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
 
  #1001  
Old 09-29-2015, 04:53 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I don't think Richard Palmer would want his paper to run the photos. He just mentioned the photos have been published.
Noooo, I don't think you're right.
__________________

__________________
The future George VII's opinion on infant carriers,
"One is not amused."
  #1002  
Old 09-29-2015, 04:58 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
Noooo, I don't think you're right.
He has almost said outright that he thinks they should publish them but that it's the editors choice not to do it.
__________________

  #1003  
Old 09-29-2015, 05:21 PM
Sun Lion's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 998
For all the reaction these photos have provoked here at The Royal Forums, on other websites, and throughout the twittersphere - I want to let posters know that when I picked up the actual magazine the other day, that the article is way, way back on pages 24/25, just before the cooking and recipe pages.

The editor/publisher did not reference them on the cover, or find them worthwhile to be placed in the first twenty three pages - all of which were devoted to other stories and features about other well-known people.

I don't think the market for this magazine here in Australia - mostly older women, there are other magazines for the younger market - had much of a reaction to the photos.

Most people who buy the magazine do so every week - and little George, and the first un-official photos of little Charlotte, are neither here nor there to them. It's been more of a "thing" amongst the full-on Royal watchers of the internet.

When the letter from Kennsington Palace came out a while back, it was very evident that neither "Woman's Day", nor "New Idea" would go along with it - there was no reference to it on their websites.

Yet, "The Australian Women's Weekly" did report it, and there is a reason for that.

This magazine, despite it's name, is only published monthly, and cannot compete with the other two magazines which come out every Monday. (The market for all three is mostly the same, if you read one, you probably read all three.)

The "Women's Weekly" has to survive on truly exclusive photos and interviews done just for it - hence the appearances of CP Mary of Denmark for example, which are not for the Danish market, and cause some comment when that happens.

Neither "Woman's Day" nor "New Idea" will stop publishing these photos, though obviously at times they are not a "big deal" for the magazines, or the people buying the magazines - and are put in the pages after all the more important reports and snaps which it is thought will actually "sell" the issue.

These photos were not judged to be worthwhile enough to "sell" the magazine, and I have to agree.

I didn't think they were worth buying the magazine for either.

Anyone buying the issue would do so as they read it every week, or there is something else that caught their eye - on the cover, or in the first twenty three pages as they flipped through.
  #1004  
Old 09-29-2015, 06:24 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,877
The cover of woman's day or new idea is always Mary or Nicole Kidman and they are either pregnant or divorcing or in Mary's case becoming Queen. I would have said no one believes them but a young girl behind me in the supermarket was every excited because Mary was having another set of twins !!!!!! Poor thing will be very disappointed when they don't appear


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1005  
Old 09-29-2015, 07:17 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty91charmed View Post
Well, surprise! Apparently the intimidating letter was no use. A pic or two of Charlotte with George and the nanny have appeared on the australian magazine...

WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Princess Charlotte’s day out with Prince George | Woman's Day
FYI - I clicked on the link just now and it has been taken down. So - pro-child privacy results!
  #1006  
Old 09-29-2015, 08:18 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
The cover of woman's day or new idea is always Mary or Nicole Kidman and they are either pregnant or divorcing or in Mary's case becoming Queen. I would have said no one believes them but a young girl behind me in the supermarket was every excited because Mary was having another set of twins !!!!!! Poor thing will be very disappointed when they don't appear
I glance at those headlines while waiting at the supermarket checkout and those regular reports about Mary or Nicole are a source of amusement to me. I know that there are people out there who believe them. My late mother was one of them. She'd read it and comment on the "news" yet never follow through with questions months later when the promised babies didn't eventuate. I came to think that she and other readers treat those magazines as a form of entertainment somewhere between fact and fiction and suspend disbelief when it comes to what they read there.

Do the readers of Woman's Day and New Idea buy the magazines just because of the photos of the children? Maybe, maybe not. But the fact that that sort of photo is in there is part of the identity of the package that the magazines present.

I'm glad New Idea and Woman's Day haven't kowtowed to the Mountbatten/Windsor/Wales pressure to not publish candid, non-official, photographs of the children. I reckon that if members of the RF choose to venture outside their crenellated battlements and mingle with the hoi polloi, they are subject to the same rules that apply to the rest of us and shouldn't be treated any differently. If they or their kids venture out into public places, they are likely to be photographed. They know there is a particular interest in them and their children, and they foster it. Indeed they need this interest. Their continued enjoyment of their privileged position requires continued interest in them. They have a symbiotic relationship with the public and they need to remain of interest, and being of interest involves getting publicity, and getting publicity includes people taking photographs of them, and the photographers who take snaps of the kiddies occupy an essential niche in the system. It would do the Royals no good for the public to not care enough about them to want to see photographs of them.

I don't approve of photographers crawling through dense hedges or scaling walls to take photographs of goings-on on private property that cannot be seen from public spaces without ladders, or trespassing to do so. If someone slithers under or through a bush and photographs the royals in places where anyone would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, that's poor form and grounds for complaint if not flat out prosecution, but if the kids are in a public place and easily seen from a public place by any passer by, and someone takes a photo from a distance without bothering them, I see no reason whatsoever why that photo should not be published.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
  #1007  
Old 09-29-2015, 08:55 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,441
Roslyn's post made me think about my father. Not that he reads the tabs. But he does pay attention to George, Charlotte and Kate in the news. He's 84 and has a tad of dementia and is a bit cranky. Yet he always smiles at the kids and Mom when they hit the news, and seems to be enchanted by them. This despite decided anti-royal beliefs. I heard at least a 1000 times in my childhood "We are eating better than the queen of England, tonight."

It's just amazing how a new generation can lift people's spirits.
  #1008  
Old 09-29-2015, 09:58 PM
Frelinghighness's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New England, United States
Posts: 3,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
I glance at those headlines while waiting at the supermarket checkout and those regular reports about Mary or Nicole are a source of amusement to me. I know that there are people out there who believe them. My late mother was one of them. She'd read it and comment on the "news" yet never follow through with questions months later when the promised babies didn't eventuate. I came to think that she and other readers treat those magazines as a form of entertainment somewhere between fact and fiction and suspend disbelief when it comes to what they read there.

Do the readers of Woman's Day and New Idea buy the magazines just because of the photos of the children? Maybe, maybe not. But the fact that that sort of photo is in there is part of the identity of the package that the magazines present.

I'm glad New Idea and Woman's Day haven't kowtowed to the Mountbatten/Windsor/Wales pressure to not publish candid, non-official, photographs of the children. I reckon that if members of the RF choose to venture outside their crenellated battlements and mingle with the hoi polloi, they are subject to the same rules that apply to the rest of us and shouldn't be treated any differently. If they or their kids venture out into public places, they are likely to be photographed. They know there is a particular interest in them and their children, and they foster it. Indeed they need this interest. Their continued enjoyment of their privileged position requires continued interest in them. They have a symbiotic relationship with the public and they need to remain of interest, and being of interest involves getting publicity, and getting publicity includes people taking photographs of them, and the photographers who take snaps of the kiddies occupy an essential niche in the system. It would do the Royals no good for the public to not care enough about them to want to see photographs of them.

I don't approve of photographers crawling through dense hedges or scaling walls to take photographs of goings-on on private property that cannot be seen from public spaces without ladders, or trespassing to do so. If someone slithers under or through a bush and photographs the royals in places where anyone would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, that's poor form and grounds for complaint if not flat out prosecution, but if the kids are in a public place and easily seen from a public place by any passer by, and someone takes a photo from a distance without bothering them, I see no reason whatsoever why that photo should not be published.
What if they are hiding in car trunks or sand dunes in order to take pictures of them in public places?
  #1009  
Old 09-29-2015, 10:45 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frelinghighness View Post
What if they are hiding in car trunks or sand dunes in order to take pictures of them in public places?
I would think if the paps were in hiding to take pictures in public places, no one would be the wiser about the pictures until someone actually printed them. The subjects wouldn't even be aware that they're being photographed.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
  #1010  
Old 09-30-2015, 12:25 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I would think if the paps were in hiding to take pictures in public places, no one would be the wiser about the pictures until someone actually printed them. The subjects wouldn't even be aware that they're being photographed.
I think the key word in all of this is "public". If the Royals venture into public places, or take their children into such places, or even places that are visible from public places, they need to accept that someone might indeed be hiding in order to take candid shots of them, and they need to behave accordingly, i.e. not do anything that they would not like to see captured by a camera and posted on the front page of a magazine or newspaper.

Victoria Arbiter is recorded as having said that the long-lasting legacy that Diana has left William and Harry, is taking them outside the palace walls. A consequence of that is they have to adapt to the constant presence of photographers in circumstances they cannot control. Earlier generations of Royals could, and did, control the press. That's no longer possible.

William hates the press. He doesn't accept the idea of being photographed all the time. He's been like this all his life, not just since his mother's death. According to Ken Wharfe, the day William started public school (which I am assuming means Eton), Diana said to him in the car, "Now listen, William, there's going to be a lot of photographers at your new school, so you need to behave yourself." He replied, "I don't like 'tographers". She said, 'Well, you're going to get this for the rest of your life."

You cannot prevent people, be they ordinary members of the public with their entry level DSLR and 55-200mm zoom lenses, or professional photographers with top quality 650-1,300mm telephoto lenses, from taking photographs of other people on public property. If William doesn't want his children photographed, he needs to keep them away from the public eye.

Diana gave her sons a taste for living a "normal life", but that sort of life has burdens as well as benefits and William can't have it all his own way.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
  #1011  
Old 09-30-2015, 02:40 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
I think the key word in all of this is "public". If the Royals venture into public places, or take their children into such places, or even places that are visible from public places, they need to accept that someone might indeed be hiding in order to take candid shots of them, and they need to behave accordingly, i.e. not do anything that they would not like to see captured by a camera and posted on the front page of a magazine or newspaper.

Victoria Arbiter is recorded as having said that the long-lasting legacy that Diana has left William and Harry, is taking them outside the palace walls. A consequence of that is they have to adapt to the constant presence of photographers in circumstances they cannot control. Earlier generations of Royals could, and did, control the press. That's no longer possible.

William hates the press. He doesn't accept the idea of being photographed all the time. He's been like this all his life, not just since his mother's death. According to Ken Wharfe, the day William started public school (which I am assuming means Eton), Diana said to him in the car, "Now listen, William, there's going to be a lot of photographers at your new school, so you need to behave yourself." He replied, "I don't like 'tographers". She said, 'Well, you're going to get this for the rest of your life."

You cannot prevent people, be they ordinary members of the public with their entry level DSLR and 55-200mm zoom lenses, or professional photographers with top quality 650-1,300mm telephoto lenses, from taking photographs of other people on public property. If William doesn't want his children photographed, he needs to keep them away from the public eye.

Diana gave her sons a taste for living a "normal life", but that sort of life has burdens as well as benefits and William can't have it all his own way.

I agree with you indeed they can't control photos when in a public place and everyone with a phone can take a photo. So they will have to weigh up the pros and cons and work out what's best for their family and the future of the royal family. Keep them behind the walls and enjoy a private life in lovely gardens etc. or take them into the public places sometimes to see the the real world.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1012  
Old 09-30-2015, 03:02 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,415
Well, William & Catherine know if they take the kids to the beach, park, farm or any other public places, they will be photographed. It's the dangerous practices in the way the pictures are being taken that's scaring them. Their first priority is to make sure the kids are safe. They are not going to raise the kids just behind palace walls. Just read Queen Victoria's words on how bad her childhood was due to that.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
  #1013  
Old 09-30-2015, 03:11 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
Well, William & Catherine know if they take the kids to the beach, park, farm or any other public places, they will be photographed. It's the dangerous practices in the way the pictures are being taken that's scaring them. Their first priority is to make sure the kids are safe. They are not going to raise the kids just behind palace walls. Just read Queen Victoria's words on how bad her childhood was due to that.

I don't expect them to raise them behind walls !


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
  #1014  
Old 09-30-2015, 09:42 AM
Marty91charmed's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Near Verona and Venice, Italy
Posts: 5,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS View Post
FYI - I clicked on the link just now and it has been taken down. So - pro-child privacy results!
I know. One can find the two pics on the net though.
__________________
"Yet, walking free upon her own estate
Still,in her solitude, she is the Queen".
  #1015  
Old 10-15-2015, 01:57 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Quote:
Prince William described Princess Charlotte as "lady-like" today and her big brother George as "lively".

The Duke of Cambridge highlighted differences in the personalities of his two children as he made his first return to the Cambridge University college where he studied agriculture.

Professor Christopher Dobson, the Master of St John’s College said: “We talked a little bit about the children and he did make a couple of comments about their different temperaments.

“He said George is very lively and Charlotte is very lady-like.
Read more: Prince William reveals Charlotte is 'lady-like' and 'little monkey' George is 'lively' - Mirror Online
  #1016  
Old 10-17-2015, 03:55 AM
Tiggersk8's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Evansville, Canada
Posts: 2,078

I love the book he was given for George and Charlotte. It sounds so charming and what a great idea for the College to produce too for both Alumni and Fund Raising purposes.

Also...Why do I have a feeling that George being "lively" is a wee bit of an understatement?


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
Recycle Life ~ Be An Organ Donor!!
Recieved my Kidney Transplant on December 10th, 1993 and will be forever grateful to the family of my donor for the greatest earliest Christmas Present I've ever been given
  #1017  
Old 10-18-2015, 09:49 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Quote:
PRINCE George and Princess Charlotte have been credited with a boom in sales of childrenswear at high street chain John Lewis.

The department store’s latest retail report shows how the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s taste for dressing their children in traditional outfits has rubbed off on the general public.

Sales of boys’ navy knitted jumpers leapt 69 per cent after George wore one to meet his little sister in hospital in May.

Red corduroy shorts similar to those worn by the two-year-old toddler to Charlotte’s Christening in July shot up by 60 per cent.

Meanwhile Silver Cross prams like the one Kate used to push the princess to the St Mary Magdalene Church in Sandringham has enjoyed a 30 per cent increase in sales.
Read more: Prince George: traditional look sends clothes flying off the shelves at John Lewis | UK | News | Daily Express
  #1018  
Old 10-18-2015, 09:57 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiggersk8;[/QUOTE
Also...Why do I have a feeling that George being "lively" is a wee bit of an understatement?
Because there is a valid reason that two year olds go through "the terrible twos" and everyone that's ever been around a 2 year old for any length of time understands all too well how it is. The youngster is very, very busy discovering everything in the world around him and its full steam ahead with no holds barred. Left alone for only a very short time (like a blink of an eye) can cause great mischief, chaos and mayhem.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
  #1019  
Old 10-22-2015, 03:18 AM
Tiggersk8's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Evansville, Canada
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Also...Why do I have a feeling that George being "lively" is a wee bit of an understatement?
Because there is a valid reason that two year olds go through "the terrible twos" and everyone that's ever been around a 2 year old for any length of time understands all too well how it is. The youngster is very, very busy discovering everything in the world around him and its full steam ahead with no holds barred. Left alone for only a very short time (like a blink of an eye) can cause great mischief, chaos and mayhem.[/QUOTE]


I know that & meant it as a joke. Which I thought the grinning smilie made clear.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
Recycle Life ~ Be An Organ Donor!!
Recieved my Kidney Transplant on December 10th, 1993 and will be forever grateful to the family of my donor for the greatest earliest Christmas Present I've ever been given
  #1020  
Old 10-22-2015, 12:58 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Quote:
Prince George may be the most famous toddler in the world, but we've never heard his "voice" – until now.

In a new book titled The Prince George Diaries, British author and magazine editor Clare Bennett offers readers a satirical glimpse of young royal life through the eyes of 2-year-old George himself.

Covering events in the Cambridge household from July 2014 onwards, the story begins with the prince waking up on his first birthday to find himself surrounded by flunkeys, his parents, Prince William and Princess Kate and his Latin teacher.

It also includes the build up to the birth of his his younger sister, Princess Charlotte, whom he refers to as "Ringo" (it's a codename and goes well with "George," he explains).
Read more: Prince George Gets the Bridget Jones Treatment : People.com
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
duchess of cambridge, duke of cambridge, kate middleton, prince william, princess charlotte


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
Prince George and Princess Charlotte, General News Part 2: May 2016 JessRulz The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family 344 11-22-2016 01:22 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll fox news grahamm grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdulah ii king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess eugenie eveningwear princess ingrid alexandra princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania revolution royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


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

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- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:27 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises