General News about Frederik, Mary and Family 9: May - December 2011 - Page 13

ricarda · #**241** 09-07-2011, 08:43 AM

It's very typical that EB puts it that way.

But I don't think this is about distributing "unflattering" pictures. This is about intruding privacy. It seems that a certain line has been overstepped this summer (at least that's what I thought when I saw all those pictures).
Is your terrace and garden "inside" or "outside" your walls?

But I too don't think there will be a lawsuit.

Duke of Marmalade · #**242** 09-07-2011, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricarda

Is your terrace and garden "inside" or "outside" your walls?

But I too don't think there will be a lawsuit.

For me, a line would have been overstepped if the photographers had actually entered the premesis of Chateau Caix in order to obtain the photos, but if you only need a good lens from outside the palace grounds M&F must have been aware of the possibility to be "shot".

**Zonk** · #**243** 09-07-2011, 09:00 AM

For me, I think there is an expectation of privacy. Do we all expect private moments when we are in the confines of the home. And for some the inside definitely is a part of that but also your backyard (i.e land). When you are at home do you have a reasonable expectation of privacy? And I think you do. Just because I am in the front of my house doesn't mean I can't have private moments.

But I agree there probably won't be a lawsuit. I just think its sad that because people are public figures its automatically assumed that they are not entitled to any type of privacy at all. Even animals in a zoo aren't on display 24/7.

Duke of Marmalade · #**244** 09-07-2011, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk

Even animals in a zoo aren't on display 24/7.

Neither are Royals. Actually, sometimes they arent on display for days or even a couple of weeks.

The problem is that the media wont play the game of being around only when it suits the royal purposes (at events having nice pictures taken when serving the country in order to remain popular with the public) and not being around when it doesnt.

The media has its own purposes too, and its a give and take. Therefore I dont expect there to be a lawsuit.

Rascal · #**245** 09-07-2011, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricarda

It's very typical that EB puts it that way.

But I don't think this is about distributing "unflattering" pictures. This is about intruding privacy. It seems that a certain line has been overstepped this summer (at least that's what I thought when I saw all those pictures).
Is your terrace and garden "inside" or "outside" your walls?

But I too don't think there will be a lawsuit.

I agree that there will probably not be any legal action. And I also think this isn't about some unflattering pictures. The paparazzi haven't broken any laws, the Danes manipulate the media as much as if not more than Diana ever did because they need to appear as if they actually do something. Unfortunately, they have allowed photographs at what should be private events and have actually sheduled the annual photoshoot at Grasten, which really isn't work or anything noteworthy...just a family getting together. By welcoming the media in on these, they kind of have a Pandora's box situation.

IMO this is just a "scare tactic" to try and get the media to back off a little, because the DRF knows any lawsuit would have no merit. If this situation is serious enough to merit legal action, they would have definitely filed lawsuits against the magazines that ran stories about Mary's greediness and taking items from clothing stores without paying, or they would threaten a lawsuit every time photographers take photographs of their children. For all the media attention Diana sought, she did actually confront photographers at least the one time and ask them not to photograph her children when they were trying to play. That situation has not occurred with the Danes.

Madame Royale · #**246** 09-07-2011, 10:21 AM

Quote:

the Danes manipulate the media as much as if not more than Diana ever did because they need to appear as if they actually do something

.lol. There's my laugh for the day

Lumutqueen · #**247** 09-07-2011, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame Royale

.lol. There's my laugh for the day

My laugh of the day as well, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

UserDane · #**248** 09-07-2011, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rascal

I agree that there will probably not be any legal action. And I also think this isn't about some unflattering pictures. The paparazzi haven't broken any laws, the Danes manipulate the media as much as if not more than Diana ever did because they need to appear as if they actually do something.

This is where my initial reaction is 'LOL what utter nonsense' - but of course you are entitled to your biased opinion.
Depending on whether the paparazzies have used strong tele lenses it is highly debatable whether laws were not are broken. People, royal or not, should be able to stay at their own terraces without having to look out for advanced tele photo equipment ready to capture you in situations where you rightly would presume you were in a private environment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rascal

Unfortunately, they have allowed photographs at what should be private events and have actually sheduled the annual photoshoot at Grasten, which really isn't work or anything noteworthy...just a family getting together. By welcoming the media in on these, they kind of have a Pandora's box situation.

In your eagerness to state our negative opinion you have overlooked some basic facts: Scheduled photo ops are usual in royal families, including the DRF. If you had done some background check you would have discovered a number of recurring photo ops in other royal families like the Danish royal family's gathering at Gråsten (a tradition instituted by the late queen Ingrid). The Dutch do the same each summer (at queen Beatrix' villa in Italy, I believe); the Belgian have invited the press for photo ops with their children several times, and a number of royal families have photo ops at their recurring skiing holidays for example (not work either or anything noteworthy

).

Rascal · #**249** 09-07-2011, 11:05 AM

Just because a person comments on this subject or any other for that matter in a thread about the Danish royal family (where it actually occurred) doesn't mean that person is ignorant, thinks the things they posted apply only to the DRF, or have done no research. Just because a person may not agree with anyone else doesn't mean that person's opinion is any more or less biased than any other poster. And some people get a laugh every day when they read some of these responses as well as the excessive superlatives showered on the DRF or any other royal/royal family with what appears to be a complete lack of objectivity or a complete double standard.

I actually got two laughs

from these responses:

1. Because I was accused of being biased - kind of the pot calling the kettle black.

2. Because none of them dealt with any of the actual examples given - saying that other royal families do the same thing in manipulating the media doesn't negate the fact that the DRF does it.

Quit drinking the Kool-Aid!!!!

"Some people only see what they want to..." - what a load of crap.

UserDane · #**250** 09-07-2011, 11:14 AM

I'm really glad on your behalf that you had a good laugh. You sounded as if you needed it

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rascal

2. Because none of them dealt with any of the actual examples given - saying that other royal families do the same thing in manipulating the media doesn't negate the fact that the DRF does it.

If you are referring to my examples of other royal photo ops you are twisting my words. I did not comment on royal families manipulating the media. I said that other royal families had recurring photo ops - just like the Danish royal family. The manipulation thing is your interpretation, not mine. Nice try though ....

Madame Royale · #**251** 09-07-2011, 11:19 AM

"Some people only see what they want to" . Ain't that the truth! .lol.

Frelinghighness · #**252** 09-07-2011, 11:38 AM

Privacy and media laws are different in every country as is legal recourse.
Privacy for children and intrusion of their rights also depends on local laws.

Legal action, especially in trying to protect the children, would certainly not be unheard of and may get them to back off.
Princess Caroline regularly took action regarding her minor children, however France seems to have very protective privacy laws.

**iceflower** · #**253** 09-07-2011, 04:26 PM

__________________

Please stay respectful towards each other - everyone is entitled to share his/her opinion! Thanks!

camelot23ca · #**254** 09-07-2011, 08:59 PM

I've noticed over the last several months there seems to be more pictures coming out of the two eldest children in situations that, for me, come close to crossing the line of what's easy to defend. Christian's recent soccer practice, the pictures taken of the family right outside his school against his parents' wishes, the pictures of Isabella alone on the terrace in France, etc. Christian and Isabella are getting older and are going to be out and about more, going to school, joining clubs, etc, so I think this would be an unsurprising time for tensions to flare between the royal house and the press.

Lumutqueen · #**255** 09-08-2011, 04:38 AM

I don't want to sound mean or rude or what not but I probably will.

I can understand that Christian and Isabella are young and probably don't understand fully the press and also Mary and Frederik are bound to get angry at some intrusive shots and I have always found that the press in Denmark are more relaxed than say the UK. But, the press are always going to be there, they will always follow the family, and the kids around especially as they grow up and they'll need to learn themselves to deal with them. Those recent pictures of Christian at his football training session?, I don't think they were intrusive it was lovely to see Mary and Christian together and Christian in his RM shirt.

I think it's all about being cooperative.

Duke of Marmalade · #**256** 09-08-2011, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumutqueen

But, the press are always going to be there, they will always follow the family, and the kids around especially as they grow up and they'll need to learn themselves to deal with them. Those recent pictures of Christian at his football training session?, I don't think they were intrusive it was lovely to see Mary and Christian together and Christian in his RM shirt.

I think it's all about being cooperative.

Completely agree with everything you said. Dealing with the media is everyday life for royals and although special rules apply for children I dont think these have been overstepped with the footie pictures, I much prefer the way the Danes deal with it = leading an everyday life with the children (football, ballet, going for a stroll etc) with media taking pictures rather than hiding their children away (by that enforcing some intrusive paparazzi shots) until at some point they become subject to full media glare and are struggling because they are not used to it and dont find it a normal part of their life what is a fact for at least the heir & spare.

By the way, the older children get, the more difficult it gets to hide them away because at some point they get bored with their restricted meetings with restricted people in restriced places, they want to be out there with their friends and do what they do, the earlier they get used to the press & accept it as a "given" the better.