General News for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 1: January 2013-December 2014

[cepe]

That's might be right but we've had

Lindo Wing Steps
Pix taken at Middleton's
More access than expected at christening (media were only expecting pix not video of George)
Christening pix
Christening arrival/leaving videos
The NZ/Aus tour access including 2 specific George events
(All this before 1 yr old)

Birthday pix.

Now I dont think that's bad, to be honest. So when the MEDIA, who make money from pix of George ask for MORE - how much more do they want?

 

[Dman]

That's might be right but we've had

Lindo Wing Steps
Pix taken at Middleton's
More access than expected at christening (media were only expecting pix not video of George)
Christening pix
Christening arrival/leaving videos
The NZ/Aus tour access including 2 specific George events
(All this before 1 yr old)

Birthday pix.

Now I dont think that's bad, to be honest. So when the MEDIA, who make money from pix of George ask for MORE - how much more do they want?

I see your point. I don't think these recent pictures of George in the park has been published in the UK media. Am I correct?

I think William & Catherine and palace officials just don't want George to be followed around when he's taking his walks. They are worried about the security risks and they're asking the photographers to back off. The photographers should do just that or this may be taken to court.

 

[cepe]

Mainstream UK press have not published the pix in the park as far as I know. That seemed to be the view on twitter yesterday.

If there were more organised picture ops of George then the mainstream media would have access but the paps wouldn't so Ikon Pictures would miss out.

Also most of the pictures would be the same.

IT's not more that some of the media want - it's "different" - candid shots, not posed. But I think posed is better than none at all.

The only moan from the UK press that I think is valid is that it was the tour abroad that gave the best access to George - need something like that at home.

Also - forgot another picture - the Family shot incl Lupo. Great pic, how could I have forgotten that one.

We have had more access to George than we had to William IMO.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I just think it is pointless to try and argue against why anybody should be denied the right to roam freely in a public park.

I am not arguing anything. I have made comments and the argument is coming from elsewhere.

 

[Spheno]

Also - forgot another picture - the Family shot incl Lupo. Great pic, how could I have forgotten that one.

We have had more access to George than we had to William IMO.

and polo game pics

 

[cepe]

The list I made was of authorised pictures following on from Dman posting a quote about the Cambridges doing more posed pix. It specifically avoided candid shots.

But posed pictures are never exclusive and that's the real issue - candids can be exclusive and therefore worth more.

I liked those pix from the polo and the photographers were out there, publically taking pictures and the couple knew about it.

 

[Skippyboo]

General News and Information for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family

Mainstream UK press have not published the pix in the park as far as I know. That seemed to be the view on twitter yesterday.

If there were more organised picture ops of George then the mainstream media would have access but the paps wouldn't so Ikon Pictures would miss out.

Also most of the pictures would be the same.

IT's not more that some of the media want - it's "different" - candid shots, not posed. But I think posed is better than none at all.

The only moan from the UK press that I think is valid is that it was the tour abroad that gave the best access to George - need something like that at home.

Also - forgot another picture - the Family shot incl Lupo. Great pic, how could I have forgotten that one.

We have had more access to George than we had to William IMO.

It is not like the UK press were not on the tour. They got the same stories and photos. It maybe several years until George returns to Aus/NZ. William went as a baby and didn't return until he was a man.

The UK media will have plenty of more photo opps- balcony on trooping the color, visiting new sibling at hospital, first day at school, etc...

Plus during the tour, some took candids in Canberra even though you had the great zoo footage the day before.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[casualfan]

Let's also add the pics that were taken when Catherine was playing with George in the gardens of the Government House in New Zealand or Australia (can't remember which-please correct me, someone). Photographers can't really hide behind the "these are public places" argument because so many of their brethren also insist on sneaking pics of the royals on private property, too.

Also, where does the "keep George in private areas" argument logically extend? Don't take him on vacation unless it's in a fortress? Keep him caged in private property until he's 18?

It's not like royals enjoy the same privileges and awe of their ancient forebears (though admittedly they enjoy enormous privilege), since in ancient times you could still have a lot of secrets while still in public service.

 

[Skippyboo]

They got snapped at the Govt House in Sydney Easter morning with George out on the lawn with WK in their church clothes and the next day which was an off day at Canberra's Govt House where there was the walk with Wills and the row row your boat George and Kate.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Dman]

I agree that those candid shots can be the best though.

I knew those pictures of Prince George and nanny Maria in the parks were going to lead to some palace action. It also worried me that George was being followed. That's one thing about parents...they will bite anyone's head off when it comes down to their children's security. William & Catherine are no different. They have a second child on the way too. They won't play around with the media and their kids. Everyone will have to get used to that.

 

[Lee27]

How would you feel about having your child photographed from people hiding in bushes and behind trees every time he went outside?
Where would it end? If they can not control the photos, then expect them to move George full time to their country home.
William is not a fan of the media. I also don't think William really cares about his face on the cover of any magazine.

 

[Skippyboo]

The move to Amner is in part to help curb the photo attention. The house is on private land owned by the Queen not a public area. The people who live there are used to seeing the royals and will protect them like the people did in Anglesey and Buckleberry. They spend a couple of years in Norfolk which puts George and sibling in school where they do a deal with the mainstream press like William & Harry had.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Kita]

Why doesn't William plead to the public to avoid buying magazines with unofficial photos of George in them? Because royals want the public to be interested in them, and the public wouldn't take well to being told that they shouldn't buy something they want to buy. The RF needs all the publicity it can get.

I respectfully disagree. The very nature of the line of work that the Royals are in guarantees both their position in life and the public interest. (Unless government were to abolish the monarchy, obviously.) I think they don't tell people what to do not because they need or want the publicity, but just because they understand that isn't their place. It isn't really the same as a film/music star who can fade into the background without constant publicity. Barring something major happening, George and William both will be King one day - they will ALWAYS garner public interest as a result. William is just trying to let his son be as normal as he can for as long as he can, especially before he understands what his position in life even means. I still remember seeing the video of William as a toddler, walking in front of a bunch of cameras, looking plain confused. That's no way for a child to grow up and William knows that better than anyone.

This issue is a complex one. A toddler shouldn't be hounded by photographers, but I can't help feeling William is seeking special treatment. As long as the photographers are complying with the laws that apply to everyone I think it is a necessary evil. If George is taken into a public park he is going to be photographed, if not by professional photographers then by people with camera phones or tourists with personal cameras. But if the photographers have been breaking the law then they should be prosecuted under the law, but special laws should not be made for the royals and other celebrities.

What is a person's expectation of privacy when walking in a public park? Does William think that no professional photographer should photograph his child/children in a public park, regardless of how far away they are from their quarry? If it goes to court, the litigation will be worth following.

I think any parent would hate to have their child photographed anywhere by people they don't know. As for William seeking special treatment, perhaps he is - but the technology to allow these long-range photos and the fact that everyone has a camera in their pockets via their mobile phone means that life is drastically different for a Royal today than it was even when he was a child. As time has moved on, the private life of this family has been further and further diminished. I really can't blame him for trying to stop the walls from closing in too tightly around his son. We don't need the photos of him at the park. He has an entire lifetime of public duties ahead. We'll see him plenty without forcing him to remain within KP or Sandringham whenever he wants to go outside.

 

[AdmirerUS]

I do think they need to get out in front of coping with the interest in seeing their children. Reacting to issues is not much of a strategy. Charles and Diana worked out a deal for their children and the press. It's time for the Cambridges to take control as well, IMHO.

 

[cepe]

I do think they need to get out in front of coping with the interest in seeing their children. Reacting to issues is not much of a strategy. Charles and Diana worked out a deal for their children and the press. It's time for the Cambridges to take control as well, IMHO.

I've already posted this - a list of the OFFICAL photo shoots/coverage of George

Lindo Wing Steps
Pix taken at Middleton's
More access than expected at christening (media were only expecting pix not video of George)
Christening pix
Christening arrival/leaving videos
Family picture with Lupo
The NZ/Aus tour access including 2 specific George events
(All this before 1 yr old)

Birthday pix.

We have had more access to George at his age than we had with William.

It isn't that there is not enough pictures or too little access - it's that the international media want candids, ie exclusives in order to make more money.

William isnt asking for special treatment - he is asking (not taking to court) a paparazzo to stop following his child. The request is about harassment, not taking pictures.

When Charles and Diana did a deal, we did not have the need for new pictures we have today - online sites, newspapers, TV, social media, blogs, forums etc etc.

This child is not a show pony - I think that William and Catherine have given good access so far.

 

[TLLK]

I agree. IMO it is on par with what most of the current royal parents have provided for the last decade during their child's first year of life.

 

[Marty91charmed]

BBC Breaking News @BBCBreaking · 2 ott
Photographer Niraj Tanna "categorically denies" harassing Prince George and will continue to take pictures - lawyer http://bbc.in/1ryNtU5

 

[Osipi]

Persistent little bugger ain't he? Too bad George isn't old enough to stash a water gun in his stroller filled with blue water. Using food coloring isn't harmful but it sure isn't easy to get out of clothing.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

I've already posted this - a list of the OFFICAL photo shoots/coverage of George

Lindo Wing Steps
Pix taken at Middleton's
More access than expected at christening (media were only expecting pix not video of George)
Christening pix
Christening arrival/leaving videos
Family picture with Lupo
The NZ/Aus tour access including 2 specific George events
(All this before 1 yr old)

Birthday pix.

We have had more access to George at his age than we had with William.

It isn't that there is not enough pictures or too little access - it's that the international media want candids, ie exclusives in order to make more money.

William isnt asking for special treatment - he is asking (not taking to court) a paparazzo to stop following his child. The request is about harassment, not taking pictures.

When Charles and Diana did a deal, we did not have the need for new pictures we have today - online sites, newspapers, TV, social media, blogs, forums etc etc.

This child is not a show pony - I think that William and Catherine have given good access so far.

I agree with most of your post. After having read your list of Prince George's official public appearances, it does seem that we have seen more of him than we think. I also think William and Catherine are doing a good job in regards to how much we see of little George - and in the near future, there will be more chances for photos, such as photos of him going to see his new brother or sister, him starting nursery and school etc.

Even though he isn't even two yet, George is still one of the most well known members of the RF as his parents are very famous (naturally, when one is as famous as William and Catherine, their children will be talked about a lot too as the public are interested in the private life of the couple in question), so I think William should expect for him to be photographed without consent, but having said that, I can still totally understand why he is complaining to the paparazzi about harassment. George is still very young and should be able to enjoy a fairly private/normal life for as long as he can.

 

[Dman]

Prince William and Kate planning New York visit - if morning sickness doesn't intervene-
Prince William and Kate planning New York visit - if morning sickness doesn't intervene - Mirror Online

 

[Roslyn]

A trip to New York? That sounds rather ambitious to me. How about starting out with some little trips around the UK and leave the overseas trips until the baby's safely born and Kate regains her health and strength?

 

[cepe]

Not definite, not actually planned - press punting a maybe.

 

[Tiggersk8]

Persistent little bugger ain't he? Too bad George isn't old enough to stash a water gun in his stroller filled with blue water. Using food coloring isn't harmful but it sure isn't easy to get out of clothing.

I was saying last night how it's a pity I couldn't somehow bop over, because I would have no problem at all w/"tripping accidentally" over something and my drink, which for some reason would not be tightly sealed, suddenly ending up being dumped over him and his camera.

There aren't many advantages to being visually impaired and in need of a white cane in public, but in this case...

William is not asking for special treatment IMO. There is no reason at all to stalk anybody, and that is what is going on here, a toddler and his Nanny are being stalked. For anyone to even think the Cambridges are asking for special treatment in getting this scumbag to stop stalking their son hasn't got a clue to how scary this is. Especially right now w/Kate having another hellish bout of HG w/her second pregnancy, it's the last thing William and Kate need.

What are the legal options in the UK? Is there a law like the one in some US states where if a Celeb is being stalked and their children are w/them, the paps do get nailed w/a rather hefty fine for the first offence and the jail time for the second one? Or at least I think that's how it works as I'm going by memory.

There's got to be something that can be done.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[cepe]

We have stalking and harassment laws.

IT is expected that initially the person doing the harassing is asked to stop - hence the letter from Cambridges lawyer/ Legal action is seen as a last resort.

Stalking is a criminal offence and one of the penalities is a limitation on access to the person being stalked, ie not allowed within 1 mile of the target.

This would cause the photographer real issues so he has to fight it.

 

[Tiggersk8]

We have stalking and harassment laws.



IT is expected that initially the person doing the harassing is asked to stop - hence the letter from Cambridges lawyer/ Legal action is seen as a last resort.



Stalking is a criminal offence and one of the penalities is a limitation on access to the person being stalked, ie not allowed within 1 mile of the target.



This would cause the photographer real issues so he has to fight it.

Thanks!!


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[Rudolph]

The issue of privacy isn't something only William is concerned about. The others royals are starting to put their foot down too. Earlier this year, Harry complained to the PCC about some photos that were published of him and Cressida. They were taken at a public place and published by the Mirror (I believe). Harry complained that the photos invaded his privacy and the paper had to take down the photos and issue an apology.

Prince Andrew also recently complained about photos taken of him (on a public beach). He felt the photos intruded on his privacy and the Sun ended up removing the photos from their site.

Princes' privacy complaints to the PCC resolved through negotiation | Media | theguardian.com

Objections by two members of the royal family about newspapers publishing pictures of them have been settled to their satisfaction by the Press Complaints Commission.

Prince Harry and his friend Cressida Bonas complained about the Daily Mirror running two pictures of them which they said invaded their privacy.

Their complaint was resolved when the PCC negotiated the removal of the pictures from the paper's website plus the removal of an accompanying article.


Prince Andrew complained to the PCC that The Sun had intruded into his private life by publishing photos of him on a beach, "which was effectively private, and where he had a reasonable expectation of privacy."

He believed the pictures must have been taken from the sea using an exceptionally long lens. The Sun agreed the lens was long but said the photographer had been on land at the time.

The prince's complaint was resolved by the removal of photos from the newspaper's website.

 

[Lee27]

The Cambridgeshire concern for their son's safety will probably result in their country home becoming their main home with KP used for stays in London for official events. This will result in fewer photos of the couple unless on official events.

So we can look forward to whining from media or photographers breaking the law by trespassing onto private property. London papers may not be able to buy the pictures, but other newspapers are not so bound.



Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

A trip to New York? That sounds rather ambitious to me. How about starting out with some little trips around the UK and leave the overseas trips until the baby's safely born and Kate regains her health and strength?

I agree - I think this is just the media's wishful thinking. As much as I would love for it to happen, I also think a trip to New York seems a little far fetched, given the fact that Catherine had to cancel a trip to Malta (which is much nearer to England than New York) last month due to HG. Perhaps the media think that as William went to Malta, the Cambridges are planning more overseas trips, but I doubt they will undertake any, or at least not now, as IIRC they didn't when Catherine was expecting Prince George.

 

[Pranter]

I don't think they (media etc) should be allowed to take pics of a minor without permission from the parents. I don't care who's child it is.


LaRae

 

[iisuzieii]

I think most people would think taking a picture of someones baby or children in a park is super creepy for anyone. if you wouldn't do that to a normal person why do it to a famous offspring...the whole thing with paps boils down to greed. They want money.