William, Catherine and Family: Annual Holiday to Mustique (2012-2015, 2018-2019)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just read on another forum that Princess Charlene is on a short holiday in warmer climes - no one seems to mind. Shouldn't we be moving on and put this subject to rest?
 
^^^^i would love to be able to put this to rest. Kate isnt the first one to marry the 2nd in line. the last one (Sarah) held a job and that in it self had the press upset and everyone worried about security. i remember the scandel that created. all i am saying if kate worked or didnt work people would be upset. if she travels or doesnt travel, she is going to make people upset. at least if she is shopping and traveling they are putting money back in the economy, right? she will never make everyone happy all the time. after a while, if i was her, i wouldnt even try.
 
I will be so, so happy when she's back to work and doing engagements again. Not because I'm worried about her work load being too light, but just because I don't know how many more slow royal news days I can take. People get starved for news and the conversation just goes totally off the rails.

Here, here!! IMO this is why're reason behind this entire conversation.
 
Does anyone know when they are due to return to England?
When they went to Mustique last year, they stayed about a week. So I imagine they'll be returning early next week.
 
When they went to Mustique last year, they stayed about a week. So I imagine they'll be returning early next week.

I do think so:flowers: At least until Wednesday. Although last year they stayed for two weeks so they could only return on Friday or during the weekend
 
Ah, you're right...they did stay for almost 2 weeks. At least Kate and the Middletons did. William had to work, so he only stayed for one week.
 
Last edited:
Ah, you're right...they did stay for almost 2 weeks. At least Kate and the Middletons did. William had to work, so he only stayed for one week.

Yes like last year William might have only a few days off work.

It's reported someone have left Mustique and I believe it was William who left if indeed someone left. I'm not sure if the source is true.

Some sources say her parents and siblings have been there 10 days already
 
I will be so, so happy when she's back to work and doing engagements again. Not because I'm worried about her work load being too light, but just because I don't know how many more slow royal news days I can take. People get starved for news and the conversation just goes totally off the rails.

It may be a slow royal news day but only if you subscribe to the view (which some on here and in the mainstream media appear to) that the only members of the royal family are William, Kate & Harry.

The Queen, Edward, Anne, Charles & Camilla (at least) have all been out & about working since the golden couple went on holiday.
 
William & Catherine are on vacation-taking their time to "recharge their batteries" for the things that lay ahead of them (and probably enjoying their last baby-free holydays!) and even if the current economic situation is not rosey,if nobody spent their money on holydays or shopping how should the situation improve?How do you create/maintain jobs if nobody buys anything?

I hope we can close the issue wheter or not their vacation is deserved for now....
 
It may be a slow royal news day but only if you subscribe to the view (which some on here and in the mainstream media appear to) that the only members of the royal family are William, Kate & Harry.

The Queen, Edward, Anne, Charles & Camilla (at least) have all been out & about working since the golden couple went on holiday.

Can we be done with this? It's ridiculous. It's their annual family trip AND all of the people you mentioned take breaks and go on vacations maybe not around the world, but they do as do other royal couples. I think we've hashed out the issue enough.
 
I do think this will be the last trip for them for a while since they will have a baby to look after.

I think it's good that Kensington Palace is the focus of attention once again.
 
Can we be done with this? It's ridiculous. It's their annual family trip AND all of the people you mentioned take breaks and go on vacations maybe not around the world, but they do as do other royal couples. I think we've hashed out the issue enough.

If you read my post nowhere did I criticise William & Catherine for taking a holiday. I commented on the POV that its a slow royal news day as an explanation for why this hullabaloo has arisen.
 
A little perspective is needed on this thread. It doesn't matter what the royals do, there will always be a chunk of the population who think they're lazy 'parasites' living the high life at our expense. Take Charles, who is the hardest-working of all the royals, who gave up his foreign ski holiday and rarely, if ever, holidays abroad gets accused of what William and Kate have here. No matter how many engagements they undertake, some will just never believe that what they do is 'work'. Even if William and Kate took just one holiday per year, people would still be saying the exact same things. They're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Also, let's remember that for decades the Queen and DoE have been taking a months-long holiday at Balmoral and a similar holiday at Sandringham every single year. During both periods they undertake very, very few engagements. Before people get all up in arms about how old they are, remember they haven't always been this old. They've been taking these breaks for their entire married lives. I'm not saying they're lazy in any way, but they enjoy holidays of a duration that 99% of the British population can only dream of. That's before we consider that the Queen paid £300,000 to hire a cruise ship for 14 days (and only used it for 10) more than once for her summer holiday.

Anyone taking the comments at the bottom of a Daily Mail article as reflective of anything is clearly lacking in brain cells. To start with, the large majority (over 70%) of the DM's traffic comes from outside the UK. Secondly, anyone who has ever spent any time perusing the DM comments, will know that it tends to be populated by racist, sexist, xenophobic, bullying wastes of space.

As an example, the DM had an article last year about Prince Philip with photos of him lifting a piece of heavy equipment at the Windsor horse show (I think). The comments consisted largely of people stating that he was skiving off work, asking why he wouldn't just hurry up and die already, that he looks like a walking corpse, that he obviously wasn't all that ill when he was admitted to hospital at Christmas and that it was obviously just the hospital giving him special treatment. Oh, and that the royals are lizzards who are controlled by the Illuminati/the Rothschilds.

The DM comments section is so notorious that several bloggers provide a running commentary on the worst of them. Case in point:

Most Priceless Daily Mail Comment: have we a winner? | Life and style | guardian.co.uk

In the end, the monarchy is more popular than it's been for at least the last 60 years. A poll in November showed Prince William is the most popular member of the RF as far as Britons are concerned. Even after her jubilee, William is actually much more popular than the Queen. There's very little for William and Kate to worry about.
 
At one time Prince Charles was taken to task for his "foreign" ski holidays and people (i.e. the tabloids) couldn't understand why he didn't stay at a royal property the way his parents did. And I remember one commentator in the 70s or 80s saying that The Queen and DofE were not criticized for THEIR holidays because they took those holidays either at freezing, raining Balmoral or freezing, raining Sandringham so the average Briton didn't envy them at all... :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I got the impression Mustique was very private and free of photo-lenses. They surely deserve a vacation free of the press. The last few days' vacation was ruined by the photographers with their long-distance lenses. Princess Margaret went there for the same reason. But I'm not a cold and starving member of the unemployed classes who might be angry at the royals for their plutocratic life. No life is easy, theirs or the unemployed. Ignore the vacation!
 
The editorial staff for The Daily Telegraph are new and ex Daily Mail which explains the more negative shift in the royal stories at the Daily Telegraph. The Guardian and The Times are serious papers and don't cover the fluff that the Daily Mail does ( and now the Telegraph does). The Daily Mail does have the largest online readership but as ERII has already pointed out the majority is foreign as are the comments which are moderated, if comments are sent in that don't fit the view that the Mail want promoted they are not posted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:previous:
That is actually fascinating ( I am from the United States, so i have no clue about this) thanks for the info. So, correct me if I am wrong, by "promoted", do you mean they choose comments they want published, in some cases on purpose of they are inflammatory??? I am not accusing the Daily mail of this at all, I just want to understand it better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:previous:
Lets just say that if you write a comment that corrects a factual error in a DM story it is quite unlikely to be posted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lets just say that if you write a comment that corrects a factual error in a DM story it is quite unlikely to be posted.

Oh WOW. Okay, thank you for the info. And believe me, there are plenty of American publications that are no better!!! Not bashing either country or journalists, just saying nothing new under the sun unfortunately!!!:ermm::ermm:
 
Lets just say that if you write a comment that corrects a factual error in a DM story it is quite unlikely to be posted.
That hasn't been my experience with the Daily Mail. Much maligned as it is, all the comments I have made, whether agreeing or disagreeing with the topic of the article and the general mood of the other commentators, they have always been published. And not all articles are moderated.
 
Thank you EIIR for your reasonable post. I have been wondering when someone would mention the extended holidays of the Queen and the DOE (not that I resent it AT ALL), I've just been struck by the fact that there is little or no criticism for these extended holidays. Few people get to experience that much "time off". And as you noted they have been doing so for years.

It is my opinion FWIW that it has more to do with the sun, sand and sea than the holidays (or the skiiing). One has to wonder how much jealousy would take place IF the holidays were all in the misty north. :lol:
 
:previous: Yes if it was in Scotland no one would blink and eyelid as its still in the country.
 
:previous: Yes if it was in Scotland no one would blink and eyelid as its still in the country.

Unfortunately for will & Kate I think they will always have any time away from the press criticized as the paps need to report something. The awful reality is that Will, Kate and Harry sell papers..... If they can't report on what they are doing (even Starbucks runs, walking the dog) then they will report on the fact that they are absent....and make as sensational a story as they need. I don't envy that life at all.
 
That hasn't been my experience with the Daily Mail. Much maligned as it is, all the comments I have made, whether agreeing or disagreeing with the topic of the article and the general mood of the other commentators, they have always been published. And not all articles are moderated.

My experience has been very different. My comments though were not agreeing or disagreeing with the article, they were to correct obvious factual errors that could so easily have been noticed and fixed before publishing. The DM, IMO, definitely does not like to be told it has its facts wrong.
 
^^Well, my experience with dailymail's coment is quite short: I only commented once and was to answer a question asked in another comment about a fact somehow relevant to the piece but that DM convenientely forgot to mention. Guess what, my comment was never published.
In any case, I've read comments that disagree with the piece they wrote and have been published, so despite the fact that the rules to publish or not a comment are quite subjective and the moderators may be biased, I don't think it's true that they just publish things that agree with what they wrote
 
My experience has been very different. My comments though were not agreeing or disagreeing with the article, they were to correct obvious factual errors that could so easily have been noticed and fixed before publishing. The DM, IMO, definitely does not like to be told it has its facts wrong.
Among the most recent comments I made was one on a Richard III article. DM wrote that Richard III's descendants were traced down and their DNA was compared to that of their ancestor. I pointed out that Richard III had no descendants (that we know of) and that the DNA sample was in fact taken from the female-line descendants of his sister, Anne of York. The comment was published and the error - corrected.

I guess experiences do vary and I probably have just been lucky. :)
 
DM comments everyone seems to outraged at everything. Almost every article I read the comments are negative. :ermm:
 
Among the most recent comments I made was one on a Richard III article. DM wrote that Richard III's descendants were traced down and their DNA was compared to that of their ancestor. I pointed out that Richard III had no descendants (that we know of) and that the DNA sample was in fact taken from the female-line descendants of his sister, Anne of York. The comment was published and the error - corrected.

I guess experiences do vary and I probably have just been lucky. :)

I think that was because you pointed out a salient and important fact critical to the nature of the story that the DM felt it necessary to correct. Awhile ago, I made a comment on the forum regarding a DM headline that was incorrect (can't remember the details), and the correction was made, obviously because staff read our comments here. That was an interesting experience!

Now had Richard's son Edward lived and had children and further progeny, then we're talking descendants!;)
 
Last edited:
Okay....time to move on from the discussion on commenting on the Daily Mail or other newspapers.


 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom