The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #21  
Old 07-19-2018, 10:27 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,238
Of course not. Charles was the "star" of the BRF when Diana married him so she expected to get attention as his wife, and she got considerable attention as his girlfriend and fiance. But when things really kicked in Diana and her image became an industry in and of itself and far surpassed the considerable attention that Charles got as a bachelor prince.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-21-2018, 08:33 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
Of course not. Charles was the "star" of the BRF when Diana married him so she expected to get attention as his wife, and she got considerable attention as his girlfriend and fiance. But when things really kicked in Diana and her image became an industry in and of itself and far surpassed the considerable attention that Charles got as a bachelor prince.
Its hard to say. I dotn think she expected such crazy attention and admiration. At 19 or 20, I don't think she had any idea of the magic quality she had of attracitng the public and the camera "loving her". I think she felt that whatever attention she got would be as C's Princess, and a bit to do with her own looks and her own manner with the public.
Se said in her Martin Bashir interview that she was told that the attention would calm down after she was married, ro then after she had had a baby or 2.. (I may not be remembering exactly), but the idea being that it would cool down in a few years. But it didn't. And later on, she got more sophisticated at charming the public and the press and using her looks and charm deliberatley to win over the public, and push Charles out of the limelight...
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-21-2018, 11:52 AM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla View Post
Did Diana have any idea that her position as The Princess of Wales would be followed as thoroughly by the media?
Absolutely not, because the sheer intensity of attention to her was like nothing that had come before. Not all because of her, mind you.

There were some really big changes in media ownership, tabloid saturation, etc. that roughly coincided with her entry into the royal family. One of the big factors was the Australian Rupert Murdoch buying publications on multiple continents and pushing them to aggressively cover lighter, more gossipy subjects. His success selling those issues created more intense focus on them from his competitors, as well, and his getting the most bang for his buck by sharing stories among his publications in various countries pushed gossipy stuff to be more international (not that it only British readers were interested in the BRF before, but there hadn’t been quite the saturation outside of the UK). And then, just as that new tabloid era was really hitting an ultracompetitive stage, she was introduced. The tabloids were in an arms race and here was this pretty blank slate of a royal fiancée for them to just run with and take advantage of, so they did to an unprecedented degree.

I really don’t think anyone could have anticipated the level of hysteria that sprung up around her because it was the result of a “perfect storm” of circumstances that hadn’t happened before and won’t likely happen again. And I think one of the (many) rifts between her and the rest of the BRF is that they looked at the changing media behavior and adjusted their engagement with reporters into a more locked-down, controlled mode while she instead adopted a method of trying to utilize the attention for good (and, as things broke down more and more, to use it for herself), which only ramped up the interest even more.

But no royal bride prior to her had experienced that crushing level of interest. So how could anyone have anticipated that she would?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-02-2018, 12:00 AM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,305
The first criticism of Diana that I remember was in 1982, although I do remember a story that came out on her honeymoon about killing a stag and yelling at Prince Charles because she really didn't want to be out shooting.

Tina Brown's Vanity Fair article came out some time before Charles and Diana's Tour of the USA in 1985. After that article was published, they did the televised interview with Alastair Burnett in an effort to speak against it and other negative stories that were in the press.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post

AFAIR Tina Brown's article 'The mouse that Roared' in Vanity Fair, inferring that Diana was a woman of steel who was running Charles's life, sacking his staff etc, was the first sign that any journalist wanted to break the mould, and that was in 1986, I believe.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-02-2018, 01:12 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,045
if she killed a stag why would she be "yelling at Charles that she didn't want to be out shooting?" doesn't seem to make sense..
and was she being criticised for shootng a stag or for yelling at Charles>?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-02-2018, 04:50 PM
Missy-'s Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: The Beautiful PNW, United States
Posts: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
if she killed a stag why would she be "yelling at Charles that she didn't want to be out shooting?" doesn't seem to make sense..
and was she being criticised for shootng a stag or for yelling at Charles>?
The story was that she wasn't keen to kill the stag, that she felt Charles pressured her into doing it, thus the outburst.

Mermaid1962, your post reminded me of those days so much, perfect synopsis. There was a time in the beginning where Diana got lots of criticism, from firing staff to getting rid of Charles' lab Harvey. Charles and HM had to intervene with the press at one point iirc.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-02-2018, 05:01 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,305
The Queen met with newspaper editors late in 1981. I can't remember whether it was her Press Secretary or Private Secretary who spoke to them first. Then HM arrived and chatted with them informally. Well, as informal as the Queen gets in those situations.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-02-2018, 05:02 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,305
For both IIRC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
and was she being criticised for shootng a stag or for yelling at Charles>?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-03-2018, 01:08 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
The Queen met with newspaper editors late in 1981. I can't remember whether it was her Press Secretary or Private Secretary who spoke to them first. Then HM arrived and chatted with them informally. Well, as informal as the Queen gets in those situations.
That wasn't because of criticism of Diana, rather the contrary. It was because the Press were so interested in Di, that she was feeling pressured by their constalty being around...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-03-2018, 01:12 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Missy- View Post
The story was that she wasn't keen to kill the stag, that she felt Charles pressured her into doing it, thus the outburst.

Mermaid1962, your post reminded me of those days so much, perfect synopsis. There was a time in the beginning where Diana got lots of criticism, from firing staff to getting rid of Charles' lab Harvey. Charles and HM had to intervene with the press at one point iirc.
I've heard very various reports about the stag... so who knows what the truth is.
And from what I can remember about the story breaking, it was a bit of a shcok to the public that Diana might take part in blood sports.. so there was criticism of her for that. But I don't remember any story of her "yelling at Charles because he pressured her to do it." It sounds unlikely that he would do that.
She got a bit of criticism for firing staff etc, but that was more the occasional bad story that every royal gets when the "Oh how wonderful she is" mood wears off a bit...By and large her press coverage in the first years was pretty much Postive.. she could do very little wrong...
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-03-2018, 04:18 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,305
You're right, Denville. I was responding to the comment about the Queen meeting the press, not that the comment was specifically about criticism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
That wasn't because of criticism of Diana, rather the contrary. It was because the Press were so interested in Di, that she was feeling pressured by their constalty being around...
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-03-2018, 04:57 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,045
It was unprecedented because the queen didn't usually do tings like that, but the Press had been very intrusive on Diana, because she was so popular. the public loved stories abouther, no matter how silly or banal.. so she was feeling pressured...
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-05-2021, 02:27 PM
Rayal's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Liberty, Missouri, United States
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
The idea that Charles Spencer abandoned his sister in her hour need has become an accepted part of the canon. I am so happy that he finally stepped up and exposed it for the lie that it is

The media have had it in for this man ever since he lashed out at them when Diana died. Good on Earl Spencer for fighting back.

Going back in time when I first heard of this I really didn't know much about the Earl. I knew about his eulogy as I had watched it live, and I had thought he had it spot on about his sister Diana and especially the media. However over time as I had taken a great interest in him, and as the media put out their lies something didn't seem to fit. To me he seemed like a good person, and I had read a couple of his books and knew he was 'the smart one' as Diana had put it.


So now after reading this new account of trash media, fake news, or yellow journalism it bolsters my negative opinion of these rotten media outlets. Yes, all for the mighty pound/dollar to feed their machine, they take the truth and sprinkle it with lies, assumptions, and accusations. There are plenty of customers who love this phony drama, shame on them as well.


So when I wonder what entity is out there that can force them to tell the truth and stop all this nonsense, there really isn't anyone. The politicians have to walk on egg shells around the media or they don't get reelected.



Its a vicious machine, and now what hurts them the most is the 'TRUTH'. Its too bad that it has taken this long for the truth to finally come out.
__________________
2021 and beyond..."Stay happy, stay healthy, and stay safe."
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-05-2021, 03:23 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 11,337
The problem is that Diana DID play dangerous games with tabloid journalists and paparazzi. She leaked stories, giving the paps a heads up on where she would be, and even feeding them falsehoods when it suited her.

She was not completely blameless in nurturing the beast that eventually helped to destroy her.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"If your dreams don't scare you, they are not big enough" Sir Sidney Poitier
1927-2022
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-05-2021, 03:37 PM
Rayal's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Liberty, Missouri, United States
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
The problem is that Diana DID play dangerous games with tabloid journalists and paparazzi. She leaked stories, giving the paps a heads up on where she would be, and even feeding them falsehoods when it suited her.

She was not completely blameless in feeding the beast that eventually helped to destroy her.

Yes, I think she was naive at first but as time went on through constant aggravation she did start to play head games with them, and basically tried to use them when possible good or bad. Both her butler Paul Burrell and her personal body guard Ken Warfe in their books alluded to her doing this. Ken Warfe even warned her, same as others, that she could be playing with fire.
__________________
2021 and beyond..."Stay happy, stay healthy, and stay safe."
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-14-2021, 03:52 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
The problem is that Diana DID play dangerous games with tabloid journalists and paparazzi. She leaked stories, giving the paps a heads up on where she would be, and even feeding them falsehoods when it suited her.

She was not completely blameless in nurturing the beast that eventually helped to destroy her.
I disagree. She experienced the same thing Jackie Onassis did. The paparazzi were ruthless--Jackie did go to press who were sympathetic to her but took those who stalked her especially Ron Galella to court.
. Diana spoke to journalists in the media that she felt sympathetic to her to get "her side out". She had to get her side out since there were stories leaked about her to the media
(as I recall very well). She certainly did not "court" paparazzi and cameras pursuing her-especially since they hounded and and swore at her when she did not cooperate and pose for them. I remember how protective she was on a ski trip with her sons and walked right up to a camera blocking the lens with her hand. The night in Paris, the Fayeds employees tried to divert the paparazzi, Diana did not have anything to do with that. She did not nurture the ones who chased her on their motorbikes. Nor the ones who swore at her.

Stunking Regarding the seatbelt, Diana had always buckled up. I always found it odd that one night she did not buckle up. Her sisters said the same thing. There was a bodyguard now amnesiac that can't explain why he let Henri Paul get behind the wheel nor did he check the seatbelts. Diana should not in any way be held responsible for that tragic night. There were Unfortunate circumstances like her bleeding to death and being placed in a slow ambulance that bypassed another hospital 10 minutes away and taking a long time to get her on the operating table, was a major cause of her death. Had she been in another country, it might have been that she got coptered out to a hospital STAT. Some heart specialists like Dr. Barnard did make comments that she could have been saved had she gotten to tht ambulance in time.

Diana used the press to get her side out, otherwise all people would hear was the accusations against her by those not in sympathy with her.

Diana's death had nothing to do with her seeking out people in the press. They were people like Whitaker and Kay who would not pursue Diana in motorbikes. In fact in that famous eulogy Charles Spencer blamed the paparazzi and called Diana the "hunted." He blamed them clearly.

Diana and her brother DID have a falling out over the cottage. She wanted the cottage he offered her but he changed his mind. She was hurt. They did make up though.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-14-2021, 05:55 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 11,337
Would you mind providing examples of when Jackie Kennedy Onassis made late night phone calls to her favorite tabloid journalists providing personal info to them? Or gave them heads up on where she and her children would be dining or vacationing? Or confided intimate details of her distress at JFK's many infidelities to tabloid favorites and the pressure she felt after marrying into the Kennedy clan?

Diana did all of the above and more. And unlike JBK she never took a paparazzo to court for harrassment.

Diana wanted to live on the Althorp estate in the wake of her divorce and separation. Her brother initially agreed then withdrew the offer fearing that the paps would descend and create a circus. He did not want the intrusion upon the privacy of his young family. In retrospect I can't say that I blame him.

He did offer his sister the use of another Spencer property ...the 16th century Wormleighton Manor House which Diana rejected.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"If your dreams don't scare you, they are not big enough" Sir Sidney Poitier
1927-2022
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-14-2021, 06:20 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 674
I would not know that re: Jackie. But she did confide in journalists and writers and did give interviews--privately
. It was a different age as well.

Diana obviously did not want the paparazzi near her children. There are photos to prove it. She and the boys were on ski trips and she'd spot the paparazzi and tell them to leave it's all out there. She and Charles would allow photographs of the children and set this up ahead of time. Like the photos of their vacations together for example.

Diana may well have taken them to court had she lived, She had a small window of life after the divorce. It was an evolving situation.

Her brother should have been more judicious and considered the conditions before he made it seem he was offering her the cottage. Diana does not to be blamed exclusively for this. He also contributed to the problem but they did resolve it. Diana for whatever reason did not want the other cottage. I have no idea why and she never said publicly. But it was the place she would live and it was her choice if she did not like it as much. I don't think she rejected it on a "whim."
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-14-2021, 07:29 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 11,337
The difference is that on the very rare occasions when Jackie confided in journalists it was because they were personal friends of hers. And it was always with the caveat that if any information ever made it into the public domain, the journalist friend would be cut out of her life. Forever.

That is what happened to former Newsweek editor and Washington Post legend the late Benjamin Bradlee. He wrote a book about his friendship with Jackie and JFK "Conversations With Kennedy" in which he repeated intimate details of what Jackie told him about the assassination among other things.

On the other hand Diana talked to her friends in the press mainly with the intention of getting her "side" out there and to influence public opinion in her favor.

I am not shading Diana at all. I devoured everything about her and have never been quite as interested in the BRF since her death.

But the hard fact is that she was the architect of a great deal of her problems with the tabloids.

May she RIP.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"If your dreams don't scare you, they are not big enough" Sir Sidney Poitier
1927-2022
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-15-2021, 11:51 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Queens Village,, United States
Posts: 674
I think that was the only recourse Diana had. She was getting flak from those who were critical of her and her husband's friends like Nicholas Soames were out there in the media. The problems with the tabloids was like a which came first scenario. It seems to me her critics were out there first going to the tabloids and she responded. So the onus should be put on those who first leaked those stories. IMO anyway. The royals have been enmeshed in issues with the tabs since time immemorial. This was hardly the first incidence of it.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Madeleine and Chris: Media and Public Opinion LadyFinn Princess Madeleine, Chris O'Neill and Family 741 12-20-2015 08:30 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 04:06 PM




Popular Tags
#uae #abudhabirullingfamily 18th birthday abdullah ii albert prince consort all tags archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian austria british royal family cadwallader camilla castile charles congo coronation crown jewels danish royal family denmark dubai expo duchess of kent duke of cambridge duke of sussex gemstones guzman henry viii history india ingrid-alexandra ivrea japan japanese imperial family japan history jordan royal family king edward iii king henry iii king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers louis mountbatten maria ii monarchist movements monarchists mongolia mountbatten nara period need help noble families norway crown princely couple official visit orleans-braganza pedro ii politics portugal prince andrew prince charles prince of wales queen margrethe ii queen mathilde queen maxima queen victoria samurai spanish royal family state visit st edward tokugawa uae


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:00 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2022
Jelsoft Enterprises
×