The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #561  
Old 05-01-2018, 08:55 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,932
It’s never just a free for all with photographers. There will be a media ‘pen’ outside the chapel it’s just not everyone gets equal access.

Accredited royal photographers aren’t a terrorist threat.

Mark Cuthbert said on Twitter he’s covered 25 royal weddings and hasn’t witnessed this limited level of press access
__________________

  #562  
Old 05-01-2018, 08:56 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,174
Arthur Edwards seemed to understand where Harry is coming from. The photographers seem to.understand it too, they're just upset they wont be getting the big money shot coming from the church.

I'd say, that Harry putting his foot down on his wedding day, because of the way the press has treated his fiance, is pretty good battle to pick, imho. And it's not a tantrum, either. The press has been absolutely shameless. It hasn't been a few nasty articles, it's been at least weekly articles tearing Meghan apart this past 18 months. And they've harassed her mother and father for months. So, Harry, put your foot down, it's the right thing to do imo.
__________________

  #563  
Old 05-01-2018, 08:56 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
If he is so bad why do Will and Kate look for him and wave to him.
I am sure Harry would to if he saw him. He not personally attacking this man. He is part of an overall issue. No different than all the complaints about the Cambridges. It is just now Harry. I so have sympathy for some but I don't have any issue with the decision that was made.
  #564  
Old 05-01-2018, 08:57 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
One more thing. When we were debating where they would have the wedding, many mentioned that Harry is merely 5th, and soon to be 6th, in line to the throne. Thus his place is at St. George with less of the pomp and pageantry to reduce cost. Funny how people don't want that to also translate into reduced access. If Harry isn't that important, then why does he need to give as much access as his brother? They will give the live feed of the ceremony and subsequent procession. There will be photos. There just won't be a bizillion photographers aiming at them when they come out of church.
  #565  
Old 05-01-2018, 08:58 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,537
Exactly! Can you imagine if the people who come out to support them on their wedding day are also able to make lots of money from their photos and videos? Win Win for Harry & Meghan as well as the public!!!

I bet that woman fro Sandringham may travel to Windsor! Who knows....lightning may strike twice for her!
  #566  
Old 05-01-2018, 08:59 PM
Zaira's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: A, United States
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapstar View Post
But the photographers aren't the tabloids. They don't write the stories. As one royal photographer put it:

@JWhatling
Are you suggesting that Photographers should either cease supplying pictures to the UK Newspapers, or perhaps they should put a caveat in the caption, "only to be used in an article that shows the subject in a positive light". Hardly a free and fair press, but do carry on.


It would be a shame if royal photographers are being punished because Harry is angry at the tabloid writers. Like it or not, the media and the BRF need each other. When Harry wants to promote one of his charities, he's going to need these same photographers to come out and take photos. I have no problem with Harry putting his foot down, but he needs to learn how to pick his battles. This one with photographers is just perplexing. Particularly when it comes to Arthur Edwards (someone who is well liked by the members of the BRF).
I agree Esp. with the bold.
  #567  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:00 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Woodbridge, United States
Posts: 894
I get most of my photos from Instagram and bypass the press completely. For coverage I prefer People or The Times that present a balanced view or just state the facts without any undertones or bias.

There will be plenty of coverage.
  #568  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:00 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Itís never just a free for all with photographers. There will be a media Ďpení outside the chapel itís just not everyone gets equal access.

Accredited royal photographers arenít a terrorist threat.

Mark Cuthbert said on Twitter heís covered 25 royal weddings and hasnít witnessed this level of limited press access
Why do they need twenty photographers when four or five can do the job? As for royal photographers, I'm assuming they will also want to cover the procession. They can't just have people coming in and out of castle grounds that day. What if someone, who is not a photographer, puts on a camera and dress up like a photographer and somehow manages to get in in the middle of the chaos? Sometimes it's not the ones you know, but it's the ones you don't know that you have to worry about. He might have covered 25 weddings, but I highly doubt he covered 25 of these weddings on private ground with terror threat at the same level.
  #569  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:00 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,174
Did Mark Cuthbert say anything about the way the tabloids had covered these 25 weddings? Were the brides subjected to weekly trash articles, based on nothing but bs? Were the brides called 'exotic', 'straight out of Compton'?
  #570  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:02 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: NYC, United States
Posts: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terri Terri View Post
Exactly! Can you imagine if the people who come out to support them on their wedding day are also able to make lots of money from their photos and videos? Win Win for Harry & Meghan as well as the public!!!

I bet that woman fro Sandringham may travel to Windsor! Who knows....lightning may strike twice for her!
Some people are lucky like that.
  #571  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:06 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
One more thing. When we were debating where they would have the wedding, many mentioned that Harry is merely 5th, and soon to be 6th, in line to the throne. Thus his place is at St. George with less of the pomp and pageantry to reduce cost. Funny how people don't want that to also translate into reduced access. If Harry isn't that important, then why does he need to give as much access as his brother? They will give the live feed of the ceremony and subsequent procession. There will be photos. There just won't be a bizillion photographers aiming at them when they come out of church.
No kidding. Some need to pick a narrative and stick to it. It can't be both.

That said, I do think the members of the BRF do need to pick their battles. I just feel that is battle is worth it. Again, the media is not banned. They will be there from all parts of the globe. I understand the frustrations of the photographer but they should step back and also understand the frustrations of the royals as well.
  #572  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:07 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
If he is so bad why do Will and Kate look for him and wave to him.

That's not the issue.



LaRae
  #573  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:08 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
One more point. Some say that this isn't the time to do this. I disagree. The press has been warned time and time again, but they fight the warnings and maybe behave better for a little bit and it starts slipping down the same path. Why? Because there isn't real consequences. If you deny them access to something they don't care about, they obviously don't get it. Some times it has to hurt a little. And yes, this constitutes hurt a little for the press, and specially the editors that choose the narrative their papers print. They will have something to fill their front pages with that day, but they won't have an exclusive by sheer luck. Everyone is treated equally. What's wrong with that?
  #574  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:09 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 5,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
The photographers might not write the stories, but their editors choose to let everything print. At the end of the day, is it the photographers that make the millions if they get a money shot? No. It's the papers. Why should Harry help line their pocket when they've been so nasty? As for promoting his charitable endeavors, let's not pretend like this is a situation where the tabloids are doing Harry any favors. If he stories about him didn't sell, they wouldn't be covering it. As long as he continues to sell, they will cover it.

Some are collateral damage along the way, but it happens. If Arthur Edwards worked for another paper that's more respectable and reasonable, the situation would be different. They can't control the situation at Westminster Abbey since it's on a public street, but this is private grounds we are talking about. While Arthur Edwards is upset about the access issue, he even acknowledges that he understands why Harry is upset with them.

The royal family, including Harry, understands that not everyone in press is bad, and that's why at times they've chosen to give access to some journalists. There is a reason why Rhiannon Mills is given deference in terms of asking royals questions at their events. They respect her enough to answer because she has treated them with respect. There is a reason why Harry gave Camilla Tominey of all people an exclusive on his Caribbean trip after she blew their cover first. He understands when they need to do their job, what he doesn't understand is when they choose to be abusive.
Every single member of the BRF has had to deal with nasty and sometimes brutal articles written about them. Yet they're not out here shunning photographers. I get and understand why Harry is angry, but I think the way he's handling it is silly. And no one is saying the tabloids are doing him a favor. What I'm saying is that the BRF and the media need one another.

This isn't just about Arthur Edwards and the Sun though. Many of the photographers are freelance and don't work for a particular paper/outlet. So why should they be punished because Harry is mad at the tabloids?
__________________
  #575  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:12 PM
Princess Larisa's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: ., Croatia
Posts: 3,440
While Will and Harry might like Arthur as a private person, I am sure they do NOT like The Sun.
Iím also sure Arthur is perfectly aware who he works for and what they have done to various royals over the years.
  #576  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:15 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Somewhere in, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,174
Why is this about punishing photographers? I don't get that at all. So Harry and Meghan chose to have less photographers right outside the church, and have only selected ones there. That's not punishing photographers. Should the grant free for all access to photographers, because some would be cut out regardless.
  #577  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:17 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,537
But this is a much smaller venue on private land in Windsor as compared to the much larger space on public roads in front of Westminster Abbey....obviously you can't have the same number of photographers as W&K had jn 2011. And if you invite 1 particular royal photographer, you may have to invite all the others.
  #578  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:17 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapstar View Post
Every single member of the BRF has had to deal with nasty and sometimes brutal articles written about them. Yet they're not out here shunning photographers. I get and understand why Harry is angry, but I think the way he's handling it is silly. And no one is saying the tabloids are doing him a favor. What I'm saying is that the BRF and the media need one another.

This isn't just about Arthur Edwards and the Sun though. Many of the photographers are freelance and don't work for a particular paper/outlet. So why should they be punished because Harry is mad at the tabloids?
Look, I acknowledge that there are collateral damage here. And members of the royal family certainly shuns press when they can. It's difficult to limit their access on public grounds obviously, and they put up with it. But if you look at the way the BRF members deals with press when they attend events versus other royal families, it's as clear as night and day. They don't stop or even look at the cameras that show up to cover the event. They do realize they need one another, and that's why this is even getting released at all. They can all print the pictures, it's not going to be exclusively for AP. Many of the agencies/papers have ownership in AP. And if they are to let some more in? Who do you propose? Those didn't get picked would throw all kinds of tantrum. And it would make things much worse. Either give all access or give one access and share the product with all of them.

As for the freelancers, there is always the procession to get the money shot. They aren't trying to control access in public areas. However, Windsor is private grounds, and they do get some say.

This seems to be the route they are taking with this wedding. Same rules for everyone. No politicians means no politicians. Not even the ones they are friends with.
  #579  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:22 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Winston-Salem, United States
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by soapstar View Post
Every single member of the BRF has had to deal with nasty and sometimes brutal articles written about them. Yet they're not out here shunning photographers. I get and understand why Harry is angry, but I think the way he's handling it is silly. And no one is saying the tabloids are doing him a favor. What I'm saying is that the BRF and the media need one another.

This isn't just about Arthur Edwards and the Sun though. Many of the photographers are freelance and don't work for a particular paper/outlet. So why should they be punished because Harry is mad at the tabloids?
Harry is doing the right thing. Meghan has been subjected to daily racist attacks. Harry does not want to reward this savagery, by allowing these publications to profit on his big day. I'm sorry if the photographers are collateral damage, but something must be done to send a message. He's tired of this.
  #580  
Old 05-01-2018, 09:27 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,404
I don't get this idea that this is some person attack on the photographers as a whole. I don't think Harry has any ill well against Arthur Edwards. I mean this man even acknowledges that he understands why it is happening. He is just unfortunately caught in the middle. But I don't see issue in a "limited" access. Not the first time one service has the main access, case and point the BBC stream of the wedding.
__________________

Closed Thread

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
alqasimi aristocracy armenia bangladesh belgian royal family birthday celebration castles charles of wales crown crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria current events cyprus danish history denmark duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch history felipe vi foundation french revolution friendly city genealogy germany greece hamdan bin mohammed head of the house henry v hill house of bourbon house of glucksburg house of saxe-coburg and gotha king salman letter lithuanian castles meghan markle memoir mohammed vi monaco christening monaco history monarchism monogram naples nobel 2019 norwegian royal family official visit palaces prince harry prince of wales princess margaret royal children royal tour rumania russian imperial family saudi arabia shakespeare south africa south korea spain spanish history state visit sweden swedish royal family swedish royalty tracts united kingdom usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:06 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises
×