‘The Crown’ finally added a disclaimer… to the YouTube description, lmao

Last Thursday, the same day that a head of lettuce outlasted Britain’s prime minister Liz Truss, Netflix released their full-length trailer for The Crown. After months of sniping and crying from Buckingham Palace, the trailer was full of all of the royal drama we’ve been waiting for – Diana and Charles’s separation, the fire at Windsor Castle, the royalshambles that was the House of Windsor in the ‘90s. What was also fascinating about the trailer was that there was no disclaimer or note about “this is a dramatization” or “some elements are fictionalized.” The day after the trailer was released, Netflix added the disclaimer… but only to the YouTube description, not within the actual trailer. LMAO.

Netflix has added a disclaimer to the description for its latest The Crown trailer following a difficult couple of weeks for the royal series.

In the YouTube description below the video for the fifth season trailer, Netflix states: “inspired by real events, this fictional dramatisation tells the story of Queen Elizabeth II and the political and personal events that shaped her reign” .

None of the previous trailers included this disclaimer, instead going straight into a description of the season.

The move comes after two years of lobbying from certain circles including former Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden, who said in late 2020 that a “health warning” should be played before episodes so viewers know the series is a work of fiction. That “health warning” still doesn’t appear in the current trailer, however, only in the YouTube description. Netflix already uses the “fictionalised” line in press materials, on social media and on The Crown’s Netflix landing page.

[From Deadline]

Come on, Netflix knows exactly what they’re doing. They’re “giving” one version of what Buckingham Palace says they want, and by doing it after the trailer dropped, Netflix is extending the story and the beef. “Oh, you said you wanted a disclaimer, well here’s one in the YouTube description, what? Is that not good enough?” They’re poking the bear, only in this case, the “bear” is a new king who believes the best use of his power and authority is masterminding an unhinged campaign against a corporation. It’s going to get so much worse for King Charles III as well – once the Crown comes out and people begin talking about the storylines, my guess is that Charles will be dumb enough to send out people to try to “fact check” the series in nitpicky ways. Netflix will do the same thing they did two years ago: drop receipts. So will other people. There will be hundreds of stories about “did this really happen, well not exactly like that, but here’s what really happened and here’s what Charles said at the time.”

This is also a pretty significant point too – it’s not that the Palace has an issue with only The Crown, they simply don’t want to cooperate with any historian or historical documentary. It is, as always, about control. The Palace wants to be solely in control of their history, their message and what’s said, dramatized and written about their family.

Photos and posters courtesy of Netflix/The Crown.

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

86 Responses to “‘The Crown’ finally added a disclaimer… to the YouTube description, lmao”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. ThatsNotOkay says:

    They should not have bent. Not even a pinky. There is a wave of right-wing extremism and authoritarianism sweeping across the globe. This is a small gripe but can snowball. Every decent person, organization, and institution needs to fight like its and our lives depend on it, because they do.

    • Lolo86lf says:

      I have already filled out my ballot and I will hand deliver it to one the ballot drop off places because I do not trust the mail delivery service and of course I voted for democratic candidates across the board.

    • Eurydice says:

      I don’t see this as bending. The RF isn’t forcing Netflix to cover up or say anything that hasn’t been obvious and true since the first season. The Wikipedia page has always said it’s an historical drama. Basically, it’s a reminder, not a disclaimer.

      • Roo says:

        I am a petty bitch. I would have published a disclaimer that said something like, “ in light of the Royal Family’s immense concerns about this dramatization, we would like to remind everyone that this is a dramatization, albeit one based on real events and real-time evidence.”

        Of course, edited and wordsmithed so it sounds better, but a statement to that effect would have gone out.

    • Sugarhere says:

      @THATSNOTOKAY: Relax, you should relax. Can’t you see this is by far the most useless, uninformative disclaimer of the entiere history of disclaimers 🤭😆?! It reads to me as “Caution, water is wet”.

      Netflix has a sense of humor to which I can relate because I love a good laugh. They complied on the surface, just to silence the wailing and whining, whike being aware their phrasing of this disclaimer barely reads as a proper invitation to tell facts apart from fiction. “Fictional account”, really Netflix? We knew that already. It must be so unsatisfactory for Charles. 👏🏻 Thanks, Netflix for taking the Mickey out of Charles.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Netflix knows how to “capitulate”.lol Originally I was going to say Elmo-your mention of Mickey changed my mind. All that’s missing from the disclaimer is a picture of a Mickey Mouse Band-Aid underneath.

    • Bean says:

      Netflix adding the disclaimer made the national news on the radio and also local radio news. The Crown would never have been mentioned otherwise – they’re getting more free press from this than if they didn’t. Netflix knows exactly what they’re doing.

      • Sugarhere says:

        Additionally, now that the so called disclaimer is released, the episodes are covered by artistic creativity, meaning Netflix cannot be held liable for any portrayal or characterization that might displease Chuck, since the warning is adamant it’s not about Chuck but a loose fictional rewriting, a figment of the writers’ imagination. This disclaimer is a genius move that enables Netflix to spill the dirt under the guise of imaginary whatever.

      • Christine says:

        Agreed, and they are militarizing the sorts of people who fact check for hobby. The royal family is not going to enjoy this, at all, if they attract the sort of people who spend decades online trying to catch serial killers. They don’t get bored and give up, it’s what they do for fun.

    • BeanieBean says:

      That historian’s letter to the Times was certainly disturbing. At the same time, I think the ‘disclaimer’ was a stick in the eye to Charles.

    • Carrie says:

      Agree with That’s not okay.

  2. Noor says:

    It is only right that Netflix add a disclaimer to The Crown fictional series.

    • truthSF says:

      No it’s not. It would’ve been had they been asked to add a disclaimer since S1. But to wait until S4 & 5, when they get to the (mostly factual) ugly part of the series is too little, too late!!

      • JDMyrick says:

        I agree. The BRF should have insisted on the disclaimer in Season 1. KC3 is upset because more people are alive to remember these events and he wants a version that views him in a more favorable light. Netflix shouldn’t have bent. KC3 is the selfish a-hole is he is showing himself to be.

    • TarteAuCitron says:

      The events actually happened, so what’s your point exactly, Noor? Peter Morgan has a long track record in writing about the Royal Family and British politics, and has won multiple awards for his work. Let’s face it, if there were straight-up lies in the script, the Royal Family would have set their lawyers on Netflix. They’ve got nothing other than whining about how this is all so unfair.

      I can live with the writer taking creative licence with the family dialogue scenes, because we cannot know what was said word-for-word in private. But… Charles and Diana were not faithful to each other. This has been a matter of public record for a good +30 years.

      • Tessa says:

        Diana imo went into the marriage in good faith Charles did not. Diana moved on after Charles rejected her.

    • Cessily says:

      I personally do not care what they call The Crown just so long as it is historically accurate and portrays the Royals as they are for the world to see. Evil needs to be exposed and what was done to Princess Diana by C&C was pure evil. The fact that there are people so ignorant that they think a show with actors is an actual documentary on that isle is telling.

    • Lemons says:

      If people wanted a documentary, they would watch that.
      In the same way that Chernobyl is a fictionalized retelling of the explosion, The Crown is a fictionalized retelling of the lives of the royal family and adjacents.

      It’s not hard for anyone to understand that. Most of us will think…”how did that really happen?”, search for it on Google, and then learn that the truth is worse than what was shown on The Crown.

      • AuntRara says:

        Right?? If I were Charles, the *last* thing I would want is people really delving into exactly what is provably true (from video and audio recordings), widely accepted as true (accounts from letters, interviews with friends, etc), and fiction (private conversations that we haven’t heard about before.) I’m no PR expert, but if he asked me, I’d tell him to make *one* comment to a sympathetic journalist about how people have been dramatizing the royal family for hundreds of years and this is yet another bit of royalty-inspired entertainment to add to the pile. The end.

    • Tessa says:

      Charles cooperated with Penny Junor on books that criticized Diana (and showed a lot of bias IMO). And in DImbleby book it was an endless list of people he blamed for his own decisions. THe main thing is he never took responsibility for his own actions but blamed others. If he did not want this situation he should have thought of all this years ago and maybe stepped up and taken responsibility and expressed sorrow for how he behaved. He is frustrated now because he can’t erase the past no matter what.

      • ThisWitchIsntDead says:

        What Charles and Penny Junor did was nothing short of abusing Diana. In her book, she wanted to claim Diana had a personality disorder, but was forced to take it out. So instead, she talks around it and calls Diana crazy while pretending to be impartial, which is even worse than outright lying.

    • May says:

      As you said, it is a fictional series. If Netflix put this in the documentary category, there would be a problem, but everybody already knows this is a drama, one based on real events. There is no need for a disclaimer.

    • Jaded says:

      I’m old. Old enough to have lived through all of the events surrounding Charles and Diana and the breakdown of their marriage. While The Crown’s dialogue cannot be exactly replicated, the events are all accurate, and enough was leaked to understand how toxic the marriage was, how Charles was consistently unfaithful throughout the entirety of it, and the family treated Diana like dirt. It’s only right that Netflix dug in their heels and only put a mild disclaimer on YouTube.

      • Tigerlily says:

        @Jaded. Me too. I remember being appalled at the engagement interview. Charles’s comment about ‘whatever love is’. I thought then that Diana should run but I hoped for the best.

    • Becks1 says:

      1) as others have said, if the BRF had insisted on a disclaimer from Season 1, this would be a different discussion. The issue isn’t the crown, it’s the Crown reminding people of what a POS Charles is. QEII looked good in the series – weak, maybe, emotionally dense, yes. But not bad. Margaret isn’t portrayed that great but it gives context for her behavior and lifestyle. But no one complained then. It’s only when we reached the Diana years that we have seen the scrambling from the Firm about it.

      2) it’s drama. It’s in the drama category on Netflix. It’s not in the documentary section. It doesn’t need a disclaimer bc people are stupid.

    • Emily_C says:

      It’s already under “drama.” A true disclaimer would say that they are FAR kinder to the Windsors than they deserve. Charles in particular has been massively whitewashed.

  3. MaryContrary says:

    The stuff that they don’t want out there is what they said in their own words-interviews that Diana and Charles gave, the leaked phone conversations. Sorry Charles if you feel like it paints you in a bad light that they show you had an affair-but you did!

    • MsIam says:

      Don’t forget books they both cooperated with. It’s ridiculous to pretend like all of this stuff hasn’t been out there for thirty years.

    • Lorelei says:


      “The stuff that they don’t want out there is what they said in their own words”

      And we see the same exact dynamic playing out right now with Harry’s book. They’re SO worried about what might be in it— because they know how poorly behaved they were, and since he witnessed a lot of it, they provided him with enough fodder for a salacious tell-all (even though that’s not even what he’s writing 🙄).

      They can’t have it both ways. If they want to be horrible assholes, fine, but then they need to accept when they’re portrayed that way. Realistically.

      • Sugarhere says:

        @HRH Lorelei,
        Agreed. They get to decide how they treat each other, not what we should think about it or how we ought to comment about it.

  4. Tessa says:

    It was never a problem for them until it got to the Diana episodes. Charles cannot erase his past no matter what.

  5. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    “Inspired by real events” bwahahahaha! Certainly NOT the words that Chuck wanted in the disclaimer! Be careful of what you wish for ! Bwahahahaha!

    • Jennifer says:

      If you wanted to look better, you should have acted bettet!

      • ThisWitchIsntDead says:

        It kills me. Charles is big mad that Netflix is talking about it. HE DID IT! They are just talking about it!

    • Lorelei says:

      Not only that, but ‘real events’ that many, many people still living today remember happening at the time! We lived through it in real time; we know what happened, what he did, what Camilla did, and how he treated Diana. It’s as if he’s trying to convince Netflix to tell people the sky is, in fact, green.

  6. Bettyrose says:

    Philip Murphy’s dropping some truth bombs. Now distinguished scholars are defending Netflix? LOL. Wonder if he got a preview copy of S5.

  7. Tessa says:

    If it were all pro Charles promotions not a sound of protest from the palace.

  8. truthSF says:

    The only thing the RF has succeeded in doing, is getting more ppl to subscribe to Netflix. In the last quarter alone, Netflix got more new subscribers than those they lost during the 3 previous quarters! No way are they ever caving to Chucky III and BM’s demands!!😂

    • Jan90067 says:

      To be fair, Netflix added an “ad supported” tier this month that would lower subscription cost and I think that is what drove most new subscriptions.

      STILL, I DO think more people will subscribe *just* to watch this, then cancel after bingeing. We’ll see if this is the case if the numbers drop in Dec.

      As for me, I just can’t WAIT for 11/9!!

      • Paisley25 says:

        The Netflix ad plans don’t drop until November.

        And I’m also eagerly awaiting November 9th!

  9. C-Shell says:

    Well, then! Done and dusted! This will not forestall CIII and his minions from Streisanding the hell out of this season, but Netflix is over in the corner smirking and counting the bucks they’re saving on marketing and publicity.

    • Eurydice says:

      Huzzah! King Charles has slain the Netflix dragon!!

      It’s weird and hilarious and sad and kind of embarrassing to watch him try to outrun his history.

  10. Mrs. Smith says:

    Lainey said the real disclaimer was casting the handsome Dominic West as Charles. Obviously that’s fiction. 😉

    • Bettyrose says:


    • terra says:

      Truer words.

      But even that was meant as shade directed towards KC3, what with West’s very public cheating scandal and Chucky’s somewhat nebulous friendship with West’s wife.

      Morgan and Netflix both know exactly how to hype this all up. It’s schadenfreude at it’s most delectable, the BRF’s chickens coming home to roost after the way they abused both Diana and Meghan.

      Now, if you’ll please excuse me, I’m off to listen Avenue Q and cackle like a Disney villain.

      • Lux says:

        Charles, this is truly much ado about nothing: Dominic’s will be a sympathetic portrayal. Although he is not an aristocrat himself, his wife IS and the only reason she was probably upset with the Lily James affair was because of his lack of discretion. DW will try to bring humanity to a cheating Charles, because that is simply what they do. If the royals/aristocratic set simply admitted to their centuries-long proclivities, no one would bat an eye at this “drama”. It’s because they try to main clean, “family man” images that everything falls apart.

  11. Amy Bee says:

    It dawned on me why the British press were supporting the Royal Family in this. It’s because the press played a major role in Diana’s torment and death and they don’t want the public to reminded of that as well.

    • ThatsNotOkay says:

      But he’s also a horrible cheater and gaslighter, so was it, in fact, accurate and obvious casting?

  12. seraphina says:

    I would have loved to see a disclaimer such as: In the words of the British monarchy – Never complain and never explain.
    And kudos to Philip Murphy, well said and what sucks for Chuck is there are many of us who still remember his messiness and Cams’. He can’t erase his past or re-write it. Isn’t there still a recording of Tampon-Gate????

  13. Rapunzel says:

    The YouTube wording is in the Netflix description of the series when you go to watch it

    Should Netflix have caved? I don’t really see the wording as a disclaimer as much as a “duh” statement. This disclaimer feels like the “caution: hot” labels on coffee. It’s obviously only there for the stupid.

    • Harper says:

      I thought I saw a follow-up article on the Fail saying Netflix had always described The Crown as a fictional portrayal, so this wording is not new nor is it a win for C-Rex.

      Charles’ and William’s inability to sit and let things play out is going to be their downfall. Their impulsive reactions always make everything worse. Of course, it also makes everything more entertaining.

      • Rapunzel says:

        “I thought I saw a follow-up article on the Fail saying Netflix had always described The Crown as a fictional portrayal, so this wording is not new nor is it a win for C-Rex.”

        This doesn’t surprise me. At all.

      • one of the marys says:

        Two emotionally immature, ego driven men at the helm of this institution cannot steer it through the upheaval that’s coming

      • Lady D says:

        There really isn’t anyone in that family who can steer them out of any crisis, or wants to. They flip between making sure they get what they deserve and being extremely jealous of every other family member. Throw in the staff with way too much power and a family that doesn’t care about one another and watch the downfall of the House of Windsor.

      • Tessa says:

        It shows how dysfunctional treating the “heirs” special is a big mistake. The Queen Mother also apparently had influenced William since she treated him Special just like she treated Charles Unfortunately, all signs are that they are repeating this pattern with George.

  14. Genevieve says:

    I never watched the “Diana in her own words” documentary on Netflix, but I assume that there was a lot of pretty damning stuff in there for the BRF, much more than in The Crown. They should make a follow-up for Charles. That’d make him regret complaining about The Crown.

    • Bettyrose says:

      Give it a watch. I’m not generally a fan of that style of cut and paste documentary but it’s gripping. And uh not fiction. No disclaimer needed.

    • Jan90067 says:

      You should also check out “The Princess” on HBO. It is ALL documents tv clips of Diana, literally only HER voice *telling* what is going on at the time.

      Here’s the official site with a trailer and some info. I *highly* suggest it to anyone who hasn’t seen it yet: https://www.hbo.com/movies/the-princess

      • Becks1 says:

        The Princess is riveting and disturbing. I turned it on one night and my husband got sucked in and when he went to bed (we started it late) he got mad when he found out I watched more of it without him and we had to rewatch the parts he missed the next night LOL. That’s how good it is.

  15. mycatlovestv says:

    To quote a meme: “Nobody gets angrier than a narcissist who is accused of something they actually did.”

  16. HeyKay says:

    All this fuss. It’s a tv show.
    Watch it or don’t.
    I really think’ Charles needs better advisors, if the BRF would lay low and stop shooting out propaganda from every corner, each trying to spin to their advantage, it would be a better look.

    TQ did “never explain, never complain”.

    • Jais says:

      But would he listen to better advisors? I do think his advisors are sycophants that live in a bubble and lack perspective; however even with better advisors, the ego of the king is that he doesn’t have to listen to anyone. Charles is a spoiled 70yr old man-baby king.

    • windyriver says:

      Charles apparently has a legal person on his team now. One of his very recent new advisors, appointed as an assistant private secretary, is John Sorabji, with a background as a barrister and UCL associate law professor. Very interesting. In light of Patrick Murphy’s comments above (and also, things like royal wills being sealed for decades), you have to assume they’re determined to do whatever possible to hide or obfuscate everything going on, and that has gone on, in that family, as much as possible – for the present, and for the future record. No doubt Will will be totally on board with this, he has plenty of his own skeletons to hide.

      Though Charles is out of luck if he thinks throughout his reign there won’t always be people who remember what went on with Diana, and, no matter how hard he tries to scrub her past, that the QC started as (one of) his sidechicks. He’d have done better to hire/listen to a top notch PR person. Anyone with even half the brains of commenters here would have made much better choices over the last year than KC has.

  17. Brassy Rebel says:

    I love Philip Murphy, an actual HISTORIAN, saying that if the royals lock the archives and cherry pick what researchers can see, they have delivered the perfect set up to dramatists. The royals are getting exactly what they deserve here.

    They won’t even allow Andrew Lownie access to the Mountbatten papers. What are we supposed to think but that Charles’ mentor was yet another nonce?

    • Size Does Matter says:

      That’s the thing – they’re all nonces. Elizabeth seems to be the only one of the bunch who put duty to the crown before personal desire, at the expense of her personal relationships. It must be a difficult balance between robotic devotion to an institution and individual passion.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        And obviously, since they won’t allow access to the papers, that means that the family has known about Louis Mountbatten’s predilections for decades and continued to tout him as a valued family member.

    • Emily_C says:

      Charles was besties with a couple of the worst nonces, including one who raped disabled girls (and basically every female of any age he could get his hands on.) Everyone knew about it. Charles thinks that behavior is fine.

  18. aquarius64 says:

    The BRF is really afraid is that people will see similarities to how Meghan has been treated and damaged the royal image even further.

    • Lola says:

      True. Joke is KC3 and the royals acted so horrifically during Betty’s funeral week toward Harry & Meghan that the royals pretty much confirmed everything that and Harry & Meghan have said about their treatment and led loads of people to assume their treatment was much worse than they’d previously imagined.

      TL;DR. The bad press the BRF is getting isn’t bc of Season 5 of The Crown. The BRF has acted horribly recently & Betty’s not alive to shield them.

  19. Lissen says:

    Netflix threw a sop to soothe a cranky child in the midst of a tantrum. It’s not a loss for them; nor did they blink. The BRF haven’t won a thing. The Crown will still screen as planned. People will still see all the evil (dramatized) that happened. As for the disclaimer – a bagatelle.

    Hisses to the lobbyists. Question: are those so-called “honours” worth your personal honour?

    Kudos to Philip Murphy, a real historian, for speaking truth. There’s a man with a sense of his personal honour.

    • Chrissy says:

      Yes. When Judi Dench complained last week, I found myself really disappointed in her. Ever heard of ‘freedom of speech’, madam? Her action started a wave of ‘titled’ actors speaking out, all of whom proved that their support was bought and paid for by the RF. Shame on them!

    • Carrie says:

      But the RF toadies WILL see it as Netflix blinking. Very disappointed in Netflix.

  20. Jay says:

    King Charles calling in so many favours to request that a disclaimer be added to this season of Netflix tells us a lot about what he worries about (people being reminded of what a little turd he is) but also demonstrates that he doesn’t have a clue when it comes to newer forms of media. Getting Dame Judy and a former prime minister to speak up for you doesn’t hold the kind of sway on public opinion it used to.

    And so what if Charles did succeed in adding a “fiction” tag to the whole series? What would that do? We know these are actors, the series has been on for many years now – People are not going to interpret the story any differently if it has a label. It just draws more attention to the controversy. He’s sort of stuck in the “war of the Wales” model, where he uses his increased power over traditional media to place stories in exchange for access. But the media landscape has changed dramatically over the last thirty years – Charles has not.

    Unless he was willing to preempt The Crown and put out his own version of all of the events, from his own point of view, no matter how painful and embarrassing, I don’t see how he can hope to quash it.

  21. Michele says:

    LOL … the final, final season/series will be called “The Crown & Netflix.” The trailer will consist of meltdowns by KC3 with The Crown executives and writers sitting in various coffee houses, bars, and Appleby’s laughing their asses off discussing how they’ll handle the situation. There will be a disclaimer and the casting for the exec’s and writers will include Clooney, Rob Morgan, Kim Min-Hee, Oscar Isaac, etc.

    • jjva says:

      omg the Applebee’s sent me <3

    • Just me says:

      It would be a shame if everyone watched the crown over and over – even if it was playing while we are at work or doing other things to drive up numbers . The BRF will flip out when it’s the number 1 watched show ever.

      • Michele says:

        I have a feeling it will be the #1 watched show without having to do anything. I will, however, be watching the last season as a run up to 11/9.

  22. CC says:

    Charles is just lucky to be monarch at a time when the biggest problem his nation faces is the impertinence of Netflix!

    • QuiteContrary says:

      That’s what makes Charles such an idiot (well this and much of what he’s done his whole adult life). There is so much more he should be worrying about

  23. Jaded says:

    Charles, The Firm and sychophantic royal commentators opened Pandora’s Box with all this whining. KCIII just needs to shut up and do some real work. His reign is going to be an abject failure if this is how he’s starting out — having a wobbly about pens and getting pushy with Netflix.

  24. NEENA ZEE says:

    I know it’s not a documentary. I love that it’s dramatized for entertainment purposes. I don’t care if it’s 100% accurate. No disclaimer needed IMO.

  25. HeyKay says:

    Jais, holy cats, did I laugh at your “Charles is a 70 year old man-baby king” 😀
    You have just explained Charles, William and Andrew completely.

    Personally, I can’t watch the real Diana in anything.
    I truly thought Diana was done wrong by The BRF.
    She was a 19 y/o thrown into a pack of wolves.

    I am her age, C&D married on my birthday, she had her children about the same time as myself, she was finding her way after a bad marriage, (me too) she adored her sons, (me too) who brutally lost their Mum too soon. (me too)
    Harry is completely correct that no child should be made to do a world wide public walk behind his Mothers casket.

    Now, having said all that, “Down with Charles!” “End The Monarchy!”

  26. Linney says:

    I think the BRF cherry pick what they complain about and what they do their “stiff upper lip” routine about. Harry and Meghan were told to shut up and not complain, that it was undignified and not the royal way. Yet here we have the Holy Father (aka Charles III) flipping out alongside Prince Petulance over a television show. So which is it? Stay silent and carry on or complain when you feel like it? One of the biggest problems with the BRF is that they are so blatantly inconsisent and hypocritical. As individuals, we can all be inconsistent. But when we are talking about a huge institution with every lawyer and adviser under the sun, and that institution keeps twisting and turning depending on the moment, then the whole thing looks foolish. Willam and Charles don’t get that their fit-throwing makes them look awful. I think they believe their fits and demands make them look kingly. Here’s an idea. How about they just focus on their “work”, William and Kate step up their minimal efforts (I know, they are just about to/keen to come into their own) and try to serve their country. All this constant whining and attempts to throw their weight around over personal grievances has gotten old.