Does this latest royal family headline show press hypocrisy?

[Constantrunner]

This latest headline exposes the hypocrisy of the press.

if the situation were to arise where the continuation of the monarchy meant some distant relation on the throne, I think it would depend on who it was.

Unfortunately, once you exclude the Waleses, you get Harry.

It raises an interesting legal and constitutional point: the Wales children are minors, so they can't make legal decisions. What happens then? Wait until each of them comes of age?

That is interesting. There is no way parliament would consent to Harry being Head of State! For obvious reasons 😂!
I would suspect that the law passed would also exclude his children. It's all a bit hypothetical, as fortunately there are 3 Wales children.

I wouldn’t put it like that.

The RF are dignified and professional, and usually low-key. Do you equate that with boring?

HAM are always up to some sort of antics - you just don’t know what they’ll do next. They are entertaining and there’s hardly a dull moment.

I wouldn’t say they’re dignified or professional, though.

Really? Where did that come from? I mean - how have they come across her?

My 30 ish children just about know who she is, but that’s it.

You are missing the point. The hypocrisy isn’t the cashing in itself, it’s that CS made the statement years ago that he would never make money off his dead sister.

I’m just surprised they didn’t accuse him of hypocrisy years ago though as he’s been making money off his dead sister since the day she died.

Including printing the eulogy he gave at her funeral and selling it in thr Althrop gift shop for £30!

And pocketing the bulk of the money raised by touring her wedding dress exhibition around the UK and US.

He certainly milked her possessions as best he could before they reverted to William.

A pp on another thread recounts that someone who had bought one of Spencer’s previous books met him at Althorp and politely requested that he sign it. Spencer tried to charge him £25 for the signature. Who does that?? The chap had bought the book - probably for about the same amount already. Traditionally authors are happy to sign if Youve shelled out for their book!

@CoffeeCantata Talk about tacky! It's on the same level of him being upset that KC pulled a rose from the Spenser flower display to toss into her grave. Maybe KC should have handed him some cash first. 😁

😂😂 I bet that's what the problem was!
I'm guessing that's why he doesn't support William - he stopped Spencer profiting from the wedding dress.

Ooh - there’s a thought. He definitely comes across as extremely petty and vengeful.

It must have been quite lucrative, touting that, plus other possessions around. Then William requests them back. Uh oh.

We moved into our house just over 15 years ago.

The previous owners had left a few things, almost all rubbish.
When I went up in the loft I was quite excited to find only one thing left which was a box full of books, because I collect books so I was hoping I might find something interesting.
It was full of books about Princess Diana, written during her life and just after her death.

So someone who had collected books about her, so was obviously interested, within 10 years of her death, had lost interest and put the books into storage. Not only that, but when they'd moved away had decided they were so unimportant that they chose to not take them, as one of the few things that weren't clearly just destined to the bin, to leave behind.
I tried eBay and FB freestuff and couldn't get anyone to even take one. Even one of the free book sites locally that I offered them to said they didn't want them! I took them to the charity shop in the end, so not sure what they did with them.

I think it's unlikely that if people who clearly found her interesting during her life time had lost interest within 10 years, that many youngsters who have living people to be interested in, will have more than a passing glance at her.

My dc (aged 25 down to 19) have no interest in her at all.

Didn't the coverage of her in The Crown not interest a younger generation? I didn't watch it myself but I thought it was a successful show?

I don’t know if young people watched The Crown in large numbers. I know it depends on what you call young, but I’d be surprised if the under 30s would have been interested.

I have two adult DC - mid 30s. They know who Diana is, but aren't interested. I don't know how typical they are.

Doubt it's the kind of thing they would watch.

I think it's quite nauseating interesting CS has used the publicly funded BBC he castigated for the Panorama interview (one of very few instances we have of Diana using her own words) to promote his tome.

exactly
any excuse to make some cash!

Yes as especially he was the one to introduce Diana to bashir and be “taken in” by the “evidence “ first! …..

The irony is pretty embarrassing when you tot up Spencer’s behaviour, influence and interventions in Diana’s life. He’s hardly been a supportive or a wholesome influence. I wonder if anyone will write an expose of his moral shortcomings? 😲

It would make interesting reading.