I stan Actress Kim Yeri

Sleep on your bed but never sleep on Yeri

[༺𝐻𝑅𝐻 𝐿𝒶𝒹𝓎 𝒥༻ 👑 @HRHLadyJ]

The Daily Mail’s Royal Vendetta: A Month of Smears on William and Catherine, Followed by Crocodile Tears

In the sweltering heat of August and September 2025, the @DailyMail unleashed a torrent of vitriol against Prince William, Catherine, the Princess of Wales, and even King Charles III. What began as whispers about a family home move quickly snowballed into a full-scale assault: accusations of “control freak” tendencies, “underwhelming” duties, a “dark past” tied to slavery, and hints of irreparable rifts. Collages of headlines tell the story — dozens of pieces from the Mail’s royal “hit squad,” peddling speculation as fact, while royal watchers cried “propaganda!” after every drop.

This wasn’t journalism. It was SEO warfare dressed up as reporting, cynically timed to ride search trends like “William lazy,” “Kate health,” and “Charles succession,” while dangling glowing comparisons to bait Sussex fans. The Mail’s royal desk has turned itself into a digital sweatshop where outrage is the currency. Every article is deliberately contradictory — William is “too private” one day, “too performative” the next; Catherine is “influential but holding him back”; Charles is “weak but meddling.” Why? Because conflict sells. Rage-clicks fill MailOnline’s coffers. It’s the business model of chaos — and chaos is the coin of their grubby little realm.

Now, in a twist worthy of their own soap-opera scripts, two of the Mail’s most prolific royal scribblers— Rebecca English and Richard Eden —have pivoted to pearl-clutching exposés about a “sinister plot” and “calculated wedge” undermining William and Catherine. It’s laughable. These aren’t brave whistleblowers; they’re architects of the very narrative they’re now decrying. The Daily Mail didn’t just report the hate—they manufactured it, weaponised it, monetised it, and now want to wash their hands as if they were bystanders.

It’s the Fleet Street equivalent of throwing petrol on a bonfire, then sobbing that one’s eyebrows got singed.

The Mail’s hypocrisy is breathtaking. For weeks, they ran columns dripping with Sussex apologia — Griffiths acting as Harry’s stenographer and Platell recycling Meghan’s grievances as “concerns,” and A.N. Wilson psychoanalysing William from his study like some amateur Freud-for-hire. All this while YouTube commenters and even their own readers blasted their Royals channel as “toxic propaganda.” But rather than adjust course, they doubled down — until subscribers fled and advertisers grew squeamish. Only then did the pivot to victimhood begin. One could almost hear the gnashing of teeth in Kensington High Street.

Let’s expose the rot at the heart of this tabloid machine — how they orchestrated the smears, gamed the algorithms, amplified Sussex narratives, twisted facts into weapons, and how their financial decline drives the cruelty.

The curtain must be pulled back, and the stagehands caught red-handed, script in one hand, calculator in the other.

The Hit Parade: A Catalogue of Calculated Cruelty

From 1 August to 27 September 2025, the Daily Mail’s royal desk became a factory for anti-Wales ammunition, deploying a multi-pronged strategy: recycle old grudges into fresh headlines, cherry-pick data to misrepresent workloads, sensationalise historical trivia, and frame every decision as evidence of impending royal collapse.

The trigger? William and Catherine’s pragmatic decision to relocate from Adelaide Cottage to Forest Lodge on the Sandringham estate — a “forever home” for family stability amid Catherine’s cancer recovery and global threats. What should have been a non-story morphed into “proof” of William’s fatal flaws: too private, too lazy, too “woke,” too everything. In short, too damned convenient for the Mail’s search engine tinkering.

This was not random. The Mail runs on click-chains: one “exclusive” generates spinoffs, which are then linked in sidebars, ensuring readers never escape the outrage cycle. Eviction headlines lead into slavery history “revelations,” which link to workload hit pieces, which in turn promote YouTube debate clips. It is algorithmic entrapment sold as news — a kind of journalistic mousetrap baited with bile.

Here’s the rogue’s gallery of the worst offenders, their pieces dripping with pro-Sussex favoritism and wild conjecture, broken down by tactic:

• Amanda Platell (Columnist): On 20 August, Platell sneered at William’s “puny” 71 engagements, cherry-picking incomplete 2024 figures and ignoring health crises in the family. She compared him unfavourably to Princess Anne and accused him of making the Firm “pure vanilla.” Platell’s column was SEO-stuffed with phrases like “workshy heir” and “royal crisis” — all designed to trend on Google and bait shares. Her follow-ups even recycled Meghan’s old “baby brain” anecdote as if it were fresh ammunition. This isn’t journalism; it’s content farming — and farming in barren soil at that.

• Christopher Wilson (Historian/Columnist): On 23 August, Wilson exhumed Forest Lodge’s “dark past,” weaponising obscure history to frame William and Catherine as morally negligent. The piece was algorithmically tied to MailOnline’s “slavery legacy” tag — the same tag used to cover Netflix’s colonial dramas. It wasn’t about informing readers; it was about capturing traffic off unrelated cultural debates. Like a ghoul rifling through parish records for sport.

• A.N. Wilson (Royal Author): On 19 September, he declared William “angry and unhappy,” citing outdated stats and palace whispers. But more insidious was the Mail’s packaging: push alerts framed it as a “shock diagnosis,” with sidebars linking to Sussex puff pieces. William’s Earthshot success was buried, Harry’s “fun scamp” antics headlined. Manipulation by design, as brazen as a conjurer’s sleight of hand.

• Charlotte Griffiths (Royal Correspondent): On 13 September, Griffiths painted William as the villain blocking Harry’s reconciliation. Her reliance on “anonymous sources” was classic Mail — unverifiable quotes crafted to fuel fan wars online. Each story was cross-promoted under MailOnline’s “Sussex comeback” hub, ensuring clicks from both sides of the aisle. Division is profitable, and she is its clerk of works.

• Liz Jones (Columnist): On 5 September, Jones targeted Kate’s “bronde” hair during a visit to the Natural History Museum gardens, mixing sharp critique with grudging praise. Trolls called the lighter shade “washed out” or a “wig,” but Jones framed it as smart and empowering, signalling Kate’s post-cancer confidence. Her long history of nitpicking Kate’s hair — from 2012 bangs to post-2024 hospital styles — fits the pattern: personal opinion masquerading as insight, always driving clicks. She also recently editorialised against William as a future king, questioning his temperament and charisma, further stoking debate and subtly undermining the heir apparent.

• Tina Brown (via Mail amplification): Brown’s Vanity Fair critiques were sliced into fragments and drip-fed as “Mail exclusives.” This is another trick: repackaging syndicated content as fresh scoops, maximising monetisation while disguising the recycling. In Fleet Street terms, it’s reheated cabbage passed off as coq au vin.

• Rebecca English & Richard Eden: Even before their pivot, both poured fuel on the fire. English questioned the Forest Lodge move as a “taxpayer gamble” (24 September). Eden mocked it as indecisiveness (18 September). Both columns carried DailyMailPlus paywall teasers, designed to convert outrage into subscriptions.

This wasn’t reporting. It was a coordinated content strategy: anonymous sourcing (cheap and unverifiable), data manipulation (engagement cherry-picking), and emotional framing (slavery, evictions, family rifts) — all calculated to maximise page dwell-time and comments. It’s the cynical mechanics of Fleet Street turned up to eleven, all brass band and no tune.

The Asinine Pivot: From Smear-Mongers to Victimhood

By late September, the Mail faced a problem: the narrative it had stoked was now boomeranging. Readers began calling out bias, subscribers fled, and Palace Confidential was haemorrhaging viewers.

Cue the pivot.

• On 25 September, Eden wailed about a “sinister plot.”

• On 26 September, English warned of a “wedge between Charles and William.”

Both pieces were smoke and mirrors. They rehashed earlier reporting — their own reporting — while pretending to be alarmed that anti-Wales narratives were spreading. Classic Mail: start the fire, then play the firefighter. They build the echo chamber, harvest the clicks, and when the backlash hits, shrug and blame “external forces.”

It is not just hypocrisy — it is fraud. Fraud against readers, against journalism, against public trust. A betrayal wrapped in bunting.

YouTube Implosion: Palace Confidential’s Monarchy Meltdown

The nadir came mid-September when the Mail’s Palace Confidential channel speculated if William’s reign would “end the monarchy.” The video was a montage of the very print smears their own desk had churned out — workload cherry-picking, rift whispers, Forest Lodge doom-mongering.

Within days, subscribers plummeted by the thousands. Comment sections filled with accusations of “hateful propaganda.” Forensic look at the analytics shows watch-time collapsing, click-through rates nosediving. Why? Because even Mail loyalists saw through the con. They were watching for the same reheated slop, dressed up as “exclusive debate.”

According to VidIQ data, the Daily Mail Royals YouTube channel currently shows around 482,000 subscribers and has amassed over 313 million total video views. While those are nontrivial numbers, the channel’s estimated monthly earnings do not vindicate the hours of content churn — often in the modest range of £14,580–44,550 depending on viewership and ad engagement. In other words, the editorial excess is not being rewarded by proportionate audience loyalty or monetisation growth — the metrics are flat or weakening under scrutiny.

Tubics data earlier in 2025 had placed the Daily Mail Royals subscriber count at ~464,000 with a view count ~292 million, indicating very slow growth — a channel in stagnation rather than ascendancy.

This wasn’t content collapse; it was audience striking back. The vox populi spoke — and it said, enough.

Follow the Money: The Mail’s Financial Desperation

To understand why the Daily Mail behaves this way, you must follow the money. The pathology of smear campaigns is fed by urgent financial pressure.

• Print decline: As of June 2025, the Daily Mail’s audited daily circulation stood at ~631,191 copies. That figure reflects a dramatic shrinkage over years — the paper, once selling well into multiple hundreds of thousands more, is now hollowed out.

• Yearly comparisons: In 2024, ABC audit figures showed the Daily Mail had a daily circulation of 706,839 — meaning circulation has dropped by over 10% in roughly a year.

• Advertiser exodus: In January 2025, the Mail announced it would merge its print and online teams and initiate cost-cutting, as major advertisers increasingly balk at brand adjacency with toxic, polarising content. The memo revealed that Mail+ (the paywall arm) had achieved 100,000 paying subscribers since its launch — a modest number given the scale of MailOnline’s reach.

• Staff cuts as symptom: This internal restructuring is not optional — it is a forced retreat. Under the integration plan, job losses are anticipated.

• Parent group pressure: DMG Media, the Mail’s owner, has made it clear that the print-online integration is about survival in a hostile advertising environment and declining print returns.

In short, the Mail is bleeding. These royal smear campaigns aren’t just editorial cynicism — they’re a press outlet in full panic, scrabbling for clicks, subscriptions, and relevance by flogging scandal, outrage, and division. It’s the frantic thrashing of a swimmer who knows the tide has turned against them.

Dirty Hands, No Excuses: Time to Hold the Mail Accountable

The Daily Mail’s hands aren’t just dirty — they’re smeared, ink-stained with the fingerprints of manipulation. This wasn’t an accident, not a slip of the editorial pen. It was deliberate. They gamed algorithms like card sharks stacking a deck, pitted fandoms against one another like gladiators in the Coliseum, and weaponised history, health, and grief as if they were trinkets to be traded for clicks. @charlotteEaLMoS , @amandajplatell, A.N. Wilson, @TinaBrownLM, @LizJonesGoddess and the rest dutifully acted as stenographers for Sussex spin; @RE_DailyMail and @richardaeden cried about “plots” they themselves had stoked; and editors signed off on every exaggeration, knowing that rage pays the bills. And now, when the wind shifts, they dare pivot to victimhood — as if they were the collateral and not the culprits. It’s theatre. Bad theatre. And the damage? It’s carved into public trust like graffiti on a listed building.

The contrast couldn’t be clearer. William and Catherine ride out the storm with quiet resilience, their 74% approval proving that duty and dignity still matter. The monarchy carries on; the Mail only carries on as long as division sells. Readers aren’t fooled. Legacy media is collapsing under the weight of its own duplicity. Advertisers abandoned The Sun after Hillsborough. News of the World collapsed after phone hacking. And the Daily Mail — drunk on its own poison — is staggering toward the same graveyard.

This was never “just gossip.” It was calculated sabotage dressed up in broadsheet clothing, a smear campaign masquerading as reportage, a racket that hollowed out the very idea of journalism. They didn’t just observe events; they made them happen. They didn’t reflect public opinion; they twisted it. They didn’t hold power to account; they abused it.

The case is closed. The Waleses endure — proof that quiet service and real substance always outlast scandal. The Mail’s hit squad, by contrast, are done. History won’t remember them as kingmakers, only as mercenaries who confused clickbait for craft and outrage for insight, and in the process wrote their own obituaries.

They won’t go down as journalists; they’ll go down as clickbait casualties — yesterday’s men and women, swept away by the very tide they tried to ride.

#BoycottDailyMail #WeAreTheMediaNow
#RoyalSmearCampaign #ExposeTheMail
#MediaManipulation #StopTheSpin
#TabloidTyranny #FakeNewsFactory
#MonarchyVsMedia #FleetStreetFraud
#TruthOverClickbait #InkStainedLies

[Red Velvet @RVsmtown]

레드벨벳 Red Velvet 'The ReVe Festival 2022 - Birthday'

🎧 2022.11.28. 6PM KST

#The_ReVe_Festival_2022
#Birthday #벌스데이
#레드벨벳 #RedVelvet

[𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗿𝗿𝘆 𝗳𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗲 @StarryFlare0305]

HQ 220618
#YERI #예리 #RedVelvet #레드벨벳
우리 꼰듀님 평생 함께해😭😭🥹🥹

[���pauls ✨ @YRsquirtle]

7 years apart!

[yeristgrm @yeristgrm]

[INSTAGRAM POST] - 4P

💧
https://t.co/gHSapkwIBq

@RVsmtown #RedVelvet #레드벨벳 #Yeri #예리 #TRF2022
220615 · 23:27:15 KST

[ও @jkdecode]

#YERI: daylight ♡

[YR ミ✰ @luvyrrv]

Some comments under Blue Birthday EP 1. Crying again after watch all praise for Yeri😭to think this is her first debut as a lead. There are more btw,but all of this are top comment. You need vpn to watch this,since this available in KR only
Actress Kim Yerim again when?!?!?

[yeristgrm @yeristgrm]

[INSTAGRAM STORY]

Makeup @.a_ryeomii
Hair @.soon_e_10
Dress from @.yerin_the_genuine 👼🏻💞
https://t.co/f4aum0eXTv

@RVsmtown #RedVelvet #레드벨벳 #Yeri #예리 #TRF2022
220530 · 21:43:43 KST

[yeri @yeripics]

the prettiest, kim yerim

[yeri pics 𐙚 @cuteyeripics]

beautiful, stunning, gorgeous

[shei 🤍 @psychoqueendom]

“what makes you happy?”

irene and wendy: members
seulgi: yeri
joy: food
yeri: desserts

[Starfess || CEK PINNED UNTUK KIRIM MENFESS @starfess]

-hey imagine all idol kpop like Yeri

[mon @329partygirl]

pov yeri grabs you by the neck and brings you down

https://t.co/YsDWXTIoXU

[Carl 🌻 @yermapologist]

WTF KIM YERIM 😳😳😳

[레드벨벳 패션 💫 Red Velvet Fashion @stylebyrv5]

YERI 💜 220527 Korea University Festival

LIKELY, LOST IN ECHO

#REDVELVET #레드벨벳 #YERI #예리 #styleby_yeri

[𝗲𝗷 ⛱️🏄‍♂️☀️🧜‍♀️ @nefelibatAtaxic]

the way they ran out of energy by age....

[☁️ @revetexts]

🐢💭
📸+1
“when i woke up this morning, i realised that the newly opened cream that i applied on my face the day before was actually a hair cream, what should i do?😇”
“i’m screwed😇😇😇”

[ㄱㅁㄹ @taetae_jhj]

개귀여운 입실렌티 김예림도 보실분
abc초콜릿 뿌려주고가심 성수인줄
#RedVelvet
#Yeri #레드벨벳 #예리