Prince William should be grateful that his uncle, Prince Andrew, was arrested last Thursday, because it saved William from being the biggest royal headline of the day. Last Wednesday, William’s interview with BBC Radio 1 was released. Reportedly, it was recorded weeks beforehand and held to air specifically during William’s vacation, so that he would look busy. On Wednesday, most outlets just covered William’s quotes, quotes in which he centered himself in the larger conversation of men’s mental health, and quotes in which he yammered on and on about how men have it so hard. The next-day story was shaping up to be centered on William sounding like a tone-deaf dolt with zero authenticity on the subject of mental health. Not only that, there was a lot of mainstream discourse about how now is not the moment to talk about men’s mental health, especially not when William’s uncle abused multiple women and girls (and William couldn’t be bothered to say anything about those women). Well, a lot of that conversation faded away with Andrew’s arrest. Except now the Independent has brought it back with this incredible piece: “Prince William is desperate to connect with a new generation – but it’s not working.” Some highlights:
William’s tone-deaf interview: Prince William kept his counsel during his interview with Greg James, too, and we can presume, the Radio 1 interviewer was under strict instructions not to raise the Epstein scandal either. Yet speaking to the audience of Radio 1’s Life Hacks, who the future king was desperately trying to connect with, there is a growing sense that the appearance felt tone-deaf and was a serious misfire from a Prince struggling to read the room.
Younger people dislike William: Many members of Gen A and Gen Z I have spoken to say that it came across that Prince William, like the rest of the royal family, is more concerned with self-preservation than with the wellbeing of his so-called “subjects”. It is a difficult line to walk. Olivia, 15, listened with her mother, who had just completed a 14-hour hospital shift. “There are loads of doctors and nurses whose mental health is awful,” she said, “but they don’t have a few palaces to retreat to. He didn’t mention Epstein’s victims or how frightening things feel for so many people. It sounded like ‘poor me’. I feel disgusted by the royal family.”
The demographic shift: Her sentiment reflects wider generational attitudes. Only 30 per cent of 18- to 24-year-olds believe the monarchy is “good for Britain”, compared with 77 per cent of over-65s, according to YouGov – and that was before the Epstein/Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor scandal escalated. While the Prince and Princess of Wales remain the most favourably viewed royals, with roughly three-quarters of Britons holding positive views, support among younger generations is far weaker. Having grown up amid a cost-of-living crisis, Gen Z and Gen A tend to have little patience for unearned privilege. They do not see William and Kate as the dynamic future of the monarchy, but as beneficiaries of inherited status, like Harry, Beatrice and Eugenie, they are all “nepo babies” living in taxpayer-funded palaces while their own peers struggle to secure housing and employment. Clint, 18, says: “There were days my mum didn’t eat so we could. We were evicted twice, once at Christmas. William can shove his ‘woe is me’ routine. Try living like the rest of us.”
The Harry problem: The long-running rift between William and Harry has unfolded like a national soap opera. Older generations may view Harry as a shirker who retained his titles while stepping back from duties. Many younger Britons, however, describe William as “cold” and “unkind”. There is also a perception among some young people that Harry paid a heavier price for his actions than Andrew did, at least until recently, and that stripping Andrew of titles and turfing him out of his Windsor home was a case of too little, too late. Oliver, 19, says: “Andrew was bringing Epstein to Buckingham Palace. Come on.”
William’s links to Epstein associates: Complicating matters further, Epstein’s network has now intersected with one of William’s flagship initiatives. Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, the Emirati businessman and former CEO of DP World, has appeared in the Epstein files as someone who corresponded with Epstein, including in emails referencing a “torture video”. His company was a founding corporate partner of William’s Earthshot Prize, to which he donated at least £1m. There is no evidence that William had any knowledge of those connections. But for conspiracy-loving younger generations already suspicious of elite networks and institutional protection, these associations simply add to their mistrust.
Andrew’s security: It has not gone unnoticed that Prince Harry was the first royal to publicly criticise Andrew, highlighting what he saw as hypocrisy in the family’s treatment of different scandals. In his memoir Spare, he wrote that despite the allegations against Andrew, “no one had even suggested removing his security”. Indeed, even yesterday as he left the police station after being arrested, two royal protection officers were in the car with him.
The anger of the common man: Anger is running high, and much of it is directed at what feels like entrenched inequality and institutional protection of the powerful. If William’s interview this week was intended to humanise him, to suggest “I’m just like you”, it appears to have had the opposite effect among the younger listeners he is so desperate to connect with. Grace, 24, says: “I don’t think the elite understand how angry people are. It feels like they’ve shown us that some lives matter less.”
William’s silence on important subjects: The royal family may feel bruised and embarrassed by association with the Epstein scandal. But their discomfort is negligible compared with that of the victims, who, alongside their lawyers, have repeatedly called for Andrew to testify under oath before Congress. The fact that the King or Prince William have remained silent on the matter has also not gone unnoticed.
There’s this theory I’ve been workshopping for a while, which is that starting with Millennials and all subsequent generations, there’s been an increased awareness of when celebrities or public figures are performative, and when they’re just going through the motions for their own selfish PR motives. That’s what this feels like too – people under the age of 40 increasingly see William as inauthentic, as a royal hypocrite who acts one way in public but is completely different in private. That’s where Prince Harry factors in as well – Harry’s memoir, Spare, revealed the other side of William and how petty, stupid, intemperate, jealous and violent he is behind-the-scenes. That bell can’t be unrung. I also think it matters that Harry walked away from this sh-tshow and he’s made his own way in life – despite trying to lump Harry in with the list of “nepo babies,” Harry walked away from palace life at great personal cost. Anyway, the young people quoted in this piece are amazing. The children are the future!
Photos and screencaps courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, BBC Radio 1, AppleTV+.
