The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Royal Highlights > Royal Library > The Electronic Domain

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 02-21-2015, 06:49 AM
PetticoatLane's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: A Small Town, United Kingdom
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
It would be very very easy to keep that private if he wanted too.but that wasn't what it was about
It was set up so people would see Will accepting Camilla
And as this just keeps going round and round I'm over and out it's very late here


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
This is absolutely not true. The fact this meeting happened was ALWAYS going to come out in the press. Every person who worked for Charles in just about any capacity will have known it was happening or heard rumours of it happening either before or after and any one of them could have leaked it. It was too big a deal to stay private. In a lot of ways Charles, if he did play a part in its leaking to the press, was probably wise to ensure that the correct version of events was the one the paper actually published. Otherwise, who knows what they would've come up with.

At different times both Charles and Diana have used their children for their own agendas. But, I suppose, that's what a lot of parents who are divorcing acrimoniously do. It's not nice, but it happens.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 02-21-2015, 06:52 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by PetticoatLane View Post
This is absolutely not true. The fact this meeting happened was ALWAYS going to come out in the press. Every person who worked for Charles in just about any capacity will have known it was happening or heard rumours of it happening either before or after and any one of them could have leaked it. It was too big a deal to stay private.
100% agreed.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 02-21-2015, 07:01 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,900
Quote:
Originally Posted by PetticoatLane View Post
This is absolutely not true. The fact this meeting happened was ALWAYS going to come out in the press. Every person who worked for Charles in just about any capacity will have known it was happening or heard rumours of it happening either before or after and any one of them could have leaked it. It was too big a deal to stay private. In a lot of ways Charles, if he did play a part in its leaking to the press, was probably wise to ensure that the correct version of events was the one the paper actually published. Otherwise, who knows what they would've come up with.



At different times both Charles and Diana have used their children for their own agendas. But, I suppose, that's what a lot of parents who are divorcing acrimoniously do. It's not nice, but it happens.

If he wanted kept private it would have stayed that way. If staff let it out without his permission they would have been sacked. He used William it is not new we have known this for some time.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 02-21-2015, 07:58 AM
PetticoatLane's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: A Small Town, United Kingdom
Posts: 381
Very little can stay private when you have a staff of over 100 people working for you. How on earth could Charles have proved definitively who did the leaking, short of making them all take lie detector tests?

We've seen it time and time again, despite confidentiality clauses in their contracts, members of the royals' staff are perfectly willing to divulge any and all information about their employers, for the right price.

Maybe Charles did deliberately leak this information, I'm not discounting that idea. I just do not trust the word of a tabloid journalist. We've all seen in excruciating detail, via the Leveson Enquiry and multiple criminal hacking trials in the UK, the fact that the press are perfectly happy to outright lie to their readers without a moment's pause.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 02-21-2015, 08:05 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
The Sun's former royal correspondent Charles Rae told the documentary that details of the meeting at St James's Palace in 1998 had been revealed by Prince Charles' former PR man Mark Bolland.

'We got all the details, her [Camilla] drinking the gin and tonic, her having a sneaky fag beforehand because she was nervous and everything else.

'So all the detail came to us and was, if you like, absolutely kosher. Apart from Camilla and William telling us, you couldn't have got it from a better source… It was Mark Bolland.'

--------
Now Bolland denies he leaked the info but as much as I don't like tabloid reporters I don't see why Rae would substitute Camilla's aid for Bolland
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 02-21-2015, 08:52 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,936
It is inevitable. There are so many people in and around and about these royals that every hiccup is immediately leaked. Remember the practices of News of the World, even hacking the mobiles of royals or persons around and knew even before the royals themselves where they would go, where they would stay, etc.

It is no wonder that "modern royals" like the new Kings of the Netherlands and Spain prefer to remain in their small, cosy and very private current houses instead of moving to the formal palaces and castles which are at their disposal... It is also no wonder that the Cambridges tried to live as small as possible, dreaming about Anmer Hall, but reality is that they will sucked up more and more in the machinery led by "the grey men".
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 02-21-2015, 10:30 AM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
It is no wonder that "modern royals" like the new Kings of the Netherlands and Spain prefer to remain in their small, cosy and very private current houses instead of moving to the formal palaces and castles which are at their disposal.
King Willem-Alexander will move in at Huis ten Bosch when renovations are complete. And King Felipe remained in his residence at the Zarzuela complex.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 02-21-2015, 10:48 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
If he wanted kept private it would have stayed that way. If staff let it out without his permission they would have been sacked. He used William it is not new we have known this for some time.
Camilla's personal assistant, Amanda MacManus, was sacked after Prince Charles found out she was inadvertently responsible for the story. The BBC News | UK | Camilla PA resigns

The first rule of PR is the same as the first rule of medicine: Do no harm. This story was bound to get out sooner or later. If Bolland pushed the story, he is incompetent. It would have been much better to wait until the surprise birthday party.

The party itself was good media for Charles because it helped counter the narrative that he was a bad father. Because the party was a surprise, it would have been obvious that Charles didn't pressure William and Harry to invite her.

The media would have been falling all over themselves to find out how long William and Harry knew her, what they did together, etc.... The story of the first meeting would have come out sooner or later because, as others have pointed out, too many people knew about it.

Charles wasn't a perfect father and I believe he did use his children to improve his image--as do most politicians in the U.S. The story that he used Harry is more believable to me. It doesn't make sense that he leaked the details of the meeting between Camilla and William.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:03 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,936
Yes, but the King could have used other residences. Already when he still was the Prince of Orange b.t.w. It is not for nothing that he seems very attached to his private villa De Eikenhorst, like Princess Beatrix has always had her most pleasant time at her little romantic private estate Drakensteyn.

Of course also King Willem-Alexander will be swallowed by the grey men: when he moves to Huis ten Bosch Palace, the dozens of figures around him are no longer avoidable. King Felipe seems to remain in his "Pabellón del Príncipe", which is "just" a nice house and reminds in nothing a royal residence. It is only illustrative for the fact that things are difficult to remain private in such circumstances (the fact that the press would always have known that Prince William met Camilla, with or without spin).

Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:22 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by US Royal Watcher View Post
Camilla's personal assistant, Amanda MacManus, was sacked after Prince Charles found out she was inadvertently responsible for the story. The BBC News | UK | Camilla PA resigns

The first rule of PR is the same as the first rule of medicine: Do no harm. This story was bound to get out sooner or later. If Bolland pushed the story, he is incompetent. It would have been much better to wait until the surprise birthday party.

The party itself was good media for Charles because it helped counter the narrative that he was a bad father. Because the party was a surprise, it would have been obvious that Charles didn't pressure William and Harry to invite her.

The media would have been falling all over themselves to find out how long William and Harry knew her, what they did together, etc.... The story of the first meeting would have come out sooner or later because, as others have pointed out, too many people knew about it.

Charles wasn't a perfect father and I believe he did use his children to improve his image--as do most politicians in the U.S. The story that he used Harry is more believable to me. It doesn't make sense that he leaked the details of the meeting between Camilla and William.
All that shows me is Camilla's PA took the fall for Bolland. It makes no difference to the Sun who leaked the story. Why would the royal correspondent for the Sun say it was Bolland when in fact it was Camilla's aide?
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:42 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
All that shows me is Camilla's PA took the fall for Bolland. It makes no difference to the Sun who leaked the story. Why would the royal correspondent for the Sun say it was Bolland when in fact it was Camilla's aide?
Why would Amanda MacManus take the fall for Bolland? But there is still no answer for the larger question is why Bolland would leak the story at all. The backfire was foreseeable. Throughout the War of the Royals, leaks were almost always followed up by investigations into the identity and the motives of the leakers.

Regarding the Sun's motive, I suppose it is possible that Bolland confirmed the story after it was obvious the Sun already had it. It's also possible that the Sun manufactured the Bolland leak as a way to discredit Charles and Bolland.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:49 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
Amanda MacManus was expendable. Bolland was tied to closely to Charles. Charles hired Bolland to implement 'Operation Camilla PB'. For Charles to admit Bolland leaked the story would make Charles guilty as well in the eyes of many.

It was easier to say a PA of Camilla's 'inadvertently' told the story to a 'trusted' third party and that person just happened to run to the Sun newspaper with the information
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:51 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Amanda MacManus was expendable. Bolland was tied to closely to Charles. Charles hired Bolland to implement 'Operation Camilla PB'. For Charles to admit Bolland leaked the story would make Charles guilty as well in the eyes of many.

It was easier to say a PA of Camilla's 'inadvertently' told the story to a 'trusted' third party and that person just happened to run to the Sun newspaper with the information
Perhaps, but you still haven't explained what the motive was for leaking the story in the first place as opposed to just letting it come out naturally. I've explained why leaking the story at that time was detrimental, so why do you think Operation Camilla PB would have benefited from the leak?


ETA: I think you've confirmed the answer to the question about why the Sun would lie about who leaked the story: they were trying to discredit Charles.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:58 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
It may seem detrimental in hindsight but perhaps at the time Charles wanted to push on the public any and all information that he though cast him and Camilla in a good light.

He was desperate and maybe didn't think it through.

In the end the Sun got a juicy story out of this. I don't see it makes a difference for the reporter to lie and say it was Bolland when it was a PA of Camilla's.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 02-21-2015, 11:58 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 11,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Yes, but the King could have used other residences. Already when he still was the Prince of Orange b.t.w. It is not for nothing that he seems very attached to his private villa De Eikenhorst, like Princess Beatrix has always had her most pleasant time at her little romantic private estate Drakensteyn.

Of course also King Willem-Alexander will be swallowed by the grey men: when he moves to Huis ten Bosch Palace, the dozens of figures around him are no longer avoidable. King Felipe seems to remain in his "Pabellón del Príncipe", which is "just" a nice house and reminds in nothing a royal residence. It is only illustrative for the fact that things are difficult to remain private in such circumstances (the fact that the press would always have known that Prince William met Camilla, with or without spin).


Felipe is likely to move to Zarzuela Palace when the old Kings are dead and his daughter is old enough to want a home for herself, Leonor will stay at Zarzuela II and Sofia will move outside the palace compound like her aunts did.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 02-21-2015, 12:11 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Amanda MacManus was expendable. Bolland was tied to closely to Charles. Charles hired Bolland to implement 'Operation Camilla PB'. For Charles to admit Bolland leaked the story would make Charles guilty as well in the eyes of many.

It was easier to say a PA of Camilla's 'inadvertently' told the story to a 'trusted' third party and that person just happened to run to the Sun newspaper with the information

Exactly, it was much more convenient to get rid of an aide, than get rid of the mastermind behind the PR operation.
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 02-21-2015, 12:20 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
It may seem detrimental in hindsight but perhaps at the time Charles wanted to push on the public any and all information that he though cast him and Camilla in a good light.

He was desperate and maybe didn't think it through.

In the end the Sun got a juicy story out of this. I don't see it makes a difference for the reporter to lie and say it was Bolland when it was a PA of Camilla's.
Anything is possible but I think it is unlikely. First of all, Bolland is a PR professional. Everything I've seen of his work indicates that he wouldn't make this type of PR blunder.

Second, I don't think Charles was desperate at the time. His approval ratings were on the rise because the public perceived him as a good father. All indications were that he was patiently laying the groundwork for his eventual marriage to Camilla. He knew it would be years before the public accepted her.

Moreover, William and Harry didn't immediately warm to Camilla. According to almost everything I've read, Charles was sensitive to their feelings and didn't try and force Camilla on them. It was carefully orchestrated, first he brought in Camilla's children, then William and Harry chose to met Camilla. So again, why would he leak that particular story when he knew it would eventually come out on its own?

I also concede that if Bolland heard the Sun got the story, he may have tried to put his own spin on it. On the other hand, the Sun reporter may have just made that up because he didn't like Charles. It wouldn't be the first time a tabloid reporter manufactured a story about the Wales' family.


ETA: I found this article with the history of Charles' approval ratings. It was at 42% in August of 1997 and 59% in March of 1998. Charles would not have been desperate. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...next-King.html
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 02-21-2015, 12:33 PM
Nico's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 1,665
The thing i want to know is the real motive behing these documentaries. After all, all this stuff is not new and i have the feeling that "reinventing the royals" is more or less a pretty new year present for a fraction from the public finding unbearable the fact that the Wales family is now in peace with herself. Is it really constructive to reharse old stories from the Bolland years ? To know who did what ? It's just a question ...
I'm positively amazed that some people seem to genuinely discover that the BRF, shock and horror, is surrounded by an army of PR and spin doctors and that some Royals, including Camilla, needed, of course, an intensive PR campaign to try to forget the hysteria of the 90's. I guess some are missing these years and the BRF became too boring without all the scandals. The articles about "Charles used his sons", "Charles and Camilla don't live under the same roof" or "Charles asked Bolland to diabolise Diana" seem to be here just to content some readers thinking, with a grin on their faces "i knew it, i knew it !". With the so called scandalous biography of Charles and the stinky papers seen here and there lately, i wonder if there's some clear attempt to highjack the wedding anniversary and Charles and Camilla in April., apparently still hard to swallow ten years later.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 02-21-2015, 12:50 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,139
You raise a good point, Nico. The real driver is ratings and documentaries on the royal family are probably always popular (I don't know what the ratings were for that documentary). But there are only so many documentaries about a relatively happy family. The more controversy, the better.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 02-21-2015, 12:50 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
The thing i want to know is the real motive behing these documentaries. After all, all this stuff is not new and i have the feeling that "reinventing the royals" is more or less a pretty new year present for a fraction from the public finding unbearable the fact that the Wales family is now in peace with herself. Is it really constructive to reharse old stories from the Bolland years ? To know who did what ? It's just a question ...
I'm positively amazed that some people seem to genuinely discover that the BRF, shock and horror, is surrounded by an army of PR and spin doctors and that some Royals, including Camilla, needed, of course, an intensive PR campaign to try to forget the hysteria of the 90's. I guess some are missing these years and the BRF became too boring without all the scandals. The articles about "Charles used his sons", "Charles and Camilla don't live under the same roof" or "Charles asked Bolland to diabolise Diana" seem to be here just to content some readers thinking, with a grin on their faces "i knew it, i knew it !". With the so called scandalous biography of Charles and the stinky papers seen here and there lately, i wonder if there's some clear attempt to highjack the wedding anniversary and Charles and Camilla in April., apparently still hard to swallow ten years later.
What the first part of the doc revealed is pretty much stuff that was already known. None of that stuff was new.

It should be celebrated that the Wales and now Cambridge household are in peace and the terrible drama of the 90's are long gone. Although, with Charles and Camilla's tenth wedding anniversary coming up, one can't be surprised a documentary like this has come about. There will be a lot more of articles and reflections to come, due to this anniversary. It's all part of the history of the House of Windsor.
__________________

__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
"De Kongelige Juveler" ("The Royal Jewels") (2011), DR Documentary Muhler The Electronic Domain 157 04-30-2015 02:22 AM
Do Your Kids Play At Being Royalty? FarahJoy Royal Chit Chat 39 12-22-2011 04:40 AM




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 dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece josephine-charlotte kate middleton 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 pierre casiraghi portugal prince bernhard prince charles princess charlene outfits 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 mathilde's daytime fashion queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania fashion 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 10:15 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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