Agree 100%!! How can be judged if a photographer used a questionable tactic or not, and that concerns any royal family.
If posters are afraid that they could look at pictures of George and Charlotte that have a questionable source should check on the respective event and refrain from opening the photolinks if the event in question wasnt on the official calendar.
To suggest that 'general news' photos of the Cambridge kids should be banned on this forum (if they are not clearly violating law) is simply ridiculous.
It all boils down to what do the
individual reader do?
Scenario: Pics of George playing in a playground. Obviously taken from some distance. Say like looking at him from 25 meters. There are a couple of other children there in the pics and a woman, perhaps a nanny.
In none of the pictures seem George or anyone else the least bit aware of the photographer.
There is no mentioning in the captions that his parents were present. There is no direct mentioning of where or when the pics were taken.
Credit is some photo agency.
You have the opportunity to comment on the pics. (Moderated).
You have an e-mail address to the media.
Now, what do
you (not just Duke of Marmalade and Lumutqueen) do?
Stop buying the magazine/newspaper - alternatively visiting the website? At least for a period.
Write and voice your protest?
Let the media have the benefit of doubt?
Nothing, because George is fair game and no one was hurt?
Nothing, because there is nothing to do about it anyway. Such pics will always surface somewhere anyway, so why not look at them?
Nothing, but fully support (in mind) if someone else write a protest or call for the media to be reported.
- You see my point?
Second scenario:
A similar media, newspaper, magazine, website, have on a number of occasions shown adverts of among other things smaller children wearing, shall we say, pretty adult underwear. - What would you do?
And if you do anything now and was passive in the above scenario, how come? - The children are unknown. No one was hurt. So what's the big deal?
You see what I mean?
It's down to the individual reader. If enough of us, in one way or another, object, the media bosses will be forced to react.
For those who think a reader boycott is hopeless, look no further than to the Sun and the city of Liverpool.
There have been plenty of official photo-ops with George. Personally I can't see why I should have to look at pics of him playing in backyard. He's a child! There is a limit to how many interesting things he will be up to.