Royals let's give them the ability to opt out of all British Press Coverage

[chinesewhiskers]

Just an idea, based on the current litigation by the Duchess of Sussex. Should we give each Royal the ability to completely opt out of British press coverage. No negative press but also no coverage of any engagements whether public or private. Mainstream media blackout. They would be allowed to use their own social media accounts only.

Is this unreasonable? Do you think there would be any take up? Would surely solve Harry's current complaints.

Oh FFS 🙄

How would we enforce it though, given that we live in a country where free speech is thankfully legal?

Or perhaps the press could behave in a responsible manner.

0/10

Yeah that's really not how 'news' works. People don't get to decide whether they are or are not newsworthy; we do that by either buying the newspapers or not. The RF sell papers, so they are newsworthy.

@chinesewhiskers they should be able to opt out but then that should also include opting out of all the privileges that come with being royalty.
Being royalty means you are a public figure a representative of your country. If you don’t want the press that comes with these engagements then you can’t also reap the benefits of such a position.

that's a bit victim blamey really.

I think the press should have a code of conduct and stick with it. Pretty much how they were supposed to after Diana died.

Putting aside enforceability- As a social contract do you think there would be any uptake.

If the royal decides to stay in - normal rules would apply. They would be open to legitimate criticism where warranted but no bullying.

That would not work given the social engagements they have. Also it would mean the publicity they have for good causes would not be reported - look at the work that Princess Diana did for landmines and AIDS in her time.

It is not a ban against any reporting they want. All they are asking for is that parts of the press stop this hounding against the Duchess. From what he has said, that included printing parts of a letter she wrote so they could twist the meaning to fit their narrative. If those members of the press would act with integrity I think they would not have the same issue with the press.

There does seem to be this vilification of her in the press that they just have not really had with other royals.

As long as they opt out of their publicly funded lifestyles, then yeah! Sure!

M&H would be on the first flight to the US.

I think it's fair enough to accept media coverage of your work where it's of interest but to think coverage of touching your stomach, buying a blanket or holding your baby is going a bit too far.

It would be a deal - you get zero criticism in the press but also you get zero coverage of any kind. But you can create your own publicity as you see fit using your own extensive social media reach and following. They control the narrative.

They could still do the good works and post on their own social media.

I appreciate it is never going to happen and is unworkable for many reasons but if the offer was there would it be taken?

I think that all the stuff the Royals do for public service should get more coverage. If you look at the court circular, most of them are off visiting schools, churches, hospitals, charities and all of that good stuff on a daily basis. Where's the coverage of that? Where is the coverage of all those people who are working hard for their communities and country being recognised by a royal visit?

Instead the media covers disagreements within the Markle family or what fucking shoes, hat or dress Eugenie wore, whether or not Charlotte is having a good first day at school, is Kate or Megan pregnant again, does Charles hate William and on and on and on it goes.

I'm not saying that genuinely newsworthy stories shouldn't be covered if they relate to members of the royal family but dear god, enough of the endless gossip and speculation about fuck all.

I think many, many royals would be quite happy with that. I don’t think they enjoy the media nearly as much as some people seem to think. Personally their lives seem like a living nightmare to me.

It's been put to a referendum. Prince Andrew and Prince Harry where well up for it but everyone else quite likes having a free press, no matter how disgusting they are.
Sounds like you'd like to live in Thailand, can't say anything about the Royals over there.

This sounds like drivel from someone who believe privacy is a right afforded by law, it isn’t.

I'd rather we just cracked down on the immoral behaviour of the press, and didn't allow publications that are hate spewing works of fiction to be called newspapers and given the credibility of presenting themselves as delivering factual, neutral information when they are not doing any such thing.doing

Anyway, in your scenario who else gets to opt out? Why only royals? Why not famous businessmen accused of sexual assault? Or politicians who've behaved unlawfully? What are the qualifying criteria and where are your safeguards?

I'm pretty sure the charities they figurehead would be disappointed.

No one is forcing them to remain 'Royal' though are they?

Zara is pretty much left alone. The option is there. Clearly no amount of suffering is bad enough to give up the privileges although maybe I'm being unfair.

I think we can trial it with the Royals and if successful offer it to other celebrities. There would have to be exceptions- like if you were accused of or charged with a crime then you lose black out privileges.

Or the papers could just try not being a bunch of racist dicks? That would also work?

Yeah right. Please fund us millions of pounds but don't ever write an article about us.

It could help restrain the press because if they continue to act as utter arseholes the Royals are more likely to opt out. Like Kate and Wills - they seem to have a pretty good deal at the moment from the press so I imagine they would continue to opt in, in the current climate.

I think the public funding for those that opt out would need to be reconsidered and adjusted accordingly.

I'd rather we just cracked down on the immoral behaviour of the press, and didn't allow publications that are hate spewing works of fiction to be called newspapers and given the credibility of presenting themselves as delivering factual, neutral information when they are not doing any such thing

Is there any such thing as a solely unbiased fact based newspaper anywhere in the world that has a press?

I think I'll spare my sorrow over media bullying for the poor victims of society who no one gives a second 2nd thought about - like the Grenfell survivors, who couldn't get media coverage for shit over the unsafe conditions they were living in until they literally went up in flames and then were vilified for daring to complain about nearly being killed or expecting decent replacement accommodation. The people filling up the court system everyday for the crime of being too poor to pay their council tax, whose stories don't get told, yet must endure being told by their hypocritical betters that they must dig yet deeper and do more for the environment. The ordinary people (like the couple falsely accused of flying a drone over heathrow airport) who fall foul of the press with no means to sue.

I don't see why I should give it to people who live great lives, choose not to live quietly, deliberately court the press and want to be famous and adored on their terms. And that includes a lot of celebrities not just H&M.