The Late Princess Diana news thread 6: June-September 2007

[sassie]

It is circular logic: if the public would stop buying the tabloids, the publishers wouldn't produce them. But, if the publishers didn't produce them, the public couldn't buy them.

Decades ago, the world existed without tabloids. But, you can't stuff the beast back into the cage now.

[TheTruth]

Yeah, we can't do anything against it so like I said we must go on with it.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by sassie

But, if the publishers didn't produce them, the public couldn't buy them.

Then the public could just get the salacious photos and tawdry videos from the internet which doesn't have the same restrictions as the mainstream media.

Some of the worst pictures and videos were first shown on the Internet; then when it appeared there was enough market for them, the mainstream publishers started to talk about them.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Then the public could just get the salacious photos and tawdry videos from the internet which doesn't have the same restrictions as the mainstream media.

Some of the worst pictures and videos were first shown on the Internet; then when it appeared there was enough market for them, the mainstream publishers started to talk about them.

Yes, I agree ysbel. People are going to be more and more morbid as the years pass. I'm afraid about what will be on internet and Tv in the future ...

[sassie]

Originally Posted by ysbel

Then the public could just get the salacious photos and tawdry videos from the internet which doesn't have the same restrictions as the mainstream media.

Some of the worst pictures and videos were first shown on the Internet; then when it appeared there was enough market for them, the mainstream publishers started to talk about them.

Well, I was referring to the tabloid print press, but you make a good point. The circular logic applies to the Internet, as well.

[Lily97]

Thank you for explaining. Over here there is a huge difference between tabloids and authentic magazines, however, that said even Time Magazine would have Diana's picture on their cover. As for the internet, in my opinon, it is totally out of control. I feel sorry for our children growing up with all this technology. I can't remember the last time I received a hand written letter!

I did see the 20/20 program last night selling Tina Brown's new book. She did indeed state that Diana was on the train and drove her mother's car to get to the train. She did not state that Diana was not a virgin until she met Charles, just that they had a tryst on the train before the marriage. I may buy the book, haven't decided yet.

Lily

Lily

[Warren]

A news story published in today's Sydney Morning Herald (broadsheet ) about some of the details in the Tina Brown Book was disturbing. I'm putting this in the News thread as it will get more comment than in the Royal Library, and it is certainly 'newsworthy'...

On the early days of Diana's relationship with Hasnat Khan.
"Diana first met the doctor while visiting a friend's husband in hospital. She then proceeded to visit the friend's surprised husband for 17 days straight in order to meet Dr Khan.
Once caught by a News of the World photographer at the hospital at midnight, she rang the paper's royal correspondent and planted a story that she went there three nights a week to comfort terminally ill patients." [my bolding]

If the last comment is true, it is very disappointing to discover that some of the reports of Diana's "good works" were not only fabrications, but fabrications created by herself. I can understand that a certain level of subterfuge was required to cover her tracks in the quest to meet Hasnat Khan, but to make up the story that she was regularly visiting terminally ill patients was not only self-serving and dishonest, but in my opinion extremely tacky.

[BeatrixFan]

Well, surely we all knew that from other stories that have surfaced? Remember the report from that nun who she asked to "Bring sicker children to the front" in Africa? Makes this tale all the more believable.

[sirhon11234]

No its not all that believable its sounds like a load of crock to me. Where is Tina Brown's source for this statement?

[BeatrixFan]

Of course it does. How wrong we were. How could we ever doubt the angelic and pure nature of Saint Diana, Mother of God and the only perfect specimen of human nature ever to walk across Dame Nature's green and pleasant planet?

[sirhon11234]

Originally Posted by BeatrixFan

Of course it does. How wrong we were. How could we ever doubt the angelic and pure nature of Saint Diana, Mother of God and the only perfect specimen of human nature ever to walk across Dame Nature's green and pleasant planet?

lol I wonder if Tina Brown's statements about poor misjudged/misunderstood
Princess Camilla only carried out her affair with Charles because he was prince and would one day become king. Since its so believable that Diana was so vindictive and manipulative.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Warren

On the early days of Diana's relationship with Hasnat Khan.
"Diana first met the doctor while visiting a friend's husband in hospital. She then proceeded to visit the friend's surprised husband for 17 days straight in order to meet Dr Khan.
Once caught by a News of the World photographer at the hospital at midnight, she rang the paper's royal correspondent and planted a story that she went there three nights a week to comfort terminally ill patients." [my bolding]

This version has been about for years and was reported by various papers nearer the time. I don't remember the papers concerned. It was after she announced to the NotW's royal corespondent, that it became public knowledge about her so called mercy visits. It was also published that she attended a heart operation, just to be with Hasnet.

[BeatrixFan]

We're not discussing Camilla. It does amuse me that whenever a story that shows Di in a different light comes about, her fans automatically become bumbling pantomime dames and begin shrieking about Camilla in an attempt to somehow give justification to what's been alledged whilst at the same time telling us there's no way it could be true. Very funny.

[TheTruth]

Diana = Human. Human = unperfect, so please let's stop going around the subject of 'Saint Diana' or not.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

lol I wonder if Tina Brown's statements about poor misjudged/misunderstood Princess Camilla only carried out her affair with Charles because he was prince and would one day become king. Since its so believable that Diana was so vindictive and manipulative.

I don't think Tina Brown has said that, she did report that Camilla's ex husbands unknown brother had said that she did not want to marry Charles, a 'fact' that was disproved two years ago!

[sirhon11234]

I suggest you read this article
The most savage attack on Diana EVER | the Daily Mail

We're not discussing Camilla. It does amuse me that whenever a story that shows Di in a different light comes about, her fans automatically become bumbling pantomime dames and begin shrieking about Camilla in an attempt to somehow give justification to what's been alledged whilst at the same time telling us there's no way it could be true. Very funny

Just as I don't find it amusing that whenever there is a negative story about Diana, the Camilla fans are the first ones to say its true.

[Elspeth]

I think that story about Diana visiting the hospital in order to meet Dr Khan is an example of how you can interpret stories when you don't really know people's motivations. If I remember right, the husband of one of her friends (Oonagh Toffolo, I think) was seriously ill in that hospital, and I do rather doubt that Diana's only motivation for visiting him so often was to have an excuse to be with Dr Khan. While there was probably something in that story, given her reported track record of intensity early in relationships, I'm very sceptical that her friend's sick husband was only an excuse and that she had no time or compassion to spare for him. This looks like a case of taking a shade of grey and painting it black.

[TheTruth]

What's really amusing is that during her lifetime no one dared to attack Diana and now, after 10 years, everybody has something to say and make money of it. What a band of miserly people !

[Warren]

I didn't make my post to start a Diana-sledging campaign. I made it because the story was published in a reputable and serious newspaper. IF the story is true her behaviour was very disappointing. Perhaps naively, I was somewhat shocked.

As to Tina Brown's sources, we will have to check the footnotes and appendices in the book.

[BeatrixFan]

Just as I don't find it amusing that whenever there is a negative story about Diana, the Camilla fans are the first ones to say its true.

Putting the two ladies aside, anyone who hasn't had their brain clouded by years of saccharine reporting can accept that this woman wasn't perfect and when there is sufficient evidence to suggest that Di engaged in some tacky media stunts, it is not a criminal offence to suggest that she may have actually abused her position which we know she did. Leave aside the "Well so did [Name]" and that's what it comes down to.