Meghan Markle and Harry have been vocal about the dangers of social media and how it influenced their choice to stand down from their positions as royals. They are not wrong. In fact, they could not be more right given the latest revelation.

A new study of over 114,000 tweets about the pair reveals a hate campaign against Meghan on Twitter, with 83 accounts responsible for over 70% of the unpleasant information directed at her.

Bot Sentinel, a Twitter analytics firm, published a report on Oct. 26 demonstrating that the campaign's primary goal is to disseminate false information about the pair. As a result, the campaign's 187,631 combined followers are being used to spread even more negative information about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

In a statement to BuzzFeed News, a Twitter spokesperson told the outlet that they are "actively investigating the information and accounts referenced in this report - we will take action on accounts that violate the Twitter Rules."

Bot Sentinel CEO Christopher Bouzy added, "This campaign comes from people who know how to manipulate the algorithms, manipulate Twitter, stay under the wire to avoid detection and suspension. This level of complexity comes from people who know how to do this stuff, who are paid to do this stuff."

In March 2020, Harry and Meghan deleted their Instagram account, and as of today, they don't have any other online presence. According to Meghan's statement to Fast Company in January, they will never return to social media unless significant changes happen. They reportedly want to see more genuine pledges to change or reform"

Meanwhile, outside of social media, there continues to be negative writeups about the pair. One significant topic that haters keep repeating is the need to remove Meghan Markle of her "titles."

According to Express UK however, this topic does not make sense as there are no titles to remvoe from her anyway. The outlet says Markle is the pretentious one who keeps alluding herself as a royal when she is not.

Following her recent engagement in US politics, Meghan Markle's title is once again at the center of controversy. However, a constitutional expert claims that "nothing can be stripped from her."

Invoking her experience as a mother of two, Meghan authored an article for a political campaign advocating for guaranteed paid leave for millions of Americans.

In a letter she sent to US congressional leaders last week, the 40-year-old duchess pleaded for paid parental leave on Sussex letterhead and signed with the title Duchess of Sussex. It certainly drew mixed reactions between those who loved the content because they believed it has to be done, and those who hated it because it was Markle who wrote it.

Meghan's involvement in US politics sparked outrage, with some, like Republican Congressman Jason Smith, calling for the duchess to lose her title as a result. Members of the Royal Family are typically expected to be politically neutral.

To be clear, Meghan Markle became Duchess of Sussex through her marriage to Prince Harry in 2018. He would have to lose his position as well, though, unless the couple divorced or an Act of Parliament was passed to remove the peerages from both of them.

Iain MacMarthanne, a constitutional expert, previously told Express.co.uk that royals are truly expected to be neutral and conservative, in a way. Not being so can mean overstepping and there are serious consequences. "Like all conventions, there is much flexibility as to what is, and what is not, acceptable territory to become involved in, and the further away any royal is from succeeding to the crown the greater the latitude given."

He said it's easier to shout cancel and remove than done. "In the instance of the Duchess of Sussex no laws have been broken, conventions are there to be tested, but above all else, suggestions that the Duchess could be stripped of her title is to assume it was given to her," he explained.

"This is not the case. The Duchess holds her styles and titles as a courtesy, derived from her husband. In effect, there is nothing to strip from her, she is at liberty not to use these titles and could, should she prefer, be known by her pre-marital name," he added.