The Royal Family and the Media


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I also notice, the young royals do very little walkabouts than they used to. Anyone else notice that? That always provided the media with lots of great pictures, and with more writing material.

Off the top of my head, I think perhaps one reason they've been discouraged from doing walkabouts frequently is due to security. With the rise of lone wolf terrorism such as at the Boston Marathon and the terror attacks in Paris and elsewhere, perhaps its better to err on the side of caution than take risks.

This is just my opinion of course. :D
 
Off the top of my head, I think perhaps one reason they've been discouraged from doing walkabouts frequently is due to security. With the rise of lone wolf terrorism such as at the Boston Marathon and the terror attacks in Paris and elsewhere, perhaps its better to err on the side of caution than take risks.

This is just my opinion of course. :D

That could be it. It's just something I noticed for a while now.
 
Off the top of my head, I think perhaps one reason they've been discouraged from doing walkabouts frequently is due to security. With the rise of lone wolf terrorism such as at the Boston Marathon and the terror attacks in Paris and elsewhere, perhaps its better to err on the side of caution than take risks.

This is just my opinion of course. :D


I would say that's why and with good reason. I'd prefer them safe


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
One could make an argument for welcoming the end of newspapers, especially the tabloids, as far as the royals are concerned. However, the Internet, 'news' sites, forums, blogs etc., aren't exactly glowing in their coverage of the royals either. And, unlike newspapers they aren't bound by any libel laws or editorial decisions. On the Internet people can and often do say exactly what they think and facts go out the window in a way even the tabloids don't attempt.

I give you, for example, the horrendous and totally disgusting speculation about surrogacy and Kate's pregnancies which goes on unchecked in another forum day after day. God help any naive young person who knows little of the royals reading that tripe.

People reading newspapers can at least see photos of the royals going about their business on various occasions even if they can't be bothered to read the story. With papers gone what proportion of the British people are going to look up various royals on the Internet if they aren't particularly interested?

Most will then only see the royals occasionally on the TV news or on documentaries many won't bother to watch. (Free to air TV is dying as well.) From there it's only a tiny jump to "Well, we hardly see them anyway, so what use are they?"

When newspapers go I shall be sad for all sorts of reasons. However, I don't think anyone should fool themselves that this is going to herald some bright new dawn for the BRF.

That's a good point on the internet - usually the worst I see in the media is that Kate is pregnant with twin girls (this pregnancy started soon after George, occurred in tandem with Charlotte somehow, and is still going on to this day). The internet, however... and without the media reports, it might be harder to counter and provide the alternate view.
 
Off the top of my head, I think perhaps one reason they've been discouraged from doing walkabouts frequently is due to security. With the rise of lone wolf terrorism such as at the Boston Marathon and the terror attacks in Paris and elsewhere, perhaps its better to err on the side of caution than take risks.

This is just my opinion of course. :D
I agree with your thoughts on this topic Osipi. The Cambridges and Harry are prime targets for a terrorist act. And considering how many acts are being carried out in recent years via bombs, that also puts the crowds in danger as well. IMO the walkabouts are now being conducted in areas which the RPOs believe they have control over ie: Sandringham estate for the post-Christmas service meet and greets.

The costs for providing security to the royals and the public would also be an issue. We only have to look to the Netherlands to see that their King's Day celebrations have been altered since the 2009 attack in Apeldoorn and the panic that occurred during the 2010 Remembrance Day ceremony at the Dam Square. And this was in a nation that had previously not experienced terrorist attacks on the same scale as the UK. The Dutch royals have less close contact with the public in part due to the need for increased security was becoming a financial burden to the cities that were hosting the royals' visit. I also believe that security needs are the reason why their engagements are not being announced too far in advance.
 
Last edited:
Off the top of my head, I think perhaps one reason they've been discouraged from doing walkabouts frequently is due to security. With the rise of lone wolf terrorism such as at the Boston Marathon and the terror attacks in Paris and elsewhere, perhaps its better to err on the side of caution than take risks.

This is just my opinion of course. :D

Agree. Current threat level for international terrorism in the Uk is Severe
 
Altho' chuffed at the widespread coverage of Prince Harry's tour of Nepal, also more than a little cross at the TOTAL lack of reporting of his Father [and step-mothers] tour of the Balkans this week.

The highlighting of humanitarian efforts in the war-torn Balkans is everybit as deserving of news coverage as the earthquake tragedy in Nepal, yet there was NOTHING on the Television, Radio and 90% of the Newspapers !

Just NOT RIGHT !
 
Well, Althouth is is annoying, it has always been like this. Younger royals get more coverage than the rest of the family. Not fair, not right, but not news.
 
Well, Althouth is is annoying, it has always been like this. Younger royals get more coverage than the rest of the family. Not fair, not right, but not news.



True. Harry will most likely suffer the same fate from his 40s onwards when George and Charlotte have become the new royal stars....
 
Well, Althouth is is annoying, it has always been like this. Younger royals get more coverage than the rest of the family. Not fair, not right, but not news.

A lot of folks don't understand this. It's always been this way. The funny part is, the older royals don't seem to mind. They enjoy going about their duties without all the fuss.
 
A lot of folks don't understand this. It's always been this way. The funny part is, the older royals don't seem to mind. They enjoy going about their duties without all the fuss.

Yes, I wonder why someone is still surprised... What should Princess Anne say then? And yet she does a brilliant job:flowers::lol:
 
To get back to my original post, Richard Palmer has had an interesting discussion on his Twitter page with various posters.

He commented that there seems to have been a sea change happening with reference to the British public and the Cambridges and Kate in particular. He commented on the Express (and other papers) publicising Kate's causes and putting her on the front page, only to see 'plummeting sales when Kate is on the front, rapidly falling online hits for stories (on her) and readers comments tell the tale'.

Palmer has noted that Kate's public speaking has become better. He hasn't been all criticism of Kate by any means. However, he states, and I think he is correct, that 'after squandering so much goodwill from the public (at the time of the wedding) radical action is needed by her and William' (to get it back.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Catherine is a very popular member of the royal family. The Cambridge's recent bad PR problems haven't affected her popularity.

The more official responsibility that's past down to Catherine, and folks see her on the job, the media will calm down. Kensington Palace need to continue publishing the young royals conducting meetings, and just giving the media and public more insight into the royals job.
 
I don't know whether she is hugely popular though, Dman. She doesn't seem to draw large crowds to her engagements, the comments below articles are rather cutting, and there aren't recent polls to draw conclusions from. And if people are very popular then there is usually a small jump in sales of newspapers and magazines featuring that person. The reverse seems to be true for Kate recently. I think since the wedding the popularity of this couple may have dropped, even if not to a disastrous extent. I do believe the bad PR may have affected public perceptions.
 
I don't know whether she is hugely popular though, Dman. She doesn't seem to draw large crowds to her engagements, the comments below articles are rather cutting, and there aren't recent polls to draw conclusions from. And if people are very popular then there is usually a small jump in sales of newspapers and magazines featuring that person. The reverse seems to be true for Kate recently. I think since the wedding the popularity of this couple may have dropped, even if not to a disastrous extent. I do believe the bad PR may have affected public perceptions.

Trust me when I say, the young royals remain very popular. The crowds do come out when Catherine is on her engagements. We just get to see the large crowds well, because it's become rare for the royals to conduct a walkabout.

With the change in technology, newspaper sells won't be the same as before. People are getting their news on their phones, IPads, Twitter, etc. Also, very naturally Catherine front page covers on newspapers won't sell as it did after the wedding. Although she remains the it girl, after a while the sells won't be that high. The media really don't write many exciting articles these days anyway.

Don't be fooled, Catherine remains the it girl and a very popular it girl at that. Her popularity will only grow once she she's the Princess of Wales and even Queen. Naturally, the attention will turn to the children too.
 
Last edited:
Well, let's hope so Dman, because I keep a close eye and ear on reactions to the royals from my large extended family in England, ex work colleagues, friends and others, in the north of England, Norfolk my birth county and the Home Counties and London.

And the word I've been getting from them, especially the younger people in their teens and twenties is that the gilt is off the gingerbread as far as William and Kate are concerned.

Fewer and fewer of the people I know there under thirty care about the royals much at all with the exception of the Queen, and what I hear from many (and I'm in regular contact) about the Cambridges are criticisms of expense, dull behaviour at engagements, hiding themselves and their children away and their work ethic.
 
My eyes and ears in Britain tell me just the opposite. I have lots of family there and they all adore Catherine. Same for my former work colleagues. (I lived there for 15 years)

Catherine easily and by far receives the most coverage of any royal. Just today she and the Queen are on the front page of the Express. Either the editors at the Express are trying to bankrupt the paper or she indeed does sell newspapers.

As a proud monarchist, I have to say Catherine is going to be a lovely Queen of Canada
 
I know here in the U.S. those who are into the royals (at least the UK royals) ...can't get enough of William and Kate...and the children.


LaRae
 
No, the Queen sells, according to Richard, who mentioned that she and Kate would be on the front page Well, Ingrid Seward, the editor of Majesty and devout monarchist, echoed Palmer's criticisms. Odd that a Royal author such as she would do so if something untoward wasn't happening. And we will look out for Diana size crowds at Kate's next engagement, then, if you are correct.

I believe several US posters have said in the past that royals aren't really followed in the States and I think that's true, whether it's BRF or the Spanish, or Monaco royals.
 
No, the Queen sells, according to Richard, who mentioned that she and Kate would be on the front page Well, Ingrid Seward, the editor of Majesty and devout monarchist, echoed Palmer's criticisms. Odd that a Royal author such as she would do so if something untoward wasn't happening. And we will look out for Diana size crowds at Kate's next engagement, then, if you are correct.

I believe several US posters have said in the past that royals aren't really followed in the States and I think that's true, whether it's BRF or the Spanish, or Monaco royals.

Regarding Ingrid Seward, I did think she was a devout monarchist - do people on here think she's just a tabloid shill like some of the others, and if so, why? Can her statements be as readily discounted as say Richard Palmer's seem to be?

Most people in the US don't care about royalty -they have a small following. That might account for 5% of the population. Out of everyone I know, I have perhaps one friend who follows them with any regularity and this is out of a wide swath of people. The royal wedding of course drew viewers, as do things like births, christenings. Most people don't know what Will or Kate do or what they are up to.
 
I know here in the U.S. those who are into the royals (at least the UK royals) ...can't get enough of William and Kate...and the children.


LaRae

That's true. I know people may think Americans aren't interested the the British royals, but they are. Whenever the popular and we'll known British royals come over to the US, there's a massive turn out to greet them.

Catherine's popularity with the people hasn't been hurt, but there's a battle going on between the young royals, palace and media though. There's some bad attitudes going on.
 
What is odd is why editors keep putting Kate on front pages if she doesn't sell. Are they trying to lose their jobs?

In the last six days Catherine's interview about the Queen has been on Australian breakfast television, It's been on Canadian breakfast television. In the US it's been on the Today Show and Good Morning America and in Britain, even with Harry on tour Catherine's interview has made two front pages. How much coverage is enough?

As for Ingrid Seward, you'll have to ask her why Catherine makes so many covers of her Majesty Magazine if she doesn't sell

This week's Hello magazine has Catherine on the cover
 
Last edited:
That was Kate's first interview which was why it was shown in Britain and Commonwealth countries. Her next one will be less of a novelty, and her next less still, just like the rest of the royals. Ingrid Seward could see a breach developing between the Cambridges and the Press and public and sought to address it. One would have thought she would have been taken seriously with this, as she is when she lavishly praises the Cambridges. This couple and KP misjudged the mood of the British press on this and there are some bridges to mend.

I know there are many US citizens on Royal forums but I've visited several times and never found huge enthusiasm for the BRF or any other royals for that matter among people I spoke to.
 
In no other line of reporting do the views of reporters suddenly translate into 'public opinion'

The Express sells less than 500.000 papers a day and yet Palmer thinks he speaks for a nation of almost 70 million people?

The next time opinion polls come out about the royal family, it will be as popular as ever and the younger royals will be near the top.
 
Catherine's face on the cover of magazines and newspapers still sell, but one can't expect the sells to be still high as it was before and after the wedding. At the time, Britian and Commonwealth and even the world Was getting a new princess. Of course her introduction sold like crazy. She, William and the the kids still generate big sells though.
 
Last edited:

Wow! That's a pretty harsh article!

But what do our resident Britons say? What's the word on the street?
Because I don't trust Daily Mail to represent the average Briton and as for those who comment... well, IMO half of them ought to be euthanized for having such a negative view on life - It would be an act of mercy - for all... :D

What is the general perception of Kate if I were to stand in say York and Cardiff at noon and ask people who walked by?
I ask out of genuine curiosity and not to start a row, pro or against Kate.
So if you prefer to PM me to keep the peace, please do. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom