I started writing this post earlier but James beat me to it. We appear to have two entirely different takes on the same situation. Here is my opinion.
Prince Harry, possible future King of England, was snapped drunk, in the buff, with another naked human being (female) a few weeks ago and the world was outraged, for about 5 whole minutes. Google coined it in, and The Sun cashed it in, yet, with a little bit of dignity, aka keeping quiet, and a lot of outside support and humour, the whole furor died a record breaking public death in a matter of days. There was no weeping, no rending of garments and most certainly no reference to Harrys’ poor dead Mum.
Fast forward to the present day and the whole universe is up in arms. Why?, because, even after Harrys’ recent ‘indecent exposure’, The Duchess of Cambridge was still foolish enough to strip off in public, and got snapped doing so. Or, as Timmy so wonderfully put it, Skinny Sloane Flaps Baps*. Yes it was in public. She was outside, and that makes it public. Just because you can’t see them doesn’t mean they can’t see you. I can’t see satellites in space but my house is still on google earth.
It can’t be nice, having your boobs splashed all over some cheap, chavvy magazine, but hey, them’s the breaks. If you are in the public eye, that eye doesn’t blink, let alone sleep. It will watch you 24hrs a day, just waiting for you to fuck up. Well lit, nicely orchestrated photos of you and your Hubby, relaxing at home, will make any magazine, and their reporter, a nice steady income. Long distance, fuzzy shots of you and your crack pipe/shaved head/boobs is what get’s that same reporter a second place in Tuscany and the Magazine in question first place on Google.
I bet every single British paper, and MSN journo, that has declared their ‘utter outrage’ over these snaps had a
letch copy, or even several, of said magazine, long before they went to print. I also bet that sales for that magazine will be through the roof this month, because regardless of the faux public outrage, everyone will want a copy, just to see what all the fuss is about. Not to mention all the people that will be googling, trying to get a peak for free. It’s human nature.
Anyhooters, back to my confusion. How can St James Palace get it soo right the first time, and yet soo very, very wrong the second?. They have decided this time around to sue the magazine. For what, breach of privacy?. Too late amigos. That train left the station when The Sun published those pictures of Harry and you all kept a dignified silence. More importantly, why the hoohah over Kate, and not over the third in line to the throne?. Enter, stage left, the all enduring ghost of Princess Diana (yawn). Cheezus that woman hangs around worse than a bad fart.
Poor Kate can’t seem to do anything without some lazy arse idiot in the MSM comparing Her to Diana. She can’t even wear a scarf and visit a mosque without some twat opining about how doing so ‘evokes strong memories of Princess Diana’. No it bloody doesn’t. My daughter wasn’t alive when Diana visited her Mosque. In fact she wasn’t even alive when Diana died. Her first reaction, on seeing those photos was ‘Wow, she looks so beautiful’. My daughter is a huge fan of Kate, as are most of her friends.
My first reaction was, ‘Oh for fucks sake, not Princess fucking Diana, again’. I had to explain, yet again, who Princess Diana was, and her connection to Kate. My daughters response was ’So, She’s dead, right?’. ‘Yep’ I replied, ‘Bummer……..OMG, can you do my hair like that, with the pearls and everything, it’s totally lush?’. There is no way, every time Kate brushes her teeth, drinks a cup of tea or selects an outfit that Wills pipes up with ‘OMG, you’re soooo like my dead mother it’s proper fucking spooky’. So, why do the press keep doing it?. And why, now, after soo long, have St James Palace suddenly decided to try and invoke the spirit of the very dead, but never fucking forgotten Diana as some kind of protective shield against the press?. They have managed to ignore all and every attempt by the press, so far, to foster or encourage any kind of ongoing
rivalry competition between the very much alive Kate and and the very much dead, but still alive in our heart of hearts, Diana. And then they threw it all away.
A strongly worded Palace statement compared the photographs to the ‘worst excesses of the Press and paparazzi during the life of Diana’.
They make no mention of the worst excesses of Diana, and how, even though She gave up the right to be Queen, She was less happy to give up the front pages. If you marry the future King of England, the whole world is going to be watching you. It’s in the job description. How you deal with that is up to you. Kate has kept a low profile, carrying out her duties as the future Queen of England with dignity and style, in quite possibly the busiest year for Royals ever known to man. Diana courted the press. Even during her marriage She was never without a few candid shots of her playing the perfect Mother or taking some time out. After the divorce She used every type of media to wage a one woman war on The Royal Family. There was not a bitter, nasty stone left un-turned in Dianas’ unending and all consuming quest to remain front page news, long after a more dignified woman (Sarah Ferguson for example) would have faded into the back ground. She fed herself, willingly to the wolves, and in the end, her bitterness, vanity and desperate quest to remain front page fodder got her killed.
I think it is a great shame, that having spent so many years, quietly undoing the damage Diana did when She was alive and, even worse, when she died, The Royal Family have fallen for the oldest trick in the book. Whilst trip trapping over the bridge, a troll jumped up. Instead of simply ignoring it and carrying on their way, they stopped, had a bit of a panic and then made the all to familiar mistake of feeding it. All in the vain hope that this would appease the Troll and allow them to carry on, peacefully, with their journey. Everyone knows what happens when you feeds the Trolls. They get a taste for it.
*I think this may possibly be the funniest blog post title, ever.
Filed under: Politics & economics