The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #181  
Old 02-23-2016, 11:39 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 2,952
Adding my compliments as well miss whirley. I admire your knack of seeing the big picture when it comes to discussing the BRF.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 02-23-2016, 07:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,187
As you all must know, though, with regard to anonymous sources, the Press has to guarantee anonymity to their sources or they wouldn't tell them anything of importance. This happens in many stories, royal, political etc, any story which is likely to be contentious. People who serve with William in Norfolk and who served with him in Anglesey are likely to receive a severe reprimand and a black mark put against their name by the authorities concerned if they complain to the media using their own names.

I don't expect to be believed on this thread, but there was talk way back on the base at Anglesey that William would have others covering his shifts at times when he wasn't undertaking Royal duties but was elsewhere.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 02-23-2016, 07:47 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
As you all must know, though, with regard to anonymous sources, the Press has to guarantee anonymity to their sources or they wouldn't tell them anything of importance. This happens in many stories, royal, political etc, any story which is likely to be contentious. People who serve with William in Norfolk and who served with him in Anglesey are likely to receive a severe reprimand and a black mark put against their name by the authorities concerned if they complain to the media using their own names.

I don't expect to be believed on this thread, but there was talk way back on the base at Anglesey that William would have others covering his shifts at times when he wasn't undertaking Royal duties but was elsewhere.
There are two kinds of sources. If a reporter says his sources tell him the Queen will abdicate at 12 noon and she abdicates well the public can judge the source is accurate.

If a reporter says Prince Philip likes to dance around his living room in the nude after the staff have retired, well that's just gossip as it can't be proved.

That's all this is about William. A 'source' says William is bored. And? It's just gossip and can't be proved one way or the other.

As for William's RAF service, nice try but his colleagues say nothing but great things about him.

He undertook 156 missions and rescued 149 people.

As for rumours, there was talk way back that Harry failed some of his Apache helicopter tests but his qualifications were pushed through anyway.

Just royal gossip
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 02-23-2016, 07:48 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,327
Papers can use unnamed sources just to make crap up. Look at all the stories when Kate was pregnant that Carole was going to be in the delivery room or that she was moving into Amner and her marriage to Mike was falling apart. Oh wait the mail had to retract that last one. Royals are easy target for crap to be made up about because they aren't going to call the papers out for it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 02-23-2016, 08:03 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 2,952
^^^Very true Skippyboo. They'll just continue to write their false stories in order to sell more ad space.
Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 02-23-2016, 08:24 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,187
Yes, but KP also didn't help the situation by bungling the 'he doesn't work enough' argument in the Press by insisting that there were rest requirements by William's employers, only to be contradicted by the statement by the CAA. From this came the revelation of William's work hours being 80 hours a month, leaving lots of time for Royal duties. (I don't know whether the KP Press office was being duplicitous or were simply muddled. They don't seem to be the most efficient operation around.)

Anyway, this has not been a good look all round and proves that the printed press may be dying but even a dying scorpion can have an almighty sting in its tail. The story has spread to Continental publications like Stern now.
Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 02-23-2016, 09:25 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,187
I'm certainly treating the CAA's statement as gospel which called Kensington Palace's rebuttal about William's hours as 'muddled'.. The CAA aren't Emily Andrews are they?

Some tabloid reports do contain a germ of truth, some are rubbish and fantasies and some quote sources who do not wish to be named because careers could be harmed.

Emily Andrews had a go on Richatd Palmer's Twitter page with another poster there who inferred her info on William's fellow workers wasn't true. Her riposte was an annoyed 'So you are calling me a liar!'

I realise that Palmer is no favourite of many posters here and EA is like many tabloid journalists in that they get a hare and run with it. Occasionally, though, and I will admit only occasionally, Royal correspondents do have genuine sources that they can't name. There were several times during the War of the Wales's for example, when the media nailed it and it was because of these sources.
Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 02-24-2016, 12:46 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
In September 2013, it’s rumored that he threatened bloody murder if the pictures of topless Camilla on a yacht were even discussed in the British press.

These are the three that have mentored William and Harry on how to view the press and how to deal with them. And yet it’s William who gets called petulant. Interesting.
I believe your information is inaccurate.

Are you confusing Diana with Camilla.

Diana was the one who went topless.

Camilla has never been topless on a yacht or anywhere in public.

In September 2013, Camilla was photographed for several days while on vacation with her sister in several one piece swimsuits.

The pictures appeared in all the papers, including in the British newspapers.

In September 2014, Camilla again was photographed while on vacation in a one piece swimsuit.

In November 2015, Camilla again was photographed in a one piece swim suit while she and Charles were in Australia. There was also a video.

Quote:
A Clarence House official said the images of Charles and Camilla 'were taken during a day off whilst Their Royal Highnesses are clearly enjoying private time'.

It does not appear legal action is being considered.

In 1989 & 1994 Camilla was photographed in a one piece. I do not think Camilla would be wearing a two piece at 67 years old if she was not wearing them when she was in her 40s.

If Camilla was topless in 2013, then we would have heard about it...the DM would never had let that one go...Richard Kay, Geoff Levy, Christopher Wilson, etc. would still be writing about it today.

As far as William.
William has been treated with kid gloves by the media and now he is receiving the same treatment from the media as the rest of the RF.

The media gave him a pass because he was his mother's son and looked like her.

When he lost his hair and was no longer attractive, the media still gave him a pass because he married Catherine and then had two children.

The media expected him and Catherine to work full time when they were given Apt 1A but that did not happen so some of the rumbling started.

When he move to Anmer Hall, he started to receive more bad press.

The media would have continued to give William and Catherine the kid glove treatment, if William had allowed the media opportunities to photograph George & Charlotte.

William has decided to limit his children's exposure to the press so now the press are treating him like any other member of the BRF.
Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 02-24-2016, 01:12 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Everyone does know it - From 2013


Quote:
Royal correspondents, like humour columnists, have a licence to embellish, and readers know the deal.
Read more: Royal reporters make it all up - doesn't everyone know that? » The Spectator
Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 02-24-2016, 03:50 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk/Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 4,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Yes indeed, I think most people realise the press make a lot of things up and embellish the truth.

I don't think people really take many of the stories to heart even if they believe some of the things they read - they take a look, see a picture or read what some anonymous source has said and then move on and forget about it.

The comments section in some of the on-line papers are certainly not representative of how the majority of people feel. And saying that, it is a reminder to the palace that the least they say in reaction to some news articles the better.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #191  
Old 02-25-2016, 05:52 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter
The Duchess of Cambridge made page 3 of my paper today, thanks to strong pictures and a couple of nice quotes from Judy Murray.

Mark Cuthbert ‏@markacuthbert
@RoyalReporter although a load of reporters with camera phones were accommodated, photographers had to make do with another pic of a coat !

Rookie @royalfocus1
@markacuthbert @RoyalReporter a joke reporters tweeting pics video nothing to do with their jobs increasingly desperate bid to stay relevant

Rookie @royalfocus1
@markacuthbert @RoyalReporter what's even funnier was @byEmilyAndrews doing rota on first job not photographers writing critical articles

Richard Palmer ‏@RoyalReporter
@royalfocus1 We're all facing a battle to stay relevant, Rookie: reporters, photographers, broadcasters, pundits, and the royals themselves.

Rookie ‏@royalfocus1
@RoyalReporter yes but often there is plenty of reporters all tweeting pictures and video when there could be an extra photographer!

--------------------------------------------------------
This morning RP is happy because Catherine provided good 'copy'

Ah but what's this? Photographers are not happy but this time with reporters.

Reporters use their phones to take pics and shoot video (just like W&C do with George and Charlotte) and photographers don't like it one bit.

I thought I'd post this because once again it shows the 'turf wars' that go on even in the press

The next time a photographer or reporter criticises W&C for taking their own pics, remember this exchange.
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 02-26-2016, 04:45 PM
eya eya is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: -, Greece
Posts: 5,412
Why the institution of the Royal Family must be reworked - Richard Palmer | Richard Palmer | Columnists | Comment | Daily Express
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 02-26-2016, 05:32 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,416
I think with The Queen turning 90 and with Prince Philip in his mid 90's, things are on it's way to changing anyway. Good article from Richard though. I agree with everything written.
__________________
"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
  #194  
Old 02-26-2016, 05:41 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
As a royal reporter it's understandable he wants the younger royals out front. There is little general interest in the current line up of royals and William, Catherine, Harry, George and Charlotte make for good coverage.

But things aren't going to change dramatically until after the Queen passes or there is a regency
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 02-26-2016, 06:02 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,416
Also, this time of the year royal news is slow. Things will start to pick up over the royal tour, birthday celebrations and other royal events to come. Two State Visits to be scheduled.

There may not be a big dramatic change, but with The Queen turning 90 and Prince Philip now in his mid 90's, things will have no other choice but to start changing. I think with William and Catherine now taking part in State events, we are now seeing the changes come into play. That's something a great deal of people thought wouldn't happen for many years to come.

The palace and press do need to rework some relationships, but I think it's been great that the Cambridge's have some breathing room for their family. No one wants another Charles & Diana crises, so William & Catherine have to maintain some privacy. Even when they're The Prince & Princess of Wales and Sovereigns.

It's not just the royal media that's interested in the younger royals, but I think everyone is interested in the younger members of the family. It wouldn't hurt to see them a little more now.

I do take issue with the thoughts on Catherine though. I think she's doing great on the royal job and she has loosen up a bit, but it will take a few more years for her to really inject more of her personality into her speeches and other things she do. Royal duties and royal life isn't an easy path to navigate, but I think she's doing just fine.
__________________
"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
  #196  
Old 02-26-2016, 06:37 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,380
Maybe we are being unrealistic because we are interested in the royals.

Reporters report news. Anne doing 500 engagements is not news because the public expect it.

The Queen holding audiences isn't news, but it's recorded on the Royal site for historical (?) purposes.

Charles making cheese (in support of organic businesses) or Camilla reading a story to young children, or them reading to her (literacy) makes a good photo opportunity and both print and online can use it.

Charles under pressure because of politics, or William being workshy, or a Royal affair or corruption or anything else controversial is viewed as NEWS!

we don't have to like it but news is immediate, different and of wide general interest. Unfortunately these days only the latter example sells. More of the same (lots of charitable engagements unless photo opportunity) just doesn't.

News is a business and needs to make money.

Just thinking out loud.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 02-26-2016, 07:29 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,327
The genie is out of the bottle with regards to social media. It's a ridiculous idea that the royals should not use it to get information out. The press uses it too. Why read the article about a Royal event if the story doesn't add to stuff we already know? The Daily Mail articles have tons of photos which draws people in. The Express doesn't.

Also I don't blame Kate for taking the Huff post offer. It brought tons of attention to a worthy cause. It's isn't Kate's job to fight for paid journalists V's blogger. Maybe have your paper partner with a charity backed by a Royal and then they will write something for your paper too.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 02-26-2016, 07:38 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 cepe View Post
Maybe we are being unrealistic because we are interested in the royals.

Reporters report news. Anne doing 500 engagements is not news because the public expect it.

The Queen holding audiences isn't news, but it's recorded on the Royal site for historical (?) purposes.

Charles making cheese (in support of organic businesses) or Camilla reading a story to young children, or them reading to her (literacy) makes a good photo opportunity and both print and online can use it.

Charles under pressure because of politics, or William being workshy, or a Royal affair or corruption or anything else controversial is viewed as NEWS!

we don't have to like it but news is immediate, different and of wide general interest. Unfortunately these days only the latter example sells. More of the same (lots of charitable engagements unless photo opportunity) just doesn't.

News is a business and needs to make money.

Just thinking out loud.
What I've put in bold letters is basically what Palmer said in the recent article.

"Part of the problem is that interest in the royals official working lives is sustained by the glamour and intrigue that supposedly surrounds the rest of their lives. If we dont see that, it becomes more difficult."

The official public life, to him, needs the juicy tidbits and the "caught in the act" and the burp heard around the world type incident to support their livelihood. In other words, like some have suggested, they should jump through hoops like circus animals for the entertainment of the masses.

Personally, I applaud the Cambridges for doing whatever they can to draw a distinct line between public and private.
__________________
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 didnt understand the assignment, and I told them they didnt understand life.
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 02-26-2016, 07:58 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
The genie is out of the bottle with regards to social media. It's a ridiculous idea that the royals should not use it to get information out. The press uses it too. Why read the article about a Royal event if the story doesn't add to stuff we already know? The Daily Mail articles have tons of photos which draws people in. The Express doesn't.

Also I don't blame Kate for taking the Huff post offer. It brought tons of attention to a worthy cause. It's isn't Kate's job to fight for paid journalists V's blogger. Maybe have your paper partner with a charity backed by a Royal and then they will write something for your paper too.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
I agree. A lot of times Palmer takes to social media to complain about the royals using social media

RP is under tremendous pressure. He wrote a blog last week complaining about no pay rise in 8 years and Express journalists make go on strike.

He also announced today that his editor told him he won't be going on any of the upcoming royal tours. Just like last year he didn't go to Africa with Harry or Malta with Charles and Camilla and the Queen
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 02-26-2016, 08:10 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
What I've put in bold letters is basically what Palmer said in the recent article.

"Part of the problem is that interest in the royals official working lives is sustained by the glamour and intrigue that supposedly surrounds the rest of their lives. If we dont see that, it becomes more difficult."

The official public life, to him, needs the juicy tidbits and the "caught in the act" and the burp heard around the world type incident to support their livelihood. In other words, like some have suggested, they should jump through hoops like circus animals for the entertainment of the masses.

Personally, I applaud the Cambridges for doing whatever they can to draw a distinct line between public and private.
The fact that it was Palmer who wrote that is irrelevant - its true. Hardly any UK media mentioned Catherine's charity work this week and the Times only showed some tennis pix (photo-opportunity). Charles is supporting pub is the hub to keep rural communities alive - no mention apart from he fact he offered to buy a round for everyone. Camilla is championing literacy (fantastic) - absolutely no coverage. It isn't considered news by editors. Many of the journalists go on the UK trips, write pieces and they are never published. One sees Twitter comments but nothing in the press.

Its a shame but its a fact. Controversy sells, bad news sells and good news doesn't (unless one has overcome huge adversity).

We are interested but the majority aren't unless its scandal. And therefore in drawing a line, the Cambridges cease to be interesting.

I'm not saying I agree with it because I don't. But that is how here in the UK it is viewed - not by Richard or Camilla or Emily or Rebecca but by their Editors and Owners.
__________________

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, caricatures, cartoons, fleet street, newspapers, tabloid press


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
Madeleine and Chris: Media and Public Opinion LadyFinn Princess Madeleine, Chris O'Neill and Family 743 12-20-2015 09:30 PM
Dutch Royal House Code of Conduct for the Press (Media Code) Silvermj Dutch Royals 41 06-30-2014 06:15 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 e-mail fashion poll 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 photo 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 09:32 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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