The Press & The Royals: a discussion

[Whaeanui]

As we were just having a great discussion on this topic I’m going to try again to continue it on a thread of its own. A previous thread highlighted two particularly prolific ‘royal reporters’, but the same is true for all. They often manufacture stories to create divisions between the women in the family, more often than the men. The public seem to feed off this and none of the family get treated very well except the monarch. So do we think it is possible for the royal family to stay relevant and in the publics mind without their unhealthy relationship with the media? Can social media replace this? What do you think they can do to make positive changes that would reflect an understanding of the mental health challenges the media intrusion results in? Also their role in charities that deal with mental health and misogyny, mistreatment of women etc could be impacted by this too. Thoughts?
Please do not derail this thread by discussing your personal dislike of particular members or if they deserve it. I would like a discussion on how the royal family could change the relationship with the press.

Yep. That is normal.
What the RF seem to insist on is not normal by any way or means.

I think both Harry and William, unlike Charles and Diana, have done a good job when it comes to protecting their children's privacy. We only the Waleses 5 times a year on average: first day of school, walking to church services at Christmas and Easter, Trooping the Colour and a couple of engagements a year (mostly George) and their parents posting a birthday picture on social media taken by their mum. Other than that, we have no idea what these children do for the rest of their time.

With the Sussexes, we've seen more of A&L in their Netflix series but other than that,we never see them.

Do those dates really matter when Diana had genuine concerns that her phone was being tapped back in 1992?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/feb/12/monarchy.france1

The last time I looked in the dictionary "paranoia" was described as an unjustified distrust of something.

And yet, that Guardian article states that;

"The Squidgygate tape, a recording of a 20-minute conversation between the princess, calling on a landline from Sandringham, and Gilbey, answering on his mobile on New Year's Eve in 1989, are now believed to have been recorded by GCHQ and passed to amateur radio hams."

Given that incident and others, I think it was very sensible of Diana to exercise caution about exactly who she could trust.

I agree that both William and Harry are doing a much better job of protecting their children than their parents did but I still don't think it's enough.

It's a personal opinion but I feel strongly that every child, who by definition cannot consent to being filmed, is entitled to privacy while growing up, whether you live on a Yorkshire Farm, have 21 brothers and sisters, or are a member of the RF.

It doesn't matter how well balanced your parents are, or how strong your family is, being famous changes your experience of life in fundamental, usually negative, ways. In this internet age, small impressions and incidents and mistakes will be written about and will follow you around for life. It's totally unfair and wrong imho.

let’s judge it from what was reported from the the kids reactions themselves at the time. William was reportedly devastated that the interview came out, he was already being bullied at school due to all the media briefings between his parents, and this interview apparently caused even further teasing from the kids.

“When William’s housemaster returned to his study, he found the prince slumped on the sofa, his eyes red with tears,” Lacey wrote.
William also was teased at school because of the interview, Simmons told Vanity Fair.
“He felt really bad for his mum because of what she had gone through, but he was furious with her,” Simmons said. “People at school were calling her all sorts of names. The weekend after it went out they had a big row at Kensington Palace. William was furious and Diana was distraught. I was there the day after she spoke to him and Diana was in a terrible state.”
William was especially hurt by his mother’s admission of adultery with Hewitt, because she had seen how painful it was for him and his brother, Harry, when Charles confessed his affair with Camilla on TV the previous year.
“Yet here she was, doing the very same thing,” Lacey wrote. Diana also revealed to Bashir how William comforted her after Hewitt disclosed their affair in a 1994 book.
William eventually forgave his mother before she died, Simmons told Vanity Fair. Nonetheless, the interview left the future king “the most angry I had seen him at her,” Simmons added.

the fact is, neither Diana or Charles acted in the best interest of their children. Charles and Diana were both acting selfish and leaking stories against each other to the press. Their children were caught in the middle. The proper thing they both should have done was to just get a divorce and keep things closed off to the media to protect their kids. Also, it was Harry who was reportedly closer to Charles for years following the death of Diana, not the other way around. There were many reports that William did not get along with Charles, and there was even a report that Charles was unhappy over the fact that he didn’t get to spend time with William’s kids. It was Kate who apparently brought them closer.

On the press and how they act, a beautiful illustration by Valentine Low today. 1st Tweet this morning openly blaming M&H for a leak, 2nd Tweet issued after lawyers for both M&H and the Palace issued letters.

How interesting!

Extremely interesting, but it's already had it's desired effect of whipping up a frenzy of hatred and accusations. Emotional priming et voila the Malcolm X quote occurs...

Mmm I am not sure I would respect the word of any housemaster who chose to betray the confidences of his charges, especially when the commentator they are talking to is writing a book for profit.

The author Robert Lacey - another gruesome (imho) self-appointed Royal commentator in need of a new kitchen extension - has written a book titled “Battle of the Brothers” so he is obviously focused on pleasantries and butterflies rather than discord and controversy.

I think many teenage children are justifiably frustrated with their parents when they are only partly aware of the full circumstances and context of the dispute between them.

Let’s face it, Charles created this issue. Diana wouldn’t have been distressed in the first place if Charles hadn’t knowingly, in his thirties, married a woman whom he didn’t love, solely for the purposes of breeding , while being emotionally if not physically committed to another woman, with the young wife being about the only person in court unaware of what was happening. It was a monumentally unjust action with predictably unpleasant consequences for their offspring.

And btw, I have just come across an article from the Royal Report, whatever that is, suggesting that William aged fourteen onwards, being sensitive to the needs of his fellow classmates, didn’t invite either of his parents to sports day for fear of protection personnel and potential press intrusion causing upset to the event. So nothing to do with hating his mother as a pp tried to imply!

Well some basic facts are undeniable! 😃

Some of us were actually trying to enjoy an interesting debate about the RF’s relationship with the press but were then forced to defend the usual ridiculous accusations that are forever brought up by the usual suspects!

I agree it’s time to get back to the subject under discussion 😃

Exactly. William is criticised over what he said about his own mother despite being her closest confidante at such a young age. As though the posters here knew her better than her own son. What a joke! Harry can apparently talk about his mother all he likes because it’s his mother, but William has no right to do so and if he does, he’s taking the palace’s side. Just like the claims of William cheating, these posters accuse him of being under BP’s spell or defending his dad over his mother when he was the one who actually had conflicts with Charles, and Charles was closer to Harry.

Thank you to OP, and the other posters who have contributed so knowledgeably to this topic and kept the topic on track. I'm not in the UK (your day is my night), so I've missed a lot of the posts in real time, but I am catching up. So far, a great discussion over all.

@Morestrangerthings thanks, I agree!

Thanks for that, very interesting but yes, they lie to get the desired effect knowing there’s no real repercussions from their deceitful reporting.

@Wingedinsectsunite thank you for your responses here!

It doesn't matter how well balanced your parents are, or how strong your family is, being famous changes your experience of life in fundamental, usually negative, ways. In this internet age, small impressions and incidents and mistakes will be written about and will follow you around for life. It's totally unfair and wrong imho.

Agreed. I also like seeing the current royal children are being better protected. I hope that there’s never again a royal baby presented on the steps of the hospital hours after birth for the worlds media. That kind of thing belongs in the past.

This is the statement from H & M, it’s so good 😂

This thread might not suit you maybe? It's an interesting iscussion on how the royals handle the media, the impact that has on them, and in turn on the public. It's interesting to know whether there is manipulation of the media for any ends.

There are more pro royal or anti H&M threads around if that's your thing...

Just on Kate which I must pick up on... it wasn't a 1 minute photo call by the way. Far far longer, and Kate has said that she found the post birth photos with George 'terrifying'. (her words)

@BelleHathor

I laughed hard at Valentine Low's volte face. And I loved Meghan's statement about the tabloids and royal correspondents and the "exhausting circus of their own creation." In other words, talk amongst yourselves, y'all, and leave my name out of your mouths! God, I hope she writes a book.

@StickyWickets and @MamoruHisaishi

This is indeed a good natured and insightful thread about the press and the royals.

It's really kind of you to call some of us Mumsnet royalty of the royal boards. I personally take it as the compliment to our non-namechanging longevity that it is intended to be, so on behalf of the Mumsnet royalty, please accept my apologies that this thread does not meet the exacting standards of the Meghan and Harry bashing you have come to expect.

Happily, that can be found elsewhere.

Mamoru recently started a thread about 8-year-old Harry being a racist. I believe that thread is still open. Also open is a thread, that, with exceptional nuance and subtlety, is titled "Harry and Meghan - why I dislike them BOTH" with the BOTH capitalised in case the casual reader may miss the fact that the OP dislikes them BOTH.

I and others left that thread when posters started comparing Meghan's face to that of Vicky Pollard, a character performed by a white man, while discussing the shade of her skin colour.

There are many other threads, but those two threads may provide for you what is missing here. Happy hunting!

@Whaeanui

You posted it!!

Love that "we encourage" ...

Would love to see if any royal correspondent will read it out in full. Or even retweets it ....!!!

The gutter press must be so so frustrated. Meghan not seen for months, they have been literally cut off, and the creative minds to come up with news stories about her must be on overtime.

I imagine the DT story was one of those. It's backfired somewhat.

Obviously the palace won’t release a statement like that. But they could release something addressing this if they wanted to. Then I guess though, that would narrow down the culprit. Is there any chance their staff leak things without their knowledge, and could they do anything if that were the case? I don’t honestly think that is the situation, they wouldn’t keep their job surely.

I hope she writes a book.

I do as well, but not yet she should hold out for a good while.

I agree she should hold off on publishing the book for at least two years. But I hope she is writing it now.