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
 
  #1681  
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: 4,421
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 ~~~
  #1682  
Old 02-16-2013, 05:24 AM
carlota's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 5,928
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
  #1683  
Old 02-16-2013, 06:14 AM
kathia_sophia's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South, Portugal
Posts: 1,753
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.♥
  #1684  
Old 02-16-2013, 11:32 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,584
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.
__________________
.

  #1685  
Old 02-16-2013, 12:49 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,621
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.
  #1686  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:06 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 731
Well said EIIR finally some logic in this discussion.
  #1687  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:12 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,344
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.
  #1688  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:18 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,256
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.
  #1689  
Old 02-16-2013, 01:38 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,052
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."
  #1690  
Old 02-16-2013, 02:22 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,052
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."
  #1691  
Old 02-16-2013, 02:52 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 731
GracieGiraffe not the place to discuss your political ideology.
  #1692  
Old 02-16-2013, 03:18 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalistbert View Post
GracieGiraffe not the place to discuss your political ideology.
Not sure where "political" ideology comes into this. Gracie discusses the finer points of the difference between something being "right" and something being "moral". It is not illegal to take pictures of Catherine in a bikini whilst she is pregnant, however is it moral? Heck no. Politics doesn't come anywhere near it, morality does.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #1693  
Old 02-16-2013, 03:21 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalistbert View Post
GracieGiraffe not the place to discuss your political ideology.
Sorry! But I'm really not trying to discuss political ideology. I'm trying to discuss Will and Kate's "right" to privacy on their holidays vs their expectations to privacy and why such expectations in their private lives might not be realistic, even if they should have such. We have been discussing the photos of Mustique throughout this thread, and whether they had an expectation/right to expect no photos in the tabloids. This to me is just an elaboration of such. Of course the mods may see it differently, and if so, I play by the rules.

The expectation that their public lives/current events be reported and their private lives/current events remain sacrosanct is unrealistic.
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1694  
Old 02-16-2013, 03:23 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 731


There are threads to discuss this but a "Current Events" thread I think not.
  #1695  
Old 02-16-2013, 03:25 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalistbert View Post


There are threads to discuss this but a "Current Events" thread I think not.
Catherine and William are CURRENTLY on holiday in Mustique, until they get back and until Catherine appears in three days time this discussion isn't going to stop. That still doesn't detract from the fact Gracie was not talking politics. Also, which threads are there to discuss this holiday?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #1696  
Old 02-16-2013, 03:29 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Not sure where "political" ideology comes into this. Gracie discusses the finer points of the difference between something being "right" and something being "moral". It is not illegal to take pictures of Catherine in a bikini whilst she is pregnant, however is it moral? Heck no. Politics doesn't come anywhere near it, morality does.
Thank you! That is exactly what I mean. I have no political ideology here, in fact, I rather like the institution of monarchy in general, but am not afraid to point out anomalies/hypocrisies where they exist. Such is necessary for the preservation of monarchies in the long run.

Perhaps there needs to be a thread on Will and Kate's expectations of privacy/right to privacy, their public vs. their private lives, and to what extent they are "public servants" and what they "owe" the public. With 21st Century technology, these lines are going to have to be addressed.

BTW, from what I'm reading, it might just be illegal to take any photos of Will and Kate in Mustique, clothed, unclothed, or somewhere in between. However, since public dissemination is international, localized laws are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. A false sense of security for people there. I'm not suggesting it is right, I'm just saying "it is what it is."
__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1697  
Old 02-16-2013, 05:30 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Catherine and William are CURRENTLY on holiday in Mustique, until they get back and until Catherine appears in three days time this discussion isn't going to stop. That still doesn't detract from the fact Gracie was not talking politics. Also, which threads are there to discuss this holiday?
I totally agree. The issues addressed in Gracie's thought-provoking post arise directly from the photographs of William & Kate who are currently holidaying on Mustique, and, as such, it is on topic, and it was not a post about politics.

Are posts in current events threads to be limited to the bare facts about where people are and what they are doing, and not to allow discussion about broader and more complex issues arising from those bare facts? I hope not. These are "The Royal Forums" and, in my opinion, any discussion about royalty impliedly includes as relevant issues relating to the institution of royalty itself and its place in modern society.
  #1698  
Old 02-16-2013, 05:38 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 731
My apologies to Gracie, I misread your post!
  #1699  
Old 02-16-2013, 05:57 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 859
DOES NO ONE UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS THE MEDIA WHO ARE MAKING A BIG DEAL OUT OF THIS, not those involved.

Talk about being "suckered" by the press/media!!!!!
  #1700  
Old 02-16-2013, 06:01 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,902
well said - its the same story on the PoW current events - all about him "secretly" advising on the legislation in the Uk (according to the Telegraph). Its public information if people care to look. Of course the Telegraph didn't mention that.

People have stopped thinking for themselves - weird!
__________________

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
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





Popular Tags
abdication belgium brussels carl philip crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events death fashion fashion poll funeral germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg maxima nobility official visit ottoman picture of the week poland president gauck president hollande president komorowski prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince henrik princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess mary princess mette-marit princess of asturias queen fabiola queen letizia queen letizia daytime fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sonja royal royal fashion sofia hellqvist spain state visit stockholm sweden the hague visit wedding willem-alexander



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:42 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2015
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]