The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Current Events Archive

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1701  
Old 02-14-2013, 08:25 PM
Sun Lion's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Lion View Post
So Germany, France and the USA are also going to publish.

Seemed inevitable.

Sun Lion.


New Zealand is also now publishing the photos,

Sun Lion.
__________________

__________________
  #1702  
Old 02-14-2013, 08:43 PM
Sun Lion's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I wonder whether the person who took the photos was getting their own back after the disruption caused by the Cambridges and Middletons last year Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton, jets off to Mustique for family holiday | Mail Online

I don't know how many people remember that story.

They don't seem to have been able to stop fellow holiday-makers tweeting their activities on Mustique Iluvbertie.

I've seen several reports of people there seeing the royal group playing volleyball - (even tweeting that they - the people tweeting - were going to get up early the next day to beat them to the court!), sailing ahead of the royal party and waiting on the beach to see them alight from their craft, seeing them at the well-known bar "Basil's" and at a resturant.

People are obviously chuffed to be there at the same time as William and Catherine and can't keep from letting others know.

Cheers, Sun Lion.
__________________

__________________
  #1703  
Old 02-14-2013, 08:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Looks as if Mustique has gone very much downmarket from the days when it was the place celebrities owned homes there and went because it was private and they could have some peace without being photographed.
__________________
  #1704  
Old 02-14-2013, 08:49 PM
Dman's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 7,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalistbert View Post
The sooner the 19th comes the better.
So true, I agree.
__________________
  #1705  
Old 02-14-2013, 10:06 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,534
I think there is a difference between a holiday maker taking a photo of a famous person who was also having a holiday at the same time and place for my personal memories of that holiday/experience and a person who then sells that photo.

e.g. I am on the beach and Kate and William walk past and I take a photo that is for me and me alone (well maybe my family) is fine in my book but if I, or my family, decided to sell that photo I think that is not on.

I have often taken photos of famous people sitting in the stands at the cricket watching the same game that I am watching - as part of my memory of that game - but I have never even thought of selling those photos and some of them.
__________________
  #1706  
Old 02-14-2013, 10:10 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,045
We have famous people come into our area (have for years) but local people here leave them alone. When they are here they are visiting family. They eat in local food places and go about their business. No one really bothers them.

I can't imagine taking a photo of them and then selling it...it's just wrong.


LaRae
__________________
  #1707  
Old 02-14-2013, 10:28 PM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 561
Well, I am particularly useless when it comes to that. I have often seen celebrities and have had a camera with me and did nothing. I have professionally shot celebrities and felt too guilty to put them up on my website. I just can't bring myself to make money out of them but know it is not the best business sense as these people have signed model release forms!

If I was to be in the same situation as that tourist on their island, I am certain I would internally struggle with the possibility of photographing them as the mortgage, etc. would flash before me. A huge temptation I think.
__________________
  #1708  
Old 02-14-2013, 11:13 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by AfricanAUSSIE View Post
If I was to be in the same situation as that tourist on their island, I am certain I would internally struggle with the possibility of photographing them as the mortgage, etc. would flash before me. A huge temptation I think.
If they were worried about making a mortgage payment then spending money on a holiday in Mustique was probably not the best decision in the first place.
__________________
  #1709  
Old 02-14-2013, 11:20 PM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 561
Good point! But I still wonder whether I would be able to overcome the temptation were I faced with the choice? I would like to think so, but I am really not sure.
__________________
  #1710  
Old 02-15-2013, 08:06 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,970
OK folks.. here we go. According to this video, William has come out and spoke up about the pictures taken in Mustique.

AOL.com Video - Prince William Speaks Out Over Kate Middleton Baby Bump Pics
__________________
“We live in a world where we have to hide to make love, while violence is practiced in broad daylight.”
~~~ John Lennon ~~~
  #1711  
Old 02-16-2013, 05:24 AM
carlota's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 5,797
in response to the people talking about kate's hair: yes, she seems to have a tendency to curls, specially when in humid climates
http://www.5starweddingdirectory.com...curly-hair.jpg
__________________
Sign the United Nations Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare: http://www.animalsmatter.org
YOUR DAILY CLICK HELPS ANIMALS SURVIVE!
Feed an animal in need, click for free.
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/
Take some time to sign the petitions @: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/animal-welfare/all
  #1712  
Old 02-16-2013, 06:14 AM
kathia_sophia's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South, Portugal
Posts: 1,708
my hair is very similar of Catherine's, though darker.
when in humid enviroment it tends to be very curly, the same applies to the beach, the sea's salt water makes the hair specially curly and freazy.
on regular basis, the hair is straight from above and large curls at the bottom (Catherine likes her natural hair, she styles her hair according to its natural resources).
never though we would have a very similar hair, except the color.

tomorow is the so awaited engagement right? will William be with her?
__________________
♫A man is not old until regrets take the place of dreams.♥
  #1713  
Old 02-16-2013, 11:32 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,214
Please note that a slew of posts (45 of them!) have been deleted as off topic.

Let's stay on the actual topic of this thread....William and Catherine's actual Current Events.
__________________
.

  #1714  
Old 02-16-2013, 12:49 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Dane View Post
William and Kate share the beach with the other vacationers on the island. Thus it is public property for them, not being owned by the royals nor the villa owner where William and Kate are staying. If these were paparazzi pics there would be a slight understanding of the upset this has caused some but it was an equal personage (in Mustique's eyes) to William and Kate who took the photos. The claims that vacationers, who had spent a nice chunk of cash to be there, couldn't use cameras for the benefit of the royals and Middletons is an actual infringement of rights. Why isn't that being brought up on this board?
These people are on a private island. They therefore agree to the customs and practices of the island in return for access to it. If these people want to scope round for famous people to take photos of, they should be in Barbados. I don't see the issue in asking for people not to take photos of individuals who don't consent to it. From what I see, they weren't exactly threatened with getting thrown in the Tower if they didn't comply with the request.

If Elle Macpherson was thought, by the Press Complaints Commission in the UK, to have had a reasonable expectation of privacy on Mustique, then why should William and Kate not have it too? As royals they're no less entitled to privacy under human rights law as anyone else.

Quote:
Yes, the girlfriend of the French president has a right to privacy. Just like when Kate was just William's girlfriend she had a right to privacy. Marriage complicates things in these cases.
The French President's partner lives with him in his official residence, provided and paid for by French taxpayers. She accompanies him to official events. She's currently on a state visit to India with him, where she is being treated as his wife. She was with him on the beach when she was photographed and the French courts ruled it an invasion of privacy. She's basically the first lady, except she doesn't have the bit of paper that says she's his wife. If a political journalist, and live in partner of the French president, cannot be photographed while on the beach with the President himself, how on earth does anyone have the right to see pictures of the heir to the heir of the British head of state while on a private holiday on a private island?

Quote:
Obviously not, otherwise there wouldn't be censorship of the photos by UK publications when the entire world's press and Internet have them. Saudi Arabia is at least honest about their "freedoms"
You really don't know anything about the British press do you? This is the country where not that long ago, the press were tapping the phone lines of Prince Charles, recording his personal conversations with Camilla and reproducing them, word for word, in the newspapers. This is the country where the press were hacking royals' (and others) phones with impunity for years. This is the press who printed photos of Harry in his private hotel room playing strip billiards!

There is no 'censorship' of these photos. The British press are choosing not to print them because the photographers who took the photos, whether they be paps or holidaymakers, have illegally infringed the rights of the individuals involved. The only time the press can do this is where there is an overarching public interest imperative. There is zero public interest argument in seeing William and Kate on a private family holiday.

Suggesting that the UK has similar press restrictions as Saudi Arabia is pretty bloody insulting.
__________________
  #1715  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:06 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 690
Well said EIIR finally some logic in this discussion.
__________________
  #1716  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:12 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
because the photographers who took the photos, whether they be paps or holidaymakers, have illegally infringed the rights of the individuals involved.
Have they though? What law covers this? Whilst I think it's common sense, is it illegal?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #1717  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:18 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
EIIR has hit the nail on the head. Bravo. Unfortunately it will not make a difference to the discussions here because a lot of people seem to believe that once you marry into the BRF you have zero right to any privacy and that the public and the paps have 100% right to make as much money as possible off of you. I am more surprised no one has suggested turning the palaces into Big Brother houses with cameras everywhere 24/7 because it is the publics right to see and know everything.
__________________
  #1718  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:38 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,740
I just saw the photos at my local grocery checkout counter. There was the royal pregnant lower abdomen, staring me right in the face as a I mindlessly stared straight ahead waiting my turn. I don't buy that magazine, and I wasn't seeking them out. But there they were. I looked at the print - if I want to hear what Kate has said to the locals, I would have to buy it.

I didn't. But it made a nice change of pace from all the images of the Kardashians, Jen Aniston and Brangelina and the printed words I can't avoid, either.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1719  
Old 02-16-2013, 02:22 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
EIIR has hit the nail on the head. Bravo. Unfortunately it will not make a difference to the discussions here because a lot of people seem to believe that once you marry into the BRF you have zero right to any privacy and that the public and the paps have 100% right to make as much money as possible off of you. I am more surprised no one has suggested turning the palaces into Big Brother houses with cameras everywhere 24/7 because it is the publics right to see and know everything.
You raise some interesting points, and some good points.

Regarding your last sentence, it's very simple; nobody would suggest such a thing because then the media CANNOT make money off capturing the royals in private moments. Simple. Is this moral? Is this a good thing? Not suggesting any of that. The media and public would not suggest it, unless of course it was a pay per view. Mind you, there are those people out there who view royals as little more now than circus animals or zoo animals on some sort of display, so you would have some out there who fully support the idea. Does this objectify another human being? Yes. Is this demoralizing? Yes. Do people nevertheless have this view; a great deal of people? Yes. Why do they have this view? Well, to me it's very complicated. I personally think that what you are seeing is an undertone of public backlash against the idea of royalty. I believe that in the 21st century there's a subconscious backlash against the whole notion of a person with a title. You can argue all you want about history and tradition of which I am well aware, but when someone is an "HRH" it gives at the very least the subconscious message that some people out there are better than others, purely due to accident of birth or who one falls in love with and marries. That's a big problem. What are people doing with these photos of Kate? It's a backlash against that message; it's a countermessage; they are the same as all of us. Why are they in Mustique and others are struggling to make ends meat? I am very well aware of the counterarguments; her mother and father got up off their butts, created a successful business, worked hard and can afford a vacation. I get that and don't disagree with it. Again, a very complicated discussion. Neither side is right, and rather than snipe back and forth, it would be far more productive to discuss it all.

As for the "right" to take the photos and sell them - depends on what you are talking about by "right." Yes, there are strict privacy laws in Mustique. But with modern technology, laws in one venue are useless. Unless there is an international law, one law is useless. There's a sort of anarchy afoot with regards to images, information and its dissemination. This is a perfect example. So does the public and paps have a "right?" Well, yes, as there is no effective way to stop it legally. Although I suspect by right you mean a "moral right." More complicated. I don't believe there was ANY moral right to take and disseminate the photos in France. Clearly outrageous. As for the Aussie DJ's - I think that was the most outrageous of all - a clear fraud committed (no matter how farcical) in order to obtain private medical information about a hospital patient). I'm a bit outraged more was not done there. These photos, on a public beach, among strangers, in perfectly acceptable dress for the 21st century? I just don't see the big deal here in the grand scheme of things. These particular photos are much ado about nothing - and I suspect that all of the ado is that tug-of-war described above regarding class structure, rights, privilege, etc. There is a segment of the public outraged that they can afford such a holiday, and feel that they therefore have a right to invade any of their privacy. There is a segment of the public that believes that tax dollars pay for at least part of their existence, and therefore they are owned by the public.

I suppose at least part of this is off-topic, but I don't know where else to post it. I see this as less about the photos on the beach themselves and more about class struggles. Very, very complicated subject.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1720  
Old 02-16-2013, 02:52 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 690
GracieGiraffe not the place to discuss your political ideology.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Duchess of Cambridge current events 2: 1 February 2012 - 5 January 2013 Zonk Current Events Archive 1905 01-05-2013 07:37 PM
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge current events 3: April 2 - September 10 2012 ghost_night554 Current Events Archive 983 09-13-2012 05:07 PM
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Current Events Thread 2: 1 December 2011 - 1 April 2012 Zonk Current Events Archive 887 04-03-2012 10:16 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:36 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]