General News about Frederik, Mary and Family 6: July - October 2010

[Tarlita]

This article from New Idea magazine in Australia is nothing new to readers who know it is rubbish. They do it every year using the photos from the opening of parliament when the royals are bored stiff and use the unflattering photos. Then they run a completely made up story to go with the photos showing Fred and Mary looking less than happy. You could lay a bet on this outcome every year. Typical rubbish and Womans Day in Australia is no better, another trashy rag. Forum members here know better, purely by the body language between Fred and Mary. They are both confident and happy with each other and in love. Well that's my rant for the day.

[Terri Terri]

Yes. Utter and complete rubbish. If this story was such "big news", it would have been all over the Danish media. Members of message boards who follow the activities of the DRF should know better than to believe such garbage. And even if CP Frederik went out to a night club, he is a 42 year old man! An Adult! CP Mary went to her best friend Amber Petty's birthday party and stayed until 2 am in the morning and she is pregnant (not that being pregnant should prevent you from going out or socializing...perish the thought!!!).
CP Frederik and CP Mary have known each other for over 10 years; conducted a long distance relationship for over a year (unknown to the media) and have been married for over 6 years. Why shouldn't CP Frederik go out occassionally with his friends? CP Mary goes out with her friends as well. It's not as if Frederik and Mary are glued at the hip! What is CP Frederik supposed to do? Stay at home and watch CP Mary's baby bump grow? A marriage is based on trust and each partner in a marriage can go out without the other.
Some of these tabloids are the absolute pits!
And infidelity in marriage is not limited to royalty! It can happen in any marriage!

[lizzydarcy]

Originally Posted by Sternchen

The brunette woman he met at Sydney Harbour is Kylie Matthews, Mary was one of her bridesmaids... Fred was having lunch with several friends on a boat.

My twopence (the first on this board): I've seen the pictures of Frederik and the brunette. Even if the woman in question is a friend of Mary's, in my opinion they were sitting too close to each other and in a very peculiar attitude that I considered to be too intimate for a married man and a "friend" of the wife.

I'm sure everything at that lunch was above board and it was nothing more than a friendly gathering, but my goodness, it sure gave me a shock to see Frederik like that!

[Zonk]

Welcome to TRF lizzydarcy....the issues (if there any) is that this magazine is not legit as one would say, I have recalled some of their more fanciful headlines.

In addition, there is probably nothing more than a couple of friends getting together for lunch. That being said, in Fred's position (and really in the position of any married person) you shouldn't give the masses anything to talk about. Some people will see this for what it is and others will make of it want they want to. Just don't give them anything to work with is what I say.

[Sternchen]

Originally Posted by lizzydarcy

My twopence (the first on this board): I've seen the pictures of Frederik and the brunette. Even if the woman in question is a friend of Mary's, in my opinion they were sitting too close to each other and in a very peculiar attitude that I considered to be too intimate for a married man and a "friend" of the wife.

I'm sure everything at that lunch was above board and it was nothing more than a friendly gathering, but my goodness, it sure gave me a shock to see Frederik like that!

The photos were from an angle where you can't really judge how close they really sat. Plus the other people surrounding them, were cut out of the picture...

Originally Posted by Zonk

Welcome to TRF lizzydarcy....the issues (if there any) is that this magazine is not legit as one would say, I have recalled some of their more fanciful headlines.

In addition, there is probably nothing more than a couple of friends getting together for lunch. That being said, in Fred's position (and really in the position of any married person) you shouldn't give the masses anything to talk about. Some people will see this for what it is and others will make of it want they want to. Just don't give them anything to work with is what I say.

As we have seen severaly times before (not only with the DRF) even if you don't give them something to work on, they will invent someting to work on. A pic is a splitsecond of a situation and yet, some construct a complete story of tears and anguish around it.

[nwinther]

Originally Posted by Sternchen

A pic is a splitsecond of a situation and yet, some construct a complete story of tears and anguish around it.

Well said. Too often, tabloids etc. post a picture of a person (usually someone of status and importance) in a split-second situation, like blinking, and they suggest that someone is sleeping or is extremely bored. This is a yearly occurence in Denmark at the opening of parliament.

But earlier this year, or last year, a picture of Obama "checking out" the reverse of a young woman, went around the world. People will look at such a picture and say - "look, he's still looking" or "look at her sleep" not really "realizing" that it's a still-image they're looking at.

IRL, Obama wasn't checking out the woman (why not btw - is he some sort of robot?) - at least it wasn't caught on camera. But "Obama walks up stair" couldn't bear an actual story or headling - so one was invented for the occation.

(FYI - the only thing I hate more than politicians are journalists. When the war comes, they're first in the guillotine.)

[lizzydarcy]

Originally Posted by Sternchen

The photos were from an angle where you can't really judge how close they really sat. Plus the other people surrounding them, were cut out of the picture...

I disagree with you. I have seen the full pictures that show the other people who were there, and what I didn't like was the way the woman was leaning back against Frederik's leg with his bare foot sticking out. Even if it's an optical illusion (which I don't believe), I agree with Zonk about not giving fodder to the media, it's a foolhardy move.

Zonk

Welcome to TRF lizzydarcy....the issues (if there any) is that this magazine is not legit as one would say, I have recalled some of their more fanciful headlines.

In addition, there is probably nothing more than a couple of friends getting together for lunch. That being said, in Fred's position (and really in the position of any married person) you shouldn't give the masses anything to talk about. Some people will see this for what it is and others will make of it want they want to. Just don't give them anything to work with is what I say.

Thanks for the welcome, Zonk, I'm glad to be here. This New Idea magazine (what a silly name!) seems very low on the integrity meter, nothing more than hearsay and innuendo. I echo those who said it's no big deal for Prince Frederik to go out on his own, I recall Mary has done it a few times, so they must be o.k. with it, and it's not like he went to a nude bar or something like that.

[Zonk]

Well personally I am one of those people who think that married couples should be able to go out and have a good time with friends. That could include drinking and clubbing. I am not married but those are my two cents. Although I will say that if I one of my friends had a pregnant wife, I wouldn't think he should be hanging out.

But again....as long as both parties are fine with it and careful judgement is used. I don't think Frederik did anything but he should be mindful at all times of who he is and recognize that you shouldn't give food (idle gossip and innuendo) to the masses (the paps).

But its much to ado about nothing. Again this wouldn't be the first time that magazines made a mountain out of a molehill.

[Aotearoagal]

Originally Posted by Sternchen

The brunette woman he met at Sydney Harbour is Kylie Matthews, Mary was one of her bridesmaids... Fred was having lunch with several friends on a boat.

I remember from the tabloid report that it was Kylie Matthews, another woman who hasn't been identified, Fred and a male friend of Fred & Mary's who were on the yacht: a party of four, to be exact. The woman who was photographed innocently leaning against Fred's leg on the bench was Kylie, who is a close friend of Mary's - it was NOT the so-called "mystery woman", who may have been Fred's male friend's companion.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by Aotearoagal

I remember from the tabloid report that it was Kylie Matthews, another woman who hasn't been identified, Fred and a male friend of Fred & Mary's who were on the yacht: a party of four, to be exact. The woman who was photographed innocently leaning against Fred's leg on the bench was Kylie, who is a close friend of Mary's - it was NOT the so-called "mystery woman", who may have been Fred's male friend's companion.

That story has long since been dispelled here in DK.

Frederik was photographed in public place among identified friends. During a considerable period of time, Frederik and the other friends on the boat was chatting and having a good time together, as friends tend to have.

The tabloid, Ekstra Bladet, came up with the story that Frederik was flirting with a "mystery brunette" and to back that up they produced a picture of Frederik and the woman in question.
Now, there is a TV-programme on TV2 in DK, called Presselogen, where various chief-editors discuss press-ethics every Sunday.
The then editor-in-chief of Ekstra Bladet, Bent Falbert, was thrashed by the other editors, who also had access to the picture and they pointed out that the picture had been cropped, that the presence of other firends right next to them had been ignored and that the ID of the woman had been omitted in the story in Ekstra Bladet.
Bent Falbert was litterally ridiculed when he attempted to explain the story as a good natured prank.

So, no flirt, no scandal. Just a question of picking the right picture and cropping it to suit the story you want.

The only thing the magazines accomplish by printing such stories, is to sell more magazines while discrediting themselves even more in the eyes of the readers.

[Tarlita]

This story is nothing more than made up rubbish by a rag of a magazine in stiff competition with its rival also a rag magazine called Womans Day. They try to outdo each other with sensational cover stories to improve sales. It has nothing to do with reality. The great majority of women in Australia know this and are frankly sick to death of the sensationalism. After all Brad and Ange according to the magazine would be separated 20 times have 20 babies and Brad would be remarried to Jen Anniston. Now if you would believe that, and if you choose to believe anything they say then I'm sure Fred and Mary have a nice castle they could sell you. [Tongue in cheek comment]

[Terri Terri]

Originally Posted by Muhler

That story has long since been dispelled here in DK.

Frederik was photographed in public place among identified friends. During a considerable period of time, Frederik and the other friends on the boat was chatting and having a good time together, as friends tend to have.

The tabloid, Ekstra Bladet, came up with the story that Frederik was flirting with a "mystery brunette" and to back that up they produced a picture of Frederik and the woman in question.
Now, there is a TV-programme on TV2 in DK, called Presselogen, where various chief-editors discuss press-ethics every Sunday.
The then editor-in-chief of Ekstra Bladet, Bent Falbert, was thrashed by the other editors, who also had access to the picture and they pointed out that the picture had been cropped, that the presence of other firends right next to them had been ignored and that the ID of the woman had been omitted in the story in Ekstra Bladet.
Bent Falbert was litterally ridiculed when he attempted to explain the story as a good natured prank.

So, no flirt, no scandal. Just a question of picking the right picture and cropping it to suit the story you want.

The only thing the magazines accomplish by printing such stories, is to sell more magazines while discrediting themselves even more in the eyes of the readers.

Thank you so much Muhler! I was amazed at the comment made by Bent Falbert calling the manipulated photo and the made-up story "a good natured prank"!! What utter drivel! If the shoe was on the other foot and a tabloid had done the same to him, he would be the first to scream murder at the particular tabloid! Such hypocrisy!

[Sternchen]

Isn't No Idea! a moniker for New Idea?

[Aotearoagal]

Yes - but to give New Idea its due, it has published many more positive than negative stories about Mary over the years. And Amber Petty I think was a columnist there briefly. I'm sure they are well-intentioned - naturally they feel protective of Mary and don't realise that publicising such a "non scandal" is nearly as hurtful as any infidelity would be.

[antonieta]

Originally Posted by Tarlita

This story is nothing more than made up rubbish by a rag of a magazine in stiff competition with its rival also a rag magazine called Womans Day. They try to outdo each other with sensational cover stories to improve sales. It has nothing to do with reality. The great majority of women in Australia know this and are frankly sick to death of the sensationalism. After all Brad and Ange according to the magazine would be separated 20 times have 20 babies and Brad would be remarried to Jen Anniston. Now if you would believe that, and if you choose to believe anything they say then I'm sure Fred and Mary have a nice castle they could sell you. [Tongue in cheek comment]

Well, it isn´t only the australian magasins.
It was at the danish press too.
This story was on the cover of a danish magasin Sog og Hor, the title ot something like "Frederik parties with strippers".

[Sternchen]

Seg og hoer isn't better than New Idea

[antonieta]

Originally Posted by Sternchen

Seg og hoer isn't better than New Idea

Ok, i agree with that.

That was just an example to say that it doesn't matter the contry.

What matter's is that's the way that "pink magazine's" works. Why give it importance?

If the people they talk about dont care, i should we?

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by antonieta

Ok, i agree with that.

That was just an example to say that it doesn't matter the contry.

What matter's is that's the way that "pink magazine's" works. Why give it importance?

If the people they talk about dont care, i should we?

I believe we should.

Imagine Mary met Frederik 25 years ago, before the Internet was widespread.

Practically all the information Australians would have about Mary and her family, would come from magazines like New Idea.
If the stories back then was just as fictional as they are now, Australians in particular would have a very distorted image of her life in DK and how she is percieved by her family and the Danes.
And we Danes would very likely end up with the notion that Mary is loathed in Australia.

The magazine publishers do not seem to realise that their days of control and dominance of the gossip/celebrity information is ending.

Nowadays, members of forums like this have access to the imagebanks of the photographers and newsagencies. We have access to news coverage just as fast, if not faster than the magazines themselves. A personal encounter can reach all corners of the world in real time if need be. We can exchange and verify facts, we have access to experts/nerds (if you like) who can provide information about all sorts of details. And so on...

I believe it's important that we, as members of forums like this, check, verify and evaluate the magazines in order to establish which are the most credible. In order for us to get as correct, truthful and balanced picture as possible of those people who have our interest. In this case the DRF.

Many chief-editors may not wish/want or be allowed to realise it, but for every fictional story they are caught red-handed in publishing, they only erode their own credibility.

[antonieta]

Originally Posted by Muhler

I believe we should.

Imagine Mary met Frederik 25 years ago, before the Internet was widespread.

Practically all the information Australians would have about Mary and her family, would come from magazines like New Idea.
If the stories back then was just as fictional as they are now, Australians in particular would have a very distorted image of her life in DK and how she is percieved by her family and the Danes.
And we Danes would very likely end up with the notion that Mary is loathed in Australia.

The magazine publishers do not seem to realise that their days of control and dominance of the gossip/celebrity information is ending.

Nowadays, members of forums like this have access to the imagebanks of the photographers and newsagencies. We have access to news coverage just as fast, if not faster than the magazines themselves. A personal encounter can reach all corners of the world in real time if need be. We can exchange and verify facts, we have access to experts/nerds (if you like) who can provide information about all sorts of details. And so on...

I believe it's important that we, as members of forums like this, check, verify and evaluate the magazines in order to establish which are the most credible. In order for us to get as correct, truthful and balanced picture as possible of those people who have our interest. In this case the DRF.

Many chief-editors may not wish/want or be allowed to realise it, but for every fictional story they are caught red-handed in publishing, they only erode their own credibility.

Sorry to say that but with your comment what cross my mind is: "we keep their pain". They (royals, famous people, etc.) don´t have to worry about those nasty things (or good things) that are written or said about them because we, as members of forums like this, get worried for them. Ok, i understand that perfectly. That's why we are here.

But than "we" can´t say that princess/prince/king/queen/actor/singer/ politician/etc doesn´t care because we dont know. They (specially royals) don't come to the knews/magazins, newspaperes saying "i'm said because i read ou listened this or that about me"....


Sorry for my english.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by antonieta

Sorry to say that but with your comment what cross my mind is: "we keep their pain". They (royals, famous people, etc.) don´t have to worry about those nasty things (or good things) that are written or said about them because we, as members of forums like this, get worried for them. Ok, i understand that perfectly. That's why we are here.

But than "we" can´t say that princess/prince/king/queen/actor/singer/ politician/etc doesn´t care because we dont know. They (specially royals) don't come to the knews/magazins, newspaperes saying "i'm said because i read ou listened this or that about me"....


Sorry for my english.

Hmm, I'm not sure I get your point.

What annoy me personally is misinformation, fabrications and distortions of facts. - Something that is way too common in the gossip magazines and tabloids.
It's fair enough if royals get a hard time, because they screw up, behave in an unfortunate way and so on. But it's not fair they get a hard time because journalists cannot, will not or are not allowed to do their job well. And it is certainly not fair if they get a hard time because some stockholders somewhere demand more magazines to be sold regardless of of consideration to their "victims".

Another matter, which I find even more disturbing, is that if it wasn't for the Internet and forums like these, I would have to rely on what the Danish media told me about what the Australian media wrote about the DRF and Mary. - The conclusion I would reach would not be flattering for my perception of Australians in general and I would certainly not put Australia high on my list of places I'd like to visit.
I don't think the Australian perception of the DRF, let alone the Danes would be more flattering.

As for "feeling with the victims", if that was what you meant. I'll leave that to dedicated fans. I want facts and a as credible information as possible, then I'll decide whether "the victims" deserve my sympathy or not.