:

      Why aren’t the new crisis managers managing this debacle? Weren’t they supposed to start in May? Perhaps we got the year wrong and they’ll swing into action in May 2022. Either that or they’re being kept bound and gagged in the dungeon because this ain’t the work of crisis managers.

      • Lorelei says:

        The crisis managers must be like “Jfc there’s not enough ££ in the world for this.” I mean, can you even imagine the private conversations they have with each other about this sh!tshow? They knew it was bad going in, but it’s gotten so much worse even since their hiring was announced. They’re probably drinking as much gin as the Queen just to make it through each day in that mess.

      • Golly Gee says:

        @loralei, yeah, they keep their stash of gin in the dungeon where they hide-out and drink waiting for the contracts to expire.
        Maybe not so much a prison as a refuge.

      • Golly Gee says:

        Whoops! Sorry I misspelled your name.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        “Only two people, or more likely three, know the complete truth of the situation: the Queen, her grandson and his wife.”

        This is the problem because QEII is not talking or will not talk. To end all of this, all QEII has to do is issue a three-sentence press release.

        I am beginning to think that this whole mess is just another palace driven-Palace-manipulated media diversion to take any attention off Andrew.

      • All I can say is the hiring job description for royal crisis managers must have included the phrase, “…if competent do not bother to apply.”

    • PlainJane says:

      Don’t come at the ghetto like that! We deserve better.

  3. Vivica says:

    My palace sources have disclosed that HM is tired of everyone speaking for her and wishes that they would all “just get on with it.” They also said that she “loved the idea” that they were honoring her as a gran and not as the Queen.

    • Enny says:

      @Vivica 👏🏻
      Harry named his daughter after a beloved grandmother, who just happens to also be a beloved public figure. But to him she is, always has been, always will be his Gran. And I don’t know either of them personally, but if she really were the type of person to get angry at an adoring grandson for wanting to honor her as his grandmother, then I just don’t think that’s the kind of woman Harry would want to honor in the first place. Harry loves his Gran, Gran loves Harry, they both love Lilibet and her name. End of.

    • LovesitinNM says:

      Yes, exactly this. They didn’t ask “The Queen” and all the power struggles that includes… they asked his grandmother.

    • Truthiness says:

      Damn if this doesn’t ring true. Being honored as a gran would be touching and she does not speak about her personal family life. Do you have palace sources?

    • MerlinsMom1018 says:

      My 2nd granddaughter has my middle name as her middle name. I didn’t know that was going to happen till all was said and done. I literally sat on the floor and bawled my eyes out (I am by no means a crying sort). I was and still am, touched beyond belief and proud too. I’m not the queen, not even royal, not famous but it meant alot to me then and still does
      So. Harry loves his GRANDMOTHER, he respects the QUEEN. Two different things
      I have no doubt QE2 was absolutely touched no matter what the greys are blathering on about
      Harry even said if she had objected they certainly wouldn’t have used Lilibet
      🙄

      • Jais says:

        Imagine if Kate had a daughter she named Lilibeth…the press would be strait up fawning. Bc it is touching as y’all said. Very sweet. Enough said.

  4. Lucylee says:

    Hard of hearing? At this rate they may have to accuse her of being senile if this continues.

    • Lorelei says:

      @LucyLee, that’s coming. They have absolutely lost their minds at the idea of the Queen communicating privately with the Sussexes and they will not let it continue. They’re brainstorming right now what their options are. As I said in another comment I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they bugged all of her private rooms.

      Does the Queen have even ONE PERSON around her that she can trust?? I know she *thinks* she can trust AK but my god, isn’t there someone, just one person, who always liked Harry and is willing to tell her the truth about what’s going on and how things are being reported?

      • Becks1 says:

        so honestly my guess is that Andrew could tell her and she would listen, but this PR disaster is to Andrew’s benefit as a general matter because if the press is ranting and raving about a baby’s name, they’re not thinking about HRH The Duke of York and what happened on Epstein’s island or with Virginia Roberts.

        I feel sure that Eugenie sees what is going on and maybe she could try to talk to her, IDK at this point.

      • Enny says:

        @Lorelei I think she could trust Eugenie, at least when it comes to clandestine communiqués with H&M… She could always just say “off for a walk with the Corgis” and swing by Frogmore. But I agree with others who have said that the grey ones will be clamping down HARD in her unsanctioned calls and zooms… 😢

  5. Cecilia says:

    Extraordinary. As someone pointed out yesterday , the Queen has correspondence with Boris Johnson every friday over the telephone to discuss matters of parliament and the state of the country, but she’s deaf and fragile when her own grandson is speaking to her?

    • SarahCS says:

      Too deaf and fragile to recognise her OWN NICKNAME.

      Someone should send them a link to the cocktail party effect.

      • Cecilia says:

        I actually have no words for this mess. Its funny tho how quickly they changed their tune once harry sent the lawyers. And for all this whining the media is doing, not ONE outlet has reported that the queen is upset about the name. So even if he didn’t ask permission, what exactly is the big deal?

      • Becks1 says:

        This is kind of like what we were talking about yesterday – how in control is the queen these days? and if she is not in control, don’t the british people have the right to know?

        If she cannot hear a basic telephone conversation (which yes, I know phone convos can be difficult with hearing loss), then maybe she should not be discussing matters of state over the phone.

        @Cecilia – yes, that’s what is so telling to me about this. I said yesterday that this seems to be an argument over semantics and timing – whether Harry asked the queen for permission BEFORE the birth or whether he discussed the name with her AFTER the birth. But they’re using that as a way to insist that “Harry disrespected the queen” but they’re not actually saying “the queen doesnt like that they are using the name and wishes they hadn’t used it.”

      • AD says:

        @Cecilia you hit the nail on the head. @Beckys1 she is very much in control and
        this is not the first time this is happening. It went on all the time they were married. She is not innocent. In fact she is the leading Mulan.

        In hindsight they should never have given her that name. This circus surrounding a baby name is not worth it. She will grow up knowing who she was named after and that person never stood up to defend her. I believe she is going to change her name when she grows up.

        Imagine how Harry must be feeling right now. Try to make it right and this is what I get? However, he should have known better.
        This is just downright crazy. I named my daughter after my two sisters. I have 4. I told them that was what I was going to do and they were happy.

        A week of nonsensical arguments and debate over nothing. Oh the Queen the queen so what? She is as human as all of us and when the she gets a patent on that name then .. until then rota rubbish needs to shut up. Can you imagine, a week of nonsensical arguments over nothing.smh

    • Mich says:

      Well, according to Kay, the problem is that it was a long-distance call. Which made me LOL. Was his last long-distance call in 1955?

      • Eurydice says:

        Not just a long-distance call, but a long-distance LINE. The kind that make crackling and hissing sounds and where you can hear other people talking in the background.

      • Cessily says:

        My mobile phone has been clear as a bell from every call I’ve made abroad, wether in the EU, Asia, south and Central American or the UK, if I had service I had clarity. Just like calls made in the USA. The long distance argument is truly stretching or we are dealing with very isolated nontraveling idiots. Also I do have a hearing loss and guess what my mobile has a volume button! Go figure🤷🏼‍♀️

      • Gaah says:

        I guess she uses a rotary dial phone too.

    • Excellent point, Cecilia. If she is that deaf, she should not be conducting state business on the phone! Perhaps she’s too poor to afford state-of-the-art hearing aids.

  6. SarahCS says:

    How on earth is this place still known as The Firm? I mean I get that it’s a business first and family second but if it was an actual business it would be as successful as one run by Trump.

    • Powermoonchrystal says:

      Ha. Birds of a feather, so not that far off

    • RoyalBlue says:

      word on the street, is It’s now called a carnival of so called experts. so Carnival for short, or Clowns, more effective.

      e.t.a. wait a minute, that’s the Rota. courtiers/rota. same difference.

  7. Amy T says:

    If it weren’t so pathetic, it would be funny. And if comedy is tragedy + time, teenage Lili is going to roar with laughter when she reads these stories.

    • Cecilia says:

      I know we laugh a lot about how ridiculous the British media can get, but the fact that they’ve made the arrival of this girl such a shit show actually upsets me. Meghan now had 2 pregnancies and postpartum where the media doesn’t even have the grace to let her enjoy this moment.

      Its inhumane

      • Merricat says:

        This is why any speculation that Meg or her children will ever go back to England is just noise and petulance. I don’t think Harry would go back if he didn’t feel obligated to the queen.

      • swirlmamad says:

        And yet they were tripping all over themselves to give Kate “space and privacy” for all three of her pregnancies. They all disgust me with their complete and utter hypocrisy.

  8. Brit says:

    These people, lol. All these losers had to do was be congratulatory and let it go but no, they have to appease their media bosses because the media is pissed about being out scooped and loss of revenue. I 100% believe this was sanctioned BS from a senior Royal. They know Harry and the Queen have direct contact and they can’t do anything about it. The courtiers and media flunkies are in control of that family and the family allows it and quite honestly thrive off it. This may sound harsh, but Harry and Meghan walked right into a trap with that name. Harry clearly separates his family and the firm but I think it’s naive to do that. The family is the firm at this point, no matter if they’re supportive or not behind the scenes. These people care about the monarchy first, not family.

    • Amy Bee says:

      Huh? Most of the Queens granddaughters and great granddaughters have her name. Why can’t Harry name his own daughter after his grandmother? The issue here is the Palace and those in the press don’t want a mixed race child to be named after the Queen. You can’t fault Harry and Meghan for other people’s racism.

      • Becks1 says:

        @AmyBee – I do think its interesting to imagine the reaction if they had named her Elizabeth Diana and not Lilibet. It seems right now the RRs are pretending the outrage is over using the “sacred and private nickname” but if they had just used Elizabeth (which I think almost every granddaughter and great-granddaughter has in her name, the exceptions being Mia Grace Tindall and Savannah Phillips and I can only confirm Savannah bc I just googled, lol)…..could the courtiers still pretend this great outrage?

        We know they would find some way to be mad, because the issue is clearly that Harry is saying “she’s still the great-granddaughter of the queen” and people cannot cope.

        ETA okay Eugenie does not have Elizabeth in her name either. Point still stands lol.

      • Brit says:

        I get that point but the problem is that Harry and Meghan know the palace courtiers and they know the Queen and none of these people have stood up for them or stopped the harassment. They know there is an agenda and targeted criticism and I know you shouldn’t live your life in fear or walking on eggshells but Harry and Meghan are separating the family from the firm and at this point, especially with how many people have anger and resentment within those palace walls working for the family, you can’t give these people ammunition especially if said family aren’t in control, which seems to be the case. I’m not attacking them and maybe it’s a bit naive because we’ve all seen they’ll be attacked regardless no matter what but that palace and family is trip.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Becks: The reaction would be the same if Lili was named Elizabeth. The fact is they don’t want a mixed race child name after the Queen and they want to perpetuate the narrative that the Queen has ostracized Harry like the rest of the family has.

        @Brit: As you said Harry and Meghan can’t live their lives fearing what the Palace and the press will react to their every move. Harry did that for most of life and it ruined his mental health. He refuses to live like that anymore and I think he should be applauded for that not critised.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Brit I think I sort of get what you’re saying – that they had to know that there would be backlash – but I don’t think they anticipated this hot mess. Or maybe they did and that’s why the lawyers were ready to go.

        But, there would have been some type of backlash regardless. Remember when “palace sources” were upset that Archie didn’t have a royal name? The Sussexes really can’t win with these people and it must have been exhausting to try to please them all the time, so I’m glad they’re not trying anymore.

      • Brit says:

        @AmyBee and @Becks I agree with you guys and I do applaud them 1000%. The point I was trying to make was that Harry and Meghan removed themselves from that toxic game but the family are still involved no matter how many personal zoom calls and chats there has been. The Queen is a part of that game and if she cared about the Sussexes as she has claimed before, she would say something, not just be supportive and happy behind the scenes. The family is the firm because they’ve allowed aides, officials and tabloid hacks control everything. Getting lawyers involved is sad because your own family members won’t come out and defend you. The firm and the family are not separate and I think that Harry is still coming to terms with that fact.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Brit I’ve wondered the same — how is there no one, apparently, no long-term employee, who saw Harry grow up and always liked him, has seen what a selfish rage monster William has turned into, and privately slip comments to the Queen about how things are truly being reported?
        I just can’t imagine how Harry feels — that absolutely NO ONE from the Palace has come out and defended him, even if they had to do it anonymously under these asinine “palace source” agreements.

        I remember that with Diana, it seemed like she really did have a few true allies in the palace, but Harry seems to have been completely hung out to dry. And he’s so likable I honestly can’t believe that there’s *no one* — someone who’s been there long enough that they don’t have to worry too much about being fired — who doesn’t have fond feelings for him and is angry at how this is all playing out.

      • MerlinsMom1018 says:

        @Becks1
        If the Lilibet is such a “sacred and private nickname” the how come it’s been put in print just about everywhere???????? Wouldn’t the RF have never let it get out?
        🙄 swear to the gods these people are morons…
        MerlinsDad has a special nickname for me that he only uses when we’re by ourselves. Nobody knows it and unless he wants it out nobody ever will.

      • I agree, AmyBee, it is just that simple and that ugly. —- I’m sure they’re are thousands of girls in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth who have been named after the Queen in the 95 years of her life. No one seems to give a hoot about them. As others have pointed out, many of the females in her family tree have been named after her as well with absolutely no problem. The problem for the racist family, aides, and media is that a biracial grandchild has been named for her.

    • MsIam says:

      And what “trap” did Harry walk into? He’s not the one who looks bad in this, you know. The media is being threatened with a lawsuit and the Windsors look like racist fools who are upset about a baby name. And what I find really interesting is that on Monday a lot of this same media were oohing and ahing over how this baby name was an “olive branch” to bring the family together.

      • Brit says:

        When I said trap, it wasn’t to be harsh or anything but palace machinery and foolishness of this family and media are all rolled into one whether it’s by force or they’re happily doing it. The problem is that these people aren’t thinking about family and relationships. They’re thinking like a business and have been throwing Harry and Meghan to the wolves to protect the establishment. I think the name is a lovely tribute and Harry and Meghan did nothing wrong but the firm and family are one and he may love and respect the Queen but she could’ve put an end to a lot of the foolishness including this story with one statement and she hasn’t done it. He has to threaten lawsuits, which signals a deeper problem. Someone is in control over there and I doubt it’s the royals. I’m not surprised this foolishness is happening because all they’ve done is show lack of empathy and care for the Sussexes. If you’re a family, act like one, courtiers, media be damned.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I’m curious about this “trap” too. We’ve learned over the past couple of years that he is more likely to walk away from traps and do things with a considerable amount of thought. No matter how many times the RR’s have implied that Harry is “impulsive”, he’s not. The impulsive ones are those that scurry out nonsense only proven to be false.

        I would love it if Harry & Meghan had a letter from either the Queen or Philip or both that said they would like them to name a baby girl Lilibet.

        If the palaces and rota’s are going to try this “hard of hearing” claim-they best explain why she doesn’t have a hearing aid. Of course, it would then be said it’s a recent development. Yep, the bullying of Harry & Meghan continues……

    • Cecilia says:

      @brit: if harry hadn’t name Lili after the queen AT ALL (and i mean nothing, not even Elizabeth), we would have had the exact same mess.

    • Eurydice says:

      I think the trap is the other way around. The RF and BM thought they could make Meghan and Archie go away – they thought they could reduce Meghan and Archie to another unfortunate footnote in royal history. But the monarchy is about birthright and now there are two children of color in the family tree. The name Archie made sense when H&M thought they would continue being royals, but now, from California, Lilibet slaps the RF and BM right in the face with what it means to be the great-granddaughter of the Queen.

      No matter how many interpretative dances they do the facts are that the Queen approved Harry and Meghan’s marriage, she has had good relations with them since and she approved Lilibet’s name. And there’s nothing anybody can do about it.

      • betsyh says:

        Yes, I agree. I do think Harry wanted to name his child after his beloved grandmother. But also the Firm wants to sever Meghan and her children from the royal family. Harry and Meghan naming their child after the queen is saying Meghan’s child is royal no matter what the Firm wants.

      • Ania says:

        I have exact same feeling – H&M refuse to be erased from RF.

    • swirlmamad says:

      Harry and Meghan are NOT TO BLAME IN THE SLIGHTEST for naming their daughter exactly what they wanted to name her. They spoke to the queen and got her blessing. They have just as much right to use the name as William and Kate would have, had they been clever enough to think about it first. Enough with the victim blaming. The sole blame and issue lies with the damn ratchet rats that make up the rota.

      ETA: Whether they named her Elizabeth, or even an “E” name that HINTED at a nod to the queen, we’d still be enduring this asinine nonsense. Like @Amy Bee said, the fact remains that they don’t want a non-lily white Sussex child to have ANY sort of connection to the queen and what she represents.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Brit, it didn’t matter what they named their daughter, the bm and rr’s would be doing the same thing that they are doing. Harry & Megan breathe and the UK media goes into over drive trying to decide how much oxygen they inhaled and how that has impacted someone in England. Go figure.

      Here’s what I want to know. The G7 is meeting, right? I wonder what everyone from those countries are thinking of these headlines. “Cause ya know–racist is racist is racist. I don’t care what perfume you pour on it, it still stinks to high heaven.

  9. Merricat says:

    If they parsed this any further, it would be subatomic.
    Meanwhile, the rest of the world has moved on as pearl-clutching palace fools freak out over the mundane. I mean, don’t they understand what this absolute furor says about them? No, because the monarchy is not concerned about anything beyond itself.
    I do think history books will write of the end of the British monarchy with much head-shaking.

    • Oliphant says:

      Yes no-one other than these incompetent fools cares about a baby’s name! I hope this is the start of the end of the monarchy, can’t see it surviving once the queen isn’t around. It’s a gross institution.

    • Myra says:

      Yesterday, it struck me that Buckingham Palace ran to the BBC to complain about a baby’s name and the BBC reported it. When you think of such institutions, you’d normally think of professionalism, quality work – the best of the best. Now, it’s just a drawn out reality drama over a nonsense issue. A royal palace complaining about a baby’s name and a ‘reputable’ news organisation, reporting it as relevant news. My brain still can’t get pass that. They shouldn’t have congratulated the parents on social media if they were going to needlessly harass the postpartum mum and little baby.

      • Lady D says:

        For most of my life, the BBC and the RF were considered the epitome of distinguished. I blame Charles and his appalling treatment of Lady Diana for the downfall of the House of Windsor. All he had to do was treat her with simple respect. This is the result of the disrespect that didn’t have to happen.
        OT: Think William is going to turn into the same kind of coward his granny and pops are?

      • windyriver says:

        Is there any reason the BBC couldn’t approach the Sussex’s spokesperson to get their response before going ahead with their reporting on this? AFAIK, there are four specific media organizations H&M have said they will not engage with, but they are tabloids, the BBC is not one of them.

      • I totally agree WindyRiver. A responsible journalist would have and should have reached out to the Sussex spokesperson. To not do so, means the BBC is bootlicking the Royals and not interested in professionalism when it comes to the Sussexes.

    • Eurydice says:

      You know, I wonder how much actual freaking out is going on. Almost all of this seems manufactured. I mean, Lili’s “arrival was initially heralded as an olive branch” – since when? Says who? The media started the olive branch/bandaid baby story, but it didn’t get traction, so they’re going a different direction. And even if, for some inexplicable reason, Charles and William are miffed, I can’t imagine they care so much to be freaking out. They have other things to do and worry about, like banishment to Scotland. The only “freaking out” I can imagine is the frantic passing back and forth of cash between courtiers and media so they can make maximum profit before the story dies.

      • Becks1 says:

        Honestly, I think the press just throws things against the wall to see what sticks. the olive branch didn’t stick. This is sticking though, so they’re running with it. There’s no rhyme or reason to it. They’re just making things up as they go along and here they got a quote from a “senior palace official” so they’re getting extra mileage out of it.

  10. Lauren says:

    I’m going to go into full speculation here… Is the source AK? She is the only one nasty enough and so sure in her role that she can kick up this shtstorm and not be afraid for her job. The only other one that comes to mind is EY, but he is walking on veeeeery thin ice after JK got sacked. They went from the Queen is very much in charge to the Queen is hard of hearing or got confused about the name in less than 4 months. Harry should tell grandma what her staff is saying about her to the media because this is getting ridiculous.

    • Becks1 says:

      We were discussing that possibility yesterday. To me it makes sense because if she called the BBC and said “well I can tell you X” the BBC would probably figure that was basically directly from the Queen.

    • Sofia says:

      Or Edward Young her Private Secretary. He’s senior enough for the BBC to think he’s speaking for the queen and think he’s speaking the truth.

      Edit: should have read your fully comment! Yup I also think it is EY

      • Alexandria says:

        @Sophia I don’t understand. EY is saying the truth? Harry is lying?

      • Sofia says:

        @Alexandria um no that’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that it’s possible EY went to the BBC and lied and the BBC trusted him because he’s the queen’s Private Secretary and for the BBC they think he’s trustworthy.

      • HeatherC says:

        @Alexandria EY is senior enough that the BBC would assume that he’s speaking for the queen and telling the truth, even when he’s not.

      • Alexandria says:

        Ah ok thank you Sophia, HeatherC

    • Cecilia says:

      What exactly is the drama with Edward Young?

      • Sofia says:

        He’s Charles’ man basically. Andrew and Charles teamed up to oust Christopher Geidt who the queen actually really liked but Charles wanted his own yes man so Geidt was out and Young was in.

        Anne and Edward have apparently complained about Young and say he doesn’t have their mother’s best interest at heart and how difficult it is to see her now or something like that.

      • The Hench says:

        The crazy thing is, whether it was AK47 or Young, NOBODY at the Palace looks good from this. The only possible benefit to making this fuss is a financial one into the pockets of whoever is the so-called source.

      • Lolo says:

        It is also worth noting the EY is also in charge of the Palace Press Office. EY could be the person who was willing to help the MOS.If PWT is involved his man is likely to be the assistant private secretary. Pure speculation – given EY knifed his predecessor in the back to get the top job, the same fate may befall him.

    • Vivica says:

      My palace sources say that Charles is behind this chess move. In one fell swoop, he can put doubt on HM abilities, forcing a cry for abdication and put a knick into the truth being told by H&M. If he gets EY to do the dirty work, once again, the BBC comes out looking like fools in a time that they so desperately need to have The Firm’s cooperation as well as the public’s need for “salty white truth.” Charles had Edward call the BBC, making them think it was 100% from HM, then had Kay write the hit piece on HM, forcing the question into her senility and calls for abdication, paving the way for an earlier coronation for Charles. Final Answer.

      • Snuffles says:

        I’ve also considered that scenario.

      • Vivica says:

        @Snuffles You have to admit, it is a thing of beauty. The BM gets the bad press and HM gets the stress of being considered obsolete. Dear Chuck gets to reap the rewards. I can’t wait to see if Harry and Meghan get to drop any receipts on this one.

      • Lauren says:

        Makes sense if EY is willing to go out of the royal scene with a bang. That man has already been implicated in much of the smear campaign against the Sussexes, I could totally see him trying to take one last swipe at Sussexes and while trying to get Chuck on the throne. But why not wait? The Queen is old, she might have 5-6 years at most. Why is Chuck not willing to wait? Is he sick? Because his fingers have convinced me that health-wise he is not fine and dandy.

      • Carrie says:

        Would be interesting if Meghan & Harry have video and audio of all conversations they have had with petty.

      • The Hench says:

        But one of the greatest flaws of monarchy is that capability has nothing to do with being monarch. You can be stark, raving bonkers and it’s not qualification for abdication. Even if the Queen was totally deaf (she’s not) and senile (she’s not) she’d still get to stay monarch. They’d just work around her – which it appears is what they’ve been doing for some time now.

        Charles knows this – I doubt he’d expend energy like this to no end when he is already effectively holding most of the reins of power. Also, all the money and preparation going into prep for 2022′s Platinum Jubilee demonstrates the Palaces are working on Liz still being Queen next year.

      • Bess says:

        Charles is a snake.

      • Sofia says:

        I’ve gotta go with @The Hench here. You can’t abdicate just like that. You can’t just go to Parliament and say “I’m too old for this shit so let me go hang with the corgis and Andrew” and Parliament goes “Oh cool. Alright Chuck you’re up” and Charles jumps on his sofa with joy going “Yipee!!”. You can’t force one either. You can implement a legal regency but that would mean that the queen has totally lost it and is incapable of functioning as a monarch. And as long as she can greet ambassadors and open hospitals and have conversations with Boris, she’s doing her job.

      • MsIam says:

        I kind of agree it could be Charles? He’s been whining for the last two weeks about what Harry said in the Apple TV special. I wouldn’t put it past him to try and hurt Harry for that. But William and the Middletons have a dog in this fight too. The Cambridges didn’t get the applause they expected over that Scottish trip and now here is the media making a fuss over his “exiled” brother? And now Kate is not the mother of Diana’s only granddaughter anymore plus she has the Queen’s nickname too? Lots of tears on that side of the ocean I imagine.

      • TeamAwesome says:

        This reminds me of Dr. Who when the Doctor basically destroys Prime Minister Harriet Jones career with the words “Doesn’t she look tired?”.

      • windyriver says:

        Not only is Kate no longer the mother of Diana’s only granddaughter, but with Meghan now having two kids, “Early Years” Kate now has competition in the mom space she didn’t have before.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Vivica, isn’t there an issue with taxes on their private wealth if Charles gets that wealth by abdication? Would he really do that?

        I have a problem with this line of thought. I don’t know what sources you have, but I think you have to at least consider the fact that this isn’t true, but makes a great way to pass on a particular sentiment. If that’s true, then this is all Willileaks, and frankly that’s who I think is behind this. He would also want everyone’s attention ton PC. Is Willi so poor that he has to do this?

      • Kkat says:

        I was thinking exactly this. Charles can use this to float his mom is deaf and next will be going senile.

    • Harper says:

      The BBC story clearly does not say Buckingham Palace when it very clearly could. It just credits the Palace, with a capital P. Therefore, I’m still throwing William in the mix for this mess. Harry and Meghan selecting Lilibet as a first name is the kind of thing that would make TOB incandescent because he didn’t think of it first. It also reveals an intimacy between Harry and the Queen that the Cambridge family doesn’t have.

      • Lauren says:

        I would agree, but there is one issue here. An aide high enough in the food chain makes such a bold declaration AFTER the Bashir mess and the BBC takes their word and runs with it? KP does not have that power right now, they had JK, but he is a pile of toxic waste that no one wants to use an anonymous source right now, just look at the daily fail having to pay Meghan because they took his word at face value. No this is 100% inside BP, it’s just a matter of is it Angela or Ed (and Ed is Chuck’s man so there is CH).

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I’m with you on this, Harper. William, Kate or Carol should remain in the mix of “palace source”. Their devious machinations have been very apparent over the years. Pretty sure William is the one who made the color comments, he would have a bigger issue with Lili being named after his white grandmother.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Lauren unless it was William himself (or Kate.) That would make the BBC feel secure in running the quote.

        But, I do think this is coming from BP with Charles’ permission.

      • February-Pisces says:

        Willie, keen and Carole may have taken a lesson out of Charles playbook, by staying quiet and keeping their name out of this narrative. They may well be orchestrating this one too. However if history has taught me anything is that those three aren’t that smart, and would have inserted how amazing they are into each article.

  11. Snuffles says:

    They’re mad that the Queen won’t get with the program in isolating the Sussex’s and now are trying to gaslight her too.

    Good Lord, I know the woman ain’t no saint by a long shot but I feel bad that she’s got to spend her twilight years surrounded by vipers and dealing with palace intrigue. But I guess she chose it by refusing to retire.

    • February-Pisces says:

      This only proved that these courtiers are loyal to no one. They have no idea how bad they are actually making the queen look. Most likely harry told her in a private conversation that he wanted to name his daughter lilibet, they queen would have been delighted by that as most grandmothers would be, and that was that.

      They could have just said the queen likes the gesture, and moved on but no. Instead making out the queen disapproves only makes her look like the worst grandmother ever. If they are not even protecting her, what’s the point of them.

    • North of Boston says:

      And by refusing to fire the vipers when she had the chance.

  12. Becks1 says:

    Lordy. Yes, they have lost the plot. I don’t think they expected Harry’s lawyers to respond so quickly. And it’s kind of funny how now all the RRs are insisting that if something is from a “senior palace source” it means its basically from the queen herself. I am NOT going back and looking at all the stories from the Great Smear Campaign – but there were many quotes from palace sources and senior palace sources. So were those all 100% sanctioned by the royal family, including the story about Meghan making Kate cry? That’s not a good look for the royal family.

    And yes I think there is a protocol around naming babies in the line of succession, but I dont think it extends to every baby ever born to one of the queen’s grandkids. Like I think she had veto rights over George’s name as the future king. I know that she did not like the game of one of the York girls and it was changed (maybe Beatrice?)

    Anyway this line “As one observer put it: ‘Briefings and counter-briefings about the name of a royal baby is not a good look for the House of Windsor.’”

    tells me that someone has realized this all looks petty and mean spirited about a baby who is not even a week old yet.

    (as a random the hierarchy around quotes is weird. “senior palace source” clearly means something different to RRs than “palace insider” or “someone close to the palace” who could just be another RR. Remember my theory back during the birth certificate issue in January, that I thought a reporter was sharing info with Lady colin Campbell who then parroted it back to the reporter as “a source”? Or remember Peter Hunt’s tweet about how one swallow does not a summer make, and then it was an article as a “palace insider” or something?)

    • Cecilia says:

      It isn’t a good look for the windsors and it baffles me that the queen is allowing her STAFF, the flipping HELP, to make an absolute spectacle of the very institution she’s tried all her life to protect. All because they have an axe to grind with the biracial American that till this day did nothing to them.

    • Jais says:

      ITA that the idea that the palace sources are 100% legitimate is not a path they want to go down

    • Nic919 says:

      Peter Hunt, former BBC royal correspondent was the one who said it was a bad look to be briefing and counter briefing over a baby’s name. He has been much sharper in his criticism of the royals since he left the BBC.

  13. lemonylips says:

    How desperate are these people to constantly try to get any kind of material on Harry and Meghan. Who cares if Betty approved it or heard it? I know…protocol but still. It’s a child name and parents have the right to chose it however it pleases them. I have to say I’m becoming weary of royal reporters and insiders and whatnots constantly making up theories and chasing clicks. They’re like Jon Snow – they know nothing.

    • Brit says:

      The RR’ s are nothing but social climbing money hungry control freaks but royals have given them, editors and tabloid hacks so much power. There’s a reason Piers was threatening them and taking pictures outside of KP. When you get in bed with trash, you become trash. The firm and family are one entity at this point.

  14. Lemons says:

    The last time I checked, Harry’s real name is Henry, but no one refers to him as such. So why is it unusual to name his daughter Lilibet and call her Lili?

    Giving your children birth certificate names, but wanting to have a nickname in place is perfectly normal. Stop the madness.

    Everyone knows good and well that the Queen’s hearing is just fine. The courtiers were having a hard time hearing a private conversation that they were not privy to, so therein lies the issue.

    • Robyn says:

      Lmao EXACTLY. The nickname argument holds zero water.

    • Chaine says:

      So true, matter of fact she can’t care that much about her descendants’ names if she let Charles and Diana name their son after the guy who had six wives and beheaded two of them!

      • Courtney B says:

        I’m more surprised she’d name her own heir after a beheaded king and her youngest shares the name of the Duke of Windsor. I’d love to know how the latter went down with the Queen mum.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        The Duke of Windsor was called David. Edward was his regnal name (the name he took when he became king) – just like Elizabeth’s father’s name was Albert (Bertie) but his regnal name was George VI. It is super-confusing but it is a tradition that was started when Victoria’s heir who was named Albert didn’t want to be Albert I and then took the regnal name Edward VII. It is highly unlikely that Charles will go by Charles III when he is enthroned. He’ll most likely choose a regnal name like his grandfather before him.

      • Courtney B says:

        @arthistorian Yes, I almost mentioned he was known as David in the family. But since he was known mostly to the public as Edward I decided just to go with that when talking about it in the context of royal names. Margaret named her son David and, again, would’ve loved to hear the Queen mum’s reaction.

        Edward VII had quite the naming issue since Queen Victoria DID meddle in these things. George wanted to name his firstborn after his beloved brother Eddy. The Queen, who liked the children to have Albert in their names, especially if they were due to reign, reminded him eddy’s name was actually Albert Victor. George stood his ground and she gave way. The second son, Elizabeth’s father, born on the anniversary of Albert’s death, did get the name.

        Victoria was thwarted five times with getting a King Albert. Albert Edward (Bertie) ruled as Edward VII, his son Albert Victor (Eddy) died, George V refused his grandmother’s request to change his own name after his brother’s death, his eldest son was named Edward (VIII) and his second son Albert (Bertie) who came to the throne, chose to reign as George VI.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Well, since Edward VIII/Duke of Windsor was known in the family as David, Liz naming one of her children Edward wouldn’t have any emotional connection to the Duke of Windsor. The names of Liz’s children seem less “traditional” than the names the Cambridges have given their children: George and Charlotte are definitely signaling a link to the current royal dynasty’s Hannoverian roots and then there is Louis and this name’s overt connection to the Mountbatten name.

        Royal naming traditions are interesting. Fx the Danish CP named their first child Christian because the Danish kings have alternated between Christian and Frederik for centuries. But their other children have been given names that aren’t traditional for the DRF (the same applies to Prince Joachim’s children – I still remember the public surprise that he named his second son Felix). The Swedish CP named her firstborn (and heir) Estelle, which isn’t really a family name but her second child is called Oscar, which is a family name since two Swedish kings have been called Oscar. The Norwegian CP named their firstborn Ingrid Alexandra and both names are family names (Ingrid is a family name in both Haakon and Mette-Marit’s families) and Alexandra is an oblique homage to the CP’s grandfather King Olav who was born Prince Alexander of Denmark but had his name changed to the Norwegian Olav when his father became King of Norway.

  15. Jais says:

    Ok, the observer at the end that says, “briefings and counter briefings about the name of a royal baby is not a good look for the House of Windsor.” Am pretty sure that is just a tweet from Peter Hunt? Why don’t they cite that rather than just call an observer?

    • Becks1 says:

      omg you’re right. It’s Peter Hunt. He’s the sole voice of reason sometimes in that carnival.

      But hilarious that they are quoting him like that.

      • Jais says:

        They must use his tweets as a counter- argument that isn’t quite as shady as say a tweet from Omid Scobie lol

  16. S808 says:

    Accusing the Queen of being hard of hearing is certainly a choice. Should England still have a monarch whose senses seem to be failing her?

    Someone said something about the Queen seeing H&M as simply members of family and no longer of the Firm. In that case there is no reason for her to disclose conversations had with them. I doubt she reports conversations had with Zara or Peter.

    • Brit says:

      The family is clearly being pressured to give leaks and info to the tabloids in exchange for covering Andrew and Williams indiscretions. The baby news and name was the last straw for them. I’ve never seen a media so angry about loss of control. They seem to be going off the rails and everytime Meghan and Harry fight back, it makes them even more unhinged.

      • Cecilia says:

        Unhinged is the right word. When news dropped that harry’s lawyers sent out a legal letter i quite literally saw media hacks loose their minds. Basically saying he was over-reacting and asking why he always had to get the lawyers out. The word accountability is not something the british media is familiar with.

      • MsIam says:

        Harry doesn’t always get the lawyers out but when he does he usually wins, lol!

  17. Powermoonchrystal says:

    That these folks get paid to write this drivel baffles me. Heck, I should be a royal reporter if that is the level of skill required. Of course, I am missing the racist, classist, and tone deaf skillset arsenal, and I am not much for boot licking either.

  18. Ginger says:

    After the news came out that Harry’s lawyers sent a legal letter to the BBC, we got SO many different versions of this story. This is the birth certificate story and the tights story all over again. The palace knows they messed up and are trying to cover themselves.

    I think the Queen really likes the name and that pisses off the staff and press. They definitely don’t want a biracial girl to have the Queens beloved nickname.

  19. Amy Bee says:

    Kaiser, you’re spot on. I suspect this latest mess made by the Palace will disappear just the bullying allegations and the birth certificate story. They’re attacking Harry for going to his lawyers but it’s the only to stop the Palace and the press in their tracks. What’s amazing to me is no one in the press or the Palace seem to have realised how racist this latest episode makes them look and it further confirms that what Harry and Meghan said in the Oprah interview was the truth.

    • ABritGuest says:

      This Amy Bee! 7 of Betty’s grandchildren and grandchildren’s names honour her (using Elizabeth) so seems to be tradition but suddenly it’s a problem for the great grandchild with mixed heritage who uses a derivative that people close to Betty use. They are so triggered they are making a controversy for a 6 day old baby who’s already experienced racism the same palace sources have been silent about. Yet it’s meant to be hard to believe the firm wanted to change rules for Archie..like with Archie they are probably concerned if Lili’s African American ancestry comes through more prominently but this baby also carries the queens name so they are freaking out.

      I wonder if this fuss, to extent they’ve had to call lawyers in & the press suggesting Betty couldn’t say no even if she was uncomfortable, is making this name feel bittersweet to H&M. Archie didn’t have a royal connected name & people still had meltdowns. Must feel endless.

      @Becks Professor Kate Williams says that royal baby names aren’t protocol but a discussion will be had with Betty & if she didn’t like it especially for those close to the throne- it would be changed out of respect to her.

      The press & courtiers are fuming that Betty knew & withheld these details about Lili’s birth so she’s not keeping up her end of the invisible contract & that’s why this story came up & she’s being called an old biddy who’s hard of hearing. Not great to suggest that for the head of state& very different from the coverage with wreathgate when she was the all powerful boss upholding the monarchy. I see this as a warning to Brenda.

      Camilla Tominey has an article that shows the courtiers don’t appreciate H&M having a direct line to Betty & distinguishing between her as relative and as monarch. I see more about what Harry said about the system trapping you- you can tell they will be managing her more around these secret conversations with Harry.

      • Courtney B says:

        I said this yesterday too. Every. Single. One of the Queen’s children (Anne/Zara, Andrew/Beatrice, Edward/Louise) and grandchildren (Peter/Isla, Zara/Leah, William/Charlotte) gave their daughter Elizabeth as a middle name without a peep. And I bet Eugenie and Beatrice will if they have girls. This is the same as ‘she stole Charlotte’s middle name’ in regards to Elizabeth and not just Diana. They always forget there are more descendants than William and Harry. If there are claiming rights for great grandchildren, Charlotte stole it from Isla Phillips.

  20. Sofia says:

    So we’ve gone “The queen knew they were gonna their daughter Lilibet” (I think the Times/Telegraph mentioned it when the announcement came) to “No she didn’t know anything at all” to “Well they told her but it was more informing then asking so it doesn’t count” to “Okay so they did ask her but how could she say no to that” to “She’s 95 and Lilibet and Elizabeth sound too similar so still doesn’t count”

    It really is amateur hour at BP.

    • Merricat says:

      Lol. Buffoonery.

    • Becks1 says:

      yeah it seems currently they are focused on the idea that the Sussexes informed the Queen but that’ not the same thing as asking permission beforehand.

      I’m pretty sure that Will and Kate did not ask her permission beforehand for any of their kids either. After they were born, they probably said “we were thinking of George Alexander Louis, what do you think” and the queen said “how lovely.” Which is my guess that’s exactly what happened here.

      • windyriver says:

        So how do the rota idiots think that conversation went? Harry is supposed to have said, “Just FYI gran, we want to honor you by publicly naming our daughter your personal, private nickname, and we don’t care if that’s okay with you.” Of course H&M got permission from his “Commander in Chief”. And the palace idiots are so consumed with jockeying for power, they can’t imagine anything done primarily from an attitude of love and respect, even from two people who have publicly stepped back, and moved half a world away.

        If they called her Elizabeth, the fuss would be, she’s upstaging Charlotte, who only has Elizabeth as her middle name. If they called her Poppy, like Archie, it wouldn’t have been sufficiently royal. There would’ve been some kind of criticism of anything they chose.

        I go back and forth between thinking Shakespeare would have great material from the last four years, and being convinced at this point he would’ve just been rolling his eyes like the rest of us.

  21. 2cents says:

    The Queen may be a bit deaf (95 🤷‍♀️) but she can still do her job as Head of State and invite the Biden’s for tea at Windsor.

    The leaking courtiers who clearly don’t respect the privacy of the royals as a family are the ones bringing the House of Windsor down.

    Charles should sack them all and start with a new team.

    • Amy Bee says:

      As mentioned up-post, the Queen’s Private Secretary was installed by Charles. So I doubt he has any problems with what has happened in last few days. He probably sees it bringing Harry down a peg or two.

  22. Charfromdarock says:

    Oh FFS.

  23. M says:

    The comment about approving of George’s name is hilarious since her father’s name was actually Albert, aka Bertie. NO ONE in his family called him George. The mental gymnastics these people do on a daily basis beats all I have ever seen.

    • Courtney B says:

      Bingo. Her grandfather was George V and her uncle, the Duke of Kent, was named George. Her father took the name to bring to bring a sense of stability after the abdication by creating a link to his father.

    • The Hench says:

      That is such a good point. The ignorance that these so-called experts put on display all the time is staggering. George was just his regnant name, as his brother David took Edward before abdicating.

      Given the reputations of the Kings called Charles we’ve had so far, PC might want to think about his own regnant name. He’s got Philip Arthur George to play with as his middle names ..the next King Arthur?? Lol.

      PS Harry is the one who has Albert as one of his middle names – the ACTUAL name of the Queen’s beloved father….

    • Nic919 says:

      There was no talk of Louis having his name approved or even Charlotte. It only mattered for George because he is the direct heir. But even then it is simply a courtesy. There is historical precedent of the current monarch not liking the name of the direct heir, which is what happened when Victoria was named and George IV didn’t approve. Her mother still never changed her name.

      Lili is eighth in line right now and as such her name is pretty irrelevant. Just a reminder but Beatrice was born as eighth in line.

      • Courtney B says:

        Victoria’s first name was Alexandrina. That was a compromise after the regent hated every other name—Charlotte, Georgina, Augusta. He agreed on alexandrina because it was after tsar Alexander I, her godfather, and Victoria because it was her mother’s name. That’s why, unusually for the day, she only had two names. The duchess of Kent, her mother, was in tears by the end of the ceremony.

  24. Over it says:

    Oh for f sake . Harry and Meghan, let’s do this. Rename her, we will call her princess monticeto , Diana . Yeah , let’s see these people argue that she can’t be called princess. If micheal Jackson son can be prince , then baby lili can definitely be princess.

    These clown ass stuges in the palace and British media are so f-ing stupid with their obvious racism against a baby . The world is watching this shit show they call protocol and news

  25. LaraW” says:

    I hope the BBC remembers that H&M’s aggressive litigation caused Splash paparazzi to file for bankruptcy. And they forced X17 to settle for an unknown amount of money. Who knows, maybe they’ll send the Daily Mail/Mail on Sunday into bankruptcy also, once the accountants at the Mail disclose the profits they made from publishing Meghan’s letter. They already have to pay her attorney’s fees on layaway.

    I hope that media outlets in the UK learn a really hard lesson: when you have a legal team who keeps winning, keeps getting more experienced, keeps building caselaw in favor of the couple and keeps making significant legal connections in the background— that in and of itself is currency. It is clout, it is power, it is name recognition as soon as you walk into a courtroom, and it is the ability to dictate the terms of any settlement talks.

    It is a reputation that gets your in-house counsel to say: Look, the best option is to settle quietly and immediately. Otherwise, you will face a legal battle that may go on for years, led by a team who is willing to scorch the earth to protect H&M’s reputation; a team willing to pursue aggressive discovery, and whose clients very clearly keep all evidence to back their claims. Settle now, or later they’ll level terms at you that will be triple the original amount they demanded, with embarrassing add-ons like printing a public retraction and an apology from the editor in chief on your website. Even if this is a fight you think you can win, it isn’t a fight you can afford. Your royal source won’t make good on their promises. Your reputation will go into the gutter. It’s already three quarters of the way there. Cut your losses, retract, and move on.

    • Merricat says:

      The BM is so used to saying whatever they like, without repercussion–much like the royal family is used to doing whatever they like without anyone publicizing it.
      I love Harry and Meghan unleashed, as someone here described it. They’re no longer bound by the code of silence that binds the monarchy. They don’t have to take it anymore, and they won’t.
      I also love watching the learning curve happen with the BM in real time.

      • Lady D says:

        I love watching the learning curve happening too. After the past four years of their behaviour towards Meghan, I’m experiencing a great deal of joy and laughter watching this.

      • February-Pisces says:

        I think the reason these tabloids get away with so much is because most public figures are too scared to challenge them. Harry and Meghan actually have nothing to lose which must be liberating in a way.

    • Alexandria says:

      HM should fight. Both their reputations were destroyed by these rats. Before their marriage, they had good reputations including professionally. They are good people and they shouldn’t have to stand these slander.

      I’m in Singapore and some comments from the public are they believe they’re spoiled and playing the victim card while airing the family dirty laundry. Papers here don’t do a deep dive and just report what the other UK press report. Our press reputation suck but they don’t pretend to be righteous like the BBC.

      • MsIam says:

        Their reputations are higher than ever. Top selling children’s book and TV special being mentioned as an Emmy nomination. You haven’t heard about that in Singapore?

      • Sid says:

        Their reputations are fine among the people and organizations that matter to them and their livelihood.

      • Alexandria says:

        Msiam, I’ve stopped following local news feed. I made the mistake of clicking on the comments when Harry and Meghan quit.

      • Alexandria says:

        All of you have good points.

    • ElleE says:

      @LaraW’ PREACH! I totally forgot about Harry’s win re: the military letter thingy that resulted in the donation to the Invictus games. We can look back at that now and see that was a warm up; “still in the ‘fam so can’t really put you out of business, so just make a donation instead”.

      Lawsuits are the only way they can proactively defend their family from the press; lessons learned and all that. Proactive meaning that fewer lies published should result is fewer death threats and more positive mental health for them personally (one hopes). I support them and that it why those laws exist in the first place-to prevent entities like the BBC from abusing their positions of power.

  26. Kimber says:

    I think the courtiers were cut out of communications between Harry/Meghan and the queen after she found out that Hardybwas blocked from talking with her directly pre-Sussexit. Just my thoughts on the matter.

  27. Lucylee says:

    You know they have been backed into a corner and lost when they say “they disrespected the Queen.”

  28. Boo says:

    It’s all such a MESS. Why can’t BP issue a statement to clear it up once and for all. Good for Harry for responding so quickly to gutter press gossip. Though it pains me to say it, there’s something about Lilibet that feels so loaded. Surely they would’ve anticipated what a stir it would cause? Well M may not have foreseen it but H should have. Why not have Lili with the Lilbet connection kept private?

    • Snuffles says:

      I see people saying that but you’re assuming that the Queen has complete control over her staff and that she’s 100% in the loop. When all evidence is that she’s very much being handled by people put in place by Charles (like Edward Young).

    • Merricat says:

      Why should they hide their baby’s name? It was done with love and joy.

      • MsIam says:

        Exactly, people always want to put the onus on the Sussexes to not make the other side mad. When the other side needs to be called out on their shit. And as I said up above, these same media were saying on Monday that naming the baby Lilibet was an “olive branch” and it could help heal the rift.

    • LaraW” says:

      I commented along these lines on another story with respect to the idea that H&M should have been able to anticipate the media fallout:

      While it’s true that we all knew the royal rota would have various unhinged reaponses, none of us predicted that the freaking BBC would chime in with a libelous story. That is the material difference here. Schillings doesn’t issue warnings to Page Six or whatever, or even (as far as we know) slightly more reputable publications like the Times or Telegraph. However, the BBC is a well-established, (formerly) respectable news organization with a large international audience. They’re the ones who picked up the story and blew it even further out of proportion. Harry has made it clear in multiple interviews that he has very strong opinions about what constitutes legitimate news, and the BBC, for all that it’s deteriorated recently, is still considered a legitimate news source. They’re the ones who crossed the line and fired the first shots. Harry responded in kind.

      More than that, there is only so much you can do to anticipate media response. And if H&M allowed their choices to be dictated by potential reactions by the media, they may as well go back to the UK and rejoin the royal family. It would essentially be the same thing. If they based their decisions wholly on how the media might react, then they’ve stopped living their own life.

      They are never going to be able to avoid conflict. The hateful coverage is too entrenched in the UK media now. So they live their lives, keep info on lockdown, and show they mean business when a news organizations takes it too far. Sometimes that’s all you can do— draw a line in the sand and say “cross this, and I will rain hellfire down on you.”

  29. lanne says:

    Sussex squad found records of a queens horse named Lillibet. Those folks know how to pull receipts.

    • The Hench says:

      That is hilarious. Although…the Queen is VERY fond of her horses – probably more so than her actual children.

    • MsIam says:

      Omg, that’s hilarious! Did the Queen give her permission for that or was she just “informed”?

      • equality says:

        It was a horse owned by her father so he used it for a filly. She probably thought it was great.

      • Courtney B says:

        Her grandfather had a filly named Lilibet in 1931 confirmed by the spokesman for the royal stables as being named for his granddaughter.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        And if she gave permission… WAS IT IN WRITING???

  30. Woowza says:

    I’m soo tired of the hate H&M get. They can’t even welcome a daughter without a “controversy”. It’s so depressing to see. I know that they have a lot of people on their side but seeing the way they are being attacked, the way they destroyed Meghan’s reputation is soo heartbreaking. And even now, NO ONE in that family will stand for them. Lizzy talking about “much loved members of the family” is such BS

    • Merricat says:

      Meghan’s reputation has not been destroyed–that’s really giving Bitter Isle more influence than they actually possess, lol. Meghan has a global reputation that is solid. And I don’t think the Sussexes are under any delusion that the family they left has anyone in it that is worth their time, with the exception of Eugenie and the queen.

      • Woowza says:

        I know.. but there is some damage done. And that’s what’s pissing me of. I know they love the queen and I know we don’t know anything but it’s so frustrating to see them respect and love her so much when she doesn’t stand up for them. They better than me

      • Alexandria says:

        Merricat it was destroyed. She had no bad reputation in Hollywood. She was professional and afaik very pleasant and considerate personality wise. All these stories threaten that. It only takes one fake news to destroy your credibility, what more the multiple slander from the salty island. The BBC is lending credibility to fake news. Harry and Meghan have a foundation now. How is it going to garner credibility if the two founders are constantly accused of lying?

      • Merricat says:

        I don’t know what you want the queen to do. She gave her permission.

      • Woowza says:

        I don’t mean to be debbie downer, it’s just that sometimes it gets to me. Is all. And the queen could do a lot… One little statement saying that she was aware of the name choice and that she approved it, or just preventing her staff from leaking would be a lot… Anyways, let’s focus on the bench doing really well

      • Becks1 says:

        I honestly don’t know how much a statement from the Queen would do.

        Remember in November-ish 2019, the press was up in arms bc there were rumors that the Sussexes weren’t going to spend Christmas at Sandringham? And I think BP released a statement saying something about how they understood the “intense scrutiny” the Sussexes had faced and they supported their decision to spend christmas privately or something. It did not stop the outrage, it just switched to being about how the sussexes couldnt handle it and omg what if this was the queen’s last christmas and they’re keeping Archie from her etc etc.

    • Over it says:

      All this . It truly is heartbreaking , a baby should bring joy, in the uk it brings out bitter spiteful evil racist bitches

    • Snuffles says:

      Her reputation hasn’t been destroyed. People with a brain know what’s up. And the racists who hate her on site will just add this to another pile of excuses.

    • MsIam says:

      If Meghans reputation was “destroyed” she wouldn’t have all these people lining up to work with her. Her profile is higher than ever and that’s what pisses people off. Look at her children’s book. Random House released Kevin Hart’s children’s book this week too, how much did you hear about that?

      • one of the Marys says:

        I’d say her reputation took a hit but now that she’s out of the senior Royal role she has solidified her good reputation and its the British Royal family that is destroying its own reputation. People the world over are watching this unfold in real time. The Royal family look completely amateurish, petty and disorganized. It’s astonishing to watch

    • February-Pisces says:

      @woowza I know what you mean. Earlier i had a meghan hater leave racially motivated abuse towards me on social media. I’m tired of this sh*t.

  31. ElleE says:

    One would think the Charles’s & the Embassy’s in any to inform Harry of Philip’s death and the imagery of a sheriff conveying the news via intercom gate (right? Sry so much has happened and I don’t care) tells one all one needs to know about the future of “family relations” Richard.

    Now I’m wondering if Megs also gave birth to Archie secretly right there under the family’s noses. Assumed at the time that Charles & others knew that she was on her way, birth imminent, all that, just no formal announcement. Two secret births combined with her suicidal thoughts and their escape from Canada after that cluster of a commonweal service in 2020= WTAF is going on?

  32. Over it says:

    You know, baldimort likes to call out racism in football. How about he calls out the racism being thrown at his new niece or is she not worth defending?

  33. Lili says:

    Oh Boy, if they are claiming she is now hard of hearing, chances are they are gearing up to have someone with her when ever she receives phone calls, so the courtiers will get the gossip straight away. I hope she refuses. But i can see they will start micromanaging her , and say its for her own good

    • Lorelei says:

      I was thinking along similar lines— I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they bugged her room/phone/etc. They are too angry that she speaks privately to Harry and they won’t just let it go.

  34. Jais says:

    Ok did anyone else wonder if the flowers on the queen’s dress are a secret message? Lol I have no idea but there are a lot of flowers on that dress and sure it’s about the new Phillip rose breed, but the pattern doesn’t necessarily look like roses just saying…
    could they be lilies???

    Realize this is kinda silly but am so annoyed with how cruel people are being about this baby that this is just fun to speculate

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      The cruelness can be overwhelming. Nice break needed.

      Lilies typically have 6 tepals(3 petals & 3 sepals). Forget Me Nots have 5 petals-leaning towards that.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      I read a nice story today about a little boy selling his Pokemon cards to help save his dog’s life.

    • windyriver says:

      “could they be lilies?”

      Not if Angela Kelly is still dressing her!

      I have a kitten channel I tune in to on YouTube when people get to be a little too much…

  35. fani says:

    a bunch of snakes (the leakers/liars) – deplorable. The Queen deserves better, especially just after her husband’s death. Very Trashy.

  36. Over it says:

    Even O magazine is pissed off about the way these people are behaving over a baby name

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Over it, Good! If they think that person with the “talk show” won’t overshadow the BBC, they really are in a fantasy land. I’ve decided that England (perhaps the UK?) is very, very insular. They simply have no concept of the world beyond their shores. They are showing themselves VERY CLEARLY to be racists to the world. And, that’s okay with them. What they need to be asking themselves is if it’s okay with the rest of the world? Let’s talk G7 and headlines, shall we?

  37. Courtney B says:

    The second variation along these lines is that Harry as for permission/informed her of his wish to name the baby after her and she assumed he meant Elizabeth and was ‘blindsided’ to use their favorite word when he used her nickname instead.

    • MsIam says:

      That lie is even more stupid than the first. They need to quit while they are behind. If the Queen was fine having one of her horses named Lilibet but not her biracial grandchild? Sounds racist to me whatcha think?

      • Courtney B says:

        Absolutely. Anne, Andrew, Edward, Peter, Zara and William all have a daughter with the name Elizabeth but this is beyond the pale?

        I think they’re floating this version so they don’t look like they’re practically calling her senile. No, this way it’s all sneaky Harry and Meghan playing a fast one. The ONE consistent story is Harry and Meghan’s.

  38. Nancy says:

    I know it’s a small nit to pick but the Queen’s father’s name was Albert. He chose George as his regnal name to honor his father. He actually had a brother named George too, which had to be confusing lol. Richard Kay needs to get his info correct

  39. Courtney B says:

    Harry is playing by the Queen’s grandfather’s rules. He didn’t do ‘never complain, never explain’. There was a false story in 1893, as he was getting married, that he already had a morganatic wife in Malta he was setting aside for a royal bride. It was demonstrably false but still made the press in the UK, Europe and US. It died down until he was crowned. Then it started back up with the added ‘the king’s children are illegitimate’ angle. It was enough for the king who launched a libel suit. The government freaked because he even wanted to take the stand himself. He was talked down from that but the journalist was convicted.

  40. equality says:

    Harry and Meghan’s lawyers jumped on this pretty fast so I am betting it was fully discussed with the Queen before the birth and they have proof. The Queen is able to text and has an iPhone and iPad according to previous reports. I imagine she also writes letters. She possibly has an e-mail account. They could have even recorded the call or zoom with her discussing it. I hope they sue and maybe the BM will get the message once and for all that “palace sources” are not to be trusted. It would also be interesting to see who decides to retire or move abroad afterward. There were months before the birth when they could have discussed this with her. It’s dumb to think that the phone call telling her the baby was born is the only time they would have to tell her.

    • Legalese says:

      I don’t think it was discussed prior to the birth because the Sussexes’ spokesperson stated merely that the Queen was the first member of the family that Harry called after Lili was born and that he had told her that they hoped to name the baby Lilibet in her honor then. There are many reasons why they probably didn’t want to ask prior to the birth, the most likely that they were afraid of a leak. I also have a theory that they were always going to name her Lily and that Lilibet was secondary to that, which is why they didn’t think it was as important to ask earlier – if the Queen said no, they would just name her Lily and it would be totally fine with them. But also, it doesn’t really matter. They DID ask her before announcing, although they didn’t even need her permission anyway.

  41. Alexandria says:

    Yes you’re right of course: racists gonna racist. Professionally, HM still get support and partnerships. I’m happy for them.

    But normal celeb gossip don’t involve allegations from “Palace sources” and “royal experts”. “Palace sources” and “royal experts” lend a veneer of official credibility. HM are not facing mindless celebrity gossip that a neutral reader would read with a pinch of salt and generally dismiss even if they’re not intelligent. HM is facing a constant bombardment of very malicious, insidious reporting meant to dehumanize especially Meghan and the kids. When even the BBC wades in, it is very damaging. The neutral reader who had no opinion may now have a negative opinion.

    Anyway I don’t even know why I’m upset. Sheesh!

    • MsIam says:

      Negative opinion of who? Of Harry and Meghan for naming their baby after Harry’s grandmother? If they do they were never a “neutral” reader in the first place.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      “Palace sources” and “royal experts” do not lend more credibility. Maybe once upon a long time ago. Especially after the Armchair Expert podcast and Dax Shepard’s comments about them-paired with the 4 nitwits that commented on the Oprah interview before it aired, credibility went down the toilet. The BBC has been losing credibility for a while now.

      The insidious reporting by insidious reporters makes the reports/reporters look more insidious-not Harry & Meghan.

  42. Lolo says:

    Another random theory what if during a Zoom call H &M said they were thinking of naming the baby Lily, Eliza or Isabella and HMQ suggested that they should call the baby Lilibet. If HMQ asked them to name the baby Lilibet they could hardly disagree.

  43. L84Tea says:

    “It might even suggest that they don’t actually much like the name Lilibet anyway,’ says one long-standing Palace figure.”

    I was given the name Katharine at birth but my parents always called me Katie from the very start and that’s the name I’ve always used. I guess my parents secretly hated my name??

    • Robin says:

      I don’t think that’s the case, L84Tea. Take heart! I think some parents put the long version of names on birth certificates so the child has the option of using it when he/she grows up and/or as a formal Sunday-best name. My daughter has never been called her long name, but she uses it to announce herself at concerts etc. It’s very sweet and sophisticated when she says it. I remember hearing the Queen has a particular relationship with “Lilibet”. I believe it is restricted to a very few people in her circle, and that the only person who was allowed to call herself beyond that group was her nanny. It’s almost like a name she wants to keep as a memory of childish things, put away before she became so adult.

      • L84Tea says:

        Oh I know, I was just being sarcastic. Their spin on this is just pissing me off because I’m starting to see where it’s heading. They’re implying that they don’t even like the name–hence why they will call her Lili–but want to “cash in” on having the Queen’s nickname as her full name. It’s absolutely ridiculous. As for my own name, I see it as my “on paper” name and have no issue with it. My mom named me after Katharine Hepburn, so I’ve always liked it.

    • Lady D says:

      My son has his formal name because I always planned on calling him by the nickname for it. I rarely think of his name unless I see it on a govt. form.

    • Becks1 says:

      I mean hell William’s wife is Kate (even if we say she’s Catherine now, its clear she was Kate for the majority of her life), Kate’s sister is Pippa, not Philippa, Harry isn’t Henry, Gabriella Windsor goes by Ella, King Edward was known in the family as David, the queen’s father went by Bertie…..

      to act like this family is unfamiliar with the concept of calling someone anything besides their full first name is just ludicrous.

      • L84Tea says:

        Exactly!

      • Becks1 says:

        Just coming back to say that they are suggesting that using a nickname means you don’t like the full name……in the context of H&M using the nickname of the queen!!! What’s the matter, was Elizabeth not good enough?!?!!?!?!!?

      • L4frimaire says:

        Also, Lilibet’s mom is named Rachel. No one has ever called her that. They couldn’t name her Elizabeth because her cousin is Charlotte Elizabeth Diana and there are a dozen other Elizabeth’s in that family. Her name is Lilibet, shall stay Lilibet and she’ll be called Lili. These critics are acting in terribly bad faith and it’s so blatantly obvious. Next they’ll be demanding photos and visits because the poor confused hard of hearing Queen. Losers 🙄.

      • Amelia says:

        And William is ‘Statesman Bill’

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      I’m guessing the long standing palace figure that said that was the statue of Captain Cook.

  44. Robin says:

    Sorry, were you talking bollocks again, Mr Kay?

  45. Heidi Davis says:

    It really does feel like England is another country. I’m in Scotland and nobody cares. They were pretty spicy about W&K coming. The press was nice to them but folks here just rolled their eyes and asked about road closures. The BBC news a few days ago featured a upset lady about the children’s book because something something babies wouldn’t appreciate the topic. Because babies are fine connoisseurs of children’s literature. I’m just saying here this feels like a bunch of unhinged hysterical fragile white men. Calm all the way down little rage dude.

  46. Jaded says:

    Another Keystone Cops cock-up where the RRs and “palace sources” run around in circles making shit up but can’t put one foot in front of the other without falling over their own feet. They will never give up trying anything possible to discredit the Sussexes. And yet they fail every damn time. There’s a lesson they should have learned a long time ago — you can’t put toothpaste back in the tube and H&M, with their impressive team of lawyers, will go to the mat again and again to stop the lies WITH receipts. IF the Queen is hard of hearing (and that’s really scraping the bottom of the lies barrel), do these idiots not understand there’s such a thing called a hearing aid…they’re so small and discreet now that you’d be hard pressed to even see them.

  47. Gretch says:

    I don’t really care for their choice of nicknames for their children anyways.

  48. L4frimaire says:

    Clean up on aisle 3- here comes Richard Kay again. Didn’t they hire some top-notch PR team recently? It shows that no one is listening to them and carrying on as usual with their usual BS because this looks so bad and plain stupid. At first, there were these happy, neutral messages coming from the birth announcement, then it seemed a flip switched because the racists on Twitter and the press got riled up, and the palace are beholden to the press. Al Roker in Today called their BS out and I think we’ve entered the laughingstock stage of this. I was kind of on the fence with the name Lilibet Diana, but it is definitely growing on me. It’s obvious there is a soft power to the name, hence the strong reaction. Loving little Lilibet Diana.

  49. Gk says:

    I agree with the observer, not a good look. I mean majority of people are rolling their eyes about this. Is this how you want the world to perceive the royal family? Getting offended over a baby being named the nickname of her great grandmother?
    Cause it makes me think it’s cause the baby’s not white. Which is even worse then making a big deal out of nothing.

  50. Laugh or Cry says:

    Lies, the queen doesn’t take great care of her great grandchildren’s names, umm Savannah.. 😒

  51. Curious says:

    The queen talks to harry as her grandson, harry is not an employee anymore. its a private matter ,got nothing to do with the firm/courtiers. as queen her whole life is ruled by the courtiers, she can’t even make a public statement without the courtiers permission. i wonder if she even wrote all her tv appearances statements from the time she became queen. There is a chance that Phillip help her when it came to the courtiers . think phillip hated living like that , the courtiers telling them what and how to do this and that . the queen seems to live a very lonely life, she can’t just do anything in public without the courtiers permission. courtiers writing things telling her to sign it for the good of the monarchy,changing this and that laws to fit the monarchy is the courtiers doing, all they need is the queen signature for what they want . harry was right they are all trapped living a life of boredom and strict rules,every moment of the queen life is ruled by the courtiers. no wonder she just spend time with her mother, makes me wonder if the courtiers told her to have 2 more children to prove she and her husband are still in love. i mean if there was any gossip at that time. the courtiers made sure she did her duty .

    • Ania says:

      Do you think courtiers dread upcoming king Charles? Because it doesn’t seem he’ll be so easily „managed”, he has education and experience the Queen lacked.

  52. Mollie says:

    I think you’re right about the courtiers being pissed about not knowing what goes on during Harry’s and the queen’s conversations. Harry and Megan obviously love and respect the Queen. I mean they named their child after her. I bet the Queen knew exactly what her name was and was probably happy about it.

  53. Christine says:

    “There is no doubt that the issue has caused disquiet at the Palace. And the row also comes at a sensitive time for the BBC in the wake of the devastating inquiry into how Martin Bashir secured his Panorama interview with Princess Diana.”

    I cannot with these people.

    Let me get this straight. You, the press, already know that you have ruined this family, and killed Harry’s mother, and our focus should be….on how mad we should be at Harry because he named his daughter after his dead mother and his grandmother??

    “Disquiet at the palace”????? Yes, let’s all pretend for three seconds that whatever palace you are talking about is not already quiet. I am going to feast for days on the image of anyone pretending that any palace is not quiet. FFS, I cannot wait until the next news story about how isolated and alone they all are, while claiming that HARRY, of all people, has effed up their lives.

    Please, you are barely waking up and doing anything useful. As a person who has to wake up every day, take a kid to school, and work, I can promise you, your disquiet is barely a sneeze. Keep going with your words, they really expose your ass.

  54. Jeanette Rushing says:

    Hrh could handle this sooo much better. Why cant she just defend her grandson and shut shut the drama down? Doesn’t she remember how they raked her over the coals for being silent after Diana’s death? Also, they should have tougher rules for gossip leaking to the press from within the household.

  55. Noor says:

    Richard Kay who stirred the pot of controversy is now blaming Prince Harry and Meghan. Double standards, hypocrisy, disingenuous. You name it and Richard got it.

    The tale of the two princesses:
    Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana, protected and privileged
    Lilibet “Lili’ Diana, (no words can describe the horror of the controversy thrown at her for daring to bear the Queen’s nickname.)

    No two great grand daughters of the Queen of England had a radically different reception at birth.

    The ugliest of the commentaries over the naming of Lilli reveal the true heart of England.

  56. Well Wisher says:

    There is a difference between a name and title. The only time the queen had to legally agree for the use of a title from birth was Lili Diana’s three cousin. Their birth certificates included their mother’s name unlike their father and uncle. Princess Diana name was not included because the title was an inheritance from their father. Peter Philips and his sister do not have titles because his father did not accept a title.
    It is passed down from the father, if asked about the ‘application’ a worker at BP will say there was none because Lili’s name is her given name.
    Most likely a senior royal inquired about written legalities concerning the name and was rightfully told there was none because the queen does not have to formally give consent for a beloved grandson to name his daughter after her. She rightfully spoke to the Sussexes and kept it to herself.
    Now the question is who has access to BP and is known to brief against other relatives?
    Why was a recently unemployed royal hack tweeting up a storm? It is known in certain circles that ‘palace source’ is the euphemism for RR minions.
    Why did they not use it but reported on it after the fact as the ‘manufactured’ storm/culture war and toned it way down after Harry engaged legal help for the now familiar harassment?
    Finally, the news of the day was many in Scotland wants an immédiate référendum and the High Court ruling confirming corruption by the Tory government by an official named Grove.
    I never doubted Harry and Meghan, their version of affairs always bear out. If they respect the real Queen: I do.
    It seems that a thought can lead to a certain action, that continued action to an habit, the continued habit becomes destiny.
    This is a habit. They might as well start ‘locking up the silver’ metaphorically speaking.

    H

  57. The Hench says:

    Comment I was responding to vanished so deleted..