Eugenie and Jack: Wedding Suggestions and Musings Thread


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Whatever you think about this royal wedding it has touched a nerve. I peaked at the Fail comments section and it's going to near 3000. The bulk is about the cost of a wedding for a ninth in line to the throne and the perception of the UK taxpayer is picking up the tab for the broadcast. Is ITV as privately owned station?
 
Whatever you think about this royal wedding it has touched a nerve. I peaked at the Fail comments section and it's going to near 3000. The bulk is about the cost of a wedding for a ninth in line to the throne and the perception of the UK taxpayer is picking up the tab for the broadcast. Is ITV as privately owned station?

That's a low number for the York Haters section of the DM comment section. Please, you can't take them seriously and all they do is spew hate.
 
Last edited:
That's a low number for the York Haters section of the DM comment section. Please, you can't take them seriously and all they do is spew hate. I mean they are the people that make up a rude nicknames like MeAgain (Meghan) and Beetroot (Beatrice)

OT but I would say you can't take anything from Daily Fail seriously:whistling:.

To me, streaming it on the YouTube channel would be the most logical and best solution. 😄

Agree. They can fully utilize it. I think BRF YouTube channel had streamed H&M wedding too?
 
That's a low number for the York Haters section of the DM comment section. Please, you can't take them seriously and all they do is spew hate.

Pretty much. Honestly who cares about the DM comment section? It is a troll cease pool where they attack every member of the royal family.
 
:previous: This is true. I looked up "troll" in the dictionary and it said "Daily Mail commentators" in black and white.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. 👅
 
  • Like
Reactions: ACO
the perception of the UK taxpayer is picking up the tab for the broadcast. Is ITV as privately owned station?

You are exactly right, it is perception. DM comments on ALL Royal related articles are littered with incorrect perceptions because the article does not represent the true fact, never would because that wouldn't get enough reads.

In the current DM article about The Queens trip to church this morning there is no less than 6 comments on the first page relating to the cost of royals, all royals. Those commenter are unaware that they only pay for The Queen and the DOE. But if the DM told them that, then it wouldn't be interesting now would it?

ITV is not publicly owned like the BBC.
 
This, IMO, is why the Palace may be quiet happy for the wedding not to be televised. Probably quite wrongly, the public are not supportive of Andrew & his family and see them as living a high life on taxpayers money and allowing the wedding to be televised for all to see won't be the best PR for the Palace and the royal family as a whole.
 
This, IMO, is why the Palace may be quiet happy for the wedding not to be televised. Probably quite wrongly, the public are not supportive of Andrew & his family and see them as living a high life on taxpayers money and allowing the wedding to be televised for all to see won't be the best PR for the Palace and the royal family as a whole.

The public will see it no matter what. While a lot of stations won’t cover it like the Sussex wedding, they will still cover it as news. Just not preempt hours of regular coverage for it. The best way to handle this is just let the chips fall where they may at this point. Stream it on YouTube and if any station wants to carry it live, let them. Don’t make too much of a stink about it is the best way.

So I guess BBC won’t air anything the royal family wants them to like I was told earlier in this thread?

Eugenie really isn’t ‘so far down the line’. If we want to nick-pic, Harry is closer to Eugenie and Beatrice in the line of succession than he is to his brother.

All the senior royals will be at Eugenie’s wedding as will a host of celebrities and maybe even a foreign royal or two. Chris Ship from ITV keeps repeating there will be cameras. Of course American networks aren’t coming over but they don’t have to. If you have a smartphone, you’ll be able to watch the wedding.
If you want to nick-pic about it, Harry is going to be a son of a monarch and Eugenie won’t. And Harry is a working royal while Eugenie isn’t. Those two factors make a big difference. At this point, Eugenie is seen as far enough down the line where pomp and pageantry of a royal wedding is seen as unnecessary. While there is always some that sees royal events as unnecessary, it’s far greater for the York girls than the Wales boys. Even though all are HRHs and grandchildren of the monarch. That’s just the reality of it. And I do think popularity, or the lack thereof, for the York family play into it. Not saying I agree it, but that’s the reality here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know the public will see it anyway, and I said that myself earlier up in this thread, my point is having a big "Eugenie Royal Wedding show" on BBC1 might just be a headache for the palace PR people anyway when a large majority of people don't care and a small minority actually dislike the Yorks. Better to let those people who want to go online and watch it do just that.

The BBC will air whatever it feels will be of interest and be worth the investment for the public it serves. Eugenie is not (no matter what others may feel ) a "core" member of the RF who's wedding is an important event for the country (TBF even Harry's probably wasn't) so the BBC doesn't have to show it unless there is enough public desire for them to do so.
The BBC have a good relationship with the RF and always broadcast various programmes for major royal events including those with plenty of insider royal access to suggest a good relationship. Look at the Elizabeth at 90 – A Family Tribute and The Coronation which saw the Queen come to closest to an interview we have ever seen. I don't see how any one can suggest the BBC and Royal Household don't have a good relationship.
 
I'm one of the biggest shouters for this wedding, but I do not think it should be televised. The best idea is to stream it on the royal youtube channel.
 
The BBC will air whatever it feels will be of interest and be worth the investment for the public it serves. Eugenie is not (no matter what others may feel ) a "core" member of the RF who's wedding is an important event for the country (TBF even Harry's probably wasn't) so the BBC doesn't have to show it unless there is enough public desire for them to do so.
The BBC have a good relationship with the RF and always broadcast various programmes for major royal events including those with plenty of insider royal access to suggest a good relationship. Look at the Elizabeth at 90 – A Family Tribute and The Coronation which saw the Queen come to closest to an interview we have ever seen. I don't see how any one can suggest the BBC and Royal Household don't have a good relationship.

Not saying they don’t have a good relationship. But some have said BBC will air whatever the royal family wants it to air. Which is obviously not true.
 
Actually the family’s relationship with ITV has been a lot stronger than with the BBC lately. Ever since that BBC documentary a few years back that wasn’t really too flattering, the Firm has been going more with ITV. The upcoming Commonwealth documentary is being done by ITV

But the DM story about ITV ‘stepping in’ to save the day I think is just another way of having a go at Andrew. I think the DM probably knows there will be ITV coverage. I don’t think Chris Ship would be tweeting as much as he’s been doing, if he doesn’t have a pretty good idea about it.

Right from the beginning of this thread, the opinion was it wouldn’t be televised. Then we starting getting rumours it will. Apparently an Australian network will cover it as well. It’ll be be on YouTube. Anyone who wants to watch, can do so.

I don’t think BP particularly cares if CNN or NBC cover it. That was always highly unlikely anyway.
 
Most Australian stations won’t cover it the same way either. They’ll cover it, but that doesn’t mean preempt regular programs for hours and air the wedding as a special.
 
I think for the Queen, first and foremost, it’s her granddaughters wedding. There’s obviously interest enough for 100,000 requests for 1200 spaces inside the castle grounds. The people of Windsor are excited. Hello Canada had a special on Eugenie’s wedding and the mayor of Windsor said everyone is getting pumped for it.

That it’s not going to be broadcast around the world is frankly Of little concern for Eugenie. I don’t think she’s too bothered by the fame game.
 
Last edited:
Most Australian stations won’t cover it the same way either. They’ll cover it, but that doesn’t mean preempt regular programs for hours and air the wedding as a special.

I think it's obvious that, yes, most won't but there is one that is already going to be broadcasting the wedding live-Channel 7. And even if they are the only ones, than I think that's fine because it fall's in line to how I see this wedding, one step below Harry's and one above the Phillips'.
 
Last edited:
In some shape or form there will be coverage in Canada as well. We always go for stuff like this. It may just be a feed from ITV, but I think either CBC or Global will have it on.
 
Good point, Osipi! :flowers:
My sister-in-law has been interested in the BRF for many years, but in a recent tour of BP, she couldn't tell Beatrice from Eugenie in the photos.
They simply haven't been given enough press coverage.

That surprises me, since I have been interested in the BRF since I was a child and (from photo books of their events) I could pick out all the more minor members of the family, including Lady Davina and Lady Rose Windsor and the Earl of Ulster, etc.

Not saying at all that I don't believe you; I'm just surprised that Beatrice and Eugenie are so little-known by many people even in Britain, probably because I follow the royals closely.

If you want to nick-pic about it, Harry is going to be a son of a monarch and Eugenie won’t. And Harry is a working royal while Eugenie isn’t. Those two factors make a big difference.

While this is true and I agree people see Harry as more important for these reasons, Harry will likely be a son of a monarch for only a short time. After that his status will be more similar to Princess Margaret.

In some shape or form there will be coverage in Canada as well. We always go for stuff like this. It may just be a feed from ITV, but I think either CBC or Global will have it on.

I hope there is coverage. I like Eugenie and would watch this wedding if I can, although it is on a weekday.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well the tabloids are having a go with the York wedding. They are making Andrew look like dad-zilla of the bride. He allegedly went into the BBC offices and demanded Eugenie's wedding be televised, or must be televised. They are aware of the sentiments of the cost of the wedding and trying to gin up a new royal wedding scandal.
 
That surprises me, since I have been interested in the BRF since I was a child and (from photo books of their events) I could pick out all the more minor members of the family, including Lady Davina and Lady Rose Windsor and the Earl of Ulster, etc.

Not saying at all that I don't believe you; I'm just surprised that Beatrice and Eugenie are so little-known by many people even in Britain, probably because I follow the royals closely.

Well, when I say that she has been interested for many years, I'm afraid her interest is limited to the Queen, Charles, and his line. She knows quite a bit about them but very little (and cares less) about the extended RF.

I suspect this is true of a great many other people, at least here in the USA.
 
Well the tabloids are having a go with the York wedding. They are making Andrew look like dad-zilla of the bride. He allegedly went into the BBC offices and demanded Eugenie's wedding be televised, or must be televised. They are aware of the sentiments of the cost of the wedding and trying to gin up a new royal wedding scandal.

Where did you read that? That sounds like something a tabloid made up to make Andrew look ridiculous. It doesn't sound true to me.
 
Where did you read that? That sounds like something a tabloid made up to make Andrew look ridiculous. It doesn't sound true to me.


It's hogwash...it's a tabloid article. The same article said Stella McCartney designed Meghan's wedding dress...tells you how accurate they aren't.


LaRae
 
Please note that this thread has had a tidy up. If people wish to discuss the costs of royal security or debate the relevancy of the Monarchy, they may do so in the correct threads.
 
Well, when I say that she has been interested for many years, I'm afraid her interest is limited to the Queen, Charles, and his line. She knows quite a bit about them but very little (and cares less) about the extended RF.

I suspect this is true of a great many other people, at least here in the USA.

You are correct about most all in USA. Some were interested in Harry and Meghan's wedding because of Meghan being American and of mixed race. They were mostly the younger people. Other than that I am the only person I know [family including my 20+ yo grandchildren and all my friends] that showed the least interest in the event. I had one woman my age group that stated how nice the Queen looked at her age still when she saw picture in media! That was it. I can understand Canadian citizens being vastly interested as the BR are part of their culture and government, but actually nothing generally to American citizens. They don't understand my interest but I always was vastly interested in history which they don't even teach in many American school systems anymore. My own grandchildren can't even name the Queen's 4 children much less their children or other lesser royals. Forget other countries royal families. They could care less. So this wedding will not touch the lives of many millions here in America. JMHO
 
You are correct about most all in USA. Some were interested in Harry and Meghan's wedding because of Meghan being American and of mixed race. They were mostly the younger people. Other than that I am the only person I know [family including my 20+ yo grandchildren and all my friends] that showed the least interest in the event. I had one woman my age group that stated how nice the Queen looked at her age still when she saw picture in media! That was it. I can understand Canadian citizens being vastly interested as the BR are part of their culture and government, but actually nothing generally to American citizens. They don't understand my interest but I always was vastly interested in history which they don't even teach in many American school systems anymore. My own grandchildren can't even name the Queen's 4 children much less their children or other lesser royals. Forget other countries royal families. They could care less. So this wedding will not touch the lives of many millions here in America. JMHO

And why would it? It's not the royal family of the US. I don't think many Americans for example knew about the weddings of the various crown prince(sse)s in Europe when they got married while those people are far more important as (future) head of states compared to the youngest child of a queen's third child.
 
You need to be watching @ITV in any case. But especially on 12 October! WHo knows what we might show ...

Via Chris Ship ITV Twitter

Looks like there will be some coverage :whistling:
 
Last edited:
Did people think there wouldn't be coverage? I think the arrivals, departures, and the carriage procession was always expected to be aired. It always is. The main question is will the wedding itself be aired/streamed to watch. I hope it is on the official Royal Family YouTube channel. Makes the most sense but if ITV is doing it than great!
 
There are also additional comings and goings happening on the Saturday 13th October, as well, with a big evening party planned I understand. I doubt any pictures will be released.

I believe the theme is based on the FUN FAIR with rides, but how accurate this is time will tell.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Channel 7 here in Australia are advertising that they will have 'the only cameras inside the church' for Eugenie's wedding. They are calling themselves 'The Royal Channel'.

I haven't seen that add before - it is part of the add for 'The Queen and the World' which they are showing this coming Sunday night and they also have the 'Harry and Meghan - First 100 Days' on their schedule.
 
Channel 7 here in Australia are advertising that they will have 'the only cameras inside the church' for Eugenie's wedding. They are calling themselves 'The Royal Channel'.

I haven't seen that add before - it is part of the add for 'The Queen and the World' which they are showing this coming Sunday night and they also have the 'Harry and Meghan - First 100 Days' on their schedule.

Here's the ad itself :
Isn't this what happened with Harry's wedding too though? A few weeks before the wedding only PBS said they were covering it, but than the week before others started announcing their coverage. Of course, it won't be even close to as many channels for Eugenie's, but if there will be cameras inside the chapel from the Aussies than I do think ITV will take advantage of it.
 
Here's the ad itself :
Isn't this what happened with Harry's wedding too though? A few weeks before the wedding only PBS said they were covering it, but than the week before others started announcing their coverage. Of course, it won't be even close to as many channels for Eugenie's, but if there will be cameras inside the chapel from the Aussies than I do think ITV will take advantage of it.

No...both US and UK and AUS channels announced they were sending teams and covering the wedding beginning in March for the Sussex wedding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom