The Nanny Issue for Mary

[ysbel]

The original interview apparently was in Danish UserDane so you should be able to find it. Both the Daily Telegraph and the Danish Royal Watchers appear to be quoting the same source which leads me to believe that they are using a reasonably decent translation of the original.

I think Marengo is right and the implied criticism of the way Margrethe raised Fred and Mary may have caused much of the initial reaction to Mary's statement which seemed misguided but not really bad. My own personal belief is that the press was trying to position Mary in the hearts and minds of the people as this simple, down-to-earth, natural girl who was going to bring some down-to-earth simplicity into this ancient royal family and the royal family was not against Mary being positioned that way. Thus, I think that Mary tried to please them all and appear even more simple, more down-to-earth, and more just like you and me than she actually was. So she made statements like "My children will definitely not be raised by nannies" and "I will be a working mother but I will be a mother 100%" which could be misinterpreted. That is not a major sin in my book but just the side effect of being in a new job and wanting to impress and occasionally saying the wrong thing because you're new.

Its possible that the interview was badly translated into English; however, I think that even if Mary originally misspoke, she made a pretty small mistake and people should leave it alone.

[UserDane]

Thanks for your answer Ysbel. I have tried to google for it in Danish but I didn't find it.

[norwegianne]

Originally Posted by UserDane

Thanks for your answer Ysbel. I have tried to google for it in Danish but I didn't find it.

It is a book published in 2004 and would therefore not be available on Google... And even if the original interviews had been published, they most likely wouldn't have been available to the public as Danish newspapers tend to move their stuff to archives where you have to pay for the articles after 6 months or so.

If you head to the library (any library in Denmark) it should be available or they could order it for you. The book found in Bibliotek.dk (a general catalogue of Danish public libraries.) If you're not in Denmark, you might try having your own public library order it for you.

[UserDane]

So, it was the Wolden-Ræthinge book! Thanks Norwegianne

[wiwaxia]

Søgeresultat - bibliotek.dk

There was another book by Karin Palshøj.......

[ricarda]

Originally Posted by ysbel

First thing, lets set the record straight: Sarah Le Marquand of the Daily Telegraph did not criticize Mary for hiring nannies.

I find some truth to this opinion, it was an unwise statement to make. However, I wonder why LeMarquand feels it necessary to bring up now. As Lena said, people have forgotten about this by now.

But the Danish Royal Watchers is practicing some questionable journalism itself with headlines such as: Breaking news! Tabloid journalist prefers Mary's babies to be home alone!"

For accusing Le Marquand of misquoting Mary, the Danish Royal Watchers then proceeds to misquote Le Marquand and in a worse way because whereas Mary's words were somewhat ambiguous "I know I'm going to have a lot of help but no way is my child going to be raised by nannies" Le Marquand's words were very straightforward and not open to different interpretations. She plainly said that she did not admonish Mary for hiring nannies, yet the Danish Royal Watchers headline clearly states the opposite.

Perhaps before chastising the Daily Telegraph for shoddy journalism, perhaps the Danish Royal Watchers should look to its own journalistic standards.

To set the record straight, Sarah Le Marquand did misquote Mary. Right in the beginning of her article she wrote: "OH how quickly they forget. Only two years ago Princess Mary was making headlines - both in Denmark and Australia - for vowing not to hire a nanny to help bring up her as yet unborn baby. Heavily pregnant with her first child, Mary confidently told reporters:.."

Now, that is definitely something Mary did not say or vow. (And just as a side-note, Mary was not heavily pregnant back then.)

Whether Mary's original quote was a wise thing to say or not is not the point here. I personally think she was probably just answering a question and expressed what she felt without thinking what the press could do to it in the context of Frederik's critic for his parents. Not a wise thing, but also nothing that would justify those ongoing misquotations and critical comments.

As a matter of fact Mary's original quote has been misquoted again and again.
And Sarah Le Marquand may not criticize Mary for hiring nannies but she clearly criticizes Mary for vowing or saying something, which Mary actually did not say/vow. IMO that article is anything else but straightforward, it's quite hypocritical.

And the danishroyalwatchers reacted to that. I personally think they gave that stupid little article too much importance with their response and thus brought back a subject that nearly has been forgotten, as others said. But I do understand that once in a while someone can get provoked by that kind of sensationalistic and falsifying journalism and tries to fight back with the same weapons. If that is a wise thing to do? well....

Lena
but maybe the one or an other "sugar" should re-think her strategy, if she wants other ppl to change their minds.

Your assumption that everyone who writes something positive about Mary is "sugar" and trying to change minds is quite provocative as well.
Perhaps they just wanted to express their own opinion?

I personally think you and everyone else are free to like Mary or not. I wouldn't try change your minds.
I also can handle critical remarks when they are based on facts (though I may see things in a different way and express that).
What generally provokes me are double standards and mis-informations/-quotations (through media and posters).

[GlitteringTiaras]

Originally Posted by Aurora810

But who are the Danish Royal watchers, anyway? I mean, can they even be called journalists?

No.

Let's get one thing straight about DRWs:
They are not and never have been journalists. They are simply a fan site that publishes as well as translates articles, for the non-Danish speaking folk, and -- yes and -- upload hard to find photos that are eventually posted onto their nice blog.

It's it's impairative that fans of the DRF make note of this difference; futhermore, I wouldn't give to much weight to them, Ysbel. Yes, they do provide up to date information from various media outlets, notably Billed Bladet, but to say or hint that hardworking professional media (from both Denmark and Australia) people lazily take some of their information from DRWs is, well, untrue. I'll leave it at that.


Finally, the misleading headline: I completely concur with you. That's definitely is a Pot-Kettle-Black moment. Ironic, ain't it?

[Royal Darkness]

I read that Crownprincess Mary took on a new (third) nanny. Is this true?

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Royal Darkness

I read that Crownprincess Mary took on a new (third) nanny. Is this true?

No - Frederik did (why does everything to do with royal children has to be caused by the mother??)

Seriously, where did you hear that?

[Empress]

Yet again ladies and gentlemen, let's please not take everything that we read as the gospel truth! Just because it is written does not make it true by any means.

Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately depending on how you look at it, people are generally entitled to write and publish whatever they want as long as it is not libelous or slanderous, and in some countries even then. The onus is on the person who is being written about to disprove what is being written. So, and Tom, Dick or Harry down the street could say that Mary has a hairy growth that is a tumor growing out of her left eyeball, and it would be on Mary to prove that it is not so, but in the meantime, everyone who hungers for news would be all in a frenzy.

I work in PR, and it is truly all about the way that things are written. One words difference can change the entire meaning of what is being written.

So the moral to this longwinded post is that we have to take everything we read with a grain of salt.

On another note, to all posters, let's be happy that people come here seeking information, and want to double check the things that they are reading rather than just assuming that it is truth. It is a compliment to all of your knowledge that people seek the answers to their questions here. And it gives us all an opportunity to help others and ourselves understand more about the royals that we so clearly enjoy following!

[Royal Darkness]

Originally Posted by UserDane

No - Frederik did (why does everything to do with royal children has to be caused by the mother??)

Seriously, where did you hear that?

I read it in a newspaper!
I can't remember the name of the newspaper - I am sorry!
They mentioned also the name of the new nanny - but I forgot it ...
maybe I can find the article and then I will tell you her name.

Do you know the names of the other two nannies?

AND I asked: "Is it true?"

[Winnie]

I personally equate "nannies" with baby sitters. I had to engage a baby sitter many times while my children were young because I was forced to attend events that were not children friendly. Even the family weddings were not the place for small children. So nannies (baby sitters) were needed just to have a nice "time-out" with husband or church meeting. We are all not lucky enough to have family close by to drop everything to watch our children for us.

Plus, I KNOW that Mary has 100 times more official duties to attend than any of us where her children were not actually wanted. If she didn't do her outside responsibilities, the same people would then be finding fault with her not taking an interest in her new country! The poor thing can't win.

[UserDane]

Royal Darkness, I can't remember the names of the nannies F&M have for the children. Wasn't one of them called Mette? I also seem to remember having read in a Danish magazine that the two nannies were not both full-time, but cannot remember where.

[kimlan]

I don't understand why people nick-pick on Mary regarding "nanny" issue. She is a working mom, even though she does not 9 to 5 job. She is still a working mom. So, she need someone look after her children while she is at work which is daycare or nanny. Does people expected her to send her children to daycare?

[Royal Darkness]

Originally Posted by UserDane

Royal Darkness, I can't remember the names of the nannies F&M have for the children. Wasn't one of them called Mette? I also seem to remember having read in a Danish magazine that the two nannies were not both full-time, but cannot remember where.

I found some informations about it (I mean the names of the two nannies):
One is Mette Hansen (Christian's nanny) and the other is Ann-Alicia Thunbo (Isabella's nanny) and another nanny Mie (in Verbier) ...
That are already three nannies (I found the informations at DRW: "...the nanny Mie, age 22 [assistant to nanny Mette Hansen]")

Now I am a little bit confused...

DRW: "In January 2006 a nanny's assitant/nursery assistant was employed part time. She is a 22-year-old student, Mie Damgaard Kristiansen, known as Misse. ..."

Take a look here:
Danish Royal Watchers
and here:
Danish Royal Watchers

Maybe one of them quit... The name I read in the newspaper was different...

[UserDane]

You're right Royal Darkness, there are tree names
We don't see these nannies much in the Danish media, so I would assume that they are not full-time employed. If they are to stand in for each other from time to time, I suppose the children have to become acquainted with them all.
Perhaps it would be a great part-time job if you have part-time studies?

[Royal Darkness]

Originally Posted by Winnie

I personally equate "nannies" with baby sitters.

I personally equate "nanny" with AuPairGirl.