Not everyone has been filled with joy at news of the Royal Baby, as anti monarchists say broadcasters are "disgracing themselves" with fawning coverage.
The Republic campaign said it was an "obscene" way to treat a newborn baby, and claimed the publicity was leading to a spike in its membership from people wanting to "stop this nonsense".
Daily Mirror journalist Brian Reade was equally unimpressed, saying the wall-to-wall publicity made him empathise with Kate's morning sickness.
"For millions of Britons, being asked to celebrate that a stranger is being born into a life of the highest privilege just because a sperm of a royal fertilised an upper middle-class woman’s egg, is as jarring as it is baffling," he wrote.
Graham Smith, of the Republic campaign group, told Huff Post UK the coverage was "disproportionate and inappropriate."
"It's completely missing the public mood," he said.
"Most people are not interested, and there's not a national mood of joy and celebration - it's not reflecting what's really going on.
"The monarchy is an outdated institution that relies on inherited power. These issues need to be scrutinised and looked at.
"Journalists need to be stepping back from the institution, not doing its job for them."
Broadcasters are "disgracing themselves", Smith said, claiming the publicity was driving people into the Republican campaign's arms.
Although only around a quarter of people would do away with the Royal Family, Smith said: "It isn't black and white like that.
"Another 75% or couldn't really care that much."
"We're on the baby's side here - the baby is innocent," Smith went on.
"It's obscene, loading all these expectations onto this kid, mapping its life before it's a day old.
"It's quite appalling really. It needs to have the same right to decide its own future as everyone else.
"He has no freedom of religion, no freedom of conscience."
He added: "This is reminder that we're not equal - and that's a crying shame in the 21st century."
For less fawning Royal Baby coverage, SEE ALSO: