The British Royal Family

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Enjoy your trip Jsizzle.

One thing that really bothers me is how hateful MM has been to the press pertaining to the BRF. Calling them toxic to a friend is one thing but to the world is not acceptable. I would be ashamed of myself if I called my famous 'toxic' and then stuck my hand out for my money. They are not a young couple. One of them is pushing 40 and has been down the marriage route a couple of times.
 
Tony1902 said:
@Lilibet I am adoring your quantum post.
@No Angel: I’ll wager you three tiaras, including the angry-mcstabby sidewalk grating one if you can produce a better string theory post than Lilibet.

And considering Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle: I really do despair when photos of Andrew laughing surface on the Daily Fail. Is it just me?

As a character in LOTR once said, and I am para-phrasing, I think it was Samwise’s papa, well folks, if you believe everything the Daily Fail says, with no logically corroborating evidence, you’ll not want for moonshine. Maybe I should retreat to Feyneman’s discussions with a glass of red wine. It’s early here, but it’s happy hour in Barcelona. And JMO, MOO, in my own universe with the Dancing Wu Li Masters doing the funky chicken, or a butterfly in The Dream of the Red Chamber dancing on a sasanqua leaf, “...each set of players exits and another one enters, each seeing the illusory for the real,” or such.

Honestly, I think Prince Harry, and dang I looove those blue suede shoes (can anybody source their provenance?)
looks weary just having to leave his son as a new papa and hash out the rest of his life. I look worse than that just feeding my menagerie. Grace, people, please just show him a bit of grace.
Click to expand...

I was surprised to see another photo of Andrew, pictured with the Queen this time.

The Queen seems very forgiving when it comes to her family's 'bad moves'. There was a lot of negative press years ago about some actions by Sophie Wessex back when she was working in the civilian world, and the Queen is now photographed so much with Sophie and has managed to put the mistakes in the past and keep them there. There have been stories about Andrew being rather 'awkward' in his roles as ambassador, and then the more recent interview with Andrew on TV, and the Queen just seems to be saying "he's my son"...

It's strange really how anyone thought the Queen would be mean to Harry and Meghan over this change.

Something else that bothered me was how it was all presented in the papers. At first the Queen, Charles and William were supposed to be so shocked because they had no idea Harry had all these plans. Then it turned out that the Queen and the others knew for months....and the Queen has confirmed in her statement that she had known for months. But the mud from the initial press outrage seems to have stuck.

The media is supposed to be there to present the news, but sometimes they really seem to 'make' the news themselves, and I really worry that it can have an effect on how 'we' see things. And, then any time that the press is on the outs with a particular royal, how does it affect the stories about that person? At the moment the Mail is preparing to go to court against Meghan, and they seem to be pulling Thomas Markle into their 'side' against Meghan. To preserve the 'reputation' of the Mail, it's in their best interests to have a public furore against Meghan, and all of this has given them the perfect opportunity to make her look awful with just a little spin and a few 'sources tell us'.

After that debacle with the phone tapping (that Piers Morgan was involved in in some way) it's in the tabloid press's best interest to make Meghan look bad right now in order to justify the tabloid behaviour. I think it's a bit dangerous how they have this position as the 4th estate, and they can do wonders with it by keeping us informed and outing things that need to be outed.....yet other times they can and do use it for their own selfish reasons.
 
Jsizzle said:
Thank you! So what about Archie? As for his “last name” for school? In Canada are they allowed to be legally called “Harry, Duke of Sussex” on their passports, legal
Docs etc?
Click to expand...

Harry and William used the surname "Wales" at school. William's children use the name "Cambridge" at school. The surnames deriving from the dukedoms. There's a long tradition of the families of dukes to take that surname over their 'real' surname if they don't have another name (if the first son of a duke is given the subsidiary earldom then that earldom can form his surname).

Archie has an official surname that he was registered with at birth, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor. So Archie would have that surname on his passport, and at school could use either that name or Archie Sussex. Presumably if he goes to school in Canada then he'll use the surname from his birth certificate.

The other royals (not the Queen as she doesn't have an official surname) can use Windsor or Mountbatten-Windsor when they need to use a surname, for instance for a passport, and which one they use depends on their position in the Royal Family.

In giving Archie the surname Mountbatten-Windsor, it wasn't a gift to Prince Philip, it was just the surname that he'd be expected to use given his position at birth as a male-line descendant of Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth II.
 
I know hindsight is 20/20 but whatever happened to settling differences privately and maintaining some level of respect (or at least act like you have some respect). This Megxit, name calling, etc seems so teen-ager-ish. Hopefully, all parties will settle into their roles and be respectful in the future.

Other than the 6 week break, has Harry ever spent much time in Canada??
All the Canadians I have ever met were all so nice and pleasant. He should be surrounded with nice people. I just worry about Harry. He seems to be giving up his whole life for the unknown. He just looks so bad.
 
Last edited:
Amonet said:
I was surprised to see another photo of Andrew, pictured with the Queen this time.

The Queen seems very forgiving when it comes to her family's 'bad moves'. There was a lot of negative press years ago about some actions by Sophie Wessex back when she was working in the civilian world, and the Queen is now photographed so much with Sophie and has managed to put the mistakes in the past and keep them there. There have been stories about Andrew being rather 'awkward' in his roles as ambassador, and then the more recent interview with Andrew on TV, and the Queen just seems to be saying "he's my son"...

It's strange really how anyone thought the Queen would be mean to Harry and Meghan over this change.

Something else that bothered me was how it was all presented in the papers. At first the Queen, Charles and William were supposed to be so shocked because they had no idea Harry had all these plans. Then it turned out that the Queen and the others knew for months....and the Queen has confirmed in her statement that she had known for months. But the mud from the initial press outrage seems to have stuck.

The media is supposed to be there to present the news, but sometimes they really seem to 'make' the news themselves, and I really worry that it can have an effect on how 'we' see things. And, then any time that the press is on the outs with a particular royal, how does it affect the stories about that person? At the moment the Mail is preparing to go to court against Meghan, and they seem to be pulling Thomas Markle into their 'side' against Meghan. To preserve the 'reputation' of the Mail, it's in their best interests to have a public furore against Meghan, and all of this has given them the perfect opportunity to make her look awful with just a little spin and a few 'sources tell us'.

After that debacle with the phone tapping (that Piers Morgan was involved in in some way) it's in the tabloid press's best interest to make Meghan look bad right now in order to justify the tabloid behaviour. I think it's a bit dangerous how they have this position as the 4th estate, and they can do wonders with it by keeping us informed and outing things that need to be outed.....yet other times they can and do use it for their own selfish reasons.
Click to expand...

It's a little different when people in the royal family use the news media for publicity for personal profit & wealth. Any corporation or individual involved in promoting themselves in order to sell something knows they have to manage their image. It's a two way street with the news media - you can't expect them to act as your personal advertising tool. Traditionally they're there to report on news. They all offer paid and "earned" media (free news media coverage for people or groups who benefit from promoting a news story), but they still report the news. Otherwise, they're little more than an advertising catalogue, right?

Every famous person who uses PR experts knows you have to manage your image. If H & M don't like the way they're being portrayed in the news media, I guess they need to manage their image better. MM should know this, she's been raised in that environment of fame, publicity, etc. since she was a small child. LOL, kids there probably learn how to write a press release by the time they graduate middle school. Her father worked in the business, she grew up around the entertainment industry on a daily basis.
 
If privacy is truly what they seek, I think they can accomplish that. It will take time & maybe the need to ‘retrain the brain’, but I do believe it is achievable.
Think of some famous or big name stars we know little about. Warren Beatty & Annette B. Do we even know what their kids look like? Or Caroline Kennedy S., she managed to raise her family without intrusion of press. Just two of hundreds of examples.
 
JaneEyre said:
15 Things You Didn't Know About Princess Beatrice

Princess Beatrice played a lady-in-waiting in the 2009 film, The Young Victoria, starring Emily Blunt as Queen Victoria.

I didn’t know this! Other interesting tidbits about her at his link.
Click to expand...
Oh, including this, that she goes by Bea York on her LinkedIn, which ties back to the discussion of royal last names for passports and such.

While Princess Beatrice is a grandchild of the Queen (the fifth, after Peter Phillips and Zara Tindall, Prince William, and Prince Harry), and can often be seen at important royal family events, she doesn’t carry out duties in the Queen’s name (nor does her sister, Princess Eugenie). Rather, “Bea York,” as she is known on LinkedIn, has a full-time career in business, working at Afiniti.com. Here’s more about the everyday jobs of royal family members.
 
Betty P said:
It's a little different when people in the royal family use the news media for publicity for personal profit & wealth. Any corporation or individual involved in promoting themselves in order to sell something knows they have to manage their image. It's a two way street with the news media - you can't expect them to act as your personal advertising tool. Traditionally they're there to report on news. They all offer paid and "earned" media (free news media coverage for people or groups who benefit from promoting a news story), but they still report the news. Otherwise, they're little more than an advertising catalogue, right?

Every famous person who uses PR experts knows you have to manage your image. If H & M don't like the way they're being portrayed in the news media, I guess they need to manage their image better. MM should know this, she's been raised in that environment of fame, publicity, etc. since she was a small child. LOL, kids there probably learn how to write a press release by the time they graduate middle school. Her father worked in the business, she grew up around the entertainment industry on a daily basis.
Click to expand...
Somehow I can't see Princess Anne using a PR firm to manage her image....
She just shows up for work, takes her job seriously, represents the Queen impeccably and is never heard complaining about her lot.
No one needs to manage her image at all IMO.

Princess Anne pays tribute to Scottish RNLI heroes | Daily Mail Online
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 68 more.
Total: 2,825 (members: 69, guests: 2,756)

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
2,756
Total visitors
2,825
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,112
Messages
17,963,388
Members
228,686
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top