• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Media incorrect use of royal titles?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,385
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
On the ITV "Good Morning, Britain" programme this morning, the female presenter made reference to "Prince Andrew" when discussing a hypothetical extradition procedure, that would compel extradition to the USA to testify in the Epstein saga.

I assumed that the title of "Prince" no longer applied to the person in question.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
9,303
Location
Somerset
It doesn’t. Unfortunately, the importance of checking facts, as well as accuracy of spelling or grammar, seems to be going out of fashion lest someone who has made a mistake has their feelings hurt.
 

Lewisham2221

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2005
Messages
2,750
Location
Staffordshire
It doesn’t. Unfortunately, the importance of checking facts, as well as accuracy of spelling or grammar, seems to be going out of fashion lest someone who has made a mistake has their feelings hurt.
Spelling, grammar and fact checking don't really apply to somebody making a slip-up when talking about somebody who was indeed known as "Prince Andrew" for decades. There were plenty of slip-ups refering to the King as "Prince Charles" in the early part of his reign.
 

DelW

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2015
Messages
5,934
Spelling, grammar and fact checking don't really apply to somebody making a slip-up when talking about somebody who was indeed known as "Prince Andrew" for decades. There were plenty of slip-ups refering to the King as "Prince Charles" in the early part of his reign.
It took me quite a while to get accustomed to the idea that "the Queen" meant Camilla not Elizabeth II.

For Andrew, I like the usage of "the Andrew formerly known as Prince" :D
 

Western Lord

Member
Joined
17 Mar 2014
Messages
1,058
At least Andrew was a bona fide Prince. The one that always grates with me is the fictional Princess Diana. There was no such person, she derived her title from her husband, thus Princess of Wales. If Prince Charles had not had any other title she would have been Princess Charles, as with Princess Michael of Kent. Another one that annoys me is the wife of a Knight being described as Lady (first name). If Joe Bloggs is knighted he is Sir Joe Bloggs, his wife, Gladys, is Lady Bloggs, not Lady Gladys. To be Lady Gladys she would have to have been the daughter of a Duke or Earl (as with the former Princess of Wales who was Lady Diana Spencer). So there!
 

SuspectUsual

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
6,664
I still find myself referring to a friend of mine as being a QC, rather than a KC

She just says "its easy to remember - QC was a rubbish sherry, KC are people like me and Cherie"
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,316
Spelling, grammar and fact checking don't really apply to somebody making a slip-up when talking about somebody who was indeed known as "Prince Andrew" for decades. There were plenty of slip-ups refering to the King as "Prince Charles" in the early part of his reign.
Yes. Some things you do/say regularly become inbuilt habits. It took me aa while to remember that "God Save The Queen" was no longer the National Anthem. Any many years ago, it took me a few weeks to remember that I no longer needed to wear a school cap.
 

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,956
Location
York
If “Prince” is a title you get by being the child of the right parents, then how can you be deprived of it? (Except by legislation affecting all aristocratic titles, as happened in some countries after WW1.) There were quite enough black sheep children of noble houses in past times, but people didn’t claim to be able to strip them of their titles.
 

Gloster

Veteran Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
12,940
Location
Up the creek
Andrew lost his right to be called Prince or to use the style His Royal Highness after Charles issued Letters Patent ordering that. There are some who get the title automatically and Andrew may have been one of those, as the son of a monarch, but I don’t think that that removes the possibility of it being removed. The rules do seem, as with so much concerning the Royal family, altered and made up to suit whatever is in their best interests at the time. Basically it seems that such titles are given by a monarch and can be taken away by a monarch, so doing something highly symbolic like this to Andrew was probably considered best at the time.
 

contrex

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2009
Messages
1,654
Location
St Werburghs, Bristol
It took me quite a while to get accustomed to the idea that "the Queen" meant Camilla not Elizabeth II.
My wife semi-humorously pretends to have still not done that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The one that always grates with me is the fictional Princess Diana.
In the 2001 French film Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain, there is the son of a greengrocer who is obsessed with 'Lady Di', and both he and his father call her 'Laddy Dee' as if she had been French. My wife and I promptly started saying her name that way, and we still do, not that we ever have much need to talk about her. I recall that in the immediate aftermath of her death, Radio 4 news interviewers did vox-pops around London, and a not-negligible number of those who spoke appeared to think that her name was 'Diane'. It has just struck me that this may have been because they regarded the name Diana as impossibly upper-class and they somehow mentally decided to adopt her as 'the people's princess' (yuck) by making her name more demotic. I think that is a bit fanciful, though. They might as well have called her 'Princess Sharon'.
 
Last edited:

Lewisham2221

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2005
Messages
2,750
Location
Staffordshire
Our own foibles are personal to us, but a very highly paid presenter on a TV programme should be ready prepared and totally professional, as befits their salary.
Is this the first time you've ever watched television? TV presenters fumble their lines all the time - they are human, after all.
 

contrex

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2009
Messages
1,654
Location
St Werburghs, Bristol
I don't know if this is exactly 'misuse' of titles or 'excessive use', but I worked with someone who couldn't just say 'the Queen', it was always 'Her Majesty The Queen', said in a kind of 'worshipful' voice. I know they do it on the BBC, but this was just a bloke chatting with his colleagues. Mind you, he was weird.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Is this the first time you've ever watched television? TV presenters fumble their lines all the time - they are human, after all.
I call them 'Colemanballs' like Private Eye. DC was not responsible for 'Harry Commentator was your Carpenter', that was attributed to Frank Bough. DC did say 'the line-up for the final of the women's 400 metres hurdles includes three Russians, two East Germans, a Pole, a Swede and a Frenchman'.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,385
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Is this the first time you've ever watched television? TV presenters fumble their lines all the time - they are human, after all.
Other highly-paid professional people, such as a Prosecuting Council, are precise to the extreme. They too are human.

TV presenters who act in the manner to which you allude should not be holding their current roles, the same should also apply to those highly-paid television executives who employ the poor quality presentation staff.
 

transportphoto

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Quizmaster
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Messages
5,554
The other reflection is that I’d suggest that Good Morning Britain is more of a magazine/sensationalist format news programme. It may be that it was intentional.
 

Trackman

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2013
Messages
4,244
Location
Lewisham
It took me quite a while to get accustomed to the idea that "the Queen" meant Camilla not Elizabeth II.
Still can't get my head around this.
Prince Phillip could never be king because of the Queen's (EII) status - because King beats Queen (so to speak!)
 

EYFanatic

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2025
Messages
621
Location
Hell's Dungeon
Still can't get my head around this.
Prince Phillip could never be king because of the Queen's (EII) status - because King beats Queen (so to speak!)
Not when his wife was monarch, but he could have been King - he just would have needed all 465 persons ahead of him to have died first (he was actually in the order from The Boss downwards according to the Court Circulars)

My small issue with incorrect titles, if one can stretch the point a little, is media not using the HMS prefix to refer to one of His Majesty's war canoes
 

contrex

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2009
Messages
1,654
Location
St Werburghs, Bristol
Not when his wife was monarch, but he could have been King - he just would have needed all 465 persons ahead of him to have died first (he was actually in the order from The Boss downwards according to the Court Circulars)

My small issue with incorrect titles, if one can stretch the point a little, is media not using the HMS prefix to refer to one of His Majesty's war canoes
I am quite happy about the relaxation of what has been called the 'British Shinto' (Royal-worship). It was absurdly pronounced during my youth (I am over 70).
 

pitdiver

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2012
Messages
1,276
Location
Warsop Vale
The error that really annoys me is "Princess Kate" when referring to the Princess of Wales. I think the perpetrators should be put in the Tower of London!
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
17,787
Location
Epsom
What really grates with me is when someone puts HRH in front of the King / Queen... Totally incorrect; it should be HM.
 

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
2,108
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
What really grates with me is when someone puts HRH in front of the King / Queen... Totally incorrect; it should be HM.

On the BBC News website, it quite regularly happens that there's an item involving Lord X or Sir James Y, and they appear under their correct titles at the beginning. But later in the item there'll be a reference to Mr X or Mr Y.

These mistakes are easy to spot and correct. If no-one bothers to check for such simple mistakes, I wonder how many factual inaccuracies there may be in the story, less easy to identify, which have also gone uncorrected. Perhaps all the sub-editors' efforts went into concocting an attention-grabbing and frequently misleading headline.
 

contrex

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2009
Messages
1,654
Location
St Werburghs, Bristol
The Guardian today said that a 'Wuthering Heights' film of 1992 starred Ralph Fiennes and 'Juliet Binoche'. Clearly the reporter was no reader of Cahiers du Cinéma.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
3,260
Location
North West
I still find myself referring to a friend of mine as being a QC, rather than a KC

She just says "its easy to remember - QC was a rubbish sherry, KC are people like me and Cherie"
If she doesn't like KC & the Sunshine Band she will welcome you calling her QC instead :lol:

Talking of Good Morning Britain, they did once yesterday have a strapline Caroline Flint MP. She ceased to be an MP in 2019.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top