To think the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge need to work on their PR strategy?

[SamanthaBrique]

In recent months they've been accused of being work shy and what's their solution? To release photos of them and the children on a luxury skiing break! Now I don't begrudge them a holiday, but why make it so public? If they wanted to release photos of the kids then they could've just released a few shots of George and Charlotte at Kensington Palace or Anmer Hall. I don't know who is advising them on their PR but AIBU to think they need to engage someone a bit more in touch with public sentiment?

Billsykes you have just reminded me of our history professor at university who recommended that we try diving the Thames for James II's great seal if we ever find ourselves in financial trouble- apparently whoever finds it will be able to retire comfortably for ever more on the proceeds. There have been times during the last 10 years when this has almost seemed a viable option!

Gosh, I do find it unbelievable that so many presumably intelligent people feel they have a basis to condemn someone they don't know and in such a thoroughly mean-spirited way.

If I was Kate, I'd say hang the lot of you and enjoy my life.

William and Kate are probably very nice people and I don't mind at all that they are trying to bring up a family. But I think it is interesting that this thread has revealed a lot of anti-monarchy feeling. I think that it is true that they can't expect automatic respect for being Royal any more. Personally I think that the institution of the monarchy has reached its sell by date and it is very unfair that anybody should be born into it and undergo that scrutiny for life.

I really dislike any anti-William and Kate attitude. They have every right to live their lives as they want to. However if they choose to be the heirs to the throne, they also choose to take on a public role.

It is interesting to me that the Palace didn't announce that Kate would take some time off for maternity leave. I think most people here would be more than happy for there to be an official announcement that she is not doing any public duties for a year after the birth of her first child. Had they done so, I think there would be many more people who would leap to her defence. As it is, the media forget that she is a new mother with responsibilities bringing up a baby at the moment. It is a shame that she is not being protected in that way.

So actually I agree with the OP - the PR has been very poor and it has led to bad feeling that may be unwarranted.

gonetosee it's the intelligent people who see the whole idea of a monarchy absurd. Kate certainly can't say "hang the lot of you" and then enjoy life. She enjoys life at the expense of all these "mean spirited" people. How the hell do you think they can afford such extravagant, pampered lifestyles?

How would they live without all the priveledges?

They would live exactly as they live now but without the titles, without any requirements to attend state events, with no expectations of patronage of charities and with no problem telling the daily mail to fuck off in those exact terms.

I know what life I would choose.

Am laughing at the idea that James II abdicated. Aren't there any Scottish MNs?

Go and have a read up about James II. Legally his status was deemed to be an abdicated King, even if he didn't like that. And it remains so for his descendants.

Also I suggest you have a good read around exactly what William and Kate get too. For a start, they would have to pay for their own security. Private security. They would have to meet the costs of recruiting, training and all the other associated employment costs. Their security would no longer be sourced direct from the police and the army so they wouldn't be able to tap into their systems.

They would no longer have access to the Royal train or the Royal flight. Their access to the rail system would become the same as anyone else's and they'd have to pay for jets and helicopters.

They would no longer have special status and diplomatic immunity travelling abroad and would no longer have access to government departments to ease their way around the world.

They would lose access to the Royal Palaces and their security systems. They would have to live in privately owned houses and pay for upkeep and renovation themselves.

With the loss of their status a lot of the rich friends who currently provide their private yachts and islands would melt away with their Royal cachet.

The royal family are rich, but they are not that rich. The idea that they could carry on leading the lifestyle they do with just their own funding and a dibs on the Duchy of Cornwall is laughable.

They are not oligarch rich. They are not palaces, yachts and private islands and jets rich. Look at what Diana's life was like when she lost access to all those things, she became dependant on rich friends to maintain the same lifestyle.

It's ridiculous to suggest that they would have access to the same experiences and lifestyle if they abandoned their royal status.

It's not just about the money, though Bill Sykes is right to point out that their wealth wouldn't cover it. It's about access to the world's most powerful & sought after people, invitations to the most exclusive events,

They'd be giving up things like jaunts to the royal box at Wimbledon, VIP tickets to the sports events across the world, star studded state receptions/dinners everywhere they visit, hanging with Hollywood A listers/world leaders.

I can see why they wouldn't want to give that up.

So they won't have private planes and trains and a stately home for each season. But they could live as well as the Middleton's do. Which if William desires a 'normal' upper-middle class, quiet life as we're often led to believe, then a life like the Middleton's have will no doubt do the Cambridge's quite well.

There are plenty of nicely well-off aristocracy who aren't Russian rich, but can send their 5 kids to private school and take 3 good foreign holidays a year and have a couple of staff. They would just become another one of those.

That's fine WTAF and may be what they'd aspire to, I don't know. But there's a significant gulf between this upper middle class lifestyle and what they have now.

And don't forget, the Middletons worked their arses off for that lifestyle. I doubt Carole shuddered with horror at the thought of doing 2 hours work when her infant was 11 months old.

they'd have to pay for their own security

If they weren't public figures they wouldn't need security. They wouldn't need their way around the world 'eased'. (In reality they would probably be delighted to travel like other people instead of meeting x numbers of fawning strangers and having to visit any number of places they have no interest in. I doubt they would choose to spend their 'holidays' providing the destination country with publicity pictures.

No, the anti-monarchists are not being intelligent when it comes to Kate. They are making up spiteful assumptions and choosing not to consider mitigating circumstances (such as difficulties Kate experienced working in the city and the small matter of her maternity leave), the better to pull her to pieces. It's not clever and it's not fair. But who cares, it must feel good.

The thing you are missing is that Kate doesn't need public opinion to live her life. She is protected from all the vitriol; it need not affect her at all. And the more vitriol there is, the more William will hate the press and cloister away his family from anything approaching public life. And unless the monarchy were to collapse altogether (not necessarily a bad thing in anyone's eyes), there is absolutely nothing you can do but grind your teeth. Which you do. Spitefully.

So yes, Kate certainly can say hang the lot of you and live her life. She has her children and her husband, she'll always have enough money to finance a comfortable lifestyle (there is no evidence she *wants " more money than that) and members of the public who do speak to her will probably be star struck and adoring.

And if she doesn't give a damn about the views of a nation who are as deliberately obtuse as many have been on this thread, it serves them right.

And don't forget, the Middletons worked their arses off for that lifestyle. I doubt Carole shuddered with horror at the thought of doing 2 hours work when her infant was 11 months old

So true. I have a lot of respect for Carole Middleton.

No argument that CM snr has a work ethic.
My understanding was that CMJnr had her education funded by a family trust.If you could have your child's education funded,would you encourage them towards a profession, or social/political connections?

So true. I have a lot of respect for Carole Middleton
I do too. I suspect a lot of the vitriol here is actually based on snobbery. How did this 'ordinary' girl get a lifestyle I should have?

boll You'd watch them make their own decisions I expect. How many of your key life choices were made on the basis of your mother's encouragements?

We are all products of nature and nuture. Imo our choices are not made in isolation of our upbringing.
Some people might consider minimum work for maximum gain to be a very smart option.

So the mother of the drug addict or tax dodger has only herself to blame, then?

Did I say that?
I'm sure there's a clever name for that extrapolation. Straw man?
Some interesting opinions here.

if she doesn't give a damn about the views of a nation who are as deliberately obtuse as many have been on this thread, it serves them right.

Fair enough, but a person who doesn't give a damn about the views of the nation shouldn't be the head of state. Of course Kate will never be head of state, but in a hereditary monarchy like ours she does have a public role as wife and mother.

I think your views actually just show what is wrong with a hereditary head of state in the way that this country understands it - you get people who enjoy (quite understandably) the perks of some parts of the job, hate (quite rightly) the intrusion into their personal lives, and end up not giving a damn about what people think because they and their family will still be entitled to be head of state no matter how much time they put into public service.

I hope there will be a rethink of the role of the monarchy at some point in my lifetime but I'm not holding my breath. Far from there being snobbery towards Kate, I think that many of the views here actually come from disbelief that in the 21st century people can still be born into or marry into a public role that carries immense privilege but also immense obligations.

andintothefire I think you have confused my views with someone else's

How do you all feel about Tony Blair who has immense privileges such as security but does nothing for the country at all?

Blair should hang. For so, so many reasons. I don't think there's much you can compare him to.

I think that Tony Blair probably deserves his own thread, and may even have one here.

I think your views actually just show what is wrong with a hereditary head of state in the way that this country understands it - you get people who enjoy (quite understandably) the perks of some parts of the job, hate (quite rightly) the intrusion into their personal lives, and end up not giving a damn about what people think because they and their family will still be entitled to be head of state no matter how much time they put into public service

I think you've nailed the essential "problem" there fire.

I suspect a lot of the vitriol here is actually based on snobbery. How did this 'ordinary' girl get a lifestyle I should have

I don't see a lot of vitriol. Some, but not much. People are allowed to disagree with the Royal Family. They are allowed to not particularly warm to Kate. That's not vitriolic.

And suggesting that many of these articulate and perfectly normal responses are borne of 'snobbery' is pretty much the same as shrieking 'haters gonna hate' across the Daily Hate comments section. Don't minimise other people's POV by labelling it 'snobbery.'

And I've never met anyone who would want Kate's life. It would be my idea of hell.