How not to adhere to the Royal Family's social media community guidelines 2 years ago

How not to adhere to the Royal Family's social media community guidelines

RIP banter, u are wiv da angles now x

It's a sad day for internet trolls as Kensington Palace has just published its social community guidelines.


Basically, they're trying to create a safe space online where people are respectful towards each other and the Royals themselves.

This will undoubtedly see an end to internet pests worldwide doing their utmost to go viral at the expense of the Royals.

Although these guidelines aren't enforced by law, it's expected that users will strictly adhere to them because it is simply the right thing to do. Banter has therefore been laid to rest today, Monday 4th March 2019, as of 10.14am.


Evidently, there's a number of things which are now out of bounds. As we all know, the best way to learn is through demonstration and practice. For the sake of clarification, I will now demonstrate precisely what is no longer acceptable.

Supposing one of the various Royal Family social channels posted the following image online:

Here we see Queen Elizabeth II innocently perusing an old restored film on a computer screen during a visit to the British Film Institute. An acceptable response to this image would be "Lovely", "What a wonderful picture" or even if you wanted to push the boat out a smidge, "Yaas Queen, slay".


Here is an example of an inappropriate response:

The above image has been altered to make it seem as though the young gentleman is showing Her Majesty a photograph in which one of her corgis is driving the car. This is disrespectful because corgis cannot drive, nor would The Queen ever be taking lifts without a booster seat in place so that she can see over the dashboard.

This is a defamatory reply. It damages Her Majesty's reputation as a perfectly competent driver, as well as the dog as it appears to be driving without a seatbelt on. Also, The Queen is far taller than the picture suggests. Rightfully, your account would be suspended for posting a reply of that ilk.


Let's revisit the time Kensington Palace shared the Cambridges' Christmas card photograph.

A suitable response would be "Wonderful", "Merry Christmas to all!" or even "Diana would be so proud xx", if you're an absolute lunatic.

What you should not, under any circumstances, reply with, is the following:


Yes, I understand that they were practically begging for interference by providing what is essentially a blank canvas background, but you must resist the temptation because it is strictly forbidden from now on.

No, stop this. You cannot put them underwater either. None of the Royals, to the best of my knowledge, have the ability to scuba dive or engage in some deep space exploration. You are misleading the public. You are making a mockery of these innocent victims. Those dolphins would never swim idly by the Cambridges, they would stop and stare, contemplating asking for selfies depending on the Royals' perceived willingness to oblige. Do not ever do this kind of image manipulation. Ever.

What about the comments section? Let's pretend the following image was posted to the Royal Family's social channel:

Here we see Prime Minister Theresa May curtseying before the Queen, alongside Boris Johnson and Amber Rudd. An acceptable comment as per the terms of the social media guidelines would be "Okay" or "Sure".

What you cannot do is write something like "Has a condom factory exploded entirely upon the confines of that man's head?" or "THERESA MAY NEEDS A WEE", as these comments are off-topic, irrelevant and unintelligible, probably. You would be likely to face capital punishment as a result.

Let's explore another platform:

This image is dangerous for two reasons. Firstly, it is implying that Her Majesty The Queen has Snapchat, which she famously does not as she finds it hard to maintain a streak with her BFFs. Secondly, it is aligning the Royals with a brand. They would never engage in sponsored content for Uber because they hate the Germans and also they are stinking rich with a fleet of cars and other modes of transportation ready to take them anywhere in the world at a moment's notice.

Should you create an image such as the one seen above and choose to share it online, beware that you are violating the terms of the Royal Family's social media community guidelines and may have to suffer the as yet unspecified consequences, such as guillotining or refusal to entry at Thorpe Park.

It's important to note that regardless of the fact that he is not a thoroughbred Royal, Prince Philip is still out of bounds.

The above image, being used for demonstrative purposes only, must never be circulated online. It is a hoax. His Majesty would never, under any circumstances, knowingly unveil a drawing of a penis with wings, standing back to marvel at its staggering accuracy, visibly impressed. This image is sexually explicit and would therefore result in you being blocked by the official Royal social media accounts. Would it be worth it? Absolutely, yes. But it is wrong.

What about that time Prince William willingly galloped on the Royal Variety Performance?

It's entirely fine to share the image, as it's an accurate depiction of what happened. But what isn't entirely fine is manipulating the image into a set of circumstances that are blatantly untrue.

Prince William did not take part in Cheltenham, and if he did, he certainly wouldn't be in third place. Prince William is famously nimble when cosplaying as a horse. He would be a frontrunner from the outset. The above image has been blatantly doctored for those reasons, and heavily breaches the terms of the guidelines.

Collating all of the data presented above, it's likely that you'll feel overwhelmed.

Remember, today is day one. The Royal Family's social media community guidelines have only been released mere hours ago. It's going to take a lot of time to get used to them.

But stay positive. Be vigilant. With the right amount of determination, you'll learn not to make fun of these very easy targets.