Are some oublications/people deliberately encouraging incorrect ideas about the Royal Family?

[sunstreaming]

In the UK we live in a constitutional monarchy, whether we like it or not. It's worrying that many people, even UK citizens, don't seem to understand what this means: e.g. As Camilla is married to the King, her title is 'Queen'. You might disapprove of her conduct in her earlier life but our constitution doesn't state that the Queen has to be popular or approved of. She is the King's wife. Another example is people not understanding that Queen Victoria and Queens Elizabeth 1 and 2 were Queen Regnant,, in other words, they were the monarchs. Queen Elizabeth later known as The Queen Mother and Queen Camilla are and are Queen Consorts - wives of the King. The latter isn't 'ruling' over us, her title merely mean s she's married to the King.
There are some very dodgy and incorrect ideas going around, e.g. that prince William expressed disapproval of the way an Air Force officer looked at the Princess of Wales. Pretty difficult for him to do as he wasn't there!
Some publications, which I assume are from overseas, regularly report that members of the Royal Family 'died today', nonsense such as a picture of Camilla holding a photograph of a pregnancy scan and announcing her pregnancy (she is around 80 years of age!) and many reports of the mona=rchy being 'rocked' by something or other, the country being 'stunned', the Palace being in uproar. All written in a similar hyperbolic style.
While you could regard these as obvious nonsense and disregard them, I think such stories make any rational discussion of what the Monarchy should or should not do/how they should be renumerated by the taxpayer and how we should treat them, almost impossible.

I’m far more concerned by the posters on here who appear to think that arguments for dismantling the monarchy and replacing it with an elected HoS are sufficiently answered by ‘Better than President Trump/Blair/ BoJo!’

For most people, especially young people, the monarchy is an irrelevance. Social media, AI, and Russian bots create and distribute content to misinform and distabilise the west. The tabloids cook up stories for clicks.

You realise that the 'shock' stories you are talking about aren't published by legitimate news publications though?

Some stories are put out to try to damage the monarchy/UK stability. Security analysts found there was a Russian bot network spreading many of the conspiracy theories around Kate's illness.

However, the majority of nonsense stories are created to make money through advertising clicks.

It is a combination of factors but IMHO, the underlying issue is the devaluation of truth in our broader society.

It used to be a clearly bad thing to lie or to make up blatant falsehoods. I date from the dinosaur era where public figures resigned or suffered significant career penalties after being caught lying.

Now, we live in an age of alternative truth and "my" truth. If a media figure wants more clicks and views and decides to generate outrageous stories for clicks and views...the upside is more money and the downside is no consequences. Given these incentives, why wouldn't they lie?

Other media creators and bots from nations that are unfriendly to the UK can amplify negative messages about all members of the royal family as drama attracts an audience. E.g. Colbert, a mainstream US comedian amplified the pile-on in "Where is Kate" as did Russian bots, each entity for different reasons but the end results was the amplification of lies and the targeting of a public figure who was ill.

If people think the RF do not command respect and lead by example, they will be indifferent to or dislike their existence, whether or not bots or whoever plot against them.