William, Harry and girlfriends and the press

[Menarue]

I was not disparaging her, I remember she modelled underwear that is all. No one wants someone to stick a camera where they shouldn´t but she should be a bit more careful and I don´t think it is that difficult to be more careful. There is a line to be drawn but how can she? The only way she can is to be more careful because the papparazzi are NOt going to draw any line, of that you can be sure.

[Parrothead]

Sadly, it's just another example of how awful the papparazzi has become. I feel for the couple because I'm sure they like to go out with friends and have a good time like other people their age. But look at the results! Cameras everywhere and then their faces plastered on the front page the next day. If they stay at home every evening things get made up that they are splitting up or whatever. It's a no win situation no matter what they do.

[envoy2400]

Isn't it the case that they got together AFTER the modelled the underwear?

[Menarue]

Maybe, but I am sure I remember the newspaper showing William in the audience to support her..... Maybe it was at the beginning of the romance and after that he

[envoy2400]

well in any case, it sort of destroys the premise that she should have known better than to pose in underwear. She wasn't the girlfriend of the heir, so she could walk around starkers if she felt like it.

[Lady Ann]

Originally Posted by Menarue

I was not disparaging her, I remember she modelled underwear that is all. No one wants someone to stick a camera where they shouldn´t but she should be a bit more careful and I don´t think it is that difficult to be more careful. There is a line to be drawn but how can she? The only way she can is to be more careful because the papparazzi are NOt going to draw any line, of that you can be sure.

Well, I did not mean for her to draw a line.I ment for the papparazzi to draw the line a moral line. I know it is alot to ask but some of us would hope that it would still be possible. but i do agree with you that they won't ....it is just a shame ...I believe that fashion show was where they report he first noticed her...if you know what i mean ....

[Menarue]

Originally Posted by envoy2400

well in any case, it sort of destroys the premise that she should have known better than to pose in underwear. She wasn't the girlfriend of the heir, so she could walk around starkers if she felt like it.

Actually Envoy I think she was already his girlfriend, or at least just become his girlfriend, but I am not arguing as I just can´t remember, there is sure to be some eagle eye Kate/Will fan here that can tell us.
Actually I am glad she didn´t walk round starkers, that would have caused her a great deal of trouble later on for sure.

[Luv2Cruise]

Originally Posted by Nitefeatherz

You can't believe anything really unless its a really reputable news source and even then take it with a grain of salt. Look at the scandal with the NY Times not too long ago- a reporter was faking his stories and no one bothered to check his sources were real.

Judith Miller was a rogue reporter and very much an anomaly -- for the NY Times -- with the exception of Bill Kristol, who is a political hack they hired for comic relief on their op-ed pages IMO, the point being he's writing his opinion. Miller should rot in jail. Or the place that rhymes with jail. Kristol's tenure at NYT began with him -- rather the paper if I remember correctly -- having had to make two retractions. But generally speaking, I tend to believe a bit more of what I read in The Gray Lady over most others. So when Adam Nagourney says on the front page that a naked William with a laurel wreath on his head proposed on bended knee to Kate, I'd pretty much believe it. LOL

I remember the kid you're referring to. Yeah, he was scandalous and the editor I think resigned. But still, NYTimes is one of the best in the business.

[envoy2400]

According to this article, they became an item post fashion show. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20529253/

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962

Yes, exactly, Jo! The editor could have taken the high road and not published that picture. But I suppose that he/she decided that people will buy a paper with a picture of Kate's bra.

yes that is correct in an ideal world but get real please, this is boulevards' territory. the editors of the tabloids are paid to print such pics, not to single them out. in britain kate middleton is seen as a celebrity (A with prince william, B without him) and whenever she appears in the same places as footballer's wifes or all the other people who are famous for being famous she's being treated as such by the papers.

such appearances are harmful for kate's image because the public will see the bra pictures and think ok she's no better than lily allen etc all these pseudo-celebrities who like flashing off their underwear on a night out to ensure they'll make headlines the next day.

chelsy davy is probably a much naughtier girl than kate but because of her motto "work hard, party hard" people will overlook the night-out pictures because the next day they'll see her in a conservative suit, working for the queen's lawyer and the papers even let her get away with nepotism.

yes, life's not fair but whilst chelsy has proven clever enough to deal with such a fact the right way, kate keeps struggling to get her act together, causing polemic every step of the way.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Idriel

I would think when those royals and their hanger-ons show up at these Paparrazzi infested drinking holes, it's a plea for attention in and of itself.

How do you define "paparrazzi infested drinking holes"? It so happens, most top and trendy night clubs in London have photographers perched outside. To let the photographers decide were you can and can't go is just ludicrous, in my book! Its not that W&K are seen out very often - this was meant to have been the first sighting of them at a late night venue since August.

Originally Posted by Idriel

I don't think this is a particularly important or harmful issue (the flesh colored bra was actually the least vulgar thing about her outfit) but it is non-the-less slightly embarrassing

Like I said previously, most people in London would not bat an eyelid to see a little bit of a woman's bra showig if she was leaning to get out of a taxi. Perhaps we just have a more permissive society in London than you are used to....

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

which clearly brings out the green eyed monster in some!

oh yes of course the usual ultimate argument in the debate ... at the end of the day the green eyed monster must be behind everything. it's getting boring.

Like I said previously, most people in London would not bat an eyelid to see a little bit of a woman's bra showig if she was leaning to get out of a taxi. Perhaps we just have a more permissive society in London than you are used to....

they don't since in the public view kate middleton has arrived on the level of b or c celebs, wags, attention seekers, social climbers or professional party attendees who go to the clubs and flash their underwear on a daily basis to make it into the papers. the unfair thing is that this image only applies to kate, not to william who for some reason is saved by his royal title.

[Idriel]

Originally Posted by muriel

How do you define "paparrazzi infested drinking holes"?

The answer is included in the question.

It so happens, most top and trendy night clubs in London have photographers perched outside.

Only a certain type of clubs: the one that cater to people who want to be 'seen'.
I guess this is my natural prejudice against trashy dens (whisky, Boujis, Tramps, etc) that is seeping in: bad commercial music, extortionate pricing, and the appalling crowd!
These places where the Royals hang are filled with footballers and their Wags, coked-up socialites, shady Russians and their money honeys, drunken bankers and layabouts let loose with daddy's credit card.
But those are their friends, apparently.

To let the photographers decide were you can and can't go is just ludicrous, in my book!

You are right. I suppose I am projecting my own tastes on them: I would rather have a house party than be caught dead in these clubs (there are amazing clubs in London that have outstanding music and are not besieged by paps).
However, since they decide to go to these place knowing paps will be around, they both must be aware that all mishaps will be documented, and take little preventive measures (like closing a coat).

Like I said previously, most people in London would not bat an eyelid to see a little bit of a woman's bra showig if she was leaning to get out of a taxi. Perhaps we just have a more permissive society in London than you are used to....

Please put my comment in its context: I have said I don't think it is a major issue (full disclosure: I am not an Amish), but it wasn't a minor slip that can be laughed about and forgotten immediately afterwards.
Remember that pic was published in a National paper. You can't tell me that isn't at least slightly embarrassing.

Originally Posted by Skydragon

She probably also possesses a paper bag, perhaps she should use that to avoid upsetting the 'apparent' puritans on this forum

You definition of puritanism is most interesting. Then again, it has been established we don't speak the same language.

which clearly brings out the green eyed monster in some!

I really don't miss high school but some do apparently.

[Amelia]

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade

....they don't since in the public view kate middleton has arrived on the level of b or c celebs, wags, attention seekers, social climbers or professional party attendees who go to the clubs and flash their underwear on a daily basis to make it into the papers. the unfair thing is that this image only applies to kate, not to william who for some reason is saved by his royal title.

I think it's a bit much for any one of us here to state what the general public's view is or isn't on any of those we discuss. To some that is what she may appear to be, to others she's not. Some might not bat an eyelid at the sight of Kate's bra, others might find it appalling. We can really only speak for ourselves on topics like this.

Personally I think she needs to be a little more careful. It is wrong that she is followed by photographers when she goes out for a night but that's the way it is, and has been for her for a long time now. She should try to keep it in mind that the press will use these type of photos if they can get them. I don't think it is exactly fair but what can you do

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Idriel

Only a certain type of clubs: the one that cater to people who want to be 'seen'.
I guess this is my natural prejudice against trashy dens (whisky, Boujis, Tramps, etc) that is seeping in: bad commercial music, extortionate pricing, and the appalling crowd!
These places where the Royals hang are filled with footballers and their Wags, coked-up socialites, shady Russians and their money honeys, drunken bankers and layabouts let loose with daddy's credit card.
But those are their friends, apparently.You are right. I suppose I am projecting my own tastes on them: I would rather have a house party than be caught dead in these clubs (there are amazing clubs in London that have outstanding music and are not besieged by paps).

I don't know how well you know the club scene in London, and when was the last time you went to a trendy night club in London. Would you like to name some of the clubs that would meet your approval?

We can agree to disagree on this, but to suggest that going out to nice night clubs occassionally is only to be seen is not something I will agree with. Perhaps you dissapprove of posh restaurants as well, and in your book, the only people who eat there are ones who like to be photographed??

Originally Posted by Idriel

However, since they decide to go to these place knowing paps will be around, they both must be aware that all mishaps will be documented, and take little preventive measures (like closing a coat).Please put my comment in its context: I have said I don't think it is a major issue (full disclosure: I am not an Amish), but it wasn't a minor slip that can be laughed about and forgotten immediately afterwards.
Remember that pic was published in a National paper. You can't tell me that isn't at least slightly embarrassing.

I really don't think its such a big deal (and I do think that it is a "minor slip" and not a "mishap"), but you clear to seem to think so, and thats fine - you are entitled to your view. I am sure I have seen enough "classy" people in Paris with the odd bit of bra showing, without most people getting worried about it.

The fact that a "national" tabloid chose to run the picture is only indicative of its low standards, and to some extent, indicative of its dumbed down readership (why would they publish it if their readers would not appreciate it)

[kimebear]

Originally Posted by Idriel

You are right. I suppose I am projecting my own tastes on them: I would rather have a house party than be caught dead in these clubs (there are amazing clubs in London that have outstanding music and are not besieged by paps).

While I'm sure that there are amazing clubs in London that are not besieged by paps at the present, it stands to reason that the minute William and Kate start to frequent one regularly, the paps will besiege that one too. W&K are one of the reasons that they haunt Boujis, Mahiki etc after all.

[Menarue]

I bet it isn´t for the food.

[Duke of Marmalade]

Originally Posted by muriel

If you have a view that Kate is a "b or c celebs", thats fine - but you must have some basis to suggest that the public think along the lines you do?

i think that tabloids or especially the weekly tabloid celebrity magazines to a certain degree reflect public opinion or public interest, otherwise they would not exist (let's leave out the intellectual standard or who has what intentions behind the scenes). the fact that kate middleton appears in these magazines alongside all these celebrity people as soons as she's out there is an indication that in public she's widely seen as one of them, at least for me.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade

i think that tabloids or especially the weekly tabloid celebrity magazines to a certain degree reflect public opinion or public interest, otherwise they would not exist (let's leave out the intellectual standard or who has what intentions behind the scenes). the fact that kate middleton appears in these magazines alongside all these celebrity people as soons as she's out there is an indication that in public she's widely seen as one of them, at least for me.

Look in any of the newspaper 'entertainment sections' or celeb magazines and they all include royalty, including W & H, C & C etc. Sadly all the weekly magazines reflect is the mentality of their readers, who pour over stories such as 'my husband was my wife and he/she ran off with my best friend straight after the ceremony', certainly NOT the views of ordinary members of the public, IMO.

[Al_bina]

Upon reading the discussion, I am inclined to agree with views of Duke of Marmalade, Boris, and Idriel on the matter. It appears to me that being Prince William's girlfriend is the excuse of Ms. and Mrs. Middleton for absolutely everything, including the current wardrobe malfunction. They have displayed a total inability to manage the mass media. One can not blame paparazzis endlessly. Although I see nothing wrong with desire to marry up, some actions of Ms. and Mrs. Middleton lack finesse.