The digital media have it covered, royally

By Deirdre Donahue, USA TODAY

Websites around the world worked themselves into various states of digital frenzy over Kate and William's jumping the broom Friday.

• 

  British tabloid The Sun had a little fun with their headline online this morning.

British tabloid The Sun had a little fun with their headline online this morning.

Not that it's any surprise, but the U.K. media sites shone brightest. A bit more surprising was which end of that media spectrum: Just as no one throws a royal wedding better than the British upper-class, nobody mixes dishy gossip with sentimental hokum better than the lowbrow British tabloids. Their exploitation of Princess Di? who many believe was chased to her death by the paparazzi ? was all forgotten in the day's glow.

At least for today, her Wills and Harry were the kingdom's beloved hometown boys. The Mirror (mirror.co.uk), The Daily Mail (dailymail.co.uk) and The Sun (thesun.co.uk) made you tear up looking at Di's little sons, all grown-up and so handsome. Then they made you laugh with headlines like "Weddy, steady, go!" a couple hours before the ceremony.

Again less than surprisingly, The Irish Times (irishtimes.com) took a more restrained and disapproving tone, discussing the "display of monarchist pomp and pageantry." Its focus wasn't hats but history: "A series of scandals involving senior royals, Britain's economic difficulties and Diana's death in 1997 aged 36 in a car crash after her divorce from Prince Charles led many to question the future of an institution rooted in the imperial past."

Many readers' posts on The Times of India website (timesofindia.indiatimes.com) made it crystal-clear that the Irish are not alone in recalling the glory days of the British Empire far less fondly than the folks back home. And down under, Australian Geoffrey Robertson in TheSydney Morning Herald (smh.com.au) begins a piece with "It's incredible that this mediaeval nonsense still applies in Australia" ? referring to the British monarchy. Then he starts quoting American revolutionary Thomas Paine.

Back in the USA, Kate 'n' Will coverage ranged from fawning to moderate to entertainingly snarky. Major American media, including NYTimes.com and CNN.com, trod the middle ground as if they were wearing the Queen's sensible shoes. They covered the royal nuptials completely, but without going gaga or posting banner headlines. Their coverage was meat and potatoes (or, more appropriately, shepherd's pie). For People.com, however, it looked more like its bread-and-butter, taking its slogan " Everything Royals" seriously. While lots of sites posted photos of the wedding (and annoying video clips that took forever to load), People went into total royal image overload.

The Huffington Post played both sides. On one hand, they posted such factoids as "85 percent of more than 15,000 respondents to a Huff Post Facebook poll said they don't care about the royal wedding," followed by breathless breaking-news alerts like "Kate Middleton's Wedding Dress & Designer REVEALED!"

And for the hard-hearted cynics left behind by TV commentators caught up in the royal rapture ("Your passport, Ms. Walters!"), snarky blogs such as Gawker.com offered a change of pace by pointing out that Prince William might be charming ? but why no Rogaine for his bald spot?

In the end, the British tabloid Sun put it best: "What a Kate Day!"

For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

We've updated the Conversation Guidelines. Changes include a brief review of the moderation process and an explanation on how to use the "Report Abuse" button. Read more.

Kim Yoon jin Samantha Mumba Coco Lee Denise Richards Lindsay Price