Why do the press continue to refer to the Duchess of Cambridge as ‘Kate Middleton’?
Two years ago yesterday, Catherine Elizabeth Middleton married Prince William. Euphoria reigned throughout the land and 26 million are said to have watched the ceremony in Britain alone.
Two stories to keep beside you
Picture of the Week: Middleton and Mills
Matthew Steeples suggests Pippa Middleton deserves to be pitied after being pictured with Heather Mills
Crown Chaos
Matthew Steeples highlights the incompetence of the CPS after witnessing a trial for an assault on his person fail due to their ineptitude and inability to file the correct paperwork On 23rd April 2016, I was the victim of an unprovoked attack outside Coya, an upscale Mayfair dining spot. Yesterday, nearly a year later, […]
Miss Middleton, as she then was, moved from being a ‘commoner’ into the realms of royalty and eventually she is expected to become queen consort.
Though the Middleton family are neither aristocratic or royal, their daughter has in fact been Her Royal Highness Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, Baroness Carrickfergus since 29th April 2011. She is no longer “Kate Middleton” and the media truly should cease referring to her as such.
Readers have their say
11 comments
My take on her being called ‘Kate Middleton’ as opposed to Duchess/Countess/Baroness or any other esss. is the ‘media’ (do you mean the Daily Mail when you say this?) want us to feel that she is ‘one of us’ – whatever and whoever ‘us’ is. So she’s not ‘common’ but she’s got the ‘common touch’. And that, in effect we know her, as being ‘one of us’. I don’t know anything about her. What’s shown and written in the press is what the Palace want us to see so that may not be ‘her’, the true ‘Kate’ at all. She is beautiful and those I know who have met her pre marrying William said she was ‘very quiet’. That’s really all they said about her ‘very quiet’. She couldn’t have been that dull, but they say it’s always the quiet ones…..
You are quite right. People should learn some respect.
I agree 100%.
Does anyone really care? The royals cost this country far too much and should be scrapped.
Finally – Some sense. I cringe every time I see the name “Kate Middleton” in print not because I don’t like her (I actually think she is wonderful and elegant) but because indeed that is no longer her name. Get it right Daily Mail.
“Euphoria reigned”? Are you mad? A real man would have said how disgusted he was at such an obscene spectacle. The royals are liggers.
I’m not a believer in royalty for modern progressive democratic nations – but I suppose if you’re going to have it, you may as follow the protocols.
I had never really thought about it, but it is interesting. She’s not Princess Kate, and Princess William sounds peculiar (at least to American ears)… and Duchess seems sort of old and stuffy. Surprised, though, as I thought this title stuff was important to a lot of people. Sarah is probably right that the media outlets do it because it reinforces the “common, one of us” aspect.
Personally I couldn’t give a damn – I’d rather we got rid of them – I really don’t like being a subject!
She should be referred to in her appropriate title. Does anyone ever pause when they say “Prince William” or “Prince Harry?” They don’t just call them Bill and Harry.. nor should they refer to royalty in her previous name. Perhaps they could call her the “Duchess Formerly Known as Kate Middleton.”
Since we style professionals properly, why not royalty? I think it stigmatizes her as an outsider, making her not a full royal — might as well style her as “Kate Middleton, the former commoner, …”