BBC The Princes and the Press

[coniferforest]

Did anyone watch this last night? About William and Harry and their different approaches to the press. Last night was part 1 of 2.

I think it depends what you are referring to in terms of the royal household. I think equerries, security, catering, footmen, drivers, housekeepers, chefs, maintenance, gardeners etc are hired centrally by the overall Royal household - at least for the Queen, Charles, Kensington Palace etc. I think William and Kate will be responsible for more personal appointments like nannies and given more personal input on their private offices like diary secretaries, personal assistants, PR and comms employees.

The Royal Household has famously relied a lot on military connections and quite a few gay staff are attracted to these roles. Royal flummery is pretty camp. But generally not terribly diverse and as far I'm aware the private offices of diary secs, PAs, comms and PR staff are pretty much 100% white - or were till recently - at least as far as W & K and H & M are concerned.

Just because you "imagine" something of mixed race people @TheElvishQueen doesn't mean it's true.

One of the narratives in the UK and on here is that 'the RF is racist' so why would anyone reading that, and who is not white, apply for jobs where the suggestion is that they will be treated in a terrible way?

The point's also often made about their intimate links to our colonialist past and that they're therefore symbols of oppression, so seen in that light it's hard to blame any POC who feel they'd rather not work for them

I was amused to see Charles shipped out for the Barbados ceremony though, just as he was with Hong Kong. Makes a change for him to visit the Commonwealth rather than scuttling to the Gulf to chisel money, and perhaps it was thought his Eeyore expression was a good fit when we were "losing" something?

@TooBigForMyBoots

Just because you "imagine" something of mixed race people *@TheElvishQueen* doesn't mean it's true.

No I didn’t say it was!

It was speculation, like much of this thread.

Maybe the pay is not that great and all you get is a Tesco Pud for Christmas.

That’s about right, yes.

@Ionlydomassiveones

“I was always quite sympathetic to H&M anyway, but was cheering them on when it came to the report about the birth. A giant FU to the press.”

You do know that the British taxpayers fund the royal family? And the British press are part of the establishment and democracy? It’s not an FU to the press, it’s an FU to the taxpayers who fund them. (Or did. And probably still do via the Duchy of Cornwall).

The senior royals know that many more FUs like that and the public will tell the whole royal family to FO.

I do know the British tax payers fund the RF which is why I am in favour of a republic. However, having a family willing to stand around in the rain and open stuff does not equate to the press being able to say whatever the hell they want, ferment trouble and then expect to still be given free access when it suits them. After the stuff they had said about Megan, i am surprised they were willing to talk to them at all. The most interesting thing for me last night, as well as the admission that the negative stories were the ones that sold, were the graphs showing the negative press Megan got over time.

@JaniieJones

'Yep. They obviously feel like they own H&M and their baby! How very dare they do it differently, the RRs were right pissed off, and if it annoys C Tominey all the better'

Totally agree rousette (bet you never thought you'd hear me say that ). They absolutely had the right to privacy and to announce it as and when they decided, who cares about tradition. Having said that H should maybe have said from the off 'there will be no scroll announcing the Labour or delivery, no showing of the baby, it will be a 100% private event'. Yes the media wouldn't have been keen but by that stage it wouldn't have mattered, pretending they'd do as expected but be so obviously reluctant with the 'mix up' over announcements just seemed a bit silly

'I agree... Meghan wanted her own Doctor I believe and why not if you can do that.'

Absolutely and of course she would have full and easy access to HCPs of her choice 24/7.

Which is exactly what H&M said at thee interview :' just let the public know that Archie is not getting a title and is therefore not part of the whole showing on steps things. Just let them know, they will understand' or something like that.

It was BP who were doing the runaround.

I didn't get the fuss over them not doing the steps of the hospital photo with Archie. It was only a "tradition" that dated back to the births of William and Harry (or did Princess Anne do it with her kids?) and anyway, H&M did a meet and greet with the press a few days later where they answered questions and let everyone get a good look at Archie. That was hardly hiding him away!

Yes, AnnunciataZ, it was Anne who started the "thing" of appearing on the steps with the new baby

It always seemed a bit unnecessary to me, especially since photos tended to emerge soon enough for anyone interested, but I suppose it offered something to do for those who like to dress up in union flag coats and that idiot who pretends to be a town crier

Companies say no one wants to apply who is black, a woman, disabled, etc, when actually they don't want to look at their own recruitment and employment practices. Normal things to look at is where you advertise, whether job descriptions unnecessarily discriminate, the proportion of people employed compared to who applies, and then retention.
So is the issue who applies, in which case you look at adverts and job descriptions, who you appoint, or who you retain. This is really basic HR practices. Most companies did this sort of work in the 80s and 90s and it is now a routine part of recruitment analysis.

Anne was the first to give birth in a public hospital, so when she left, the press were ready to take pictures. She didn't really pose as such. Diana did the same, as did Kate, although those were more formal poses, rather than just getting into the car.
Meghan and Harry are the only ones that did a pose with questions and answers inside Windsor Castle, so theirs was actually giving more access and publicity, not less!

having lived in the states for a long time, I can vouch that the British tabloid press is quite shocking in its vitriol

Celebrity interviews tend to be cloyingly sycophantic - women’s magazines and the Sunday supplements, for example. These seem to me to be similar to the Ellen interview. Access is traded for PR.

Hillary Clinton alluded to how difficult it was to have to be chummy with journalists on a tour, when she was running for President, when they were currently destroying her in the previous days’ reports.

Does any nation have a press which gets the balance right between questioning the syrupy nonsense they’re fed by people who are paid to lie (aka PR), without tipping into viciousness?

@queenofarles

Maybe the pay is not that great and all you get is a Tesco Pud for Christmas.

Tesco's Finest and the princely sum of £8 though.

Probably tax deductible too so a win all round

I didn't get the fuss over them not doing the steps of the hospital photo with Archie

I blame it on the royal PR machine. They decided they needed to throw the plebs a tot pic bone or two as a sweetener to divert attention from rocketing costs.

It's the royal equivalent to looking at the kitten pic rather than the vet bill.

The pay is not great. But they have plenty of white staff. Since black people tend on average to earn less, low pay is not a reason not to apply for a post.

julieca, we can either discuss this rationally or just make general assumptions that the main reason is that the RF look down on POC.
It could be great number of reasons, it could be that POC don’t feel comfortable working for the RF, if could be low pay and long hours, living in and being away from home and family for long period of time, do they even give yearly bonuses?
It’s not very appealing.

I think the sort of people who would be attracted would want the job because of the kudos involved in working for the RF. For some people, especially those with a history of oppression and discrimination may not be thrilled about being employed by an elitist institution linked to all the wrongs perpetrated in the days of Empire. I may be wrong, but that’s my suggestion as mentioned up thread.

Why would POC be affected more with any of that?
What a strange thing to think.
Low pay, long working hours, being away from home (no idea what that means) affects everyone surely?

Because they have a history of oppression, that’s why. It’s fairly obvious.

I can imagine them being wary of working for the RF because of the family's colonial history.
But not low pay and all of that.
That was my point.
Low pay long hours etc applies to everyone surely

@HeddaGarbled

having lived in the states for a long time, I can vouch that the British tabloid press is quite shocking in its vitriol

Celebrity interviews tend to be cloyingly sycophantic - women’s magazines and the Sunday supplements, for example. These seem to me to be similar to the Ellen interview. Access is traded for PR.

Hillary Clinton alluded to how difficult it was to have to be chummy with journalists on a tour, when she was running for President, when they were currently destroying her in the previous days’ reports.

Does any nation have a press which gets the balance right between questioning the syrupy nonsense they’re fed by people who are paid to lie (aka PR), without tipping into viciousness?

This is why I specifically referred to the tabloids. People over there who have experience with both countries often comment on how the British tabloid press (not the whole press) is like nothing else they have come across. Seems a lot more personal over here and that they whip themselves into a froth which is then reported as news in itself. It is one thing to not want to be chummy with someone who wrote an article disagreeing with you or questioning your abilities - it is the job of the press to challenge, but would be hard to live with. But quite another to have a press that thinks up insults and revels in them. You also don't get the partisanship that that tabs show in the extreme level we have here. Even when the tabs are trying to be nice, the tone and attitudes can be appalling (straight out of compton, for example).

Not everyone Rousette From what I read there is absolutely no benefits ,

Employees sometimes keep moving from one place to the other, its not just all office work in one place.