Royal reporters

[CurlewKate]

Just heard an interesting/depressing thing about the slimyness of old school royal reporting. Apparently, James Whittaker (well known to us older people) couldn’t get close access to Charles and Diana while they were on holiday so sat on a cliff watching them on a yacht through binoculars. After 8 hours without them exchanging a word, he drew the conclusion that their marriage was in trouble….and broke the story. Those were the days-they had to suffer for their stories!🤣

I think it's not about "averting eyes", but about what constitutes invasion of privacy.
In all honesty, I never cared about how many children Boris Johnson had, I cared about how he ran the country.

What about someone like Boris Johnson? In the days of James Whittaker he wouldn’t have got away with his affairs and unknown number of children.

What do you mean ‘got away with his affairs’? Do you think had James Whittaker exposed these affairs it would have stopped them?
There has been endless gossip in the media about his affairs just as there was about Robin Cook and rumours about Tony Blair and Wendy Deng.

Very much agree with Spectre8

Most royal commentators seem to be a particularly odious brand of journalist peddling tittle tattle while at the same time appearing to be wierdly obsequious!

I would bin the lot of them!

I agree! I don't think they're on a moral crusade at all!

Each to their own, but personally I don’t give a damn about the sexual morality of public figures. I’ll qualify that by saying I don’t mean paedophilia, sex-trafficking or exploitative criminal behaviour like tat, obvs!

But I’ve never been interested in who’s having an affair with whom…if it doesn’t impact me. OK, most people won’t agree, but so what if say, Prince Philip had the odd girlfriend.

I see it as personal stuff which I’m happy not to know about. And some long marriages (for example) work like that. The couple might truly love each other and want to stay together but have a relaxed attitude to the odd affair.

All I’m saying is that marriages are the business of the 2 people involved and no one else’s.

This times a million.

Exactly.

To add, I didn’t care about Bill Clinton and his amours as long as he was doing a good job as President. I don’t care how many mistresses JFK had either. Yes, I’d be sad (but not judgemental) if the Obamas split because I’m a fan and they seem/seemed such a great team.

To use an expression I actually detest and which is peak patronising Mumsnet….unclench!

I’ll get my coat…

Yes, I agree with this. Dabbling into people's private lives in order to make a judgement? No-one knows what really goes on in a relationship, what changes happen and what compromises take place.
I wish these reporters would uncover real scandals which impact all of us more (eg water companies etc).

And let's not forget David Mellor and the model and wearing his football strip to shag her.
Invasive yes but
Gotta admit that was funny 😂

That's just celebrity gossip, we have even more of that now.

Great post balloon , I too remember two particular things that I read but cannot recall where they were !
first one was … apparently Charles used to chase a giggling Diana upstairs quite frequently!! 😳 ( this may have been from a staff member)
two …apparently they ( particularly Charles ) used to send each other many love letters! , Diana kept hers and apparently (again) wanted these to be released because she wanted people to know how much they did love each other.
lastly before Diana’s tragic death her and Charles were actually quite friendly, apparently ( again) he would stop off at her house to use the loo ( I’m sure a helicopter was mentioned) a witness said that Diana used to cheekily say “ same time next week?”

Spot on. They really are a noisome bunch and always have been.

Yes - and they're not moral crusaders because they know there's much more money in spying on Diana's and Charles's relationship than there is in uncovering corruption in say, industry or politics. They're exploiting an unpleasant side of our human nature and they absolutely know it.

Moral crusaders, my....foot.

So nobody thinks that someone’s private morality has anything to say about their public morality?

I'm going to make a confession now, and it's not one I'm proud of!

Long ago when I was a commuter in London and had a stressful job I used to occasionally buy Hello magazine to read on the tube. It was new then - I think it had been done in Europe - Spain?? - but was a new thing in the UK. What was new about it was:

• it focused unapologetically on celebrities and royalty (in other words, rich and often glamorous people with amazing homes and clothes)
• its journalism was so soft as to be marshmallow-like. The interviews were absolutely not deep or scrutinising. They basically allowed the subject to boast or tell us about their wonderful marriages and lovely homes.
• the photography and the full-page spreads of photos were stunning - nothing quite like it had been done before.

For me it was total escapism and (despite what pps might think...) I'm not an idiot. I knew exactly what I was getting, yet I loved it, particularly the amazing photos. I was much younger then, but even so.

So I do understand the appetite for celebrity 'news'. It's a fantasy world to most of us and we need some escapism. But there wasn't anything nasty or snoopy about it - it was just a load of daft blather for the train journey home!

I suppose the film-star fanzines of the 30s and 50s were the only real forerunner, come to think of it.

If you're a politician taking bad handers, or you run a public service into the ground for massive personal profit? Yes.
Gossip about a marriage or relationships? No.

No, but read my previous post for details.

Private morality covers a lot of things: do they 'insider deal' on the stock exchange? Bribe people? Beat their partners or children? Do the criminal sexual things I mentioned? Of course those things aren't acceptable - some of them are crimes!

But sexual morality in the sense of affairs - not bothered.

I've read about the novelist, Kingsley Amis and he was a complete nightmare in terms of being a husband. He apparently once had sex with all 3 female guests at one of their dinner parties in between courses down in the garden shed (he'd set himself this challenge, and he was an attractive man at that time and everyone was well-oiled). I'd hate to have been his partner - but it doesn't affect how I feel about his work. Yes - I judge him, but if he hadn't openly admitted it I wouldn't think I had the right to know.

As long as they do their public job properly I don't mind what they do in their personal, sexual lives.

What you were reading sounds like harmless celebrity gossip, @CoffeeCantata . Quite different from the intrusive stuff. I've seen film of the then Kate Middleton being pursued along the street by photographers in her face and shouting at her. Awful.

But CoffeeCantata lots of us did. When Hello and Okay or whatever it was called, came out, they were something else. Glossy, wonderful pictures of how the other half lived. Posing by their beautiful swimming pools, houses, dressed in fabulous clothes... it really was something different to ogle at.

I suppose we then grow out of it. And can see it for what it is.

Op, do you think Max Mosley should’ve been exposed for what he was doing with consenting adults?
I get you probably don’t like him because of who his parents were, but that aside, should that sort of thing be made public?

I suppose we then grow out of it. And can see it for what it is.

@jumpingthehighjump what is it?

Oh - David Mellor - awful man. But I think the exposure of that affair didn't just harm DM - in fact, in a horrible, preening, male way, I seem to remember he rather enjoyed it, being seen as a Lothario, when in fact he wasn't an attractive man to look at.

But his poor wife and family!!! They're the ones who will have suffered terrible humiliation on a number of levels, as well as the absolute ick (esp for the children) of hearing about their father's sexual shenaningans.

There's a huge amount of fallout from these so-called courageous revelations by heroic journalist. I don't think anyone cares now who's shagging who in the House of Commons as long as they don't mess up professionally. I certainly don't!

Exactly!

I disagree.

I do think that the fact that Boris Johnson had affairs and did not acknowledge how many children he had showed the exact nature of his personality, which flowed through to the way in which he governed the country.

If a person in their private life is prepared to cheat on his wife, who is presumably supposed to be the most important person to him, numerous times, have affairs and not acknowledge the number of his own children, then why would he have any regard for, or loyalty to the general population?

It became clear that Boris Johnson was totally out for himself, didn't care about the country at all, and the mess of his personal life gave a view of exactly that attitude.

I bet you'd find that Enoch Powell was a totally faithful husband (not checked, but I'd bet on it).

Sexual morality and the wider morality don't always go together.