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
 
  #281  
Old 03-23-2013, 12:27 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 1,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModernDayJackieO View Post
Will is losing popularity? According to who? Forums and the Daily Mail comment section? Truly curious because this is the first i am hearing about it.
He's not. He and Kate consistently poll as some of the most popular members of the royal family. And yea, all I can think is that posters that feel that way are basing their comments on daily mail comment sections which is not a good way to collect data.
__________________

__________________
  #282  
Old 03-23-2013, 12:28 PM
Dman's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,563
The Duke & Duchess of Cambridge remain very popular members of the royal family. Along with Prince Harry. Nothing has changed about that.
__________________

__________________
  #283  
Old 03-23-2013, 01:36 PM
CanRoyal's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: West Coast, Canada
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
The Duke & Duchess of Cambridge remain very popular members of the royal family. Along with Prince Harry. Nothing has changed about that.
Agree.

Also, the trending increase in engagements by William and Kate should not be interpreted as a response to a minority who gauge the amount or quality of work they do by what appears in the media.

Rather, it should be viewed as the previously announced 2 years of William and Kate being part-time royals is coming to a close. (William and Kate's 2nd anniversary is at the end of next month.)
__________________
  #284  
Old 03-23-2013, 02:10 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,835
The Whalen article has a very valid criticism, but presents her argument in a juvenile way that is aimed more at attacking William and Catherine than actually critiquing their behaviour. As Whalen is an academic I have even more of a problem with it than I might were she just a blogger, because an academic should know that this is not how you make an argument about something.

Underneath the gimmicks, Whalen's argument is essentially that this engagement can be seen as a publicity stunt aimed at improving Catherine's reputation but fails to take into consideration the tactlessness of bringing a pregnant woman to a charity event for parents who have lost a child. Furthermore, Whalen also criticizes both William and Catherine for their seemingly awkward behaviour, and calls into question some of the things that they said while at this engagement, notably William stating that he's been in a similar situation owing to the death of his mother.

I think on a surface level all of these issues can be seen as legitimate, although Whalen makes assumptions about the circumstances of the engagement, takes some things out of context, and fails to grasp the purpose of the charity. As such, rather than constructing a clear and valid argument, Whalen has essentially written a fluff piece.

The argument that this is a publicity stunt to boost Catherine's popularity is, in my opinion, a bit ridiculous, and doesn't take into consideration just how much Catherine's been doing lately. She has gotten a lot of criticism (at least on online forums) for being seen as not doing enough, especially as unlike William and Harry she's not otherwise employed, but I think that we've seen her doing a lot lately (whether it's a lot more than usual or not I don't know). We could possibly say that the BRF is trying to put Catherine out there more (if she is in fact doing more engagements), perhaps in response to this criticism or perhaps because they're anticipating her to do less as her pregnancy progresses. I don't think this event in itself is a publicity stunt (any more than any engagement with the press involved is one), and I think that this is a cause that really means something to William. Catherine's involvement in it is most likely because of her relationship with William, but I don't agree that we can criticize her for being involved in something simply because it's important to her husband - doing stuff like that is a part of relationships.

If Catherine's pregnancy wasn't taken into account when arranging this engagement and selecting the parents that were in attendence then I do think this is a huge error both on the part of the BRF and the charity itself. Whalen makes an assumption that they didn't take her pregnancy into account, I'm going to make the opposite assumption. I don't think that a charity that deals with grieving people is going to be that tactless and, as far as I understand it's the charity that selects which of its members were there.

I do agree with the general argument that some of what William did there was awkward, but I think that's just him in general. He's prone to being awkward, and I hope that in time he learns to kind of relax a bit in situations like this. I don't think it's inappropriate for William to compare the loss of his mother to the loss that the people at Child Bereavement have sustained. His mother's death is the reason why he chose to be associated with Child Bereavement, and the charity is for both parents who have lost a child and children who have lost a parent or other close relation. If the charity itself is essentially saying that there is an association between the two situations then it's not really inappropriate for William to say so either.
__________________
  #285  
Old 03-23-2013, 02:37 PM
CanRoyal's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: West Coast, Canada
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish
....If the charity itself is essentially saying that there is an association between the two situations then it's not really inappropriate for William to say so either.
Child Bereavement UK is not "essentially saying" anything. Their outright, boldly-stated purpose - right on the home page of their website - is the belief:
Quote:
...that all families should have access to the support and information they need when a child grieves or when a child dies.
Child Bereavement UK's mission statement is not open to interpretation by anyone, including Whalen. It's their mission statement (a mission statement is a statement of the purpose of a company, organization or person, its reason for existing).

As to whether it's appropriate that a pregnant woman attend Child Bereavement UK - if a child has lost a father, or a sibling, it could be that their mother is pregnant. To infer that their mother should not attend Child Bereavement UK because she is pregnant is preposterous.
__________________
  #286  
Old 03-23-2013, 02:53 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanRoyal View Post
As to whether it's appropriate that a pregnant woman attend Child Bereavement UK - if a child has lost a father, or a sibling, it could be that their mother is pregnant. To infer that their mother should not attend Child Bereavement UK because she is pregnant is preposterous.
I do think that if Catherine's presence at the event had been previously unannounced it would have been at a minimum rude of them. In this case it's not simply a pregnant woman attending an event, it's a pregnant woman who is at least in part the focus of this very publicized event. If she had just shown up without telling CBUK that she was coming with William then it could have been really hard on the parents there.

To just randomly show up, be the focus of the event, hug the parents there, and have the press involved (at least partially) is a lot if the parents who have lost children haven't been previously informed that Catherine would be there. With prior information the parents can decide whether or not this is a type of event they can handle. Without it, they're potentially been thrown into the deep end.

The assumption that Whalen is making is that Catherine just showed up to this event; that she hadn't been invited to it, or CBUK hadn't been informed that she was coming. If that happened I do believe a massive error was made - but I personally see no reason to believe that that's what happened. Royal engagements are planned out well in advance and I really doubt that a royal can go "you know, I'm not doing anything today, let's go to this engagement with hubby." It is highly unlikely that the people attending the event didn't know well before hand that Catherine was going to be there and were unable to make the decision for themselves if they could handle being at such an event around a pregnant woman.
__________________
  #287  
Old 03-23-2013, 02:56 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanRoyal View Post
Child Bereavement UK is not "essentially saying" anything. Their outright, boldly-stated purpose - right on the home page of their website - is the belief:


As to whether it's appropriate that a pregnant woman attend Child Bereavement UK - if a child has lost a father, or a sibling, it could be that their mother is pregnant. To infer that their mother should not attend Child Bereavement UK because she is pregnant is preposterous.
I've read both sides of the particular argument and my take on it that the charity exists to aid bereaved parents/children to manage their grief and be able to live meaningful lives in the real world. And that includes meeting other parents with children; other children with parents and also pregnant women. The people that they met had been asked if they wanted to be there - if it was painful they would have said no. In laying the "blame" on Catherine, you are saying that the Charity allowed people to be upset or hurt - no way would that happen.

Everyone who attended was there because they made the decision to be there. I don't think that either William or Catherine are insensitive.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
  #288  
Old 03-23-2013, 03:14 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Serene Highness - Picture of the Month Representative - Britain
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach (CA), United States
Posts: 1,104
This engagement was officially announced by the media on March 7th. So everyone knew well in advance that William and Kate would be attending.

I think we should give the charity a little more credit. This organization has been dealing with bereaved families for years, so I'm pretty sure they took into account that Kate was pregnant, and asked those that W&K met if it would be okay.

Also, what awkward behavior did William exhibit during this visit?
__________________
  #289  
Old 03-23-2013, 03:28 PM
CanRoyal's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: West Coast, Canada
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
The assumption that Whalen is making is that Catherine just showed up to this event; that she hadn't been invited to it, or CBUK hadn't been informed that she was coming...

...It is highly unlikely that the people attending the event didn't know well before hand that Catherine was going to be there and were unable to make the decision for themselves if they could handle being at such an event around a pregnant woman.
Well, then Whalen is a fool for making such an assumption. The BRF is well versed in manners, protocol and diplomacy. Attending an engagement without being invited is the height of boorish behaviour.

Again, Child Bereavement UK's stated purpose is to support when a child grieves or when a child dies. Because of this duality of purpose, there will always be pregnant women, or families that have children that are of age, or look like the one you lost, in attendance at CBUK's programs and services.
__________________
  #290  
Old 03-23-2013, 03:31 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,161
Part of me wants them to do another engagement so this craziness can end, the other part fears what craziness will erupt from the next engagement.
Btw if this forum is open to discussion and debate then it has to go both ways. If you give your opinion be prepared for people to disagree and state theirs back.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
  #291  
Old 03-23-2013, 03:43 PM
Dman's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,563
Everyone enjoyed Their Royal Highnesses visit and it was also a touching day. I saw nothing but warmth and comfort at the visit.

I think everyone should now move on now.
__________________
  #292  
Old 03-23-2013, 03:44 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 1,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Part of me wants them to do another engagement so this craziness can end, the other part fears what craziness will erupt from the next engagement.
Btw if this forum is open to discussion and debate then it has to go both ways. If you give your opinion be prepared for people to disagree and state theirs back.
Yea, all of this is so out of left field. I'm still baffled that a fairly typical royal engagement inspired so much ugly commentary.

I hope this doesn't become something people do for all of William and Kate's appearances.
__________________
  #293  
Old 03-23-2013, 04:08 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,019
Whalen got what she wanted didn't she? Oxygen of publicity.

Over here the UK public, who knew about it being a joint engagement, thought that it went very well and so did the charity and the people William and Catherine met. At the end of the day, that is all that counts.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
  #294  
Old 03-23-2013, 04:12 PM
CanRoyal's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: West Coast, Canada
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHHermione View Post
Yea, all of this is so out of left field. I'm still baffled that a fairly typical royal engagement inspired so much ugly commentary.

I hope this doesn't become something people do for all of William and Kate's appearances.
Me too.

Although I believe that those who are already antagonistic towards William and Kate might be getting more so. Especially because we are coming to the end of the announced 2 year part-time royal status for William and Kate (their 2nd wedding anniversary is next month) and their baby's birth in July.

With an increased public presence and a babe in arms, the already popular William and Kate's popularity will really take off about the middle of the year.
__________________
  #295  
Old 03-23-2013, 05:11 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
He makes this visit at a time when public opinion about him is falling - he and Kate are being called out on their commitment to the BRF, on their vacation schedule, on Kate's downtime.
Could you please provide a link to the opinion poll that leads you to state this opinion as a fact?

The most recent opinion poll on this subject, that I know of, was in November 2012, carried out by King's College London/Ipsos MORI. KCL is one of the most respected universities in the country and Ipsos Mori is one of the best pollsters around. Their poll found that Prince William is not only popular, he's the most popular member of the BRF by a significant margin, even more popular than the Queen at the end of her amazing Jubilee/Olympic performance year.

Kate is also more popular than all the royals excepting William, the Queen and Harry (who was in Afghan at the time). This was after the French topless photos scandal, and before her pregnancy was announced, of course.

Taking the comments at the end of a Daily Mail article (or any other paper for that matter) as an indicator of the opinions of the British people is a big mistake. The big majority of the DM's readership is from outside the UK, and commenters can claim to be from literally anywhere. On one DM article on the royals it'll be loads of "these people are parasites" comments, then the next day another article will be "we're so lucky to have these people representing our country".

The only people unhappy with William's work ethic are those who clearly don't value the job he does as a SAR pilot, putting his own life in danger to help others. We knew Kate wouldn't be a full-time royal for at least the first few years, BP and CH were open and honest about that at the start.
__________________
  #296  
Old 03-23-2013, 06:01 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 1,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
Taking the comments at the end of a Daily Mail article (or any other paper for that matter) as an indicator of the opinions of the British people is a big mistake. The big majority of the DM's readership is from outside the UK, and commenters can claim to be from literally anywhere.
Also, I work for a news website, and while I can't say that this is the case across the board, I know in our case, the stats show only about 3% of the people who read the site are commenting. It really is a very small portion of the population and it's certainly not representative.
__________________
  #297  
Old 03-23-2013, 06:09 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,019
The only "shift" in opinion re William is that the most recent poll asked about who should become the next monarch (as if there is a choice!). The poll found in favour of Charles over William - something like 42% vs 37% (this is from memory) and the poll before the most recent had that the other way round.

I saw that as a greater acceptance of Charles (and Camilla) following Jubilee Year.

It wasn't a popularity question so I dont think that it counts but the info was posted somewhere on this site.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
  #298  
Old 03-23-2013, 06:16 PM
cinrit's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Deep South, United States
Posts: 360
I saw the poll in the DM a little earlier, and it was 51% for Charles vs. 49% for William. Very, very close.
__________________
  #299  
Old 03-23-2013, 06:23 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: , United States
Posts: 104
As in many situations, the media feels that they are the ones who made a person "popular".
Then once the public likes and admires the person, the media starts a campaign to take down the person --- articles critical of the person - focus on a negative event- use a minor comment to take away from the value of the event. Or focus on a dumb comment as representative of the appearance.

the media has started on Kate --- all the stories on her hatred of the wonderful perfect upper class girlfriend of Harry.
Stories of problems in the Cambridge marriage.

Etc

If a parent who has lost a child has problem seeing a pregnant woman, they are probably staying close to home so not to see any pregnant women as Kate is not the only woman expecting.
__________________
  #300  
Old 03-23-2013, 06:27 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee27 View Post
...the media has started on Kate...
Not in the UK. And believe me there are 1 or 2 papers who would print this if they had the story. The US rags have not the slightest idea about the BRF - they make it up because people buy it and believe it.
__________________

__________________

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Duchess of Cambridge current events 3: 5 January 2013 - 31 December 2013 Zonk Current Events Archive 1288 01-01-2014 10:44 AM
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge current events 4: Sept 2012 - Feb 2013 Warren Current Events Archive 1797 03-02-2013 07:12 AM
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
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria danish royals engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta elena king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander norway picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim prince laurent princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess charlene daytime fashion princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess maxima queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state visit wedding willem-alexander william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:46 PM.

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]