The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Family

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #761  
Old 10-26-2015, 01:11 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,669
It was also stated via a tweet earlier that some people had taken pictures of Kate and George and were asked to delete them. I'm sure they didn't see everyone that took pictures and the ones that were spotted were asked nicely to please delete. They don't want the pictures splashed all over the tabloids but I think they're astute enough to realize that short of confiscating phones in the venue while they are there, there's not really too much they can do.
__________________

__________________
“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 didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #762  
Old 10-26-2015, 01:26 PM
GömdNatt's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Cincinnati, United States
Posts: 1,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
It was also stated via a tweet earlier that some people had taken pictures of Kate and George and were asked to delete them. I'm sure they didn't see everyone that took pictures and the ones that were spotted were asked nicely to please delete. They don't want the pictures splashed all over the tabloids but I think they're astute enough to realize that short of confiscating phones in the venue while they are there, there's not really too much they can do.
I get being excited to see them in public and even wanting to be able to prove it, but what's so wrong about just letting a mother and son have a private visit to a museum? Why take photos? If I saw them in public, I'd be so excited and I might look at them for a bit, but then I'd move on and I certainly wouldn't take photos. It's a private visit, let them be a family.

It's so just weird and gross to me.
__________________

__________________
My facebook fan page: https://www.facebook.com/SignyCullen
Author of fiction novel Farther Side of Away, and non-fiction book about royalty If You're a Princess, Where's Your Crown?
Reply With Quote
  #763  
Old 10-26-2015, 01:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: san diego, United States
Posts: 5,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
George is getting so big already.
Nice that they enjoyed a trip to the museum.
Reply With Quote
  #764  
Old 10-26-2015, 01:30 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: ***, Sweden
Posts: 1,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by GömdNatt View Post
I get being excited to see them in public and even wanting to be able to prove it, but what's so wrong about just letting a mother and son have a private visit to a museum? Why take photos? If I saw them in public, I'd be so excited and I might look at them for a bit, but then I'd move on and I certainly wouldn't take photos. It's a private visit, let them be a family.

It's so just weird and gross to me.
I mean... people take photos of every meal they eat and post online and every little thing. Ofc they will take photos if they run in to these two. That is why I have WAY less problem with an excited "normal" person taking a quick snap of an exciting moment in their life than the paparazzi that hang around places or stalk them for the sole purpose of taking photos. I think it's the question of intent.
Reply With Quote
  #765  
Old 10-26-2015, 11:23 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 8,109
General News for the Cambridge Family Part 2: January 2015

I think asking people to delete the pictures was a good move. It's impossible to know the intent of every single human being that wanted to take a picture of the Duchess, and her son on a day out. While more than likely majority of the people just wanted a snapshot to brag about, no one can guarantee that that is indeed the case. It's the few bad apples, whether they're paps, or members of the public who would sell such pictures to make a quick buck, that ruin it for those of us who may just genuinely want a picture to keep on our phone/camera. Personally, I won't take pictures of any royal when it's family time, but during official appearances/engagements, definitely will have my camera ready to go.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #766  
Old 10-27-2015, 12:40 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
Very cute. Smartly dressed. Leaning out. Looking forward to seeing Charlotte one of these days.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #767  
Old 10-27-2015, 05:21 AM
Tiggersk8's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Evansville, Canada
Posts: 2,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
What I found interesting and also very well done is those the took pictures with their cell phones were asked nicely to delete them. So far I've seen no pictures that have hit the media anywhere.

What I'm wondering now if the trip to the museum has anything to do with what all little boys seem to have in common. A big love for dinosaurs. George may have come across dinosaurs in movies or books and Mummy took him to see how big they actually really were. I've seen where Pixar is releasing a movie with a very cute dinosaur in it called "The Good Dinosaur" in November.

Yes and I think when it comes to an outing to a place like the NHM, where there are plenty of Staff around and they can see who is doing that, this is best way to go. They can make sure the photos really are deleted and that frees up the Protection Officers to do their jobs a bit easier, than when at a Playground or anywhere out and about sadly.

As for the rest...Tell me about it!! Guess who has a Great Auntie who is crocheting a Dinosaur hat for her three year old Great Nephew for Christmas? I'm amazed he isn't going as one for Hallowe'en honestly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GömdNatt View Post
Sorry, I meant consent, not knowledge.



And I'm sorry, but it's such a gross attitude to have. He is a child. He cannot consent to this life he lives. He's 2! It's one thing to take a photo of Kate, it's another to do it of George.



I just don't like it.

Welcome to the never ending debate of the Cambridge forum threads. I'm in the group that agrees w/you BTW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daria_S View Post
I think asking people to delete the pictures was a good move. It's impossible to know the intent of every single human being that wanted to take a picture of the Duchess, and her son on a day out. While more than likely majority of the people just wanted a momentous to brag about, no one an guarantee that that is indeed the case. It's the few bad apples, whether they're paps, or members of the who would sell such pictures to make a quick buck, that ruin it for those of us who may just genuinely want a picture to keep on our phone/camera. Personally, I won't take pictures of any royal when it's family time, but during official appearances/engagements, definitely will have my camera ready to go.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

Thank you Daria for, once again, explaining why many of us have such a huge concern about, not just the scummy Paps, but also the camera phone photos. Said it far better than I could have.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
Recycle Life ~ Be An Organ Donor!!
Recieved my Kidney Transplant on December 10th, 1993 and will be forever grateful to the family of my donor for the greatest earliest Christmas Present I've ever been given
Reply With Quote
  #768  
Old 10-27-2015, 05:39 AM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 3,367
General News for the Cambridge Family Part 2: January 2015

Unfortunately I was reading a Kate fashion blog about the Spectre premiere and a photo of George and Kate at the NHM was also part of the post. The picture source said TMZ. I went to TMZ's website and buried down the page after a lot of stuff about rappers they had exclusive museum pictures of George and Kate. I didn't click further.

The fact that TMZ had exclusives would suggest that it wasn't some random tourist cellphone picture. I have been a random London tourist before and I would have no clue how to sell a photo. My closest Royal encounter in London was a black cocker spaniel out of KP in the gardens which I tried to pass the photo to my family as Lupo. William and Kate were at the Order of the Thistle service at Edinburgh so it's possible. 🦄🐶


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #769  
Old 10-27-2015, 06:33 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
It was also stated via a tweet earlier that some people had taken pictures of Kate and George and were asked to delete them. I'm sure they didn't see everyone that took pictures and the ones that were spotted were asked nicely to please delete. They don't want the pictures splashed all over the tabloids but I think they're astute enough to realize that short of confiscating phones in the venue while they are there, there's not really too much they can do.
I would like to know what the minders would have done had the people they asked to delete their photos had politely said no. Or even not so politely said no. If this was a public place where people were at liberty to take photographs, there's nothing that could be done to stop it, and, in my opinion, nothing should be done to stop it.

George is not like an ordinary child. I can understand celebrities wanting images of their children taken when they are out as a family to be blurred so the child is not recognisable. In those situations the child is not a public person and is entitled to privacy. But George is in a very different situation. He has been public property since before he was born. Everyone knows what he looks like. It is George that people want to photograph. You can't parade the child in front of the public and sundry photographers one day and the next day tell people they mustn't photograph the same child when you take him out amongst the public.

As for him being unable to consent, of course he is too young to be able to consent. It is his parents who make decisions like that for him at this age, and if they don't want him photographed in public then they shouldn't take him out in public. They must know that nearly everyone has a camera phone and that they are curiosities that people will want to photograph. And unless they are in a place they control and where they can make rules prohibiting photographs, they just have to suck it up. Fair? Hell, no. But a fact of life.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #770  
Old 10-27-2015, 06:36 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 Skippyboo View Post
Unfortunately I was reading a Kate fashion blog about the Spectre premiere and a photo of George and Kate at the NHM was also part of the post. The picture source said TMZ. I went to TMZ's website and buried down the page after a lot of stuff about rappers they had exclusive museum pictures of George and Kate. I didn't click further.

The fact that TMZ had exclusives would suggest that it wasn't some random tourist cellphone picture. I have been a random London tourist before and I would have no clue how to sell a photo. My closest Royal encounter in London was a black cocker spaniel out of KP in the gardens which I tried to pass the photo to my family as Lupo. William and Kate were at the Order of the Thistle service at Edinburgh so it's possible. 🦄🐶


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Its only one photo, the one that was posted here. It can well be random, lots of people take pictures of everything and post on their social network. TMZ might be getting their stuff from there too, I know of tabloids that encourage their readers to take pics of celebrities when they see them and post those pictures on the tabloid's website.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
I would like to know what the minders would have done had the people they asked to delete their photos had politely said no. Or even not so politely said no. If this was a public place where people were at liberty to take photographs, there's nothing that could be done to stop it, and, in my opinion, nothing should be done to stop it.

George is not like an ordinary child. I can understand celebrities wanting images of their children taken when they are out as a family to be blurred so the child is not recognisable. In those situations the child is not a public person and is entitled to privacy. But George is in a very different situation. He has been public property since before he was born. Everyone knows what he looks like. It is George that people want to photograph. You can't parade the child in front of the public and sundry photographers one day and the next day tell people they mustn't photograph the same child when you take him out amongst the public.

As for him being unable to consent, of course he is too young to be able to consent. It is his parents who make decisions like that for him at this age, and if they don't want him photographed in public then they shouldn't take him out in public. They must know that nearly everyone has a camera phone and that they are curiosities that people will want to photograph. And unless they are in a place they control and where they can make rules prohibiting photographs, they just have to suck it up. Fair? Hell, no. But a fact of life.
They can ask politely but that's it. As soon as they would appear to threaten people the Cambridges would have a PR issue, big time.

There is no harm in asking, maybe people even agree and delete their pictures. But others will not, the same as opinions differ on this forum. But some will say no and thats it, some will say yes but do not delete in the end. And the minders will never be able to ask anyone, given the amount of people at the museum and the smartphones they have.

I agree 100% with the rest of your post.
Reply With Quote
  #771  
Old 10-27-2015, 11:40 AM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 8,109
I used to go to stage doors after viewing a theatre performance, and I've been in situations where the security guard at the door specifically asked that no pictures be taken of so and-so, and if he saw any such pictures being taken, he would personally delete them, and check that person's phone at the end. He also said that if those rules weren't acceptable, people were free to leave. Something similar can be done at any venue that Catherine, William and their children choose to visit on a family outing. People can be let inside in small groups to help crowd control, and to make it easier to keep an eye on the photographing. If people don't want their phone/camera checked, they can be mindful of what they photograph, delete an accidemtal/intentional snapshot of the royals, do without photographs, or vacate the premises and come back another time if the rules are not to their liking. The RPOs don't even have to get involved.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
Reply With Quote
  #772  
Old 10-27-2015, 05:13 PM
Marty91charmed's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Near Verona and Venice, Italy
Posts: 5,702
I don't think that pic was real to be fair. My first thought ,when I saw the pic, was that George and Kate looked weirdly photoshopped...
__________________
"Yet, walking free upon her own estate
Still,in her solitude, she is the Queen".
Reply With Quote
  #773  
Old 10-27-2015, 05:56 PM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daria_S View Post
I used to go to stage doors after viewing a theatre performance, and I've been in situations where the security guard at the door specifically asked that no pictures be taken of so and-so, and if he saw any such pictures being taken, he would personally delete them, and check that person's phone at the end. He also said that if those rules weren't acceptable, people were free to leave. Something similar can be done at any venue that Catherine, William and their children choose to visit on a family outing. People can be let inside in small groups to help crowd control, and to make it easier to keep an eye on the photographing. If people don't want their phone/camera checked, they can be mindful of what they photograph, delete an accidemtal/intentional snapshot of the royals, do without photographs, or vacate the premises and come back another time if the rules are not to their liking. The RPOs don't even have to get involved.
There a big difference between visiting a performer back stage vs seeing them in a public place.

The performer is allowing you special access and request that no private pictures be taken.

If pictures are allowed in a public place then policing them becomes a large issue.

If a museum has a 'no photograph' policy then that is a different situation.

Making special rules for William & Catherine during normal business hours will cause a major PR disaster, not only for the Cambridge family/BRF but for the museum.

William and Catherine can ask to for a private visit to any museum or attraction. There is no need to treat everyone like a criminal.
Reply With Quote
  #774  
Old 10-27-2015, 05:58 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 4,418
Kate mentioned the visit today so I don't mind posting an article. No pap photos

Quote:
Once again, Princess Kate and Prince George are getting their roar on.

In the middle of a busy few days at work last week, Kate squeezed in some mommy time, taking her "lively" 2-year-old son to see the dinosaurs at the Natural History Museum in South Kensington on October 22.

"She was holding George's hand, showing him around and talking to one of the people who worked there," says fellow museum-goer Rimi Rahman.

"People didn't really notice her at all," adds Rahman. "They went all around the dinosaur gallery – George looked so cute and little, his hair is so nice. He looked so happy."
Read more: Royal Roar! Princess Kate and Prince George Go Dinosaur Hunting : People.com
Reply With Quote
  #775  
Old 10-27-2015, 11:10 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,455
Here's an interesting take on the DoC

Leave Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge alone says AMANDA PLATELL* | Daily Mail Online
__________________
"If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”

Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #776  
Old 10-28-2015, 12:08 AM
Frelinghighness's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New England, United States
Posts: 3,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
I would like to know what the minders would have done had the people they asked to delete their photos had politely said no. Or even not so politely said no. If this was a public place where people were at liberty to take photographs, there's nothing that could be done to stop it, and, in my opinion, nothing should be done to stop it.

George is not like an ordinary child. I can understand celebrities wanting images of their children taken when they are out as a family to be blurred so the child is not recognisable. In those situations the child is not a public person and is entitled to privacy. But George is in a very different situation. He has been public property since before he was born. Everyone knows what he looks like. It is George that people want to photograph. You can't parade the child in front of the public and sundry photographers one day and the next day tell people they mustn't photograph the same child when you take him out amongst the public.

As for him being unable to consent, of course he is too young to be able to consent. It is his parents who make decisions like that for him at this age, and if they don't want him photographed in public then they shouldn't take him out in public. They must know that nearly everyone has a camera phone and that they are curiosities that people will want to photograph. And unless they are in a place they control and where they can make rules prohibiting photographs, they just have to suck it up. Fair? Hell, no. But a fact of life.
The answer to this is very simple. The laws do not protect the image of an adult or child in the USA, the uk or Australia in a public place. Any child, famous or not, can be photographed in a publi,c place without their consent and that image can be u sed for anything. Advertising, you name it. The blurred faces of children's images which you mention, are from continental Europe, where images of children in public places are protected by law.

Yes, I agree with the article, especially the last part-about her mother
Reply With Quote
  #777  
Old 10-28-2015, 12:21 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frelinghighness View Post
The answer to this is very simple. The laws do not protect the image of an adult or child in the USA, the uk or Australia in a public place. Any child, famous or not, can be photographed in a publi,c place without their consent and that image can be u sed for anything. Advertising, you name it. The blurred faces of children's images which you mention, are from continental Europe, where images of children in public places are protected by law.
Wrong. You can not use a photo (in the US) for any commercial i.e. advertisement purpose without the written consent of the people recognizable in the photo. The law is clear and enforceable.
Reply With Quote
  #778  
Old 10-28-2015, 12:42 AM
Anna Catherine's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: U.C., United States
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
I would like to know what the minders would have done had the people they asked to delete their photos had politely said no. Or even not so politely said no. If this was a public place where people were at liberty to take photographs, there's nothing that could be done to stop it, and, in my opinion, nothing should be done to stop it.

George is not like an ordinary child. I can understand celebrities wanting images of their children taken when they are out as a family to be blurred so the child is not recognisable. In those situations the child is not a public person and is entitled to privacy. But George is in a very different situation. He has been public property since before he was born. Everyone knows what he looks like. It is George that people want to photograph. You can't parade the child in front of the public and sundry photographers one day and the next day tell people they mustn't photograph the same child when you take him out amongst the public.

As for him being unable to consent, of course he is too young to be able to consent. It is his parents who make decisions like that for him at this age, and if they don't want him photographed in public then they shouldn't take him out in public. They must know that nearly everyone has a camera phone and that they are curiosities that people will want to photograph. And unless they are in a place they control and where they can make rules prohibiting photographs, they just have to suck it up. Fair? Hell, no. But a fact of life.
I disagree. Even for public figures, I believe they should be allowed privacy and to go out in public without worrying about pictures and harrassment(not to say that's happening here). The only people who say they should suck it up are people who have no idea what it's like to live in their shoes.

Being a public figure does not mean people own you. Royals are representatives of their nation not objects to be ogled everywhere they go. They is too much obsession with people in the public eye anyway. Everyone deserves a private life especially children. I believe that people can ogle them when they are performing a public duty not and only then. I think the Cambridges have a right to ask people to take down pictures of their children. I can't understand why this activity by papparrazi and the general public should be okay. No one would be okay with it if it were their child, public figure or not. It's a double standard.

How is it even logical to argue that they should keep their children locked in their homes? These people taking pictures are old enough to understand privacy and boundaries. They just don't care.

I do understand your point that it is unavoidable, however. I just think there are better solutions for these situations that respect their privacy.
Reply With Quote
  #779  
Old 10-28-2015, 03:35 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frelinghighness View Post
Yes, I agree with the article, especially the last part-about her mother

It's a good article but this bit

Nothing could possibly have prepared her for the unending pressure of becoming a senior member of The Firm, the sheer weight of responsibility of being a future king’s consort, of raising the next generation of monarchs.

I think she would have known what she was in for, if she didn't she must have been hiding under a rock.
I think she's doing a good job and at times it must be horrible but she would have known that it was going to be like that. I also don't think she's complaining about it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #780  
Old 10-28-2015, 06:30 AM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,303
I've deleted and edited a few posts discussing trophy hunting and William's conservation speech. If you wish to discuss his speech, you can do so in the Duke of Cambridge and Conservation Efforts thread.
__________________

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
General News about the Danish Royal Family Part 2: January 2013 - November 2015 dazzling Current Events Archive 403 11-14-2015 12:06 PM
General News for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge 1: January 2013-December 2014 Zonk Current Events Archive 1689 01-04-2015 06:46 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 10:04 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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