Royal Family and Associates as 'Influencers': The Diana Drama as Content Marketing
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/profile/marinahyde. "Earl Spencer SLATES the king. Charles DESTROYS Spencer. If only Diana were here to click on it | Marina Hyde | The Guardian." September 18, 2026. www.theguardian.com
The Gist
Marina Hyde argues that the royal family's public feuding over Earl Spencer's tell-all book about Diana is basically the same as internet influencer drama - full of fake modesty, strategic timing for profit, and dramatic statements that claim high-minded motives while clearly being about money and attention. She points out how both Spencer and the Palace use the exact same tactics and language patterns you'd see in a petty online beef between social media creators, just dressed up in royal language.
Conclusion
The royal family and those connected to them (Earl Spencer, King Charles, Prince Harry) behave essentially as social media influencers, packaging private grief and family conflict as consumable content while claiming higher, altruistic motives.
Premises
- Earl Spencer released a tell-all book about Diana with sensational claims (e.g., Charles sounding 'giddily elated' after her death), timed strategically for maximum commercial impact (serialization rights, Christmas sales)
- Buckingham Palace's statement claiming 'we do not comment on books as a matter of principle' immediately proceeded to comment extensively, mirroring the performative non-denial tactics common in online influencer disputes
- The rhetorical style used by both the Palace and Spencer (pompous, aggrieved language about 'fraternal grief' clouding judgment) is indistinguishable from typical low-brow social media 'beef' rhetoric
- Spencer frames his commercially lucrative book as a 'simple tribute' to his sister, despite it being a major publishing house's lead autumn title
- There is a broader pattern of people financially benefiting from Diana's legacy (psychics, actors, family members) claiming her spiritual approval for their ventures
- Prince Harry's public statements about his memoir causing global 'reconciliation' follow the same pattern of framing profit-driven content as altruistic mission
Assumptions
- Genuine grief and commercial exploitation cannot coexist authentically - if profit motive exists, claims of pure tribute are suspect or contradictory
- The rhetorical patterns and tactics used in celebrity/influencer online disputes are a valid comparison point for evaluating royal family communications
- Public statements claiming disinterest in commentary (while commenting) reveal insincerity or strategic performance rather than genuine reluctance
- readers/audience will recognize and find compelling the parallel between royal drama and lower-status influencer culture
- The commercial success of the book/statements is evidence of, rather than incidental to, cynical motive