George's exams

[everetting]

Kate is not going with william to Singapore as George has important exams. What exams would a 10 year old be sitting in November?
I know nothing about private school systems so hoping someone here does.

What a strange reaction! "Poor little chap"

Royal children have been appearing on these mags forever. It's part and parcel of the role.

As you seem to be an anti-royalist, I'm guessing your real objection is the perceived promotion of royalty.

I've never found hockey terribly useful but maybe that's because I hated it.

Re magazine cover - there’s nothing to sue for. Photo is from a public event - words are speculation opinion.

I haven’t read the full article but I can’t see a legal issue (ethics and moral issues aside)

Royal children have been appearing on these mags forever. It's part and parcel of the role.

And what do the royal children get out of this arrangement?

Surely the Royal family must have approved the hello cover?

I haven’t read the full article but I can’t see a legal issue (ethics and moral issues aside)

Yes, it’s the ethical and moral issues that concern me.

And what do the royal children get out of this arrangement?

It's not really any of your business

Not a strange reaction at all. I would've not wanted my 10 year old front cover of a magazine whoever they were.

Fine if you sell pics to Hello like Mike & Zara of their firstborn. Well... not fine... but you know what I mean. That's a whole different argument.

No, my real objection is nothing to do with perceived promotion of royalty at all.
You obviously don't know me and what I've posted over years and years. I object to children being used for the purposes of promotion or PR, or in this case to sell magazines by Hello.

As you seem to be consistently pursuing an anti-monarchy agenda on MN, I'm skeptical about your 'ethical and moral' concerns for the children...

Yes it is. Our taxes pay for them. Once they pay for themselves, it will no longer be our business.

Object all you like, they aren't your children so it's really none of your business. And why single out George? There's plenty of kids in the public eye.

Good seats at big events, football/tennis etc.

I object to children being used for the purposes of promotion or PR, or in this case to sell magazines by Hello

I feel the same. I am consistent with my views.
Fortunately for me @royalwatchewr your skepticism doesn’t factor into my principles/morals.

no-one wanted to address the issue of young vulnerable children signing NDA’s so their images could be used commercially to sell a book and potentially a documentary

Is is better if you’re wealthy enough not to use your own kids, but proxy ones ?

And why single out George? There's plenty of kids in the public eye.

George isn’t being singled out. If you have an issue with this thread, take it up with his mother. She chose to share private information about her 10 year old with the world.

@MissElinorDashwood

How does the use of children to promote a book sit with your principles/morals?

Start up a thread and we can discuss it, if you like.

You keep saying to posters 'it's none of your business'. Hate to tell you. It is.

I am talking about a child being shaped to be a King. The other kids in the public eye arent taxpayer funded royals.

You are obviously new here and haven't been on the RF threads before, there's thousands of them, so the RF are obviously 'our business'. !!

Why? I don't have any problem with George being in the public eye, and I believe the limited amount of personal information his parents have revealed about him is entirely appropriate.

You however have been saying that you object to him being discussed on ethical and moral grounds out of concerns for his privacy.

So I am asking - why single George out? If your objections are motivated by a crusade to protect children from the public eye, what other children are you worried about? Are you posting on threads about the over-exposure of Harper Beckham? Or other kids in the public eye?

Or is it just George, and this actually just a thinly-veiled excuse to criticise Kate/William/ the RF?

If we stuck to discussing what's our business there wouldn't be much of a Mumsnet

George is too much in the public eye. He is only 10.

I think it about any child too much in the public eye and have said this on various posts for years. It's not right IMHO.

No - this is exactly the type of cover that does not need approval.

It’s bread and butter for Hello. They buy the usage rights to a photo from Getty, and make a headline up as an excuse to use the photo.

Anyone in a public event could have their image used like this without recourse.

the thread is about George, because of something his mum said.

A life of complete luxury, never having to want for anything, never having to worry about passing any exams, what jobs they will get, pay any bills etc etc. The family knows that they have to do things to keep the whole thing going. That includes having sycophantic nonsense made up about them by Hello Magaxine.