The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/)
-   -   Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall: Visit to the US - November 1-8, 2005 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/prince-of-wales-and-duchess-of-cornwall-visit-to-the-us-november-1-8-2005-a-7662.html)

Lady Marmalade 11-16-2005 11:20 AM

We have tabloids all over the place in the U.S., and they are just as bad as the British tabloids. ;)

tiaraprin 11-16-2005 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon
Diana 'courted' the cameras and publicity, she set out to get all the attention. IMO. So yes it was her fault. Camilla loves her husband and is happy to be there to support him.
I'm not surprised to hear you have the gutter press in Florida as well.

Gee, it is the gutter press if it is in the USA. What about the British gutter press?? I have heard much worse about them then our rags!

BeatrixFan 11-16-2005 11:24 AM

It makes one wish there was a Luxembourgish-style inviolable clause in our non-existant constitution.

pollyemma 11-16-2005 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiaraprin
Gee, it is the gutter press if it is in the USA. What about the British gutter press?? I have heard much worse about them then our rags!

I agree! most of the lower orders of the US press are still on a higher place than the brits.

Lady Marmalade 11-16-2005 11:29 AM

The tabloid British press is just vicious in many more respects...very appalling in their ways to get headlines and pictures..

The U.S. tabloids are not perfect by any stretch...but...

pollyemma 11-16-2005 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
The tabloid British press is just vicious in many more respects...very appalling in their ways to get headlines and pictures..

The U.S. tabloids are not perfect by any stretch...but...

sorry, should have specified that I meant tabloids, i was definitley dubbing the Economist "gutter press."

Elspeth 11-16-2005 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiaraprin
Gee, it is the gutter press if it is in the USA. What about the British gutter press?? I have heard much worse about them then our rags!

I don't think Skydragon was denying that the British tabloids exist and that they practise some rather questionable journalism. The comment had to do with the gutter press existing in Florida too. Please note "too."

Quote:

I agree! most of the lower orders of the US press are still on a higher place than the brits.
Well, not that I have much respect for the Mirror, the Sun, or even the Mail, but I'd say they operate at a considerably higher standard than rags like the National Enquirer.

The British and American papers are arranged differently. Most of the British papers are national in scope - the Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independent, Mail, Mirror, and Sun (and others that I might have forgotten) are distributed nationally. Most major US newspapers (apart from USA Today) are local and are based in one of the big cities. The British local papers are almost entirely focussed on local news, whereas papers like the Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, and Chicago Tribune are a mixture of local and national news but mostly don't tend to be available to buy in other parts of the country. Because the major British papers are available countrywide, they tend to be targetted at different demographic (rather than geographic) groups. That's why some are full of "hard" news and some are more full of gossip.

It isn't that one way is necessarily better than others but that the different sizes and histories of the two countries means that the newspapers have developed differently. It'll be interesting to see what the Internet does to papers in both countries.

pollyemma 11-16-2005 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Well, not that I have much respect for the Mirror, the Sun, or even the Mail, but I'd say they operate at a considerably higher standard than rags like the National Enquirer.

I think we're a little confused about semantics. by "higher place" I didnt mean that the national enquirer prints more truthful information. libel laws in the US are much more relaxed than in Britain. so there's a lot more innacurate printed in US tabloids.

I think the general tone of british tabloids is ruder and less respectful. like their photoshopping a pic of Camilla to make her look like a horse. that sort of thing happens in the US too, of course, but I dont think its quite as pervasive as in the UK.

Skydragon 11-17-2005 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
I don't think Skydragon was denying that the British tabloids exist and that they practise some rather questionable journalism. The comment had to do with the gutter press existing in Florida too. Please note "too."
.

Thank you Elspeth.:)

I was saying that any paper that judges someone on their looks, is IMO, the gutter press, whether they are in the UK, Russia or America. To me tabloid = gutter press.

Quote:

Lady Marmalade said.
We have tabloids all over the place in the U.S., and they are just as bad as the British tabloids
I had never realised how sensitive some Americans could be!:eek: so I will say it again,

Any paper that judges someone on their looks is, IMO, the gutter press, whether they are British or American.

Lady Marmalade 11-17-2005 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon
Thank you Elspeth.:)

I was saying that any paper that judges someone on their looks, is IMO, the gutter press, whether they are in the UK, Russia or America. To me tabloid = gutter press.



I had never realised how sensitive some Americans could be!:eek: so I will say it again,

Any paper that judges someone on their looks is, IMO, the gutter press, whether they are British or American.

How sweet of you... but not sensitive in the least bit....especially in discussing these things.. ;)

Skydragon 11-17-2005 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaan
Why can't we just let C & C alone.Diana is dead and there is no way of bringing her back - it is a shame that their marriage Di and Charles' didn't work out but why only blame him? She was no angel or saint and don't forget she had more than her share of lovers also. If camilla had been a young and beautiful 2nd wife I don't think anyone would have cared either way but because she isn't people just want to make remarks abt her etc. Let them be.no one has the right to judge people and I think that charles has always been the ' bad ' guy and i think that he can't be as bad as all that.If she makes him happy, let camilla make him happy something that beautiful and enchanting diana was unable and couldn't do.

Thank you for a well thought out post IMO.:)

Lady Marmalade 11-17-2005 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon
Thank you for a well thought out post IMO.:)

Ironic...considering all the judging going on in the Charles, Camilla, Diana thread next door...by everyone....including me.

Skydragon 11-17-2005 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by love_cc
Very glamourous, but... What I meant is to see more smiles from Camilla on these photos. Some journalists are quite mean to make some strange photos.

We are at least getting some better pictures now.:)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises