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 have seen all sorts of negative stories about Harry, but I wonder what he could have briefed about regarding William

Perhaps that's what the palace are really worried about if the "disclosures" continue, to say nothing of what else he might be able to reveal about his father

And while I take the point about the lawyer offering "balance" (does a straight denial without context count?) I'd no more take what she'd been fed on trust than I would the stories which the RF plant
Not when the whole lot of them have been shown to lie like they breathe

Why do you think they would say this then, and why not the real reason if you think this is false

Who can say?
Between the filthy media, the palaces who lie all the time to buttress their images and H&M who've been shown to lie too, there are so many strings to the whole mess that it would need a better mind than mine to pick it apart
Unless there's actual proof of whatever-it-is, I generally find it best to regard whatever story's put out as just that - a story

It has been suggested that the BBC are beginning a "campaign" to ensure that, when the Queen dies, the RF ends.

I believe the "Republic" organisation is also taking this line.

I don't know what you mean by 'disclosures'. Are you referring to the Oprah interview, but that was not briefing that was him talking from his own mouth.
I am asking what negative rumours and from 'a source' were said about William.

Does a straight accusation without context count? It only makes sense that if people are saying something and you don't agree you also have someone say something on your behalf.

Speaking of which, There was only Scobie and the lawyer who normally are positive about H&M. Except for Peter Hunt who is neutral, each and everyone one of those reporters write vitriol about Meghan, hardly a balanced number. I am actually surprised there wen't much more lies being told (except Wootten did just that).

@BadgerB

It has been suggested that the BBC are beginning a "campaign" to ensure that, when the Queen dies, the RF ends.

I believe the "Republic" organisation is also taking this line.

I understand Republic, but what is The BBC' skin in this game?

Just, I think, the usual attitude of the metropolitan elite.

It's not really a question of not agreeing with what's been claimed, rubics, more not being able to know - and the whole lot of them twist endlessly to make sure we don't
It's true that not much has been "disclosed" about William, but then with his position so close to the throne, more effort will go into squashing whatever isn't wanted

Badger even if the BBC pushed for it, I doubt the monarchy could end with the Queen, simply because they're out of time to pick everything apart by then
And FWIW I doubt the BBC would really push for it anyway; they make noise, but are also part of the establishment controlled by government via the licence fee, so if push comes to shove they'll have to bend to whatever governments want

'The documentary is billed as the two brothers are briefing against each other'

Yes, unfair scrutiny. He said/she said bollocks. Better suited to a tabloid spread rather than a BBC 'documentary'.

I bet the concert thing was always going to be itv but as always the media spin it into something else.

They're all privileged from a material point of view but it must be like living in a ridiculous soap opera every single day.

'even if the BBC pushed for it, I doubt the monarchy could end with the Queen'

Yes, what a farfetched claim. I think the BBC's days are numbered rather than the RF. What with their archaic 'licensing' fee and woke crap.

You are missing the point. It's not a she said, he said documentary. It goes deeper than that. Fundamental questions about press and rf responsibilities.

I think you are right, I think there were scheduling issues with the pre-recording of the Songs of praise xmas special anyway.

I think 'the woke' would be surprised by the statement that The BBC is somehow woke. In terms of the RF itself, they seemed to have been riding along with positive stories about the palace, if anything to the point of covering the negatives about H&M.

@JaniieJones

'even if the BBC pushed for it, I doubt the monarchy could end with the Queen'

Yes, what a farfetched claim. I think the BBC's days are numbered rather than the RF. What with their archaic 'licensing' fee and woke crap.

You are probably right. So much legislation would be needed to unpick the links between monarchy/parliament/church. Would take years.

Anyway - I'd like to see another coronation. I had chicken-pox during the last one & couldn't go to the local pub to watch it on their 10inch black& white TV...

From what has been said the Royal Family and Palaces issue with this programme is not necessarily the content but that the BBC have broken their own guidelines by not allowing them the right to reply.
Just from the first programme it is obvious from the fact that Meghan's lawyer has been interviewed and stated she had Meghan's permission to speak on the programme that the curtesy has been extended to the Sussex's and it should have been to both.
Everything in the first programme is unsustantiated "tittle tattle", as the Palaces have stated no proof has been provided. Only one reporter said their source was an ex-courtier and the reporter made it clear that the source was already an ex-courtier when they spoke to the reporter so would not have had permission from any Palace or Royal to speak to the press.
The main problem is the press there is no accountability as they can almost print anything they like and hide behind "a source said" without any proof or having to state who the source is.

So much legislation would be needed to unpick the links between monarchy/parliament/church. Would take years

Yes I read somewhere it would take between ten and twenty years to unpick.

On the RF's right to reply... would they honestly have taken advantage of that? Who would they sent on their behalf? Nicholas Witchell? A courtier? The Queen's press secretary?

I think it hinged on having a prior viewing of the programme which no one had. They were miffed at that

@BadgerB

It has been suggested that the BBC are beginning a "campaign" to ensure that, when the Queen dies, the RF ends.

I believe the "Republic" organisation is also taking this line.

She won't actually die, she'll go to sleep for a hundred years as brambles spring up around Windsor Castle, immobilising sycophants, courtiers, BBC executives, tabloid reporters and the Tory cabinet in their thorny embrace.

Then Uhtred of Bebbanburgh will ride in to seize power, turn WC into a major tourist attraction and restore the realm to the glory of its 9th-century origins.

Thanks for fuelling my post-monarchy utopian fantasy, BadgerB. Having a slow work day, will investigate the "campaign".

Do people posting headlines from the sun and treating those headlines as truth not see the irony?

Do people posting headlines from the sun and treating those headlines as truth not see the irony?

Almost as ironic as briefing the press to say you never brief the press!

interesting thread
didn't watch it. bit surprised about the palace binning the BBC, if thats true. PW just did a big thing on there.

He did, but I don't think the ratings were very good so maybe the BBC aren't too worried.

@Nishkin

Do people posting headlines from the sun and treating those headlines as truth not see the irony?

My thoughts exactly! I am sure the schedules are planned a long time in advance, I doubt W&K decided the Beeb couldn't show their concert in a hissy fit.

But it's not just the Sun is it? It's everywhere.

Oh is it? Why link a story from the Sun in that case! Not very Mumsnet is it .

It wasn't a link, it was a screenshot. Would you like links? There's pages of them. Actually, you can go and look yourself if you like!

Alright then, screen shot. Are you always this pedantic? Yes please I would like some links to other papers reporting that W&K have changed their minds about the broadcasting of their concert on the BBC. I can't seem to find any but my searching skills are dreadful. Would be very interested to read them.

Absolutely agree with everything you said @randomdisneyaddict.

'Everything in the first programme is unsustantiated "tittle tattle", as the Palaces have stated no proof has been provided.'

He said/she said gossip bizarrely featuring M's lawyer . I'm surprised they don't have a code of conduct where appearing on this type of show would be deemed inappropriate and unprofessional, particularly as the investigations and court cases are still ongoing aren't they?

Imagine if ANL lawyers appeared saying 'yeah well they colluded on FF even though they said they hadn't so therefore their credibility is non existent'. The Sussexes would rightly be wtf wouldn't they.

Either have a gossip show, or have a court case with evidence from both sides provided and cross examined. To attempt to do both seems a bit amateurish and crap tbh.

@A580Hojas

Alright then, screen shot. Are you always this pedantic? Yes please I would like some links to other papers reporting that W&K have changed their minds about the broadcasting of their concert on the BBC. I can't seem to find any but my searching skills are dreadful. Would be very interested to read them.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-william-and-kate-snub-bbc-over-screening-of-christmas-carol-concert-79dqxgbpk?ilc=timesradio:morefromthetimes#:~:text=Prince%20William%20and%20Kate%20snub%20BBC%20over%20screening%20of%20Christmas%20carol%20concert,-new&text=The%20Duke%20and%20Duchess%20of%20Cambridge%20have%20snubbed%20the%20BBC,Westminster%20Abbey%20Christmas%20carol%20concert.

The Times ok?