The Duchess of Cambridge Current Events 1: April 29, 2011-January 2012


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
What bothered me about those pictures was the fact that they appeared to be taken INSIDE the store and ABOVE, as though from an office which looked out on the floor below. IMO it is bad enough that the paps would be bothersome but to have an employee of TESCO, which IMO it appeared to be, taking pictures and probably selling them to the tabloids is over the top. That is my issue. It's just very bad "customer service" if nothing else, and I hope it has been pursued and the employee dealt with. If she went into Harrods and a clerk stood and snapped a picture of her and her purchases it would be the same thing. At the end of the day it's about good business practices ... and this is/was not. People may argue my interpretation, however it is quite clear to me that the pictures were taken inside the store, from ABOVE through a glass window. IOW, an office of TESCO, and IMO that is just wrong.
 
windsorgirl said:
Charles receives his income from the Duchy of Cornwall, not HM, from which he supports William, Catherine and Harry's official expenses. It would not surprise me one bit if Catherine's grocery budget comes directly from William's military paycheck. If I were a British taxpayer, I also would not have a problem with spending 61p towards the Monarchy....money well spent imo.
Click to expand...

I am a U.S. citizen and live in the U.S., but I'd gladly mail the British government a buck or two a year for the pleasure of enjoying the British royal family! Maybe they should set up a subscription service for those of us overseas. Pay it through PayPal! Could be the first time the royal family turned a profit in the history of Great Britain!
 
Princess of Durham said:
What bothered me about those pictures was the fact that they appeared to be taken INSIDE the store and ABOVE, as though from an office which looked out on the floor below. IMO it is bad enough that the paps would be bothersome but to have an employee of TESCO, which IMO it appeared to be, taking pictures and probably selling them to the tabloids is over the top. That is my issue. It's just very bad "customer service" if nothing else, and I hope it has been pursued and the employee dealt with. If she went into Harrods and a clerk stood and snapped a picture of her and her purchases it would be the same thing. At the end of the day it's about good business practices ... and this is/was not. People may argue my interpretation, however it is quite clear to me that the pictures were taken inside the store, from ABOVE through a glass window. IOW, an office of TESCO, and IMO that is just wrong.
Click to expand...

That was what I was trying to say but you have put it far more succinctly :)

In response to the 'would you take a photo'? Heck yes but it would be for personal use and I wouldn't be an employee of a company abusing access or potentially a company trying to get free advertising.

If the photos had appeared to be from a fellow shopper, that's fair enough but I seriously don't think they are but am happy to be proved wrong!!

If one of my contractors was giving out information about one of our customers in the public arena, they would have their contract terminated immediately!!
 
abcdxyz said:
I am a U.S. citizen and live in the U.S., but I'd gladly mail the British government a buck or two a year for the pleasure of enjoying the British royal family! Maybe they should set up a subscription service for those of us overseas. Pay it through PayPal! Could be the first time the royal family turned a profit in the history of Great Britain!
Click to expand...

Now THAT would be money well spent in my opinion. At least Royals give back to their community, unlike those Americans deem 'celebrities' on this side of the Atlantic. I'm in complete agreement with you.
 
Princess of Durham said:
What bothered me about those pictures was the fact that they appeared to be taken INSIDE the store and ABOVE, as though from an office which looked out on the floor below. IMO it is bad enough that the paps would be bothersome but to have an employee of TESCO, which IMO it appeared to be, taking pictures and probably selling them to the tabloids is over the top. That is my issue. It's just very bad "customer service" if nothing else, and I hope it has been pursued and the employee dealt with. If she went into Harrods and a clerk stood and snapped a picture of her and her purchases it would be the same thing. At the end of the day it's about good business practices ... and this is/was not. People may argue my interpretation, however it is quite clear to me that the pictures were taken inside the store, from ABOVE through a glass window. IOW, an office of TESCO, and IMO that is just wrong.
Click to expand...


MARG said:
:previous: I believe Catherine has the right to expect privacy when she is engaged in private activities. I personally do not believe that Catherine doing her grocery shopping is "News" and it is certainly not a "Current Event"!

This is simple intrusion. Do we like the pretty pictures? Oh yes! Is it right that photographers can go to any extreme to get them? No! We are part of the problem and we justify ourselves by saying "she knew what she was getting into", but that does not wash.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with these two posts. This is exactly the same point I was trying to make about why these pictures are different then other papz phots we've gotten except you guys put it way way better then I ever could. :flowers:
 
Corner security camera up by the ceiling is what it looks like to me.
 
You'll get no argument from me.:flowers: Scooter could be correct in saying that they were taken by a security camera.


Princess of Durham said:
People may argue my interpretation, however it is quite clear to me that the pictures were taken inside the store, from ABOVE through a glass window. IOW, an office of TESCO, and IMO that is just wrong.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Daria_S said:
Now THAT would be money well spent in my opinion. At least Royals give back to their community, unlike those Americans deem 'celebrities' on this side of the Atlantic. I'm in complete agreement with you.
Click to expand...
So am I, where do I send my dollar?
 
Trishy said:
I have to say that I probably wouldn't. Whenever I have seen a celebrity, I've certainly taken a discreet look at them but I've never approached them or taken a picture of them as I felt they were entitled to their privacy, regardless of who pays their wages or the fact that they are a public figure.

When Prince William visited QLD earlier this year after Cyclone Yasi I went and saw him at one of his public appearances. Watching him and the photos being taken of him by the general public made me feel that he was like a monkey in a zoo. I know that is his role and constant photography is one of the prices to pay for their privileged positions, but I think sometimes we forget that regardless of their status and celebrity, they are still human beings. Yes I expect to see photographs of them when they are in public places conducting their private life, but I think there is a fine line and these photos cross that. If she is on the street fine take photos, but once she is inside a building leave the woman alone.
Click to expand...

i'm with you on this trishy. if it was a public event i.e. a royal walk about or a celebrity taking part in a promotional event then that's different but if saw the same people in a restaurant or out shopping or in the airport i wouldn't take a pic.

william does have a job so there's no fallacy about private income there. he also has his inheritance from his mother so no fallacy there either. to think that their groceries are paid for by the taxpayer is bit of a stretch.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is as it is. Pictures taken from inside Tesco might feel wrong but they are reality. I dont think Kate is surprised or angry, she doesnt mind sitting near the front window at the hairdresser when having her hair done, there is no need neither for this nor for doing her shopping herself. Everybody knows they have servants or can have their hair done at home but if they dont chose to do so but go out in public this is the result.

Just get along with it and this is exactly what Kate does. In contrast, everyday people have to put up with a lot of everyday annoyances as well, they might be different but nobodys world is perfect, why should royals, who never have to queue up, always have a parking slot, never have to wait for the train, never have to sit at the doctors with a sick child while the boss at work is ranting etc etc, have a perfect world.
 
:previous:
Well said. I completely agree with you as I said earlier I'm sure catherine isn't worried about it as much as other people are. This will be part of her life and I'm sure she knew it would be this way.
She could always do what Russell Crowe did when press sat outside his house everyday. He wore the same clothes everyday and as every photo looked the same they eventually gave up Ha ha
 
Last edited by a moderator:
semisquare said:
how crazy is that to take pic of her while she does her shopping!!!! that is sick...imo kate is being treated like princess di
Click to expand...

I feel so sad even looking at these and she even looked right at the camera. :sad:
 
Very interesting video. I liked it and thought it quite informative. I would send a monthly donation to keep them going. It's true. Being a republic would suck.
 
Well, so far in this thread the Yanks have pledged approximately $5.00 US for the BRF. We just need to know where to mail it. LOL

Seriously, it would be nice to believe that people and/or journalists would leave celebrities and royals alone while they are doing obviously 'private life' things, shopping, hair, etc. but it just isn't going to happen without legal intervention.

I believe that Catherine is a well-grounded young woman who has a well grounded husband to help her get through all the media attention. I believe also that the BRF 'establishment' has learned valuable lessons in the past and that they are more able to provide her with support in dealing with the challenges in her new life.
 
Princess of Durham said:
What bothered me about those pictures was the fact that they appeared to be taken INSIDE the store and ABOVE, as though from an office which looked out on the floor below. IMO it is bad enough that the paps would be bothersome but to have an employee of TESCO, which IMO it appeared to be, taking pictures and probably selling them to the tabloids is over the top. That is my issue. It's just very bad "customer service" if nothing else, and I hope it has been pursued and the employee dealt with. If she went into Harrods and a clerk stood and snapped a picture of her and her purchases it would be the same thing. At the end of the day it's about good business practices ... and this is/was not. People may argue my interpretation, however it is quite clear to me that the pictures were taken inside the store, from ABOVE through a glass window. IOW, an office of TESCO, and IMO that is just wrong.
Click to expand...

It bothers me too that the pictures were from inside the store. Kate has a right to whatever little privacy she currently gets and she probably enjoys the shopping whether it is for clothes or groceries. She won't be able to do it when William is King and she is Queen. I don't think she would be able to do it when William becomes the Prince Of Wales but I could be wrong there. I think whomever took those pics inside the store crossed a line.
 
Duchess said:
william does have a job so there's no fallacy about private income there. he also has his inheritance from his mother so no fallacy there either. to think that their groceries are paid for by the taxpayer is bit of a stretch.
Click to expand...

He doesn't make much. The range for a Flight Lieutenant is BPS37,170-44,205.*

If they're paying a fair rent in Wales, buying their own food, running their own cars, etc. there wouldn't be any Jenny Packham money left over.

*Source: RAF website
 
Last edited:
There is a budget for clothing for official engagements. I believe the figure of $65,000.00 was printed when they made the trip to Canada. She doesn't where expensive clothes in her private life.
 
KittyAtlanta said:
He doesn't make much. The range for a Flight Lieutenant is BPS37,170-44,205.*

If they're paying a fair rent in Wales, buying their own food, running their own cars, etc. there wouldn't be any Jenny Packham money left over.

*Source: RAF website
Click to expand...

Well he does have rather sizable private resources.
 
I believe that's what the Duchess of Cambridge's would-have-been mother-in-law did when she went to the gym, as well.

Lady74 said:
She could always do what Russell Crowe did when press sat outside his house everyday. He wore the same clothes everyday and as every photo looked the same they eventually gave up Ha ha
Click to expand...
 
:previous:IMO, Madge could take some pointers from the Duchess.

:whistling:


:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

iceflower
Queen Mary, Current Events Part 1: January 2024 -
2 3
Replies
75
Views
11K
Izzie
Izzie
iceflower
King Frederik X, Current Events Part 1: January 2024 -
2 3
Replies
70
Views
9K
polyesco
P
CrownPrincessJava
  • Sticky
Italy: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
Replies
4
Views
418
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
Birthday and anniversary wishes for the Royal Family of the Spain 2024
Replies
12
Views
1K
Biri
B
iceflower
Prince Albert & Princess Charlene Current Events Part 6: January 2024 -
Replies
9
Views
3K
iceflower
iceflower

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom