Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
The Queen gives YouTube royal seal of approval
dailymail.co.uk — The Queen's Christmas Day speech will be posted on YouTube for the first time as the 81-year-old Sovereign keeps up with modern technology. A "Royal Channel" on YouTube went live just after midnight last night and her message will appear at 3pm on Christmas Day.
plinky- 726 diggs
- digg it
- dampcloth, on 12/23/2007, -36/+222 girls one goblet
- chrillen, on 12/23/2007, -1/+2Oh god.
- trenchfever, on 12/23/2007, -12/+6The queen can suck my dick.
- Myonosken, on 12/23/2007, -2/+4I actually loled. I dunno why you're dug down.
- thinlight, on 12/23/2007, -18/+12It's great, but why can't we comment on it?
- chedabob, on 12/23/2007, -2/+29Have you seen the Youtube comments lately? "OMG LYK YOU SUCK, ***** OFF DYKE".
- threepio, on 12/23/2007, -1/+12Why can't you comment?
Have you seen the tabloids? What the media does to the royal family? The nature of the dilweeds on the intertrons? Yeah, it's not a shock that they don't have comments turned on - I wouldn't either. - smartass007, on 12/24/2007, -2/+3i also think comments should have been enabled. sure, some people will post rude comments, but a lot of other people will have positive comments.
disabling comments seems to go against the spirit of youtube. if they just wanted to release vids in a non-interactive way, they could have done so on the royal web site with an embedded flash player.
- SoloMalee, on 12/23/2007, -5/+52"One is chuffed to bits to be found on the worldly wide webs"
- XA04, on 12/23/2007, -10/+7Wibly Wobly Web
- WTC7WasPulled, on 12/24/2007, -8/+5The Queen is scum. If only you knew about their ideas on Eugenics. They are the most corrupt evil family on the face of the planet. Prince Phillip wants to come back in another life as a virus and kill most humans. That is a direct quote.
- GonadHunter, on 12/24/2007, -1/+6Source of the quote?
- markvand, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
-Prince Philip, in his Foreward to If I Were an Animal; United Kingdom, Robin Clark Ltd., 1986.
- markvand, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
- fef560, on 12/24/2007, -1/+3I don't see how that makes him scum.
- GonadHunter, on 12/24/2007, -1/+6Source of the quote?
- Chazx, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I always laugh when someone uses 'one' like that. That's not how you use it. Common folk...
- LMKidney, on 12/23/2007, -13/+4This is great and so much more personal.
- Rockby, on 12/23/2007, -10/+3"I wonder if she wants a mac computer now"
- Harrison88, on 12/23/2007, -4/+13Suppose it'll be useful for non-brits.
- b3mus3d, on 12/23/2007, -4/+19I'm a British teenager, and this will probably be the first time I bother watching the queen's speech.
It's never really been a big thing in our family, so I've been to busy to bother with it on christmas day. But I'll probably end up watching it out of curiosity now, as it's more at my leisure. - PURPLEDRINK, on 12/23/2007, -3/+4No.
- GMorgan, on 12/23/2007, -6/+2For non-brits. It's worth noting that the Queen's speech is written by the PM.
- NoQuarter, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7No, it's not. This is the Queen's Christmas speech, you're getting it confused with the Queen's speech where she speaks to parliament about the governments plans etc. That happened a few months ago.
For the Christmas speech (Royal Christmas Message) she won't write it herself, but the PM definitely has nothing to do with it.
- NoQuarter, on 12/23/2007, -0/+7No, it's not. This is the Queen's Christmas speech, you're getting it confused with the Queen's speech where she speaks to parliament about the governments plans etc. That happened a few months ago.
- gambl0r, on 12/23/2007, -0/+10It's a pretty cool that they've put it on Youtube. I have never even heard of the Queen's Christmas Speech (I'm from the US) but I'll check it out this year. The one from 1957 is pretty interesting in the way she's welcoming new technology (at that time it was television). It's fitting that she'll be welcoming a new technology 50 years later.
- JorgeGT, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4You should listen to the Christmas Speech of our King here in Spain... half the country suspects he aids his intervention with a cup of fine wine... (or two, or three...), Also, the photoshop work in the royal family's christmas photos is awesome... There are always several legs missing and such things :-D
(But we'll forgive him for his ass-kicking "¿POR QUÉ NO TE CALLAS?" shouted in the face of Chávez)
- b3mus3d, on 12/23/2007, -4/+19I'm a British teenager, and this will probably be the first time I bother watching the queen's speech.
- RedRoostered, on 12/23/2007, -0/+27Here is "The Royal Channel" - http://www.youtube.com/theroyalchannel
- sandkiller, on 12/23/2007, -42/+9***** the queen!
but not literally :S- trenchfever, on 12/23/2007, -15/+8Yeah! seriously who the ***** is this queen? And why the ***** are the royalty important? This is the epitome of cultural hypocrisy; being born in a certain circumstance should never make one "special". ***** the queen and ***** royalty.
- archer104, on 12/23/2007, -4/+1Seems like just a ***** of wasted money.
- KSUdesigner, on 12/23/2007, -0/+8May I just point out...
Bush
Clinton
Bush
(Clinton?)
- trenchfever, on 12/23/2007, -15/+8Yeah! seriously who the ***** is this queen? And why the ***** are the royalty important? This is the epitome of cultural hypocrisy; being born in a certain circumstance should never make one "special". ***** the queen and ***** royalty.
- skeen07, on 12/23/2007, -31/+12I don't like royalty - I think it's ridiculous simply happening to be born into a certain family, gives you some kind of control over an entire country - it's crazy.
- chedabob, on 12/23/2007, -3/+12The Queen doesn't have as much control as you might think. She delegates running the country to the PM.
- trenchfever, on 12/23/2007, -3/+2But then why is she there? Kick her out and make the palace a historical monument. ***** the queen
- REBELinBLUE, on 12/23/2007, -1/+9Because the royal family bring in a huge portion of our tourists, because we Brits like our heritage and because there aren't that many people that actually want the royal family gone. Plus, she can do all the ceremonial things like state visits instead of wasting the time of the people who are suppose to be running the country.
- Myonosken, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Because she is a historical monument...
- xxbrighteyed, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1What, like Bush?
- trenchfever, on 12/23/2007, -3/+2But then why is she there? Kick her out and make the palace a historical monument. ***** the queen
- whyufail, on 12/23/2007, -4/+16Protip: She is a figurehead only. Her role in actual politics is almost zero.
- marcusbrutus, on 12/23/2007, -1/+6Wars between monarchies tend to have less casualties than between democracies. Just saying.
- 3leggedHorse, on 12/24/2007, -2/+2 Bollox Republics are a new thing of late in the west. take a look since the Roman republic turned into a empire and all the wars since the year 0 kings & Queens of Europe have dominated. WW1 was a war between monarchies, Czar Nicholas 2 , Kaiser Wilhelm , King George. ***** sake take a look at history. Play Assassins Creed.
- Lynxpro, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1France was a republic in WWI. Revolutionary France - even before Napoleon took control - was also a republic that launched wars against the British, the Austrians, and the other German states. It also should be pointed out that Britain has been a "crowned republic" since 1688.
The Soviet Union was also an antagonistic state and it was not a monarchy. Same goes for Communist China. Thus monarchies are not the end-all of evil that you claim.
- Lynxpro, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1France was a republic in WWI. Revolutionary France - even before Napoleon took control - was also a republic that launched wars against the British, the Austrians, and the other German states. It also should be pointed out that Britain has been a "crowned republic" since 1688.
- 3leggedHorse, on 12/24/2007, -2/+2 Bollox Republics are a new thing of late in the west. take a look since the Roman republic turned into a empire and all the wars since the year 0 kings & Queens of Europe have dominated. WW1 was a war between monarchies, Czar Nicholas 2 , Kaiser Wilhelm , King George. ***** sake take a look at history. Play Assassins Creed.
- warriorscot, on 12/23/2007, -0/+10She has little power and it has nothing to do with the nobility when it comes to it the royal families derived their power from the fact they owned more land than anyone else thus making them the most powerful entities in the land it just saved time for them to rule the whole country, even now the royal family still owns allot of land in Britain.
Also there is the appealing aspect of having someone actually trained to lead a country as your backup rather than more self serving political ass wipes.
Allot of the royal family probably share your position as serving the people of Britain for little reward(considering they are all mostly personally wealthy) is a bit crap, and before you go on about the civil list that is paid by mortgaging the queens estate to the treasury. - gudnbluts, on 12/23/2007, -1/+7The crazy thing is having your head of state and the person running the country being the same person. You don't want the leader of your government wasting loads of his or her time on ceremonial crap, and you certainly don't want the public servant running your country to be the person representing it to the world, giving him or her automatic respect.
- archer104, on 12/23/2007, -4/+1That makes sense. But I still think that they should have a monkey for the ceremonial stuff. Just keep him in a glass box so he won't embarrass the country.
- chedabob, on 12/23/2007, -3/+12The Queen doesn't have as much control as you might think. She delegates running the country to the PM.
- Fuze07, on 12/23/2007, -12/+5I smell a new meme coming.
- infinitus64, on 12/23/2007, -26/+9 O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.
With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!
From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.- TRENT310, on 12/23/2007, -0/+13I love our National Anthem as well, but that was randomly irrelevant and out of context...
- ryanmct, on 12/23/2007, -1/+37...And some people said youtube wasn't worth the 1.65B.
- ahpro, on 12/23/2007, -3/+23"One does prefer bebo."
- josho, on 12/23/2007, -5/+3jeez.. load the page, popup. click the page, popunder. try to find a link to the channel or video in question.. impossible.
what a spectacular experience!- jaekay, on 12/23/2007, -1/+4Well it is the Daily Mail (or as it's editor likes to call it "The Daily Hate"). You shouldn't expect too much from them, bless them... they probably only just discovered the internet
- MattTC, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Doubt they have discovered their Brain's, reasoning, let alone the Internet...or Grammar, Common Sense...etc,etc...
- jaekay, on 12/23/2007, -1/+4Well it is the Daily Mail (or as it's editor likes to call it "The Daily Hate"). You shouldn't expect too much from them, bless them... they probably only just discovered the internet
- Yarkz, on 12/23/2007, -8/+2Why youtube and not stage6....
- lazerus9, on 12/23/2007, -15/+9I clicked on the Youtube link above expecting to hear "We are the Champions" and all that I kept getting was some old guy dressed in drag with a British accent!
- sesstreets, on 12/23/2007, -10/+1Because stage6 blows.
- slowmotiony, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3Your mom blows.
- fef560, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2This is true, I can vouch for sesstreets mom.
- slowmotiony, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3Your mom blows.
- Quote737, on 12/23/2007, -3/+25I had no idea the queen was good looking in her early years. Just check out the 1957 Christmas Speech you'll see.
P.S. I've never heard her speak before. I'm American. - jscnet, on 12/23/2007, -2/+11Thank goodness, now I can fully enjoy youtube without the guilt.
- StanleyKoolPrik, on 12/23/2007, -16/+9Ha...Silly monarchy.
- stikkitjim, on 12/23/2007, -8/+29hehe to the Candian national anthem singer... she's your Queen too! (see Commonwealth of Nations)
And to "***** the Queen" people... our royal family is the only thing protecting Britain from what the USA has become.- dezmo, on 12/23/2007, -24/+2The greatest country in the world?
- rebotfc, on 12/23/2007, -2/+22The laughing stock of the world more like.
- TitanX13, on 12/23/2007, -9/+1we talking about canada now?
- AussieFox, on 12/24/2007, -0/+5Sorry Titan, but right now? America is the laughing stock of the world.
One of the most hypocritical governments, shouting freedom while the CIA spends its time destroying the governments of other countries, outright occupying other countries with military force, removing rights of their own citizens, and refusing to abide by US law's.
- rebotfc, on 12/23/2007, -2/+22The laughing stock of the world more like.
- TitanX13, on 12/23/2007, -17/+4a super power?
- Bonzidave, on 12/23/2007, -0/+11I’m sure Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth turned Britain into superpowers for their time... but I’m a bit sketchy on my history.
- TitanX13, on 12/23/2007, -4/+1through conquering everyone and the use of the church to kill all against them probably
- Bonzidave, on 12/23/2007, -0/+11I’m sure Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth turned Britain into superpowers for their time... but I’m a bit sketchy on my history.
- 01l0, on 12/23/2007, -3/+8a monarchy? oh wai
- GMorgan, on 12/23/2007, -5/+10The only thing that has stopped us going the direction of America is the population. We have a history of people trying to tread on us so tend to have more perspective on terrorism, being subject to 30 years of the IRA helps. The Queen has little or nothing to do with it. Being frightened is simply a fresh concept to a country that was isolationist less than a century ago and was an untouchable superpower for most of the period since. In theory America has a much better system than us, legally whatever parliament says, goes and that scares the crap out of me.
Lets be clear though. If enough of our people ever take leave of their senses (and many of them have already, how often do you hear BNP support these days) there is nothing to constitutionally stop them from doing anything. At least the Americans have seen some resistance from other branches of their system, if someone like Bush ever got into power here there'd be nothing to stop them. There isn't even a formal constitution for them to ***** on.
I seriously worry because while the IRA killed several thousand Brits we didn't show anything like the irrational fear as many do now with Islamic terrorists that have killed a handful of Brits. Then again we had a government and media then who didn't preach fear every 5 seconds. Back then it was about preserving our freedom (and the freedom of others to choose their own path) in the face of terrorism whatever the cost, now it seems to be about doing the terrorists job for them.- Lynxpro, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Yeah, but when did the IRA consider acquiring nukes or biological weaponry to use against the average British subject/citizen? How many IRA members were walking wackjobs that would consider it glorious to strap themselves to their bombs and blow themselves up in the process of carrying out their orders? There's quite a bit more reason to be fearful of the "new" face of terrorism when compared to the IRA and their ilk. Al Queda makes the IRA look like PeTa on PMS/PMT.
- dezmo, on 12/23/2007, -24/+2The greatest country in the world?
- 01l0, on 12/23/2007, -3/+10The Queen bears an uncanny resemblance to Mike Gravel.
- blackbrutha, on 12/23/2007, -24/+4***** the queen. She aint nobody.
- Viriatus, on 12/23/2007, -0/+5well yeah she is "just" The Queen....
- Myonosken, on 12/23/2007, -2/+1Who dat honkey bitch?
Holla.
- Tomyris, on 12/23/2007, -1/+3I'm interested to see how this will be used. Whether or not it's going to be about the promotion of Charles' character or not. Seems to have quite a bit on him, but that's expected. Also I'm not seeing anything of much on Diana, in fact nothing at all.
- endlessraining, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4Thats because she wasnt a Royal anymore before she was killed. She divorced Charles.
- xerexes1, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2Well, Diana died 10 years ago, so there is nothing current to report.
There has been a steady stream of UK press surrounding her death, as well as a couple of inquires looking into various conspiracy theories, if you are truly interested.
- D3koy, on 12/23/2007, -0/+12That's Sir Youtube to you...
- turleh, on 12/23/2007, -12/+3who cares
- Matthew720, on 12/23/2007, -17/+4The Queen is a tosser. lol
- floatsum, on 12/23/2007, -2/+8Not the first queen to have a channel on YouTube.
- JNPDonovan, on 12/23/2007, -1/+8I'd hit it.
- domokunt, on 12/23/2007, -1/+4If they put it on youtube, maybe they'll take it off TV, and no more kids will have to suffer on xmas day *shudders at memories*
- KiwiMark, on 12/23/2007, -3/+3It sucks that royalty has taken so long to do this. Every English King and Queen that has gone before her should be ashamed they didn't embrace the interweb..
- domokunt, on 12/23/2007, -2/+6Uh ...... um...... serious?
- Myonosken, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4S. A. R. C. A. S. M.
- KiwiMark, on 12/29/2007, -0/+1Thanks.
- Myonosken, on 12/23/2007, -0/+4S. A. R. C. A. S. M.
- MattTC, on 12/23/2007, -3/+5We had the internet in 1910????
- domokunt, on 12/23/2007, -2/+6Uh ...... um...... serious?
- JorgeGT, on 12/23/2007, -0/+6"Welcome to Official YouTube Channel for the British Monarchy"
...
I'm speechless. Totally. 0_o - Luinar, on 12/23/2007, -5/+0The cynic in me says that this is just another attempt to try and persuade us Brits that the monarchy really is still doing things in an attempt to protect themselves from increasing anti-monarchist sentiment.
That being said it also just seems to me like they wanted to jump on the internet bandwagon.- asiarock, on 12/24/2007, -1/+4right... So if they have no internet presence then they are branded as old fashioned and out of touch, but if they have an internet presence then they are just jumping on the bandwagon? Seems like they can't win.
- Lynxpro, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2Sorry, Asiarock...accidentally hit the thumbs down on you instead of the thumbs up. I totally agree with your position.
- asiarock, on 12/24/2007, -1/+4right... So if they have no internet presence then they are branded as old fashioned and out of touch, but if they have an internet presence then they are just jumping on the bandwagon? Seems like they can't win.
- 9storeyfiretrap, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2What no comments!? On second thought good idea considering the penalty for treason..
- REBELinBLUE, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1and what would that be? If you were going to say the death penalty you'd be wrong, it was changed in 1998 under the Crime And Disorder Act, it is a common misbelief that the death penalty is still in use for treason. It is now a maximum sentence of life, the last person found guilty of treason was 61 years ago.
- jimmiss, on 12/23/2007, -0/+3My god, youtube owners have to be just LAUGHING at how successful they've become.
- NuWeb, on 12/24/2007, -5/+1http://www.youtube.com/theroyalchannel
Someone get me on DR Who. Id "hit that" back in the day.
- The UK has the only Royal Family. They are inbred, but they stop us from becoming the worst... An American
GET THE QUEEN ON YOUR iPHONE, WIth Queen PodCasts. LMAO!
http://clients.westminster-digital.co.uk/royal/pod ...- thomashauk, on 12/24/2007, -0/+3What do you mean the only royal family?
The Spanish, Danish, Dutch, Monicans... and the Saudis are gonna be a bit confused then.- neptuniac, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2All the European royal families are apparently the same family. More inbred than any hillbillies.
- SGIsus, on 12/24/2007, -0/+3isnt the royal family descended from Germany?
- LostRiot, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1WWI was basically a family bust up.
- neptuniac, on 12/24/2007, -1/+2All the European royal families are apparently the same family. More inbred than any hillbillies.
- LostRiot, on 12/24/2007, -0/+4I think there is more that divides the UK and the USA than a monarchy.
Guns for starters.... and the language... - asiarock, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2Thailand also have a royal family, but that's probably too far outside the scope of your little brain. FYI, Thailand is a country in Asia.
- thomashauk, on 12/24/2007, -0/+3What do you mean the only royal family?
- spookycheddar, on 12/24/2007, -2/+0so not cool anymore
- neptuniac, on 12/24/2007, -2/+1Off with her head!
- iDrinkKoolAid, on 12/24/2007, -2/+3i'm an ameriKKKan studying in rip-off UK right now, but i did think the queen's speech was good. at least the first half of it, talking about how even if technology changes, we should hold on to timeless ideals. most of us are slaves to technology and get buttraped by cell phones and facebook. some of you mofo's should watch da queen speak before you digg me down.
- 3leggedHorse, on 12/24/2007, -6/+1 Buried. The British royal family are on they're last legs in this archaic rip off excuse for a country. I cannot believe how low I think of the country I was born in. Adolf Hitler had more loyalty to the Jews than what I have to England. If anyone on digg is thinking of coming here don't it sux ass.
- asiarock, on 12/24/2007, -0/+6Nice try, but you are obviously not English. For a start we say "arse" not "ass".
- gudnbluts, on 12/24/2007, -0/+0Heh heh heh. Nice catch.
- SGIsus, on 12/24/2007, -0/+2It's a bit expensive... but it's alright...
- asiarock, on 12/24/2007, -0/+6Nice try, but you are obviously not English. For a start we say "arse" not "ass".
- adamawick, on 12/24/2007, -0/+3Like the commenter above, I can't recall ever hearing the Queen speak before, and as crazy as it sounds, I was blown away by her '57 speech. It's actually a bit scary how relevant the opening line of her address still is:
"That it's possible for some of you to see me today is just another example of the speed at which things are changing all around us."
Bulls-eye! - estesce, on 12/24/2007, -0/+1I wonder if she really thought about the implication of the neighbors she will be keeping on You Tube. So much spam so much trash... Not a very elitist style if you ask me. But who knows she may be catching onto the social/viral media bug!
- sodimizer, on 12/24/2007, -2/+0No she is just trying to be cool and she is failing miserably at it. who even cares what the queen says, she has as much power as George Bush
- DestroyFascism, on 12/24/2007, -1/+1Jolly Good.....How much of my tax would like this year maam?
- nanotaboada, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1What an hypocrite. God save us from the queen!
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by