The King is at war with Princess Diana‘s brother over Earl Spencer‘s bombshell claim Charles declared ‘rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough’.

Buckingham Palace issued an extraordinary statement in response to the explosive new book by Earl Spencer about a devastating row he had with then Prince Charles in the days after Diana died.

In a riposte that sent shockwaves through Royal circles, King Charles’s aides acidly suggested that grief can ‘cloud reason, affect judgement and colour memory’ – in what was seen as a barbed echo of the late Queen’s famous ‘recollections may vary’ retort to Harry and Meghan.

The unprecedented slap-down by Buckingham Palace on Earl Spencer came after the Daily Mail revealed the first details from his searing new memoir – the first extract of which will be published on dailymail.com at 5pm today.

The Daily Mail’s sensational revelations are splitting society with rival camps backing either side.

Last night one senior establishment figure – a household name – told friends Earl Spencer ‘should be horse-whipped across town.’

The Palace’s remarkable statement disputing Earl Spencer’s claims reveals the depth of the King’s anger, according to experts.

Former BBC royal correspondent Peter Hunt said Charles is ‘clearly absolutely incandescent’ over the allegations he said Diana would be quickly forgotten.

Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams described Earl Spencer’s allegations as ‘destructive’ and ‘driven by hatred’, adding: ‘There is no question that the King, and rightly so, is absolutely furious.’

Editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine Ingrid Seward said: ‘I think Diana would be horrified that her brother has revealed this remark by Charles.

‘When I last met her, six weeks before her death, she was adamant that she and Charles really loved each other. It was so important to her that their children knew that.

‘So she would be horrified that he has shared a comment that could appear to show so much malice. I am sure it was not meant like that. But at the time, the Spencers and the Royal Family were at loggerheads.’

Julian Payne, the King’s communications secretary between 2016 and 2021, said the ‘highly unusual’ statement from the Palace displayed the ‘strength of feeling that there must have been for them to feel that they needed to go out there and correct it’. 

Advertisement

The King’s unprecedented response reveals that has been outraged by Earl Spencer’s claims, experts have said

Charles and Diana on their last official trip together to South Korea in November 1992

In Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, the earl tells how in 1997 he clashed with Charles over the idea of Princes William and Harry walking in their mother’s funeral procession. 

Spencer said he insisted Diana would not have wanted William, then aged 15, and Harry, 12, to endure such a public ordeal, telling the then heir to the throne: ‘That’s not going to happen.’

But he claims furious Charles ‘went nuts’ and responded with a ‘stream of anger’ including telling him, just days after the death of the princess that shook the world, that ‘rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough’.

The first full part of the serialisation of the memoir will be published on dailymail.com at 5pm UK time today.

Last night Buckingham Palace took the highly unusual step of issuing a withering put-down to the incendiary claims about the King.

A Royal spokesman said: ‘While we do not comment on books as a matter of principle, His Majesty is mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgement and colour memory in ways others do not recognise, even many years after such a loss.’

The caustic response is being compared to the late Queen Elizabeth’s celebrated remark that ‘recollections may vary’ about Harry and Meghan’s outlandish claims in their Oprah Winfrey interview attacking the Royal Family.

A source close to the King said the comment he is alleged to have made about Diana was ‘just not in his nature and it certainly wasn’t in his nature at that time, when he was a man absolutely grief-stricken’.

They pointed out that the then Prince of Wales was the person who overruled Royal protocol to insist that Diana should have a full state-style ceremonial funeral.

The rebuke was issued by the palace shortly after the Mail revealed claims made by Earl Spencer in his book.

Earl Spencer, 62, says he has written the memoir to correct ‘untruths’ told about his older sister.

The astonishing account of the King’s alleged outburst, almost 30 years ago, is described by the earl over several pages.

He says that one of Queen Elizabeth’s most senior aides had told him, in the days before the funeral, that William and Harry would take part in the procession, which is when he responded that this was not what his sister would have wanted and was ‘not going to happen’.

Minutes later, he recalls, he received a phone call from Prince Charles who questioned the Spencer family’s sense of duty and insisted that, 18 years earlier, he had walked in the funeral procession of Lord Mountbatten, his great-uncle.

The memoir describes how Charles ‘went nuts’ after the earl pointed out that the prince had been 30 at the time of Lord Mountbatten’s funeral in 1979.

In one of the book’s most extraordinary passages, Earl Spencer writes: ‘Prince Charles continued his stream of anger, without me interrupting. Then he stopped.

‘I assumed the pause signalled an effort to bring himself under control, but then he unleashed down the phone what I have always taken to be his pent-up contempt for Diana, and his horror that the world was so bowled over by her death. ‘Rest assured,’ he hissed, “we’ll forget her soon enough!”.’

Julian Payne, the King’s former communications secretary between 2016 and 2021, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘I just don’t recognise the way the King is characterised in those remarks.

‘I personally was working for him during the 20th anniversary of the late princess’s death in 2017 and naturally we ended up discussing her several times during that summer because the media interest was so intense.

‘What I remember was he was very clear that there was never to be any criticism, never to be any pushback on the narratives that were usually highly critical of him – but he was absolutely emphatic that we were to respect her memory and not undermine it in any way.

‘So it seems to me very odd that in the moment itself with the grief of his family and his own shock that he would choose that moment to use those words. It’s just not language that I recognise.’

BBC royal correspondent Sean Coughlan said the Palace see the allegation against Charles as ‘being entirely out of character for a man with a deeply compassionate nature, who at the time was dealing with his own grief and that of their two sons’.

Royal expert Phil Dampier described the palace statement as ‘extraordinary’, adding: ‘The days of never complain never explain have gone… not surprisingly.’

Commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told GB News: ‘I think it is something that the Royal Family obviously have taken very seriously with an extraordinary statement.’

He added that royal observers will now be considering whether the Duke of Sussex will also respond to the book’s contents.

Mr Fitzwilliams said: ‘People will be asking what did Prince Harry know about this book and what its contents are. Will he in fact be speaking about this? Will he be reacting? I sincerely hope so because it’s a scandalous thing to accept to say that his father made these statements.

‘Here you’ve got a situation where it will be interesting to see what Prince Harry says, if anything, about this because he’s been speaking about so many topics linked to the royal family since they’ve stepped down as senior working royals.

The Earl, Diana and Charles at the Earl’s 21st birthday party in 1985 at the Mirabelle restaurant in London

From left, the Earl, Prince William, Prince Harry and Charles at Diana’s funeral on September 6, 1997

Earl Spencer said that he was ‘so stunned’ by the alleged remarks that he took a few seconds to reply.

‘I can’t believe you just said that,’ I said flatly, before hanging up,’ he writes.

Diana’s death on August 31, 1997, aged 36, sparked a global outpouring of grief.

On September 6, 1997, six days after Diana’s death, Earl Spencer delivered a defiant eulogy at her funeral that was later named one of the greatest speeches of the 20th century.

His raw oration in Westminster Abbey was delivered after he walked alongside William and Harry, as well as Prince Charles and Prince Philip, behind Diana’s coffin in a funeral procession through central London.

The new book includes a string of further extraordinary claims about Diana’s failed marriage to Charles and the tumultuous aftermath of her tragic death in a car crash in Paris.

The revelations are set to plunge Buckingham Palace into a fresh storm just weeks after the return of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their children to the UK from California.

The exclusive serialisation will begin on dailymail.com later today.

Described as ‘historic’, Swan Song is due to be published worldwide next Tuesday – in the UK by Penguin Michael Joseph, a division of Penguin Random House.

Police in the Netherlands are still investigating what publishing sources say is the ‘extremely suspicious’ overnight theft of four copies of the book from the back of a parked lorry earlier this week.

Extracted from Swan Song: Diana, My Sister by Charles Spencer, to be published by Michael Joseph on September 22, £28. © Charles Spencer 2026. To order a copy for £23.80 (offer valid to 10/10/26; UK P&P free on orders over £25) go to www.mailshop.co.uk/books or call 020 3176 2937. 

Below-par showings were forgiven last season as Celtic simply just had to get by to stay in touch at the top before eventually leapfrogging Heart of Midlothian on the final day with a seventh successive league victory.

That Premiership-winning streak has been extended to 13 games following six straight victories to start the campaign, but concerns about performance level remain. Four of those six wins have been by a one-goal margin.

Twelve goals over three wins at Kilmarnock, Dundee United and in the first leg of the Champions League play-off against LASK sent an ominous warning to Celtic’s domestic rivals amid a period of high spending, particularly in forward areas.

Camilo Duran has been the standout summer recruit so far with six goals and three assists in 10 appearances, while record signing Kasper Hogh and fellow big-money arrival Haissem Hassan are yet to fully settle.

Sutton said his old club have been “flat-track bullies” by “beating the teams you expect them to beat”, but the collapse in Austria, plus Sunday’s bruising loss, has highlighted glaring deficiencies.

Even captain Callum McGregor lamented Celtic’s “team of individuals” after the weekend defeat at Ibrox.

Speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live’s Monday Night Club, former striker Sutton also expressed his “great concerns” for O’Neill’s men and said they have “big issues” after a “lightweight” midfield was “run all over” by Rangers.

Celtic have struggled to build up play against coherent pressing teams, which results in opposition sides being offered too much encouragement when the ball turns over.

They faced a whopping 60 shots across both legs with LASK. Forty of them came in a mess of a second leg. In the Premiership alone this season, they have faced 64 attempts, the same number as Hearts and six more than Rangers.

Over just six games, that tally already makes up almost a quarter of the total they faced in the entirety of the 2024-25 league-winning campaign under Brendan Rodgers.

That said, in comparison to last term, which was overseen by Rodgers, Nancy and O’Neill, Celtic’s Premiership numbers show they are currently averaging a far better goal concession rate while scoring and shooting more.

Come Sunday, though, the most crucial statistic could be in the points column.

With a rapid rematch against Rangers offering the chance to move eight points clear of their city rivals after a test against European-level opposition, the next four days will at least be mood-shifting.

Whether that is to O’Neill’s benefit remains unclear.

The conflict between Iran and the US appears to have reached a stalemate. The US navy continues to prevent Iranian vessels or others transiting to or from Iranian ports. Iran, meanwhile, threatens shipping moving in or out of the Persian Gulf region via the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has also recently said it will establish a new “restricted zone” stretching into the Gulf from the Strait of Hormuz – although details remain sketchy.

Less frequently discussed is the network of undersea cables across the Persian Gulf which connect the region with the outside world. On August 16, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Iranian government was considering attacks on that network. In the Gulf’s relatively shallow waters, threats to this critical undersea infrastructure (CUI) pose a credible risk to the Gulf States and the wider world.

These cables form a largely unseen foundation of the global economy, carrying more than 95% of international data traffic. Their role extends far beyond everyday internet and call usage. They support financial transactions, government communications and the increasingly data-intensive operations of the global technology sector.

Major technology companies such as Google, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft are investing heavily in subsea connectivity as they expand data-centre networks and seek to meet the growing demands of AI. For the Gulf States, where hundreds of billions of dollars are being invested in AI as part of efforts to diversify economies away from fossil fuels, disruption to this infrastructure could therefore have consequences far beyond communications. Cutting these CUI cables threatens a key element of their broader economic ambitions.

To demonstrate the scale of this risk, the key cable networks include the Fibre in Gulf submarine cable system, which connects Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE. There is also the Falcon Network, which connects Bahrain, Egypt, India, Iraq, Kuwait, Maldives, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan and Yemen. The Asia-Africa-Europe1 (AEE1) network, with landing sites in Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE, linking southeast Asia to Europe via Egypt. And the Gulf Bridge International, which links Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and has onward connectivity to India and Europe.

With that web of connections funnelled through the Strait of Hormuz, an international waterway that has long been of strategic importance for oil and gas has taken on a new significance as a choke point for global undersea infrastructure.

What makes the Strait of Hormuz and the rest of the Gulf region particularly vulnerable to an attack on the CUI is the shallow water. With an average depth of 50 metres and a maximum depth of less than 100 metres, those who might wish to attack the CUI network do not need the sort of high-end capabilities of Russia’s Gugi agency. Gugi, which is the Russian acronym for the Main Directorate of Deep Sea Research, is responsible for underwater sabotage and espionage.

Remotely operated vehicles (ROV) with working depths of thousands of metres are commonplace in the oil and gas industry. There are growing numbers of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) with similar operating parameters in that field. Both can be repurposed and used for offensive operations.

Iran has already debuted its own mine clearance ROV, and there may be other capabilities which it has not chosen to publicise. The shallowness of the Persian Gulf puts most of it well within the depths military divers are able to operate at. We could also see the sort of blunt threat posed by a ship “accidentally” dragging its anchor to cut cables in the manner we have witnessed in the Baltic.

So it’s entirely feasible that Iran could conduct attacks against the CUI network. And the threat has already affected planned extensions or new elements of this undersea infrastructure. Several projects have been put on hold after their owners or contractors declared they can’t safely operate in the Gulf.

This neatly illustrates the impact of conflict on the ability to maintain and extend the cables carrying so much of the world’s trade and communication. In the context of the Middle East, that will have a direct impact on the ambitions of Gulf States to become AI-enabled economies.

Iran clearly appreciates the strategic and operational significance of the regional CUI network and will have put significant effort into mapping it. It is also reasonable to assume that it will have a trained force of divers able to operate at depths that would enable them to reach the cables across the Persian Gulf seabed.

We know that they have an ROV designed for mine clearance operations – and it’s highly likely operate other assets in support of a well-developed offshore oil industry.

How far would Iran go?

The most important question is what would the Iranians be prepared to do? An attack on the cable network could create a very significant impact on trade and communications across the Middle East, with global ramifications. Such an attack would need to be targeted and limited if Iran wished to avoid global condemnation. But it’s a risk they may be willing to take given their current isolation.

That “maybe-they-would” doubt leads us to consider a new form of deterrence – of one nation’s ability to affect either CUI of another, or of broader networks.

It’s something of an extension of Nixon’s madman theory of nuclear deterrence. A nation that is desperate enough could be willing to take extreme action in the CUI domain – with what might appear to a rational observer to be disproportionate regional and potentially global consequences – in order to deter more traditional military strikes against it.

To a certain extent this should come as no surprise. The CUI network is the cyber age equivalent of the roads, bridges and rail systems which have long been targets for military planners seeking to disrupt an opponents’ ability and willingness to fight. Iran’s capacity and desire to conduct this sort of operation may be uncertain – but that very ambiguity may prove enough to have a significant impact on the region.

Greater Manchester Police and Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service attended the incident in Moss Bank Way at around 9.20pm.

The incident involved a black SUV, with an eyewitness account also confirming that the ambulance service was at the scene.

Greater Manchester Police have confirmed that two vehicles were involved in the incident, with the drivers not sustaining any injuries.

The collision shut the road at the junction with Crompton Way, opposite the ASDA Superstore.

North Yorkshire Police said officers were called to a property on Stockton Lane at 2.49am on Tuesday, September 15, following a report from the resident.

Recommended reading:

A force spokesperson said the man made off immediately on being discovered.

“It is believed the intruder gained entry via an insecure door to the property, and we are warning residents to remain vigilant and ensure they secure doors and windows overnight,” the police spokesperson added.

A North Yorkshire Police description of the man is a white male, short, in his forties, with balding dark hair, clean shaven and wearing a dark top and trousers.

Anyone with information is asked to contact DC Sarah Scott at sarah.scott@northyorkshire.police.uk or call 101, quoting incident reference 12260181024.

“The development of AI – its substance and its pace – are both intriguing and deeply concerning in equal measure.”

The King will seek reassurance from tech bosses at a summit at Dumfries House amid concerns about the future of artificial intelligence which risks being overshadowed by claims made in a memoir written by the late Diana, Princess of Wales’s brother.

Charles will address bosses from some of the world’s leading AI developers – Nvidia, Anthropic and OpenAI – and he is expected to say the new technology should be in the “service of humanity, community and the natural world”.

The event comes as an excerpt from a new book called Swan Song, about Diana, Princess of Wales written by her brother Earl Spencer, was published by the Daily Mail claiming that after her death in 1997 the King said “rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough”.

Buckingham Palace pushed back against the claim, with a spokesman saying Charles is “mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason”.

Doomsday warnings have been levelled at AI, seen by some as a threat to the existence of humanity, sparking a debate among industry leaders over how best to rein in the technology before it could escape human control.

Before talks begin later on Thursday, on whether principles can be developed to guide future applications of AI, as both a tool and an aid to the flourishing of people and the planet, Charles will deliver opening remarks to the delegates.

He is expected to say at the event being held at Dumfries House, near Cumnock, home to the King’s Foundation: “The development of AI – its substance and its pace – are both intriguing and deeply concerning in equal measure.”

The King will also comment: “Those in our world who value our humanity and its vital moral component are anxiously seeking your reassurance that we will not lose control of our destiny.”

Anthropic researcher Evan Hubinger sparked headlines around the world when he warned last week he believed there was a greater than 10% chance AI could pose a species-ending risk within 10 years.

Over the weekend, Elon Musk, the chief executive of SpaceX, and OpenAI leader Sam Altman backed a call from Dario Amodei, the boss of Anthropic, for the AI industry to “slow down” to give safety measures time to catch up.

Mr Amodei wrote in an essay that he was concerned about AI “advancing drastically faster” since the summer and that the technology could be capable of taking over the entire internet.

Charles is expected to say: “The decisions taken at this formative time will shape the world inherited by future generations.

“And so, the task before you is not merely to advance technology, but to ensure that it remains firmly in the service of humanity, community and the natural world.”

The King will also comment “our humanity must remain sacred”.

Nvidia chief executive Jensen Huang, Google DeepMind founder Sir Demis Hassabis and chairman and chief executive of IonQ Niccolo de Masi are among those attending, according to reports.

Paolo Benanti, who is an adviser to the Pope on issues of AI and technology ethics, will also reportedly be at the summit.

Charles will ask guests to consider how to harness the benefits of AI with safety at its heart and how they can build international co-operation and consensus to achieve this, so no nation is left behind and the future of mankind is protected.

The event will be overseen by the Ditchley Foundation, an organisation that brings leaders with diverse views together to address complex challenges, which has drawn up a draft charter for AI leaders.

According to reports, the charter is understood to include a “shared set of principles” that would “help guide the future application of AI, not merely as a driver of capability and efficiency, but as a tool that upholds human dignity and contributes to the flourishing of both people and the planet”.

Get more Daily Record exclusives by signing up for free to Google’s preferred sources. Click HERE.

The summer window has been and gone, but Premier League clubs remain active in the transfer market with Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester United, Liverpool and Tottenham still exploring potential deals ahead of January. Arsenal are believed to be closing in on the signing of Vincent Joseph – a young striker from Liverpool – and remain interested in Kenan Yildiz and Eli Junior Kroupi, amid shock links Rio Ngumoha.

By EVE SIMMONS HEALTH EDITOR

Published: 07:55 BST, 17 September 2026 | Updated: 07:59 BST, 17 September 2026

Waterbeach train station is planned to close as a new station is being built to accommodate thousands of new homes

Village residents have described plans to close a train station as “disgraceful”, saying it will leave them feeling “isolated” and make life “an absolute misery”. A new station is set to open in Waterbeach next year to replace the existing one about a mile and a half, or 2.4km, further north along the track.

The project is being funded by the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) alongside Homes England to serve the village as thousands of new homes are built.

South Cambridgeshire District Council approved up to 4,500 homes as part of the Waterbeach New Town development in 2024 under the condition that no houses are to be built until a new station opens. The station is planned to open in summer 2028 and the GCP said no closure will take place until the new station is open.

Dr James Dennison, a resident and parish councillor, said the new location will force people to drive there, calling it a “massive inconvenience” and a “disgrace”.

The professor of social and political science produced a report after surveying residents that estimates rail usage could fall by 50 per cent whislt car usage will rise – causing traffic congestion and an increase in emissions.

One resident, aged between 18 and 29, said the closure would make their life and those around them “an absolute misery”. They said they would have to rely on lifts from friends and family as the new station would be “too far away to be convenient for someone who doesn’t drive”.

Another resident called it “disgraceful” to move the station to serve “new homes which hardly anyone wants to or can afford to live in”.

A widow said it would “seriously impact” her life as her “lifeline will be cut off” since she doesn’t drive and most of her family lives away.

Dr Dennison, 40, said: “People are very worried and it’s pretty heartbreaking stuff. This is part of the village and it’s people’s connection to the outside world. This is a modern village that will only survive with this station – otherwise it declines.”

He said the homes nearest the new station won’t even be built until the mid 2030s, on land that is still empty fields, and the current station is closer to those that have been built so far. He said the developers had conducted a “careful PR exercise to sell it to the village” with promises of a new cafe at the new station.

He said: “Of course people come to the train station to catch the train, not to have coffee in a field. There are stations closer together on this line. We aren’t opposed to the new station – what we are saying is just don’t close our station.”

Dr Dennison added that if the station closes, it will cause a drop in the value of homes for residents living closest to it.

He said: “Everyone who moved here has moved here for the station – a lot of their land value will disappear into the air.”

Cllr Chris Boden, chair of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority’s transport committee, said the impact of a closure would be “properly considered”.

Answering a question from Dr Dennison at last week’s meeting, he said: “The combined authority will continue to engage with partners as the scheme progresses and will expect decisions relating to the future of the existing railway station to be supported by robust efforts.”

A spokesperson for GCP said the new station will be “modern, accessible, fit-for-purpose and future-proofed” and “will support the growth of the community”.

They said: “The new station will have wider platforms, an accessible footbridge and lifts, 100 cycle spaces and electric vehicle charging points. The station is part of a package of transport projects being delivered in Waterbeach by the Greater Cambridge Partnership, including a new travel hub with park and ride facilities, a new busway, and the Waterbeach Greenway.

“Together, these projects will provide sustainable and convenient ways for people to travel into Cambridge. The Department for Transport will lead the consultation process on whether to close the existing station.”

A spokesperson for the DfT said that a public consultation will take place on the station’s closure once the new station is open. They said Network Rail, as infrastructure manager, would weigh the costs and benefits of keeping the station open before submitting a closure proposal to the secretary of state for a final decision to be made.

BBC Morning Live’s Rav Wilding has warned of WhatsApp username fraud risks because of the new rule and what to avoid

A BBC security expert has highlighted a significant change coming to WhatsApp users, warning that it could pose a considerable risk. WhatsApp is introducing a feature that will allow people to communicate without needing to disclose their phone number, instead exchanging unique usernames.

However, former detective Rav Wilding cautioned that this could leave people vulnerable by sharing keywords linked to their identity, potentially enabling fraudsters to impersonate them. Appearing on BBC Morning Live, he said: “This is about a rollout that’s coming out to users of WhatsApp where you can actually have a username rather than give out your number. So it could be unique to you a bit like an email address but you give that out.

“The problem that I could potentially see with this, though, is that scammers could use a username which is very similar to a business name, for example, perhaps with a few changes, such as an underscore or swapping an I for a number one or something, and they could use that in order to try and defraud people.

“So it’s just a bit of a word of warning when this is rolled out. Treat it like an email address. Like we say on Morning Live all the time, just really make sure it’s genuine before you react to anything you’ve been sent.”

WhatsApp confirmed the feature is being rolled out globally to the platform’s three billion account holders. The company added that users would be able to remove or change their usernames at any time.

Once fully rolled out, WhatsApp users will be able to connect with one another simply by exchanging usernames. Options to block or report unwanted messages will remain in place.

Usernames are capped at 35 characters and restrictions will be minimal, with the exception of certain high-profile officials and celebrities, whose names will not be made available for others to use.

Alice Newton-Rex, WhatsApp’s head of product, said she had heard from users that they didn’t always want to share their phone numbers in order to be in contact with others, particularly in group chats.

She added that she hoped the feature would “give users control over how they choose to show up” on the app.

According to Meta, users will receive a notification once their username has been activated. Those wishing to secure a username on WhatsApp can do so through their account or profile settings within the app.

The option to reserve a username will appear once it becomes available, though this cannot be done via WhatsApp Web or Desktop.

Meta has confirmed that creators, small businesses and organisations will have the opportunity to claim the same username they use on Instagram or Facebook, ensuring consistency across platforms.

However, anyone else wishing to align their WhatsApp username with those held on other Meta platforms will need to link it to their existing accounts through Accounts Centre. Carisa Veliz, a professor at Oxford University and author of Privacy is Power, has remarked: “It is a good feature, but even if it does offer more privacy, remember WhatsApp is not a privacy-friendly app overall.

“It collects much metadata about users for marketing purposes.

“We have to remember that WhatsApp is owned by Meta – one of the tech companies with the worst track records when it comes to privacy.”