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
 
  #21  
Old 03-31-2006, 01:54 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: los angeles, United States
Posts: 52
Which type of tell-all book os more damaging?

I just finished Sarah, Duchess of York's autobiography and this question came to mind. Which do you think is more damaging, a tell all by a royal or by someone in their circle or a staff member?

This book was odd at times because it seemed like she was wavering between saying some damaging things and trying to stay neutral of deferential to The Queen. It also brings to mind the books the the late Princess of Wales "participated in" and those of former staff like Paul Burrell and Stephen Barry.

My opinion: I think both are damaging but I am leaning more to the royal's books being more damaging.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-31-2006, 01:54 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: los angeles, United States
Posts: 52
Which type of tell-all book is more damaging?

I just finished Sarah, Duchess of York's autobiography and this question came to mind. Which do you think is more damaging, a tell all by a royal or by someone in their circle or a staff member?

This book was odd at times because it seemed like she was wavering between saying some damaging things and trying to stay neutral of deferential to The Queen. It also brings to mind the books the the late Princess of Wales "participated in" and those of former staff like Paul Burrell and Stephen Barry.

My opinion: I think both are damaging but I am leaning more to the royal's books being more damaging.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-31-2006, 02:21 PM
Kelly's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington, United States
Posts: 1,110
I would say that both are damaging. But I also lean on to the one where the royal "tells all." For instance when Princess Diana told her side in some aspect or another, there is nothing to prove because she said it. When someone else tells the story most of us seem skeptic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-01-2006, 02:11 PM
Claire's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 841
I think what is damaging is the furore that surrounds it. The problem with the Andrew Morton book was that Diana lied and said that she had no particpation in its written, blamed her brother in law - Andrew Fellows and than when it came out that she had been passing tapes and such along to Morton.

Sometimes unofficial records make more trouble because they great press as they are sensational. The majority of people don't care if it is coming from a realiable source. Many people honestly believe that news print the truth and that where there is smoke there is fire. So I think it is more the damage control of either that determines which is more damaging in the long run.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-01-2006, 02:57 PM
soCal girl's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Irvine, United States
Posts: 1,683
Any "tell-all" book, doesn't matter who writes it, is not good news IMO. Sometimes mystery is the best thing.
__________________
사랑
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-01-2006, 03:31 PM
crisiñaki's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,803
Charles' former employee, the one that sold copies of his diaries and more than the Andrew Morton book, the crossfire interviews of Diana and Charles were one of the worst blows the monarchy had endured
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-01-2006, 03:38 PM
Toledo's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Spain, residing in the USA, United States
Posts: 1,523
Which type of tell-all book is more damaging?

We need to know what type of damage are we going to discuss about. By damaging do you mean:

1. a tell all book written and backed up by tabloids, thus, printed lies;

2. a tell all book exposing secrets, thus, an insider's story.

3. a tell all book based on people and interviews behind the back of the person the book is written about. For example, Kitty Kelly's books on the Windsors and the Bush Family (I got that last one on CD and is a jaw dropper scandalous book). Like the unauthorized bios.

I think the most damaging book is the one written by an insider, a family member. Why? because the book acts as a diary, a catharsis from that person that let us go inside of the inner circle with his account of actual events. That's the book that hurts the most, not the unauthorized bios or the ones backed up by tabloids.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-24-2012, 01:07 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,118
The real Royal courtship | Mail Online
19 May 2012

The real royal courtship: The monarchy and the media

It was the story of the century – the King abdicating to marry a divorcée – yet it had been kept out of British newspapers by the palace.
Author Juliet Nicolson explains how the crown had to learn to woo the press


excerpts

Since last year’s Royal Wedding, the Duchess of Cambridge has become one of the country’s most popular cover stars. A princess who resembles a supermodel ensures the happiness not only of the British press but the public too, who are guaranteed the prospect of pages of wonderful pictures during the upcoming Diamond Jubilee – pictures not only of Kate and the Queen herself but also of a new, particularly photogenic and relaxed Royal generation.

Yet just 75 years ago such lavish coverage of the Royal Family would have been unthinkable. Press freedom was controlled and even censored by crowned heads themselves. When the current Queen was ten years old, the face of the woman who wished to marry her uncle the King was almost unknown to the British public. Just one week before the 1936 abdication of Edward VIII, Wallis Simpson’s picture erupted on to front pages. Until that moment an almost total press blackout on her existence had been guaranteed in Britain.

The new Queen Elizabeth, the future Queen Mother, soon revealed an instinctive gift for working with the press in order to allay the sense of betrayal felt by a post-abdication public. She realised that a succession of carefully placed images, lifting the veil on some of the mysteries of the Royal Family’s daily life, would help to re-establish the nation’s confidence and affection in the monarchy as a whole. So she set out, with the cooperation of the press, to present to the public a united family, untainted by divorce, a family who would never dream of abandoning each other, nor, just as importantly, their country.

Not only had the Queen managed to reassure a jittery public that the monarchy was a reliable symbol of unshakeable continuity in the face of adversity, but she had given the editors pictures that would guarantee soaring newspaper sales.

The postwar years ushered in a new challenge – television...In an attempt to use the medium to the monarchy’s advantage, in 1968 the Queen agreed to the filming of the BBC Royal Family documentary. But the cosy scenes of life at the Windsors’ dinner table and family picnics were interpreted by the public as embarrassing rather than endearing. Glaring sunlight had been let in on royal magic, bleaching out something of its appealing mystery. Barbecued sausages became a source of derision.

Yet royalty remained news, and the fascination with Prince Charles’s young bride-to-be enveloped the popular press...The fascination grew into an addiction that proved dangerous for the monarchy, press and public alike. On a couple of occasions when the intrusion into Diana’s life seemed beyond control (shopping for Mars bars, sunbathing in a bikini when six months pregnant), the Queen personally appealed to editors on her daughter-in-law’s behalf. But this time not even a Queen could quell the fevered interest.

In the 90s the Royal Family inadvertently provided the press and public with a helter-skelter of irresistibly newsworthy stories... The final horror of Diana’s death in 1997 momentarily shook the country’s loyalty to the monarchy... This time press photographers were accused of being directly responsible for the tragedy. The relationship between the press and the monarchy had reached an all-time low.

Gradually the press and public sympathy turned back towards the Queen, and during 1997's Golden Jubilee summer newspapers and broadcasters were united on one story: that a great number of the British public recognised, applauded and welcomed the service this now elderly woman had given her country.

In this past year...the public image of the monarchy has been revitalised by the glamour and charm of [William and Harry] and, of course, Kate. Over the past 15 years the press and Royal Family have learnt that there are mutual boundaries to respect, and that cooperation can only work to mutual advantage... And we the public – and the press – appreciate the Royal Family all the more for it.

__________________

__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, 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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria danish royals engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta elena king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander palace picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim prince maurits princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess astrid of belgium princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess maxima queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state visit wedding willem-alexander william


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

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV 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 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:03 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]