Smear Campaign? And if so, by whom? (Re: William and Kate)

[Princess of Durham]

I live in the states and have not heard or read any comments about the Queen telling the press to back off. Frankly this sounds like a story from some entertainment "news" show, some of which are on par with the worst tabloids. I think in terms of the dress the US press is probably more open minded. It seems to me that the european press was quick to jump on the "copy cat" remarks. As most here have said, Catherine's dress was a very traditional dress, given that just HOW original can one be? There many dresses like that past and present, the differences being in the length of the train and it's design, the fabric, and the length of the veil. It just seems to be that some people in the press/tv are just trying to conjure up something negative to report whether it is fact or not. The US press has no real agenda to push regarding the monarchy as some tabloids and european countries do. That's not to say if something "bad" happens it won't be published ... after all it was the US magazine that has reported the pregnancy story. Needless to say it's NOT a class publication.

 

[jemagre]

There may be an agreement not to report certain things but that won't stop the press from doing their jobs e.g. not saying exactly which house in Anglessey is the one where William and Kate are living is fine - we know that they are living there and there are press reports of the way they are living there but just not the exact house. Most people understand why that is the case.

The press write just as many negative stories about the royals as they do the positive ones so it isn't as if the press don't do their jobs but rather that they actually realise that some things aren't necessarily in the public interest for a range of reasons.

How does the press decide what is right and what is wrong? I know the press will always report on the scandals. Don't get me wrong I don't want to know where they live but what about other issues. Is it right to tell the press what they can report? I am thinking back to Harry's scandal where Charles made a deal with press about what to report and then he would confirm the story. The press ran with it because they got the confirmation they wanted. Charles looked like a great parent for the whole rehab stint but I still wonder if there was more to that story.

I also think you can't use the press to promote charities and then get mad at them for taking pictures of you playing tennis. The relationship between the
royals and the press is not as solid as it should be.

Where and how do you draw the line? What is private and what is public? As far as I am concerned if you don't want to be photographed then do not go to nightclubs or take vacations in certain places when you know you can use a secluded private estate where you know people can not take your picture. The Queen is a great example of this. She knows where to holiday and how to conduct herself with the press. granted they are more respectful of her but ....just some thouhts.

 

[FanofMonaco]

Royalty and public figures are not zoo animals confined to cages. They have a right to a personal life. Following someone 24/7 is stalking; regardless of who they are. Was it okay for the press to take pictures up Charlotte Casiraghi's dress when she was standing on the balcony at the Grand Prix? Was it okay for a student to take pictures of his roommate's sexlife secretly and then post it on the internet? To me, both examples were sexual harassment, a crime. One was of a public person, one a nobody. With the internet, we are starting to see the same problems with everyday people that celebrities have had to deal with for a long time. Freedom of speech and photography is so that people will always have the right to complain about the government. It is not an excuse to harass each other.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I also think you can't use the press to promote charities and then get mad at them for taking pictures of you playing tennis. The relationship between the
royals and the press is not as solid as it should be.

Where and how do you draw the line? What is private and what is public? As far as I am concerned if you don't want to be photographed then do not go to nightclubs or take vacations in certain places when you know you can use a secluded private estate where you know people can not take your picture. The Queen is a great example of this. She knows where to holiday and how to conduct herself with the press. granted they are more respectful of her but ....just some thouhts.

What you are saying it that royals should have to live their private lives only in the great homes etc and not do the things that other young people their age do. That is simply to confine them to a limited life.

I do think that when they are on public duties they should be photographed etc but at all other times should be private individuals and allowed to be able to enjoy themselves without having the fears that the press will report on them.

 

[jemagre]

What you are saying it that royals should have to live their private lives only in the great homes etc and not do the things that other young people their age do. That is simply to confine them to a limited life.

I do think that when they are on public duties they should be photographed etc but at all other times should be private individuals and allowed to be able to enjoy themselves without having the fears that the press will report on them.

When you agree to live your life in a public way, by being a royal or a politician, you agree that your life will never be the same. That the privacy you once had as a private citizen is no more. I am not advertising stalking or anything like that. They do deserve some privacy. I just don't like it when they go to nightclubs and then complain about the press. They must understand that when they let the press into their lives it can be difficult to kick them out.

I don't think that people want to see the staged photo ops as much as they want normal pictures. As a result of that, the price for those normal pictures will always drive the press to be more aggressive. So the royals should be aware of this and not sue at the drop of a hat. One such example is the Dutch royals who won a lawsuit stopping the publication of pictures of their children because it invaded their privacy even though they were in a public place. Dutch royals win privacy case against AP

The royals need the publicity that the press provides in order to survive. I often find these days though that they are more interested in blaming them for their problems rather than acknowledging that they too are responsible for their actions. For example if you fall out of a nightclub drunk expect to get photographed. Do not blame the press, blame yourself for going there. The media after all loves a good scandal.

 

[Myself1995]

I heard on one of the channels I was watching stateside but I don't remember which one. I do find it interesting how the media has always regarded her. In the American media, people magazine for example, has never written a critical article about Kate. By that I mean it is always just glowing reviews. I am not asking them to rip her apart but they could appear less biased. You could also consider that The daily mail pointed out that some European newspapers thought Kate's dress was nothing but a copy while England and America's media seemed to love it.

Since she is royalty and he proposed they have just accepted her. When she makes a mistake though they will jump all over her just to make up for it and I wonder if she will be able to handle a less than generous media.

The Daily Mail certainly didn't write glowing articles about her - they called her "waity Kaity" and accused her parents of being social climbers. Now that they're married it's a different matter - they call her "Catherine" and seem to have decided to promote her sister for some strange reason.
As for the American media, they seem mainly just to echo what the British media says - they had the British commentators on during the wedding. But not all the American media praised them - Bill Maher, Shepard Smith and the women on the View certainly didn't heap praise on them - sort of the opposite. I imagine she'll get good and bad press like Diana and Fergie did before her.

 

[jemagre]

The Daily Mail certainly didn't write glowing articles about her - they called her "waity Kaity" and accused her parents of being social climbers. Now that they're married it's a different matter - they call her "Catherine" and seem to have decided to promote her sister for some strange reason.
As for the American media, they seem mainly just to echo what the British media says - they had the British commentators on during the wedding. But not all the American media praised them - Bill Maher, Shepard Smith and the women on the View certainly didn't heap praise on them - sort of the opposite. I imagine she'll get good and bad press like Diana and Fergie did before her.

You made a good point about how now that she is married they treat her differently.

I just hope that the press starts to focus on the work or lack there of. Fashion is fun but it is not what keeps the royal family around. I do see some nice things like how she likes to talk to people longer but it is not enough. She needs to still prove (to me) that she can be more than a fashion figure. after all she is making no speeches on this tour. Time to step-up.

I also wonder if they are really changing people's beliefs about the monarchy or if they are just celebrities and people want to see that. Does that make sense?

 

[Daria_S]

You made a good point about how now that she is married they treat her differently.

I just hope that the press starts to focus on the work or lack there of. Fashion is fun but it is not what keeps the royal family around. I do see some nice things like how she likes to talk to people longer but it is not enough. She needs to still prove (to me) that she can be more than a fashion figure. after all she is making no speeches on this tour. Time to step-up.

I also wonder if they are really changing people's beliefs about the monarchy or if they are just celebrities and people want to see that. Does that make sense?

I think 'stepping up' will occur with time. To me, this kind of like student teaching. You start out just watching the teacher and trying to gauge how she/he runs the class. Then you step in a little bit, and after a little while, you start working with small groups, and so on. Right now, Catherine is in between just observing and doing small group instruction. Does that make sense? Perhaps in a few months (maybe after the new year) she will be given more engagements that give her a chance to speak and take on the role of a leader. Right now though, she's right where she should be.

 

[Meadow]

I think it great that she is starting off small and having time to learn. Not just being thrown in the deep end with engagement after engagement. She has the support of William and I think it will be awhile before she steps out on her own. They do need to be careful because with William working Catherine will need to at least to be seen to do something other then sit at home and wait for him. So far she still has no charity to support she needs to choose something. It doesn't take much for the press to turn!

 

[jemagre]

I think it great that she is starting off small and having time to learn. Not just being thrown in the deep end with engagement after engagement. She has the support of William and I think it will be awhile before she steps out on her own. They do need to be careful because with William working Catherine will need to at least to be seen to do something other then sit at home and wait for him. So far she still has no charity to support she needs to choose something. It doesn't take much for the press to turn!

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Myself1995]

My thoughts exactly.

They definitely have their favorites that they promote and the ones they don't like that they give backhanded compliments to. It doesn't seem to matter if you cooperate with them or not - some celebrities have tried that and the media has turned on them. Bad news sells better than good, and bad stories about a celebrity sells better than good.

 

[PaulaB]

I find people attitude to Prince William and Catherine strange to say the least. There are two message boards I have seen google them to see they are royalinsight and royal gossip. On the first one I asked a question about why people hate Catherine and several people came back saying they not only hated her but where proud of hating her why she isnt Moira Hindley or some such person so why hate? As for the royal gossip board the poor girl has been accused of everything up to and including prostitution. According to them William hates her the Queen and all the royal family hate her,they are hoping her live will be made into a living hell there is an example below
"I think she'll start ot really spiral out of control when she realizes just how hated she is and how they aren't going to let bygones be bygones. HM will show her wrath and HM (seeing Kate's shamelessly pampered lifestyle) will be more than personally affronted at having ot put up with her"

So when the Queen said she didn't like the display of the wedding dress it was seen as her saying that she hates Catherine that (despite all evidence to the contrary) William didn't ask for permission before asking her. That the video of the Queen and Catherine was forced with the Queen not knowing about the press being there do people really think the Queen wouldn't know.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I find people attitude to Prince William and Catherine strange to say the least. There are two message boards I have seen google them to see they are royalinsight and royal gossip. On the first one I asked a question about why people hate Catherine and several people came back saying they not only hated her but where proud of hating her why she isnt Moira Hindley or some such person so why hate? As for the royal gossip board the poor girl has been accused of everything up to and including prostitution. According to them William hates her the Queen and all the royal family hate her,they are hoping her live will be made into a living hell there is an example below
"I think she'll start ot really spiral out of control when she realizes just how hated she is and how they aren't going to let bygones be bygones. HM will show her wrath and HM (seeing Kate's shamelessly pampered lifestyle) will be more than personally affronted at having ot put up with her"

So when the Queen said she didn't like the display of the wedding dress it was seen as her saying that she hates Catherine that (despite all evidence to the contrary) William didn't ask for permission before asking her. That the video of the Queen and Catherine was forced with the Queen not knowing about the press being there do people really think the Queen wouldn't know.

Wow, what you describe is truly pathetic on the part of those posters. They are the complete opposite of the people who post on this forum, I believe the forums you described are not 'controlled' for want of a better word properly and people just spout rubbish to get attention.

Catherine is a lovely woman, and I do not notice any animosity between her and the royals. I might check out those forums to see what they have to say. Thanks for the info.

Welcome btw, hope you enjoy posting in a friendlier environment.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Most CPs have a "hate" forum devoted to them, Mary, Letizia, Charlene; its not something that only applies to Kate. People are free to chose or ignore what they dont want to read and participate in a forum that suits them.

 

[Royal Newbie]

Most CPs have a "hate" forum devoted to them, Mary, Letizia, Charlene; its not something that only applies to Kate. People are free to chose or ignore what they dont want to read and participate in a forum that suits them.

I do not understand this AT ALL.

1) Why do they spend time posting about people they "Hate"? Don't they have better things to do?

2) How can they possibly "hate" someone they have probably never met? Do they base their feelings on what has been reported in the media and supposed "inside" information? (dubious sources IMHO as to a persons true character)

3) Why do they have to be so nasty? It's like there is a contest on who can be the wittiest or the snarkiest in their put downs.

 

[Osipi]

I do not understand this AT ALL.

1) Why do they spend time posting about people they "Hate"? Don't they have better things to do?

2) How can they possibly "hate" someone they have probably never met? Do they base their feelings on what has been reported in the media and supposed "inside" information? (dubious sources IMHO as to a persons true character)

3) Why do they have to be so nasty? It's like there is a contest on who can be the wittiest or the snarkiest in their put downs.

I think it ranks right up there with the folks that will get into a chat room and see how many four letter words they can use before getting kicked out. Behind a keyboard and a monitor people can be whomever they wish to be and I guess for some trashing someone else is supposed to make them look better and feel better.

To be honest, if I came across forums such as the ones described as "hate" groups, they would quickly be a place I'd choose to avoid. It does make me appreciate even more now the quality of TRF and the caliber of posters here.

 

[Daria_S]

I find people attitude to Prince William and Catherine strange to say the least. There are two message boards I have seen google them to see they are royalinsight and royal gossip. On the first one I asked a question about why people hate Catherine and several people came back saying they not only hated her but where proud of hating her why she isnt Moira Hindley or some such person so why hate? As for the royal gossip board the poor girl has been accused of everything up to and including prostitution. According to them William hates her the Queen and all the royal family hate her,they are hoping her live will be made into a living hell there is an example below
"I think she'll start ot really spiral out of control when she realizes just how hated she is and how they aren't going to let bygones be bygones. HM will show her wrath and HM (seeing Kate's shamelessly pampered lifestyle) will be more than personally affronted at having ot put up with her"

So when the Queen said she didn't like the display of the wedding dress it was seen as her saying that she hates Catherine that (despite all evidence to the contrary) William didn't ask for permission before asking her. That the video of the Queen and Catherine was forced with the Queen not knowing about the press being there do people really think the Queen wouldn't know.

This reminds me of behavior that goes on in middle and high schools. A bunch of people team up against someone who a notch above them out of jealousy and meanness and see how far they can take it. Petty and pathetic really.

 

[Donovan]

This reminds me of behavior that goes on in middle and high schools. A bunch of people team up against someone who a notch above them out of jealousy and meanness and see how far they can take it. Petty and pathetic really.

I agree. Unfortunately, many people would rather find something to dislike about a person rather than anything to like. Instead of proclaiming how much they hate Catherine and other people they do not personally know, they really should take a look at why they feel the need to put others down and act that way.

 

[HRHHermione]

Although, I must admit, the idea of Her Majesty as a Regina George style Mean Girl just waiting to take down Kate is pretty funny. Where do people get this stuff from?

/That's why The Princess Royal's hair is so big. It's full of secrets!

 

[Super Baroness]

I most definitely agree with everything being said about the nonsense that goes down in other forums and message boards. If you look hard enough, you are sure to find place of hate for many of the major princesses/royals. Unfortunately, I stumbled upon one of the most disgusting sites when I first started royal watching. I was trying to look up the wedding dress of a certain Crown Princess, and instead found a board 100% devoted to putting down every single move the woman made. It was so ridiculous and kind of made me sick. Made me love the sane-ness of TRF even more!

 

[Tiggersk8]

Although, I must admit, the idea of Her Majesty as a Regina George style Mean Girl just waiting to take down Kate is pretty funny. Where do people get this stuff from?

/That's why The Princess Royal's hair is so big. It's full of secrets!

So, I'm reading through the thread and enjoying my nightly cup of Chai Tea before bed and then I read that up there just after having a sip from my cup. Do any of you have any idea how painful it is to get Chai Tea up into your nasal cavity from trying not to spit it out laughing?

It's *very* painful!!

ROTFLOL though!!! Really good one HRHHermione!!!

 

[Myself1995]

I think the only time they really had press silence was supposed to be when their mother died and they were going to school. For a time the media was shamed into silence, but it didn't last long. It was around that time Prince William got his phone hacked and all the stories about Prince Harry's drug use came out.

 

[melina premiere]

I like very much princess Mary of Denmark, princess Letizia or princess Charlene, But I like also princess Cathrine, but the newspapers like to make a battle between them that people enter in this game. For me the english or other tabloids are the same . they make more money saying a negative story that every body will belive even it is not true. Now , papers say, ' we have a new which comes of an unknown person near the palace but well informed and it becomes true in their papers., people do not think why the report do not give the name of these unknown because they do not exist, but Daylimail or other want to sell more and more papers and have more and more money. Now there is internet, it could be a good thing but the negative new without a control could make the turn of the earth in 30mn and what can the palace do against this? nothing! and it spoils the lives of many people (royal or not) look the Murdoch press. People want news of a princess or a prince and they do not the difference between a true new and a false new and the tabloids play on it

 

[Myself1995]

I like very much princess Mary of Denmark, princess Letizia or princess Charlene, But I like also princess Cathrine, but the newspapers like to make a battle between them that people enter in this game. For me the english or other tabloids are the same . they make more money saying a negative story that every body will belive even it is not true. Now , papers say, ' we have a new which comes of an unknown person near the palace but well informed and it becomes true in their papers., people do not think why the report do not give the name of these unknown because they do not exist, but Daylimail or other want to sell more and more papers and have more and more money. Now there is internet, it could be a good thing but the negative new without a control could make the turn of the earth in 30mn and what can the palace do against this? nothing! and it spoils the lives of many people (royal or not) look the Murdoch press. People want news of a princess or a prince and they do not the difference between a true new and a false new and the tabloids play on it

It looks like it wasn't just the Murdoch media, either - the Guardian is also being accused of hacking phones and Piers Morgan said several years back that his reporters were hacking when he was the head of the Mirror. Bad news sells better than good, sadly, and a picture of, say, Harry drunk with a new girlfriend will sell better than one of him in a suit doing charity work.