General News about Joachim, Marie and Family Part 4: July 2014 - August 2019

[dazzling]

Im surprised that the court released a statement and not let it pass. I do understand that they want to protect her privacy and the families but whats next, a divorce article and the court will jump on it. I mean, if the court does not release a statement when another story comes out then many people will assume it is true.

Tabloids will always write stories, whether it's true or not, we won't know but for sure it won't stop by the court denying it.

[FasterB]

Originally Posted by Muhler

It could also be a general warning to Aller, who owns both Her & Nu and Se & Hør, that they have not been forgiven, on the contrary, and that they may still face a lawsuit once the Se & Hør case has been tried at court later this year.

It's no secret that Aller has allocated more resources to Her & Nu, perhaps as a result of the bad reputation Se & Hør still has - and negative stories sell...l]

Her&Nu is not owned by Aller, but by Egmont

Billed-Bladet and Se&Hør are owned by Aller

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by FasterB

Her&Nu is not owned by Aller, but by Egmont

Billed-Bladet and Se&Hør are owned by Aller

I stand corrected.

[polyesco]

Originally Posted by dazzling

Im surprised that the court released a statement and not let it pass. I do understand that they want to protect her privacy and the families but whats next, a divorce article and the court will jump on it. I mean, if the court does not release a statement when another story comes out then many people will assume it is true.

Tabloids will always write stories, whether it's true or not, we won't know but for sure it won't stop by the court denying it.

I agree
And hopefully "official" denials from the courts aren't used too much because it can become a slippery slope .... "if a story isn't denied, then it must be true " sort of thing

must have gotten Joachim or Marie angry that day to respond

[Archduchess Zelia]

That's exactly why it bothers me a bit, too. From now on, are we now to think that every time the court doesn't deny a story, it's because it's true? And this is just stupid gossip hardly anyone believe, after all.

[pammy]

Here's my thought on the issue:

Perhaps, after the Se og Hor scandal broke, there was a meeting between the court and the weekly magazines, where it was stated clearly by the court that, unlike before, if they did not tow the line of the boundary set by the law, they would use the long arm of said law to go after the offenders when it came to the blatant breach of the privacy of the members of the DRF in other to have a sensational headline for the frontpage. It would no longer be business as usual, where the papers would and could print falsities as if they were truths and get away with it because the DRF did nothing. Her og Nu probably thought it was the bark of a toothless bulldog, and went ahead with the story, expecting the DRF not to notice, or if they did notice, not to do anything about it, as usual. How wrong they were, if, indeed, it was the threat of legal action from the court and the subsequent consequences that came with that that caused them to capitulate so spectacularly, which is what the editor more than hints at, was the case.

[Queen Penelope]

True or not, it is Marie's business, and she shouldn't have to respond. IMO, if she had work done, it was done very conservatively, because they look unchanged. It's not like she got the Dolly Parton package or anything!!

What's the big deal if she did anyway?! I don't get how it's scandal material.

[Archduchess Zelia]

A bit roughly translated (), here's another comment on the breast-story (as BT so charmingly put it), this time from Anna Thygesen, from the communications agency, Geelmuyden Kiese:

"You could say that the court has shot itself in the foot. If they hadn't denied the story, no one would have thought more of it, but now it's given all the press a reason to bring it up – several times, even. If the goal was to protect members of the royal family, it hasn't worked very well (...) If it's a new communications strategy, it has to be followed through every time [untrue gossip is published], otherwise people will think that the other stories are true (...) If they hadn't commented on the story, most Danes would've just thought it was a lie."

Thygesen also mentions how the Australian press also often write fanciful stories about Mary, and says: "That's why I probably wouldn't have chosen to use my denial-energy on the breast-story, if I was in their place".

Source: Ekspert: Kongehuset skyder sig selv i foden med brysthistorie - Royale | www.bt.dk

I can't say I disagree with her. While I can sympathise that having stories like this written about you must be distressing, the DRF might have wanted to think this through a bit more before getting involved (but, you know, with Joachim's temper... ).

[Queen Claude]

Originally Posted by dazzling

Im surprised that the court released a statement and not let it pass. I do understand that they want to protect her privacy and the families but whats next, a divorce article and the court will jump on it. I mean, if the court does not release a statement when another story comes out then many people will assume it is true.

Tabloids will always write stories, whether it's true or not, we won't know but for sure it won't stop by the court denying it.

Originally Posted by polyesco

I agree
And hopefully "official" denials from the courts aren't used too much because it can become a slippery slope .... "if a story isn't denied, then it must be true " sort of thing

must have gotten Joachim or Marie angry that day to respond

This is my reaction as well. It is strange that they took this approach when it was clear that they are setting themselves up for a slippery slope type situation. Did anyone even pay attention to the original story? I don't recall it but the Daily Mail ran a story about the denial.

[Muhler]

Originally Posted by pammy

Here's my thought on the issue:

Perhaps, after the Se og Hor scandal broke, there was a meeting between the court and the weekly magazines, where it was stated clearly by the court that, unlike before, if they did not tow the line of the boundary set by the law, they would use the long arm of said law to go after the offenders when it came to the blatant breach of the privacy of the members of the DRF in other to have a sensational headline for the frontpage. It would no longer be business as usual, where the papers would and could print falsities as if they were truths and get away with it because the DRF did nothing. Her og Nu probably thought it was the bark of a toothless bulldog, and went ahead with the story, expecting the DRF not to notice, or if they did notice, not to do anything about it, as usual. How wrong they were, if, indeed, it was the threat of legal action from the court and the subsequent consequences that came with that that caused them to capitulate so spectacularly, which is what the editor more than hints at, was the case.

I find that very plausible.
Considering all the crap that has been written over the years I find it odd if the DRF should suddenly "lose their temper". After all, they do have advisers to guard them against making rash decisions.

[polyesco]

Originally Posted by Archduchess Zelia

A bit roughly translated (), here's another comment on the breast-story (as BT so charmingly put it), this time from Anna Thygesen, from the communications agency, Geelmuyden Kiese:

"You could say that the court has shot itself in the foot. If they hadn't denied the story, no one would have thought more of it, but now it's given all the press a reason to bring it up – several times, even. If the goal was to protect members of the royal family, it hasn't worked very well (...) If it's a new communications strategy, it has to be followed through every time [untrue gossip is published], otherwise people will think that the other stories are true (...) If they hadn't commented on the story, most Danes would've just thought it was a lie."

Thygesen also mentions how the Australian press also often write fanciful stories about Mary, and says: "That's why I probably wouldn't have chosen to use my denial-energy on the breast-story, if I was in their place".

Source: Ekspert: Kongehuset skyder sig selv i foden med brysthistorie - Royale | www.bt.dk

I can't say I disagree with her. While I can sympathise that having stories like this written about you must be distressing, the DRF might have wanted to think this through a bit more before getting involved (but, you know, with Joachim's temper... ).

I kinda agree.
Of all the things to deny, why put energy on this story?
i think most agree that its her body and she can do whatever she wants...

the denial just made this non-story into a bigger story, more attention.

[ashelen]

what's the big deal, she wouldn't be the first royal with plastic surgery , or the first woman have it one done1 as for me, she can have all the plastic surgery she wants! it is her private life! lets leave Mary alone with all this .....But I think she did it or not1 the Royal family shouldn't had envolve in answer, it is giving them more ammunition.....

[Nordic]

Originally Posted by ashelen

what's the big deal, she wouldn't be the first royal with plastic surgery , or the first woman have it one done1 as for me, she can have all the plastic surgery she wants! it is her private life! lets leave Mary alone with all this .....But I think she did it or not1 the Royal family shouldn't had envolve in answer, it is giving them more ammunition.....

? I don't think Mary has anything to do with this.

[ashelen]

Originally Posted by Nordic

? I don't think Mary has anything to do with this.

You are right I meant Marie

[grevinnan]

All they had to do was to have Princess Marie wear a tight jogging bra and a tight dress. That should have been a better denial then what they got them selves into. Assuming the story isn't accurate of course.

[Muhler]

Breatgate goes on, but in a direction surprising communications experts (and dare I say the media).

Gallup has conducted a poll and the result is that a vast majority support the DRF (and our Marie) putting the foot down against the press.
55% believe it was wise or predominantly wise that the DRF put the foot down.
40+ % believe the DRF could do more of that.

Political commentator and royal expert at the serious paper Berlinske, Thomas Larsen (as a political commentator at least he is not uninteresting to listen to), says: "The Danes like that she (Marie) in this way shows she has spunk/character/will power/strength. You should not be mistanken that many Danes believe the media go too far. Not least against the royals. It's rare they fight back, but when they do, the Danes reward them.
Some would say it was unwise, but the public isn't buying it. There they too think that the line has been crossed when major lies are being fabricated in the press".

The poll shows that 71% has not changed their opinion of the DRF after this.

[dazzling]

Price Joachimof Denmark, Princess Marie of Denmark and their children pay tribute to victims in front of the French embassy in Copenhagen on November 14, 2015 the day after the terrorist attack in Paris.

Picture

[FasterB]

Princess Marie was deeply touched and couldn´t hardly speak when she spoke to the press after the visit at the French Embassy

Prinsesse Marie dybt berørt | BILLED-BLADET

[iceflower]

.

Here's an additional gallery of the family at the gathering in front of the French embassy in Copenhagen on Saturday:


** pp: Princesse Marie : Emue avec Athena et Henrik, et en larmes après les attentats **

[Elektra]

Princess Marie's engagements for today and tomorrow have been cancelled.

The Princess is currently in France with her grandmother whose health is "in serious conditions".

Afbud - Kongehuset