PR and the Palace; are the mists clearing?

[Whentherainsetin101]

For those of us interested in the PR aspects of how the institution of the monarchy presents itself to us, the unsuspecting public, and given that Charles Spencer’s book has prompted a re-examination of events which took place over twenty-nine years ago, I thought this might be a good time to examine what Andrew Lownie calls;

“that gap between the curated narrative and the reality”.

We now know lots of things that weren’t obvious thirty years ago, for example;

We know that BP sometimes issues statements that question the credibility of the “accuser” rather than addressing an accusation directly.

We know that the relationship between the press and the palace is largely self serving on both sides.

We know that the royal rota tow the line in exchange for access.

We know that certain tabloids favour certain royals eg Fergie and The Sun.

We know that BP leaks and briefs certain stories to deflect from other more damaging ones.

We know that BP uses “safe” public figures to broadcast their spin for them eg it used to be Nicolas Soames but now appears to be Rory Stewart.

We know that many things presented to us in one way are in reality very different, eg the late Queen Elizabeth’s marriage, AMW being “banished” to Sandringham.

Given all of the above, do you think the Palace are losing the PR battle, simply because people are now much more switched on about ‘spin’ and because they favour a much more authentic approach?

So.... you don't have time to spare, you don't follow it... but you think William and Kate "have an extensive history of surprise visits?
Eh?.

Security. Best to consider that, and take appropriate advice. Better than sharing lots of details then moaning about it all.

Quite.

Entirely possible the grunts on the ground might genuinely be gobsmacked.

Far less likely for their PTB.

'recent history' ring a bell? 🙄

No. I'm just wondering about the logic of your statement. It's somewhat contradictory.

Is Kevin Sinfield being called a grunt on the ground?

It's not when when I say I haven't followed recent history.

FML 🙄

So.... you're basing it on previous engagements...so you do follow William and Kate and what they do?

Not actively, no.

Never a lot to see without it being presented unasked for in news feeds.

Funny how queen Elizabeth never needed to do that.

I don't know
Perhaps you followed her engagement programmes, I didn't.

Need to do what? Did the pointed sarcasm go over your head?

So.....ok, I give up. If you follow them it's fine. I have no idea how many surprise visits they do, but if you keep a tally, that's fine.

Nonce?? , nonce??? , if you want to say pedophile just say it!
instead of using a non word that sounds ridiculous.

Shall we go further with our trivialities? ….how about….hey nonny , nonny ..?

Maybe they are surprise for security reasons.

It's definitely a word, and it has a definite meaning, which you well know.

What was the point of your post?

I certainly do. It is a known tactic. Bot farms exist to do just this.

This is partly why dimwit Harry and his grasping wife are such a problem.

The division they cause in our monarchy is a gift to those wanting to destabilise our country.

We live in dangerous times and these two grifters will do anything for money.

There seems to be so many of the old ugly posts rearing their heads again - I would say that that indeed shows that the RF are doing the right thing. Dredge up all the old stuff in an attempt to deflect from the Sussex failures.

As this thread is meant to be about palace PR, and to summarise the comments I am catching up on, I think the fact that the palace are battling three different issues all at once at the moment indicates a certain fragility in King Charles’s reign to date?

The Earl Spencer Memoir Clash
BP response > indirect denial > usual tame journalists and media friends sent out to battle

AMW and the Epstein Fallout
BP response > driven to crisis management after years of stalling + distancing + distraction + pushing in to long grass

Tensions with H&M and their return to UK
BP response > cold clarification of roles but no real resolution

All three issues are still dragging on and I wonder if this is down to the King’s indecision, or whether, understandably, because he is ill, he doesn’t have the bandwidth to be more pro-active ?

As for the Spencer book, I think the Palace’s indirect denial has made things worse not better.

Also, it could be argued that although Piers Morgan is an ally of Camilla’s, his lawsuit is just keeping the book in the news, whereas without it, the worst of the publicity would be over by now.

And Piers Morgan himself is so inherently vitriolic and unlikeable , that him going out to battle, is very much a mixed blessing for the Palace.

From a PR pov overall, this all amounts to a significant collective blow because coverage of the King’s AI summit at Dumfries House was severely compromised.

And the very significant thing about all three of these issues imho is that William will probably inherit them along with his crown.

The battle of the brothers is not something that the press will let go and a wiser move there in PR terms would be reconciliation. Keep your enemies closer in other words.

I think the Epstein issue will be picked up again once Trump steps down. And there is a possibility that AMW’s case will drag on in to William’s reign.

Of all three, the Spencer book is probably the one most within William’s power to resolve, as he can protect his mother’s memory more effectively once he has the top job.

There is no "battle of the brothers".
William has remained above such nonsense. It's entirely Harry and Meghan's greed and desperation.
Spencer's book has been proven tbe inaccurate.

There most definitely is a battle of the brothers being played out in the press. I am talking from a PR perspective remember.

And Spencer’s book has opened up a re-examination of Diana’s death and events leading up to it that are uncomfortable for the monarchy.

There is no "battle of the brothers". It's a figment of the tabloids imagination, and their readers. Has William made a statement, done an interview, written a book, spoken to a gossip magazine?
No. Harry has. He wants to create something to distract from his own greed and folly.
William has not participated in this nonsense.
Spencer "opened up examination", or created gossip fodder about his dead sibling for money and publicity? At least he's admitted to some of the fiction. The monarchy carries on.

Sadly the Spencer book has significant inaccuracies and one could now call into question whether anything in the book is accurate at all.

If it is causing anyone to be uncomfortable, I should imagine it would be CS. He has shown himself up rather.

Will OP and the pps who think the matter of AMW has been “ pushed into the long grass” please say precisely what they propose they would do about it WITHIN THE LAW.

I’d like to push him off a cliff personally, but that’s illegal.

Come on - suggest some specific steps as to what else could be done, or give the repetitious moaning a rest. I’ve heard of several cases of awful / maybe criminal behaviour over the years where apparently no actual crime was committed, or where I’m sure guilty people were acquitted, but things have to be proved in court, to the satisfaction of a jury, i think you’ll find. Moaning on MN isn’t going to change that.