The Panorama Interview: November 20, 1995

[camelot23ca]

I think that Diana was manipulated certianly but Im not all that surprised as there have been hints about this story for some time. And If she had been dead agains the idea of an interview I think she would have ignored his activiites but she did want to talk publcily about her marriage...just as she allowed Peter Settelen to discuss private matters and tape her doing this..
And as Bashir is apparently now ill, Im surprised why it has suddenly become a big issue

Diana was a complicated woman. On one hand she wasn’t a rookie new to the ways of the British media. She also actively engaged with the media and used it to further her own image and goals. The Diana persona/phenomenon wasn’t foisted on her unwillingly and it couldn’t have been perpetuated to the extent it was without her help.

On the other hand I think she overestimated her ability to control her own narrative, or rather, she assumed the narrative would always be hers, no matter how big it got. And while she was a sophisticated and savvy person in many ways, I do think she was mentally vulnerable and not especially psychologically robust.

So I don’t think Diana would have believed all the claims Bashir allegedly made in the lead up to the interview. And even if she did believe things like the bank statements, it’s not like going on air for a major interview is the only choice available when a journalist shows you some sketchy documents. She did the interview because she wanted to, full stop.

But Bashir and other journalists around Diana at that time must have known she had issues and to set out to deliberately play on her weaknesses by lying and falsifying documents is disgusting. I wouldn’t think it would be surprising to anyone old enough to remember
the British press in its heyday pre-Leveson inquiry, but it’s disgusting nonetheless.

 

[Denville]

Yes I agree their behaviour was horrible but her brother Charles who introduced her to Bashir soon became aware that Bashir was a dodgy character and Im sure he would have advised her to stay out of it...but she wanted to do the interview. but it is rather upsetting to see how credulous she was...
it seems that the rationale was to try and convince her that the queen was ill.. etc and that everyone was spying on her, so as to dissuade her from seeking advice from her aides or the RF....
but some of it was so fantastical that it is weird that she apparnelty believed it.

 

[Curryong]

The BBC is a publc service company.....

And is regarded as the national broadcaster since its radio service before the war. It's not a company, it's a public corporation and in that sense is very unlike CNN, Fox etc.

 

[Denville]

And is regarded as the national broadcaster since its radio service before the war. It's not a company, it's a public corporation and in that sense is very unlike CNN, Fox etc.

Indeed.. and yet their journalists used a lot of dirty tricks ot try and lure Diana into the interview....

 

[MARG]

I wondered why this suddenly burst on the scene like an ugly boil and there we have it, the 25th Anniversary of Diana's death and little brother Charles has a yen to be a headliner again. Wow! Gee whizz! Golly gosh! It's only taken him 25 years expose all the skulduggery behind his sister's infamous 'Panorama' interview by a BBC journalist he introduced her to.

They are trying to make a splash as there is "no" Royal news due to Covid so Earl Spenser has decided to try and rewrite history and portray her as the same naive girl who married Charles evilly taken advantage of by the dastardly BBC and its journalist, Martin Bashir.

At the time of the Panorama debacle Andrew Morton's book had already been published much to the horror or the BRF and the ideas she participated was pretty widely suspected. The BBC and Martin Bashir made her an offer and she accepted. She was in total control of her destiny and I personally believe the only misjudgment she made was believing she was untouchable, sort of the royal version if believing her own press.

Having the Queen respond to such an airing of the dirty laundry by demanding she and Charles divorce immediately was a rude shock. I don't believe it occurred to either she or her brother that the repercussions could or would be quite so dire. In retrospect they should have, which is why I find Earl Spencer's stirring the pot quite perplexing. Not only will dragging all this through tabloids not endear him to either William or Harry, it could cause an irreparable schism.

 

[Tarlita]

Yes I am perplexed as to why this is coming out now. I believe the BBC has been on the nose for some time now. The Princess would secretly meet with Richard Kay about press issues so I really do believe she would have asked him what his thoughts were if she were to do the interview with Bashir. It would be interesting to know what Mr Kay has to say about it now.

 

[MARG]

I should have thought all of this so called 'new' information is rubbish. The BBC is supposedly the TV version of the DM and Paul Burrell, Diana's rock, is marking the occasion by saying he was covering up for Prince Charles.
What a load of rubbish but the allure of the headlines seem to be calling him as loudly as Charles Spencer.

 

[Pranter]

Earl Spencer posted days ago about this on his Twitter account, you can go read about it there. Richard Kay made comment on his own Twitter as well.


LaRae

 

[Denville]

Yes I am perplexed as to why this is coming out now. I believe the BBC has been on the nose for some time now. The Princess would secretly meet with Richard Kay about press issues so I really do believe she would have asked him what his thoughts were if she were to do the interview with Bashir. It would be interesting to know what Mr Kay has to say about it now.

I don't know if Kay would be likely to advise her to do the interview.. Depends on how much of a friend he was to her as opposed to a journalist. As a journalist he might want to help a fellow journo get a scoop but he would probably have been suspicious that dirty tricks were involved. It seems that Charles S advised her against having anything further to do with Bashir. I think if Diana consulted friends, they would have advised against it.. and so would her brother.. but she was in an unhappy paranoid frame of mind and she was probably unsure whom she could trust even with her closest friends or family. And she had an itch I think to reply to Charles' interview by a public TV appearance where she could say her say directly as opposed to Morton's book where she had to appear uninvolved.
But Bashirs behaviour whatever Diana's feelings or actions, was still beyond the line... and shows the BBC up...
He clearly tried to dissuade Diana from consulting people by implying taht so many poeple in her life were out to get her and that the RF were not on her side... so she would not talk to royal aides or any members of the RF. It problaby made her more suspicous of people and more ready to want to hit out at the RF in her interview....

 

[Rayal]

Sometimes it takes a while for a crime to raise its ugly head. The assumption that Charles Spencer just one day woke up and decided to talk about this is pure rubbish.

Charles Spencer, "Many people are, quite understandably, asking why I’ve waited till now to come forward with the truth about how the
@BBCPanorama
with my sister came about. While I knew that Martin Bashir used fake bank statements and other dishonesty to get my sister to do the interview,...what I only found out 2 weeks ago, thanks to journalist Andy Webb’s persistent use of the Freedom of Information Act, is that the BBC also knew. Not only knew about it, but that they covered it up."

 

[camelot23ca]

Charles Spencer, "Many people are, quite understandably, asking why I’ve waited till now to come forward with the truth about how the
@BBCPanorama
with my sister came about. While I knew that Martin Bashir used fake bank statements and other dishonesty to get my sister to do the interview,...what I only found out 2 weeks ago, thanks to journalist Andy Webb’s persistent use of the Freedom of Information Act, is that the BBC also knew. Not only knew about it, but that they covered it up."

But the BBC carried out their own investigation into Bashir’s conduct and the bank statements back in the 90’s. It was an internal review but I don’t think the results were hidden from the public. Regardless, if Charles Spencer knew about the fake bank statements and everything else he claims Bashir told his sister and found it so appalling, why didn’t he make the call for an apology and a public investigation right after the interview? Or, even better, why did he not notify the BBC of what their reporter had done immediately after the meeting with him and Diana and insist they take action at the time?

If I found a reporter’s actions so appalling and had my volatile sister’s best interest at heart i wouldn’t let things go at, “this guy’s a crank, Diana, sorry I wasted your time.” I’d use my substantial influence to force the BBC to shut their man down, and if they didn’t I’d go public at the time.

Of course, that assumes Spencer is being honest when he says he didn’t know his sister would go on to do the interview. There’s also the possibility that he knew Diana was going to do the interview, that she was going in with her eyes wide open, and that she wouldn’t have looked kindly at all on her brother doing anything that might have prevented the interview from happening.

 

[Rayal]

A person can speculate and make assumptions a hundred times over but until you have the evidence sitting right in front of you, only then does it make it possible to make any definitive statements about wrong doing. 20 plus years ago it was only hearsay and that is a good way to set yourself up for slander after making a public statement. A 'cover-up' is just that and I doubt the BBC would have announced such a blatant disregard of British law aimed at their own organization. It wouldn't make any sense. Enter the 'Freedom of Information Act' and even then it takes a while to do the research. When did Charles find out these rumors back then? I have no idea but if I researched it long enough I might have you an answer in a few years..(making my point).

 

[Durham]

An interesting interview I heard this morning with a former BBC graphic designer - from about 1:34 in to 1:44 :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000p6vy

 

[Denville]

But the BBC carried out their own investigation into Bashir’s conduct and the bank statements back in the 90’s. It was an internal review but I don’t think the results were hidden from the public. Regardless, if Charles Spencer knew about the fake bank statements and everything else he claims Bashir told his sister and found it so appalling, why didn’t he make the call for an apology and a public investigation right after the interview? Or, even better, why did he not notify the BBC of what their reporter had done immediately after the meeting with him and Diana and insist they take action at the time?

If I found a reporter’s actions so appalling and had my volatile sister’s best interest at heart i wouldn’t let things go at, “this guy’s a crank, Diana, sorry I wasted your time.” I’d use my substantial influence to force the BBC to shut their man down, and if they didn’t I’d go public at the time.

Of course, that assumes Spencer is being honest when he says he didn’t know his sister would go on to do the interview. There’s also the possibility that he knew Diana was going to do the interview, that she was going in with her eyes wide open, and that she wouldn’t have looked kindly at all on her brother doing anything that might have prevented the interview from happening.

I think that Charles S knew that Diana was keen on saying something to the public, and was willing to be persuaded or cajoled into doing the interview. She kept it very secret, because she was paranoid and because she probably knew that many of her friends and family and aides would try and persuade her not do to do something like that.. but odds are that if he DID try to intervene and persuade her against it, he'd only make her more determined.

 

[AC21091968]

No 10 Downling St backs the independent inquiry into how Martin Bashir secured or got hold an interview with Diana, Princess of Wales.

The Prime Minister Spokesman said: "The BBC’s director-general has committed to investigating the matter fully and this is the right course of action. As a public service broadcaster we expect BBC journalists to adhere to the highest standards"

No 10 backs BBC inquiry into how Martin Bashir won interview with Diana
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...tin-bashir-won-interview-with-diana-5865brf3j

No 10 gets behind BBC inquiry into how Martin Bashir won the famous interview with the Princess
The two-part ITV documentary broadcast earlier this week brought a fresh – integral – voice to the table, that of Matt Wiessler, the graphic designer and alleged scapegoat in the BBC ploy
https://www.tatler.com/article/mart...er-princess-diana-tell-all-panorama-interview

 

[Sandy345]

This was already discussed in Morton's 2004 book Diana in Search of Love.

 

[AristoCat]

Doesn't anyone hold Diana responsible? She never had to do that interview or an other interview and it is clear that she wasn't some innocent teenage ingenue who was manipulated by an older shyster. She was active in participating in it.

 

[Denville]

She was in some ways still a teenager in that she'd married into the RF at 20 and been protected and sheltered all through the years when she was growiing up. When she broke away from the RF, in her early 30s, she was still very inexperienced in some ways, trying to learn how to date, meet men, make her own social life and friends and she made a lot of mistakes. I do feel that she was partly responsible for the interview as I have said. I felt that she wanted to do it, and if it hadn't been Bashir SOMEONE would have gotten the scoop. That doesn't alter the fact that the BBC and Bashir acted unethically and dishonestly, in hopes of persuading her to be interviewed. Faking documents, lying to her.
I can't see how they can be defended...
They knew that by then she was very unhappy, and a little unstable and they pushed her buttons by telling her lies in order to put some pressure on her....

 

[Kataryn]

Doesn't anyone hold Diana responsible? She never had to do that interview or an other interview and it is clear that she wasn't some innocent teenage ingenue who was manipulated by an older shyster. She was active in participating in it.

Yes, she surely was. But I think Diana (and Charles Spencer) believed the BBC to be honest with them. And to give Diana a fair interview, one that looked out for her as well as searching for the "big scoop". Especially as the BBC did not need to go after the big scoops back then and use all the tricks in the book (and then some) to get the biggest of them all back then. So IMHO Diana trusted the BBC and was sold out by the way the interview went. She was paranoid after her seperation from Charles and Martin Bashir fed into that and used it for himself, never for Diana. The interview (and what went into getting it and the reactions to it) lost Diana the goodwill of the Royal family, her marriage, her title, her feeling of security as part of the family, her belief in the police security offered - and in the end her life, as no police protection officer saw to it that she closed her seatbelt that night in Paris.



And all that because Diana was lied to and given the faked incentives to make her side of the story known. And the BBC knew it and celebrated it as a big scoop. Unbelievable.

 

[Denville]

That's true but I think that by the 1990s the BBC was hardly a beacon of integrity and a brilliant broadcast service any more... Their glory days were gone. All the same, it is horrible that they fed into Di's paranoia and alienation from the RF.. which did push her furhter "outside" and the interview itself pushed the queen to insist on a divorce.

 

[Rayal]

That's true but I think that by the 1990s the BBC was hardly a beacon of integrity and a brilliant broadcast service any more... Their glory days were gone. All the same, it is horrible that they fed into Di's paranoia and alienation from the RF.. which did push her furhter "outside" and the interview itself pushed the queen to insist on a divorce.

This does explain why she began to be paranoid regarding her closest of friends and members of her family. The slightest thought that someone was leaking information drove her to cut some of them out of her most private thoughts. This was mentioned in Burrell's, Warfe's, and also Morton's second edition book after her death. I had a hard time understanding the change in her demeanor towards people she trusted until now. Here she was forth coming with all the things that was happening behind close doors and Bashir sitting there like a Cheshire cat grinning at all the revelations that are coming his way and the possibility of being dishonest and getting away with it. This isn't over with yet.

 

[Denville]

She was paranoid already, and Bashir knew what things to say and do to make her more so...

 

[camelot23ca]

Doesn't anyone hold Diana responsible? She never had to do that interview or an other interview and it is clear that she wasn't some innocent teenage ingenue who was manipulated by an older shyster. She was active in participating in it.

Of course the decision to do the interview was ultimately Diana’s. I actually don’t think she was tricked into doing anything she wouldn’t have otherwise done. But there were other people in the background who obviously didn’t help; primarily the journalist, but also, for example, her brother, who introduced her to Bashir and then went on his merry way, (frankly I’m not sure why Charles Spencer wants to get into all of this again - IMO he doesn’t come out of it looking well).

I get that now that the issue has blown up they have to do the investigation, which will no doubt end with a mea culpa and a slap on the wrist for the BBC. But,of the two people who could potentially give substantive information, one is dead and it sounds like the other may not be that far off. And this all happened decades ago. So to me it looks like Charles Spencer, never one to shy away from the public eye, has taken advantage of an opportune moment to once again depict himself as the defender of Diana’s honour. And the investigation itself is political theatre, the kind of thing that politicians and the media like to do from time to time to show the public how honourable and accountable they are.

 

[Denville]

I dont see that Charles Spencer "went on his merry way." He realised Bashir was dodgy and said so to Diana, didn't he? Di kept her doig the interview very secret, and Charles S problaby knew that whatever she wanted to do, trying to persuade her against it, was likely to be counter ;productive.

 

[camelot23ca]

I dont see that Charles Spencer "went on his merry way." He realised Bashir was dodgy and said so to Diana, didn't he? Di kept her doig the interview very secret, and Charles S problaby knew that whatever she wanted to do, trying to persuade her against it, was likely to be counter ;productive.

I think there are two possibilities with Charles Spencer.

The way he describes it he introduced Bashir to Diana, came to the realization during the conversation the three of them had that Bashir was lying and unreliable, briefly told Diana just that right after they met Bashir and that was it. Given who his sister was, the issues she faced and the potential consequences of going ahead with the interview, I would argue Spencer shouldn’t have immediately assumed he and Diana were on the same page. Maybe it will come out that he and Diana did have follow up discussions and she misled him or shut him down but based on what Spencer has said so far I think he owed her more. Both as her brother and as the person who introduced her to Bashir.

The second possibility is that, as you say, he knew Diana and knew she’d do what she wanted. So, fair enough, he let it be, but if he knows Diana did the interview because she wanted to then him jumping on the BBC decades later is a bit rich. Especially since, as I said before, he and Diana had all the info they needed to force an investigation at the BBC as soon as they left the meeting with Bashir.

 

[AristoCat]

Of course the decision to do the interview was ultimately Diana’s. I actually don’t think she was tricked into doing anything she wouldn’t have otherwise done. But there were other people in the background who obviously didn’t help; primarily the journalist, but also, for example, her brother, who introduced her to Bashir and then went on his merry way, (frankly I’m not sure why Charles Spencer wants to get into all of this again - IMO he doesn’t come out of it looking well).

I think that if the courtiers had known what was about to go down, they would have moved heaven and earth to prevent it. Even still, no one anticipated that Diana would openly suggest that Charles be skipped over or that she had had an affair with the riding master (that has resulted in endless jokes about Harry's parentage), or the bulimia, or rather a lot of other things. I remember reading that Charles wasn't aware that the Andrew Morton book would be an assault on him as a father/man/husband and no one likely would have anticipated that Diana would go as far as she did. Yet she did it and it makes me angry that everyone still sees Diana as a duped ingenue despite her age and life experience.

 

[Denville]

I think there are two possibilities with Charles Spencer.


The second possibility is that, as you say, he knew Diana and knew she’d do what she wanted. So, fair enough, he let it be, but if he knows Diana did the interview because she wanted to then him jumping on the BBC decades later is a bit rich. Especially since, as I said before, he and Diana had all the info they needed to force an investigation at the BBC as soon as they left the meeting with Bashir.

I dont know why he is pushing for the investigation but its possible that he feels now it has a better chance of a success, because of the times we are in.
I think that he didn't realise that Diana was going to go ahead.. she did keep it very secret, and thought that when he said that he thought Bashir was dodgy Diana agreed with him. Diana was very good at giving people the impression that she agreed with them and then going on her way and doing what she wanted to do...
And if Charles had uneasy feelings that Diana wasn't completely done with Bashir, i do think no matter what he said, even if he had made a big effort to dissuade her, she would do what she wanted in the end. (after all most of us do). but it doesn't alter the fact that even if Di were willing to do the interview, she was lied to and tricked and not just little lies, big ones with forgeries involved. Bashir could have probably persuaded her given time, without the use of these lies but he did them.. and in doing so, he increased Di's paranoia and instability.. and pushed her towards complete alienation from the RF.

 

[Sandy345]

I think that if the courtiers had known what was about to go down, they would have moved heaven and earth to prevent it. Even still, no one anticipated that Diana would openly suggest that Charles be skipped over or that she had had an affair with the riding master (that has resulted in endless jokes about Harry's parentage), or the bulimia, or rather a lot of other things. I remember reading that Charles wasn't aware that the Andrew Morton book would be an assault on him as a father/man/husband and no one likely would have anticipated that Diana would go as far as she did. Yet she did it and it makes me angry that everyone still sees Diana as a duped ingenue despite her age and life experience.

Diana said what some journalists have said, when Charles becomes King his ability to speak out on political and other matters would be discouraged. As Diana put it the "top job" would put limitations on him. She never said he was incompetent. I don't understand why these "jokes" about Harry's parentage took place, I don't remember many of them--since Harry was 2 when DIana and Hewitt started their affair. Harry was conceived when CHarles and Diana were staying together at royal apartments during the Christmas season and was a planned child. He also looks more like CHarles and Philip than william does, who favors the Spencers. It should be recalled that over a year before the Bashir interview, Charles made embarrassing revelation in the interview, forcing the PB divorce. He also got heavily criticized for his authorized biography based on his own confessions to DImbleby including having a go at his own parents. He also humiliated Diana confessing he never loved her.

Diana was suspicious and rightly so. I would not call her "paranoid."

 

[Sun Lion]

Prince William has released a statement regarding the "Panorama" interview.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-54996143

 

[AC21091968]

Chris Ship interviewed Rosa Monckton (Diana's friend) after Prince William released a statement on the Panorama interview.

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
We interviewed @MoncktonR today after Prince William made a rare intervention in the ongoing BBC Panorama/Princess Diana/Martin Bashir allegations.
Rosa, Diana’s friend, is convinced she totally changed in 1995 after being told stories about spying, payments & plots against her.
8:36 AM · Nov 20, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
Prince William is, according to his mother’s friend, @MoncktonR, doing what a “son would and should do” which is to “stand up for his mother in such circumstances” Down pointing backhand index @itvnews
8:42 AM · Nov 20, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

Chris Ship @chrisshipitv
Replying to @chrisshipitv
Martin Bashir cannot respond to the allegations about how he secured the famous Princess Diana interview as he is on sick leave from his current job as the BBC’s Religious Affairs Editor after heart surgery.
The BBC has launched an independent investigation headed by Lord Dyson.
8:47 AM · Nov 20, 2020·Twitter for iPhone​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1329539085405478917