Kensington Palace issues letter on publication of unauthorized photos of Prince George

Kensington Palace issues letter on publication of unauthorized photos of Prince George

This morning, August 14, Kensington Palace issued an open letter about the publication of unauthorized paparazzi photos of Prince George and has requested both the media and the public to stop purchasing them. The letter comes directly from Prince William, Kate Middleton, and Prince Harry‘s Communications Secretary, Jason Knauf, and is written in first person.

George's 1st Birthday Photo

Kensington Palace is issuing this open letter now after one “disturbing but not at all uncommon” incident last week though there have been “an increasing number of incidents of paparazzi harassment of Prince George” in recent months. Kensington Palace hopes this letter will “inform the public discussion around the unauthorised photography of children” and that “those who pay paparazzi photographers for their images of children will be able to better understand the distressing activity around a two-year old boy that their money is fuelling”. As well, KP wants “the readers who enjoy the publications that fuel this market for the unauthorised photos… to understand the tactics deployed to obtain these photos”.

Knauf described the incident last week which prompted this letter:

    “A photographer rented a car and parked in a discreet location outside a children’s play area. Already concealed by darkened windows, he took the added step of hanging sheets inside the vehicle and created a hide stocked with food and drinks to get him through a full day of surveillance, waiting in hope to capture images of Prince George. Police discovered him lying down in the boot of the vehicle attempting to shoot photos with a long lens through a small gap in his hide.”

Other incidents in recent months include:

    • on multiple occasions used long range lenses to capture images of The Duchess playing with Prince George in a number of private parks;
    • monitored the movements of Prince George and his nanny around London parks and monitored the movements of other household staff;
    • photographed the children of private individuals visiting The Duke and Duchess’s home;
    • pursued cars leaving family homes;
    • used other children to draw Prince George into view around playgrounds;
    • been found hiding on private property in fields and woodland locations around The Duke and Duchess’s home in Norfolk;
    • obscured themselves in sand dunes on a rural beach to take photos of Prince George playing with his grandmother;
    • placed locations near the Middleton family home in Berkshire under steady surveillance

[Kensinton Palace press release]

William and Kate “have enjoyed sharing an increasing number of photos of their children and look forward to continuing to take them to more public events as they get older” but they “feel strongly that both Prince George and Princess Charlotte should not grow up exclusively behind palace gates and in walled gardens. They want both children to be free to play in public and semi-public spaces with other children without being photographed.”

Basically this letter spends a good amount of time playing on the emotions of other parents in the hopes of getting them on William and Kate’s side.

I take issue with this line from the letter: “[William and Kate] are pleased also that almost all reputable publications throughout the Commonwealth – in particular Australia, Canada, and New Zealand – and in other major media markets like the United States have adopted a similar position.”

And here’s why: Australia and the United States are two of the biggest publishers of these unauthorized photos. In fact, all of the unauthorized photos I have seen have come from either Australia or the United States, save one which came from Germany (but was still People, a US based publication).

So what is KP talking about that OZ and US don’t publish the photos? The photos showed up in People Magazine for heaven’s sake!! Publicist friendly/publicist approved People Magazine!

Prince George 2nd birthday pic

Here are some responses on Twitter from royal reporters, photographers, and commentators which I would like to share here (both questioning Kensington Palace and agreeing with them).

Richard Palmer, Royal Reporter at the Daily Express:

    1) “It can’t be nice for the Cambridges to think every time their children go out someone could be watching but does that go with the territory?”
    2) “there are regular phone pics taken in the royal parks etc. Should we all have to turn our backs if we see the royals?”
    3) “I think Kensington Palace needs to explain in what circumstances a free press should be able to take photos of the Cambridge family off duty”
    4) “The palace’s control freakery has exacerbated the problem. eg Most regular royal photographers were banned from Charlotte’s christening.”
    5) “Are we saying nobody’s kids should be photographed anywhere in the world if out in public having fun? Or is it special treatment for royals?”
    6) This Tweet is in response to someone asking about W&K not complaining about polo photos: “Yes, they are sort of semi-official. They don’t want to be seen to have arranged a photocall but they’re not going to complain.”
    7) “Should newspapers and magazines have run pictures of Mia Tindall, daughter of Mike and Zara, having a tantrum?”

Mark Cuthbert, Royal Photographer:

    1) This is in response to a tweet about KP praising British media for not publishing pics: “what about praise for the official photographers who play the game and yet are the only people excluded from the christening?”

Tim Rooke, Royal Photographer for REX:

    1) “A couple of decent photocalls a year like the Dutch… or Danish Spanish Swedish would reduce demand of pap pics”

Dickie Arbiter, former press spokesman for the Queen, current royal commentator:

    1) “Wake up everyone.Yes it’s about paps and pics with long lenses; It’s about greed over decency but importantly it’s about child protection”
    2) “William couldn’t protect his mother, from the paps in August 1997, which is why he is going all out to protect his family no matter the cost”

Victoria Arbiter, royal commentator in US (and daughter of Dickie):

    1 & 2) “In their quest to provide as “normal” a childhood as possible I applaud W&K’s desire to allow their children to go beyond palace walls but …if pix are taken in a “public” place they have very little recourse. The threat to security is the greater issue here.”
    3 & 4) “Just asked husband if he knew who Pss Estelle was. He had no clue. Euro style photo ops not the answer for the BRF. Stricter rules &… …harsh consequences the only deterrent.”

Prince George kissing Princess Charlotte taken by Kate Middleton

I don’t know what to make of this whole thing. I have posted about these “unauthorized photos” before, as have other blogs. Though I know some refuse to based on the principle of not posting paparazzi photos. Obviously security is an issue, but some of these reporters/photographers have raised valid questions and points. I’ll have to think about my stance on this issue. What say you guys?

Prince George Christmas Photo 3

Photos: John Stillwell/AFP / Mario Testino via Kensington Palace / Duchess of Cambridge, Kensington Palace / Kensington Palace

212 thoughts on “Kensington Palace issues letter on publication of unauthorized photos of Prince George

  1. Well, looks like William has finally responded to all of the pictures. Part of me thinks this is in response to questioning among the family about these pictures that have cropped up. I find it very hard to believe that all of these were taken by paps with long lenses. Nope, just not buying that.

    I also understand the need to keep them protected. I think the RPO’s who were on duty kind of didn’t do a great job because someone should have seen a person with a camera, especially on the beach. Do they not do a walkabout of the area, what if that person hadn’t had a camera, but something else?

    But on the other hand, as much as William and Kate want to pretend to be normal, they are NOT. Kate was normal until she went in pursuit of the ring and by marrying into the family her life changed. William, George and Charlotte are not normal by circumstance of birth. They do deserve their privacy, but at the same time William and Kate need to understand that people want and need to see the family they are basically supporting the incredible lifestyle of. Should they be able to go play in a park, sure. But the parents need to understand that the chances of them having their photos taken are going to increase for as long as they keep them away from the public eye.

    They are trying to mold things to the way they want them and they want all the toys on their side of the fence and they’ll let others play when they feel like it. Doesn’t work that way guys, figure it out and adapt. Or just give it up and go live your normal life without all these fabulous perks you so love.

    1. The RPO thing was a question I had, too. If paps get photos then that means the RPOs aren’t doing their jobs. Oh, there’s a pap hiding in the sand dunes? Well why didn’t you check those out before the pap was able to take over 50 photos? I mean, come on.

      I mean, some pap hiding in the trunk of a car to take their photo is frightening, but at the same time they have been known to do the PR pap thing. People Mag never would have printed those photos they printed had they not been approved. I mean come on now. I do think they have some scary moments, but they are lying if they say they’ve never used those types of photos to their advantage.

      And while some instances can be scary, that’s what they have RPOs for. The RPOs are supposed to keep them safe and if they feel threatened, their RPOs aren’t doing their jobs properly. They cannot tell people they can’t photograph them when in a public place – there is no law against that.

      1. Since when do we believe everything KP says? Just because they say something in a press release doesn’t make it true. Why isn’t the Royal Protection squad weighing in here if security is a pressing concern. Because if they said it, I’d believe it. RPO’s have stopped people from getting pics of Kate shopping, but they’re helpless at the beach? This is a smokescreen to distract people from knowing the extent of the collusion between Kate, her family and trusted paps. Also it doesn’t hurt that it also protects Kate and Will from having their own activities and whereabouts known. Will is supposed to be working full time, remember. He can’t afford to have the press keep track of how many, or few, shifts he works.

        I know its cynical, but I’m not buying it. This press release isn’t about protecting George, its about protecting his parents front unwanted and damaging attention.

        1. Looking back at Petulant and lazy snowflake rare War Remembrance attendance -the disrespect towards his father, POW*DoC after reports of threesome carol meddleton residency at AH (running off household staff) taking over Prince George; see snowflake disrespectful behaviour towards HM DOE, Prince Harry (point 3:17 to 3:52)- Prince Harry trying to be cordial to km (BP greysuit men are observing km!)…

          1. Not sure what you mean by disrespectful. It did seem weird that she didn’t go over and say hello like William did but idk, it doesn’t seem like a huge deal.

      2. These are photographers – they take photos. If someone were taking photos of my child who is neither famous nor a future king, I would of course take action. Since this kid is not relegated to a mediocre existence it shouldn’t come as a surprise to them that people want a couple of snaps. This child has protection officers; no one can get within 30 metres of him. I think the real issue here is that the Cambridges want to control their image, and own all the copyrights to their photos, and are using their kids as an excuse to be left alone by the press, in order for them to continue their life of idle leisure. Frankly, if I never saw another photo of this precious kid or his sibling or his parents, or heard of them again, and they gave back all their perks and privileges I wouldn’t miss them at all.

      3. KMR – I don’t think the taxpayers pay all that money for professional security teams – so they can’t stop photographs of royals in public spaces. I think the royal family misuses the RPO – who are there to protect them against threats. Photos taken in public spaces are not threats, nor illegal. It is not a “bad job” if photos of the royals get out. It’s a bad job if they get killed.

  2. It seems that if Carole and DOC wouldn’t leak their outings to the beach or the animal park maybe there would be fewer pictures. They doth protest too much. She married into this. They are not “normal people”. Give up the privileges, resign and then let’s talk.

  3. This is loathsome and laughable. For one thing, they ” feel strongly that George and Charlotte should not grow up exclusively behind palace gates and in walled gardens.” Um.. WHAT!? The only places they ever seem to be is “behind gates and walled gardens.” The first official public appearance of George after his christening (which was private) was when he came to St. Mary’s Hospital to see his baby sister, almost two years after he was born. Everything else has been unofficial or pictures taken by paps or onlookers. There is no security concern as far as I’m concerned. Unless they are kept in a secured palace or home 24-7, there is always a risk of kidnapping or assassination. Even with an army of bodyguards around them, a crack shot sniper could take any of them out at over a mile distance; that’s the range of top-of-the-line sniper rifles. The target can’t even see the sniper, b/c they’re so far away. This is absurd. Willy is going to make his children neurotic, paranoid nutcases if someone doesn’t step in and lay down the facts of life to them (mostly him). Barring some incident, George will become King. He will have to learn to deal with the press and the public some day, or the monarchy will be toast. Willy is so damn aggravating!

  4. Sorry William but you look two faced when you have your wife and her family photograph and release photos of your kid but no one else can. Sounds like you want the royalties for the photos only to go to the Middletons. Sounds like you don’t like a little competition for your lecherous in-laws. Not to mention, you make those released photos look even more like PR opportunities because you don’t complain about them. In fact, you make it too easy to spot PR opportunities with the not complaining and threatening legal action.

    When and where you chose to stamp your man-child foot is hilarious William. Grow up dude. Stop stamping your foot like a spoiled child and take it like your brother who seems to have learned the Queen’s lesson “never explain, never complain.”

    I bet a lot of women are over their teen crushes on William given the kind of man he grew up to be. I am. You’re a lazy, spoiled, whiny man who can’t see his own hypocrisy when it slaps him in the face. Then, with needing mummy surrogate Carole there making you toast and Kate drawing your bath, you come off as a b–ch to live with. Those women must reeallly want the crown because who else would put up with you if they didn’t?

    Not to mention the mommy issues. You only can carry that torch for so long before sympathy turns to wanting to hand you a card for a good therapist, then, turns into to annoyance that you haven’t booked an appointment with that therapist yet are still going on about mommy.

    Okay, rant over.

    1. “I bet a lot of women are over their teen crushes on William given the kind of man he grew up to be.”

      I definitely am.

        1. Ditto. I think William was attractive when he talked about wanting to go into the army and serve abroad, and when the Tsunami hit he helped out. William had a bright career ahead of him and he has lost sight of those goals that he wanted to do.

    2. Insia, Red Snapper 12:01
      Amen !

      Petulant wants it both ways and distraction by Knauf, KP that William is suppose to be working (just off paternity leave and not yet 2 months on duty) – now it’s reported William and lazy snowflake is in Mystique on vacation!


  5. Well said Lisa.

    Kate and William make Greta Garbo look like an exhibitionist. My solution: live that normal life you say you crave. Get up in the morning and…Go. To. Work. Sit in on charity board meetings. Attend openings and fundraisers, give interviews, lobby and make speeches. And then when you’ve finished work, go out and do family stuff. Go shopping together. Go to a movie together. Take the children to the park together. Take the family to church together (minus a nanny in full uniform). Make regular appearances at state ceremonies (Trooping, Garter, dinners etc). In short, grant so many photo opportunities that after a while, pictures of you, and of your children, become routine and even boring.

    Regularly release photos of a happy family unit, (releasing more than just two or three at a time), or hold photocalls. In the early years, William’s parents seemed to get the balance right.

    I don’t think this will dumb down the monarchy; William and Kate need only to go about their lives quietly, diligently, and with dignity. Both parents don’t need to work full-time, but two or three days a week from Kate would be something. I know William has his air-ambulance job, but I’m not sure it’s what readers of this blog would consider full-time.

    William needs to be careful not to bite the hand that feeds him: his frequent carping (this letter is the latest example) and wish for complete control could lead to bad feeling among journalists. Remember how they crucified Sarah, Duchess of York. All it takes is a drip-feed of unflattering photos, pictures of holidays and shopping, stories asking questions about work ethic, renovations, spending and in-laws etc…

    As for the use of paparazzi pictures in this blog: I believe that KMR uses a few well-chosen photos responsibly to promote debate and critical comment. Readers are able to choose for themselves if they wish to follow embedded links to further photos and articles. Whilst critical where it’s warranted (and isn’t that why we’re all here), I feel KMR is always respectful and well-informed.

    1. Well said! I especially agree with what you said about putting more photos out there. Simple cost/demand principle – if you flood the market with photos of you and your family, they will drive the price and the uniqueness of them down. The more that they keep to the themselves, the more that those simple photos bring in lots of money and are more desirable.

  6. I’m torn on this issue.

    Part of me thinks the children deserve their privacy. Part of me thinks Will and Kate protest too much. Let’s not forget that they dragged a younger George to NZ and Australia and used him in as many photo opps as they could in order to garner positive press for the Royal Family.

    When they want the exposure, things are fine. When they – or another family link – leak to the media that Carole will be at the beach with PG or that Kate is bringing her son with her to a petting zoo, what can they expect?

    I agree if the children (Charlotte is still too little) were taken to more events with their parents and official photos were taken and published, eventually the interest in the kids might subside.

    Will and Kate do seem to want things both ways. The perks of the job come with certain strings attached. When will they realize, or accept that?

    The photographer who hid in the “boot” of the car? Now, that is scary and such behavior needs to stop, but there’s a way of handling such situations that would not alienate legit media reps as well.

    I feel sorry for William and Harry. They lost their mother to the paps. I am sure it is a pain that will never go away, but Harry seems to manage his position in life far more effectively than his brother does. I know they are two different individuals and cannot be expected to react the same to every situation, but William really needs help. He is going to drive his children into panic mode. They are beautiful children and their privacy should be guarded, but it’s also important that their family doesn’t turn around and use them for their own selfish ways, too.

    1. The boys did not lose their mother to the paps. They lost her to her own recklessness- not wearing a seatbelt and the use of a drunk chauffeur involved in a high speed chase.

      1. So true Maven. The fact she didn’t have to get in a car with a drunk, didn’t have to forgo a seatbelt and didn’t have to drive quickly racing paps through the streets seems to get lost. Give them a photo and then be on your way.

  7. Well at least William is taking action. I would have preferred it and think it would have stood a more favourable outcome if William had taken action at the time. By gathering this so called evidence will not wash with some people and I hope cough cough that it was not taken by someone else. Though the range of the lens and the way the people are looking might indicate what is really going on. Why continue in public view particularly with no RPO’s. I think William believes that the press are invading his privacy. I don’t think we are getting the full story here which is why it is good a complaint has been made. However Prince George and Princess Charlotte are beautiful kids ( which kid isn’t to their family) and are entitled to privacy growing up however they need to be aware of their future role in the Monarchy and need to get used to being in the public eye on specific occasions. There should be clear boundaries not excessive privacy. Finally when William and Harry were growing up the media was becoming more impersonal and the paparazzi and other photographers were more interested in them partly because they were Diana and Charles children. I am feel for William and Harry. They lost their mother to the paps which has made them untrusting and suspicious.

    1. Oh, Laura, prepare to be slammed the way I was. According to some, Diana’s death cannot be attributed to the paps, but to her own recklessness. Give me a break, you guys. Read up on Diana’s life and how she was hounded in such a brutal way. Put yourselves in her shoes. The paps treated her like she was a prop and not a human being. Of course, Will and Harry would resent the hell out of the paps. I’m with you, Laura, W&H are naturally untrusting of the paps and I guess the traditional media.

      I also think the kids deserve privacy, but they are also going to have to become used to the interest the public has in them. I don’t envy W&K for not only having to do what is best for their children, but also be understanding of the roles they and their children play because they are members of the Royal Family.

      1. Eh, not sure about this. It’s pretty well known that Diana frequently used the press to her advantage as well. She is said to have frequently called the press to leak stories and give tips when it suited her (Middletons taking a page out of her book…?). I think everybody would agree that Diana’s death was very sad, and that she didn’t deserve to die that way. However, I personally think it’s a bit of a stretch to say she was an innocent victim of the press.

        1. The media and the paps are two different things. Yes, Diana knew how to use the media to her advantage and perhaps, Carole has become good at that, too,. But, I defy anyone to think that Diana wanted to be chased by the Paps to the extreme that she was throughout so much of her life.

          1. My point was that she wanted the attention, but only on her specific terms, much like Willy and Kate. Sadly, she couldn’t have it both ways, nor can Willy and Kate, no matter how much they stomp their feet and throw their toys out of the pram.

            Don’t misunderstand – I’m not saying being chased by paparazzi would be fun or that she deserved it. I’m just saying that she was feeding the fire, to some extent.

          2. I agree with Amanda. First of all, paps are a part of media. Not all of it, but certainly a subset. Secondly, as Amanda pointed out, she couldn’t have it both ways. She couldn’t seek attention when it suited her, but then expect the media to just leave her alone otherwise. If she called for attention, then she called for attention to all of her life, not just the parts she wanted to be made public (especially since unlike Kate and William, she actually did involve the media quite a bit in her personal life, not just her public one).

          3. Diana was offered help by the palace which she turned down. The paps didn’t turn into a feeding frenzy until she got rid of her RPOs. The situation quickly deteriorated to what it became, and the palace stepped in to help a few times which she refused.

            There is a reason we don’t see so many photos, papped or otherwise of all the royals and it’s less to do with individual royals’ popularity and everything to do with the presence of RPOs. They are empowered to stop this type of harassment, so where they have allowed it, it’s been sanctioned by the royals themselves.

            One more thing about Diana, she used paps to help herself eg the example given above of a pap hiding in the boot of a car with a day’s supply of food so that he can stake out the target? That’s how Fergie was caught with her toe sucking lover. The paps dug a trench near the remote villa she had rented and lived in it for 3 days until they got their money shot. Who tipped them off? Diana.

            The last summer, she went on holiday on a yacht. Followed by just one boat of paps. For a week only that boat followed her. The second week she went to the boat of paps and told them to expect a big surprise. In the boat was sitting James Whitaker. He reported the conversation verbatim. Next thing, there was a feeding frenzy all summer long as many paps descended on her to try and capture this promised big surprise.

            Everything she did that summer was just one stunt after another. I remember as an intern in a media office having to report her antics daily to increasing irritation of my bosses. To extent that when she *died, their first reaction was that it was another stunt.

            *initial reports said she was in an accident.

            These are a few of many instances where Diana used the paps and the media not just to help herself, but to throw someone else under the bus.

            As for whether paps are worse now, I don’t think so. These days there are laws that protect people from them. Precipitated by Diana’s death.

            Before that, it was completely lawless. Paps could climb into people’s homes to take pictures – see pictures of naked Brad Pitt and GOOP which were taken in their back garden because a pap had climbed in. And there was nothing they could do about it.

            Or pictures of naked Jackie Kennedy, full bush on display, taken on a private island and published world wide.

            At best Jackie could keep paps 100yards away from herself and her family and only after going to court could she get that amount of relief.

          4. Herazeus, I agree that paps aren’t worse, in that their tactics have always been like this. But I wouldn’t be surprised that technology and the rise of social media have made them exercise said tactics on a more frequent basis, because the payoff is higher now.
            But yeah, one of the things that bugs me about the letter is that it kind of makes it sound like George is the first kid to face this. He’s not and he won’t be the last either. Many children of celebrities and other well-known people experience similar circumstances. It’s not something new or special to George. Which is why I find it hard to believe that this is about security and not just the Cambridges’ incessant need for privacy.

      2. I was just a teenager when Diana died. I think her death was a combination of things not just one cause. Whatever her character Diana was their mother.

          1. Thank you, I know that when Diana died Tom Cruise was recorded as saying that the paps had a reputation. I don’t think Diana should have refused the RPO’S as she was entitled to have them or because she did not have HRH status she thought she could cope. Diana had two boys and life ahead of her.

          2. Andrew Morton’s book would probably hit closer to the image Diana wanted to portray considering it was made with her approval and exclusive interviews. You need to read it a few times and try to read between the lines. The book is obviously on her side but some parts kinds sound ridiculous. Like how her emotional support system was made up of her eldest son (who was still a teenager at the time) and a coterie of palm readers and fortune tellers. The same could be said of Fergie.

          3. Laura, i’m alittle late here, but look up a book by Patrick Jephson. he was her private secretary for many years. he was forced to resign when Diana secretly organised the panorama interview behind his back and he was the one blamed by the palace for not informing them.

            i”d also thow in Sarah bradford. please stay away from Andrew Morton because even though this is a ghost written autobiography it was written at a time when Diana was at her darkest , lowest point. Diana was always dangerous in those moods and and very vindictive in those moods, so much of what is written in there is coloured to wound everyone as much as possible, she tells quite a few fibs in it. or you could read it as a cry for help at the lowest point in her life. she came to regret writing it.

      3. No one said Diana wasn’t hounded by paps. But even if she was hounded, good security wouldn’t have allowed them to begin a high speed car chase just to get out of it. And certainly not with a drunk driver. Kate used to get hounded pre-marriage but was never physically hurt because she didn’t try to out-run the paps or race away in her car with them following behind her. I’m not blaming Diana – I can understand the need for getting away from the paps. And I get why Harry and William would resent them. But they were not the cause of her death – there is no way they could have predicted that high speed car chase. Could they have chosen not to speed after Diana’s car? Absolutely. But they didn’t force Diana’s retinue into deciding that speeding away was the best decision. They did not pose any danger to Diana when they tried to take pictures of her, so to respond by speeding away is what initiated the danger. Again, certainly not Diana’s fault – but any security and the driver deserve some blame.

    2. The biggest mistake Diana made was giving up her royal protection. If I remember correctly, it was offered and she declined. BIG mistake. If she had used them she might not have died that night.

      1. I’ve read that she declined the Royal Protection Squad b/c she was paranoid and thought they were reporting on her actions back to the Prince of Wales and Buckingham Palace.

        1. She was offered royal security and iirc Charles offered to fund private security, which she turned down.

          She was paranoid and flighty. Made some bad judgement calls. She once tried to reject security for Harry and wills on a holiday, but was overruled by the queen.

          Her death was sad, preventable, and tragic. But she was a complex person, who ended up as the forever young, beautiful, and charitable princess.

  8. I admit to eating up pictures of Prince George, whether official or unofficial. However, as a parent and grandparent, I can understand W&K’s plea. The examples cited indicate that no setting, whether private or public, is safe from intrusion by a long-range lens. I imagine that it’s unnerving to know that family homes are under surveillance, that your car might be followed, that someone may be tracking you around the city. To me, the stake-outs of private property are clearly beyond the pale. For the public locations – e.g., park or beach – I think they can only rely on a sense of decency (“Please allow us our privacy”)…in short supply in the case of paparazzi, I believe.

    1. Constance-I could understand W&K’s pleas better if they didn’t try to manipulate the press so much. Also the paparazzi are doing their job, which is to get photos of people of note. W&K are of note, as are their children. Also in public, no one can have any expectation of privacy. There are thousands of closed-circuit cameras in London as well as most other cities. Satellites can map any location on Earth. They can not protest so much in public.

      1. Ah, but Seth don’t you know that soon William will be protesting those cameras as well, demanding that they be shut down or diverted elsewhere when he and his family are out and about. He’s the son of Diana and will one day be King you know, so what he says goes.

        1. I know you’re joking, but sadly even as King, he wouldn’t have that power unless his Government advised him to do so. The monarch has no de facto power anymore.

  9. Or maybe there should be privacy until a certain age. The media blackout at St Andrews meant that we don’t know what really occurred with William and Kate.

  10. I think the US thing they’re referring to is in the state of California (I think) where the paps have to blur the faces of children of celebrities. Was it Jennifer Garner who was leading the legislation about this? I can’t remember now. Sometimes in magazines or certain websites, you will see celebrities on the pap stroll but their children’s faces will be blurred. Maybe the reason why George’s pictures have been printed in the US is because they weren’t taken on US soil where some of these laws are starting to take hold?
    Otherwise, I’m 50/50 on this. Paps resorting to creepy measures like hiding out on private property NEED to be dealt with, but usually the argument of the celebrity is “I’m famous, my kid isn’t.” George and Charlotte are in a different position. I think they should be afforded privacy as they are growing up (I mean they are really young and obviously have no concept of the crazy around them), but I wish Will and Kate could find the balance that Vic and Dan in Sweden have with Estelle. That little girl seems to have found the right mixture of comfort in front of cameras, also with the ability to be left alone most of the time.
    I guess in the end I just feel bad for those kids, really.

  11. Prince George beach photss were staged – carole meddleton was aware and seem to approved!

    The RPOs office should return a warning to Petulant, Knauf, threesome carol and km in using their professional office as scapegoats for carol meddleton (called out by HM POW BP/CH), and tarnishing their professionalism. There were at least a dozen photos on the beach with PG, carol was very aware/posing – if the pics where not allowed – the RPOs would not have allowed access and period of time.

    Again, Petulant ‘crying wolf’ to cover for the climbing carol meddletons classless behaviour to outdo Prince Charles and the RF.

  12. First PW should have a discussion with Kate and Carole. All the unofficial photos that I have seen look to show a set-up by either Carole or Kate. However, finding the paparazzi hiding in his car is rather scary!!! That would make me think twice as a parent as well. I’m not sure what the answer is for PW. PW and his children are public figures, yet they deserve some degree of privacy. Instead of complaining he should figure out what that should look like (balance of public and private). Complaining isn’t the answer!!!

  13. I think this is just a hissy fit because Will thinks he gave us what we wanted, but the paps are still taking pics of George in public. We’ve seen George in an official/semi-official capacity much more than we are used to in recent months, ie at Charlotte’s birth, Trooping the Colour, polo game and Charlotte’s Christening. Wasn’t Charlotte’s birth the first time George was seen in an official capacity on British soil?? He was nearly 2 years old at the time! So there’s been a HUGE increase in his visibility. I think that Kate and Will expected demand for paparazzi photos of George to decrease because they made him more visible. That didn’t happen and now Will’s having another one of his tantrums directed at the media. As a parent, I can understand why they find George being photographed in public places distressing. But at the same time, they both signed up for this. They want us to forget that, but they CHOOSE to put their children in this situation. William could live a quiet life, out of the public eye and have the Queen change the succession. But he chooses this life and all the luxuries it affords. Being photographed in public places and having one’s children photographed in public places goes along with that. Once again, Will and Kate want to enjoy all the perks without any of the pitfalls.

  14. I will probably get a ton of negative comments, but I am tired of 100% of the blame for Princess Diana’s death going to the paparazzi.

    First, it is my understanding they were not wearing seat belts. Second, who gave the driver permission to drive at excessive speed? Third, sadly she suffered trauma in a country which did not follow “the golden hour” of trauma care.

    To me this is either an excuse to keep paps away from you for the rest of your life, or a clear example of someone with minimal critical thinking skills. Take your pick.

    These two are very tiresome. I am glad it is not my tax dollars going towards their lifestyle.

    Please, please Prince Harry, get married and have darling children. I bet when he does, the Cambridge’s will want the limelight back. The story will be something along the lines of their children are now older and able to handle the press attention.

    W&K will never get over themselves. Actually, these two may be the perfect match after all.

    1. No negative comments from me. I wholly agree with you on the paps getting the blame for Diana’s death. Sure, they chased her from the hotel, but from what I understand they were no where near her car when it actually crashed. Also, Diana and her people left via the front entrance where all the paps were waiting for them, instead of going out the back to try and get away from the paps. Also, the driver was going at very high speeds through a tunnel. Also, neither Diana nor her boyfriend nor the driver were wearing seatbelts. The bodyguard was wearing a seatbelt. Guess which one survived. The bodyguard. The paps did not force Diana not to wear her seatbelt. She made that decision all on her own. Also, from what I understand, the medics didn’t get her to the hospital until an hour after the crash. That’s on the medics for not doing their job properly. Sure, Diana was running from the paps, but there were so many factors that contributed to her death – most notably her lack of wearing her seatbelt – that the paps had nothing to do with.

      1. Also the diver, Henri Paul, was drunk and not trained in advanced evasive driving techniques that the Royal Protection Command utilizes. He was also driving twice the speed limit.

      2. Er, KMR, they did leave by the back entrance. And stabilizing victims before transporting them to hospital is official French policy. Its how they do it in France. That said I agree with this generally. Drunk driver plus no seatbelt equals tragedy. Personally I’ve always felt that the person most responsible for the crash (other than Dodi and the driver) was Mohammed Fayed. He knew it too, which is why he spread all those vile lies afterwards.

        1. I was just going to say the same thing. They didn’t use the front door, it was actually the side door.
          Ambulances in France are the extremely well equipped with trauma equipment – they do not employ the ‘scoop & run’ as in UK/US but its not necessarily to the detriment of the patient. The ambulances are different & better set to deal with trauma at the scene.
          Diana had horrendous internal bleeding & took an age to be stabilised. Then on the way to Hospital had a series of heart attacks.
          There is no reason to doubt the French medics did anything less than their utmost.

          1. Also, it was the bodyguard’s job to make certain the passengers he was hired to protect were buckled in. I think he deserves some blame, too. I ask each and every one of you, has there never been a time that you were not buckled in while driving in a car? Maybe, while in a limo or a taxi? Please, I think most people have been guilty of that at one time or another.

            Mistakes happen, but they would not have been racing through that tunnel if they were not being pursued. And, take a look when you can at the many lewd, horrific comments that were directed toward Diana — mostly after her divorce — when she was moving about London. Who of any of us, would want to be treated with such disrespect and persistence? Yes, she was a public figure, she knew that, but the way she was hounded is something none of us would probably wish to endure. I cannot blame W&K for wanting to protect their little ones. I just think that somewhere along the line, a balance needs to be found in overseeing their lives the way a balance has been found for Princess Estelle.

          2. The U.S. for decades has believed in the golden hour. Between my critical care background and the professional experience of many friends in emergency trauma medicine (including the president of emergency medicine physicians), the first hour after a trauma is not the time to waste any precious moments.

            While this may be the approach in some countries, it does not mean it is the best approach. I have some familiarity with paramedic training in the U.S. and the equipment/medication on the scene. I cannot speak to the equipment/medication differences between each country, but after years of being part of a team which covered cardiac and respiratory arrests for years, I put my money on getting a patient to a trauma center in as fast a manner as possible. Patients can quickly have lines placed and IV meds on board, as well as airway patency and CPR initiated at the scene.

            Any time which passes, increases the risk of irreversable physiological changes. The time used to attempt to stabiliize a patient is time which could be used getting a patient on the O.R. table.

            The staff who treated Diana may have worked their hardest to provide her with the best care available based on the system, but if I am ever in a MVA, I hope I am somewhere where the “golden hour” is part of the system.

    2. I recommend the Paget report to everyone! Fascinating details about Diana’s last days thoroughly debunking all of Fayad’s ridiculous claims. It is very interesting stuff. And truly sad. Diana refusing police protection, drunk driver, Dodi in a panic, and no seatbelts. Of course the paps were the reason why they were in such a rush, but they had chased her for decades yet she dies on Fayad’s watch.

      It is really long, but an easy read and well organized.

    3. the decisions of that night all led to this disaster. the often forgotten point is that they’d planned to spend the night at the hotel and that’s why they changed drivers. that’s why Henri Paul the substitute driver went off to have a drink. he thought his day was done.

      Dodi and Diana decided to change location which inconvenienced their entire team, as lackadaisy as it turned out to be, and the fact that Henri Paul came in having drunk afew didn’t deter them from using him. IIRC, the attitude was that everyone drinks in France, so what’s the big deal.

      having decided to change venues, the new plan had to be approved by mohamed Fayed in London which took some time and allowed for the hotel to become engorged with more paps.

  15. First comment, here. I’m not sure what I think of the Prince’s statement, I’m of a few minds about it! Historically, something about the attitude and personalities of the Prince and Duchess are reminiscent to me of personality/biographies of some other royals – the Empress Elisabeth of Austro-Hungary, “Sisi,” and the Tsar Nicholas and Alexandra both come to mind for different reasons. Sisi’s reclusiveness, extreme interest in her appearance combined w/ dislike of being photographed; Nicholas and Alexandra’s lovely devotion to each other and to family life, combined with stubborn disengagement and dislike of court life or effective leadership, for example. Interesting to speculate about how Prince W sees himself fitting into the English and European history of monarchy and how he thinks history will view him. Yes the paps are a challenge for the prince, but, while different, I don’t think the challenges of modern royalty are greater then any faced by their predecessors.

  16. Celebrities, royals, the famous…don’t “deserve” privacy. Privacy is not a human right, as is liberty, for example. When these people, and their children, venture out in public, whatever happens with photographers is just a fact of life. If a photographed person doesn’t like it, he needs to stay inside. And yes, I realize that children, specifically George, don’t choose to be royal, but then George isn’t the one complaining. If his parents don’t want to be the subject of paps then they should do as others on here have suggested…just slip quietly away and we’ll forget about you…it won’t be difficult.

    1. The European Convention on Human Rights actually says there is “a right to respect for one’s private and family life.” The problem (for the Cambridges) is that it is very vague and Britain, unlike some other European countries, does not have a right to privacy in any of its own laws (although the European Convention does apply except it’s vague).
      That being said, yes, the media in Britain is doing them a huge favor by agreeing not to publish off-duty photos because there is no legal reason for them to not do that. And their expectations for how the press treats George would be special treatment as compared to how the children of celebrities are treated.

      1. I didn’t realize the Human Rights Commission says that! I’m surprised, because, as you point out, it’s extremely vague. How does one even define privacy? And isn’t it all relative? I think I’m just sick and tired of celebrities (and I include adult royals) choosing professions that exist because of public fascination and then bitching and moaning about public fascination. I think we should become more tolerant of journalists and photographers and less tolerant of the spoiled rich people who owe their wealth to the fact that people pay to see and read about them.

        1. Royalty didn’t choose their existence; they literally were born into it. They are not celebrities, despite what the ill-informed press may think. They are royalty. They don’t “owe” their wealth to the people, they owe it to their landed estates and careful investment portfolio.

  17. Ok, I am in two minds of this. Of Course the guy should not be in the back of his car taking photos of George, that is just creepy and sick. And if I or Hubby caught anyone doing this to our child they would hurt, very hurt.

    On the other hand. There seems to be an awful lot of leaks about where George and either Waity or Ma Mids are going to be and they seem to be looking at the cameras an awful lot. The Farm visit and the beach spring to mind.

    We have had issues with people wanting to take photos of our three year old, but on a much much smaller level.

    Our daughter is a very pretty child. It is not just maternal pride, she has dark blue eyes, which she gets from my Dad’s side of the family ( I got boring blue from my Mum). My Aunts have all had comments all their life about their eyes. My daughter also has pale skin and light brown long hair and she is an outgoing child.

    She was flower girl for my SIL a month before she turned two and we had three seperate complete strangers come up to us and tell us how beautiful she was and they wanted to either have their photo taken with her or to take a photo of her by herself. My Husband and I were stunned and Thankfully Hubby recovered before I did and he Thanked them for their comments, but that they could not take the photos. She was in the formal photos of course and in family photos but we did not want strangers taking photos of her.

    Last December we were on a Ferry in Sydney and lining up to get off the ferry when there was a commotion amongst some Japanese tourists. They were pointing at our daughter and then started taking photos of her. I thought it was because she was dirty as she had spilt an ice cream down the front of her but when they started pointing at her eyes we worked out what they were on about. It is rare to see eyes as blue as hers, and my hubby and I turned the pram around so that they could not take the photos of her.

    People do a double take when we take her to the shops and we get comments on her eyes at least once a week from strangers.

    Of Course we do not have the security nightmare that the Royals face nor do we have protection officers but I do know the urge to protect your child from strangers when they want to take photos of them.

    I just hope that Wills has had a talk with Waity and Ma Mids about the media and not leaking stuff to them, as the kids deserve to be kids without the hassle of photographers.

    1. Tanya, yes it would be beyond creepy if someone were hiding out in his car with a telephoto lens to take pictures of your child. But your child is not a prince and future king! I have to disagree and say I don’t think it’s the least bit creepy that someone is trying to take pictures of George! It’s his livelihood! If his parents gave some photo-ops there would be fewer of these events.

      1. Dag, the creepy thing is the guy in the car, but we have not heard who he is. I am actually starting to wonder if he existed LOL.

  18. Realistically – how are the paps a danger or bother to George? They are just trying to get pictures, not hurt him (and they know better than to swarm him like they did with Kate or Diana because of Diana’s death and because he’s 2 and they would lose all support for their pictures then), and he has security to make sure they don’t ever get too close. Additionally, by hiding, aren’t they bothering him less because they aren’t interrupting his playdate by him getting distracted by the cameras? And most of all, he’s two years old and has no idea what’s going on. Like I understand that no parent wants their child’s life followed like that, but let’s be realistic here. He’s a future King who already faces actual death threats, etc. And as a result, his security is built to deal with that (or should be). So how are the photographers ever going to be an actual danger to him? Or even a real bother? PO’s can keep them from taking pictures so obviously from close as well. Heck, I’m more worried about the kids being used to “lure” George out into the open. They don’t have security and receive no benefit from the pap process (at least George maintaining his importance to the public helps ensure royal benefits). Also, random question about this – how would the palace even know if the photographers are using children to “lure” George into visible areas? Did they notice the photographers doing it? Because that seems super stupid of the photographers to do that anywhere noticeable. And how would the paps do it? Did they bring their own kids? Lol. Or just ask a random kid. This is very confusing to me.

    Anyways, for those who are saying that the RPO’s aren’t doing their job if they can’t stop these pictures – the RPO’s would have to be pretty superhuman to be able to stop a photographer with a long-range camera. By superhuman I mean they would need long-range eyes lolol. I think it’s also important to remember that they can’t always scope out every single place Kate or George is planning on going before they go – they do it for official engagements because those are announced ahead of time and are thus higher security risks, but for an impromptu trip to the park? I’m sure they do a quick check but they can’t really do a whole security sweep, especially not without alerting even more attention to the fact that Kate and/or George are there, which would just invite more photos.

    I also don’t get why people are so sure Carole invited the paps to that beach trip. It looked like she was looking at the camera, but that could just be because she noticed the photographer, but decided not to do anything about it! If she wanted to do something about it, she would either have to leave with George, thus interrupting his birthday playdate, or have a PO go over and stop the photographer, which would just invite more attention and potentially more pictures. Don’t get me wrong – I think Kate and/or the Middletons manipulated the media quite a bit when she was dating William, and being a royal family member means constantly manipulating the media. But still, there’s no way to be sure that any of these current pap pictures involving George were a result of someone leaking in advance. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were going to let the older pictures go because they were good PR (Kate being a good mother, etc.) but then changed their minds when the stalking got to be a little too much. But that still doesn’t mean they asked the paps to be there, just that they decided not to fight that battle.

    Lastly, I find it amusing that Kate and William have a problem with the “stalking,” because the only reason photographers do that is because if they do it openly, then the PO’s will make them stop, even though they aren’t doing anything illegal. Get your PO’s to stop using their authority illegally and photographers will stop sneaky following your son around.

    1. I agree with this. I don’t understand and have never understood this crazy protectiveness over pictures. As you said, no one is getting harmed and some people who are far less wealthy and probably far more hardworking than anyone in the royal family, are going to make a living and the public will remain interested in the royal family.
      When public interest crosses over into gossip territory and if leaks start to happen about personal affairs I can understand how that would bother people, but what is big deal with pictures. I wonder what would happen if William and Kate just chilled for a while.

  19. Omg I’m writing so much. Sorry everyone! One actually last thing – I don’t think they need to be bringing George out for the usual royal engagements. I actually found it weird that they had him do the christening walk because it seems really overwhelming for a two year old to have to walk in between thousands of people screaming his name. But I think they could do more stuff like they did on the Australia tour – the playdate and zoo thing were perfect because George just got to do kid things while photographers took pictures without bothering him (since he was oblivious due to being distracted by having playmates or a bilby). They could do something like that in the UK twice a year. Kate does engagements involving interacting with children, and she could just bring him with her to one and have him play with the kids when she does too. She could even have him brought through a private entrance so that he wouldn’t have to be subject to the usual media/public hoopla that occurs when she enters or exits a building for an engagement. The problem is that the pictures they release don’t relieve the desire for pap pictures because they are so staged and don’t show anything about their normal family life. So if they did the toddler-oriented engagements and then had a few photocalls every year of them doing normal family things (maybe a day in the park with a family photographer, or on vacation, or whatever), they would be able to convince more people not to look at pap pics. Oooh and if they released a home video or two instead of just pictures, that would be PERFECT, and would probably negate the need for bringing George out for public engagements.
    Okay I’m done now! 🙂

    1. Problem is George is an unpredictable 2 year old and it doesn’t look like Kate has great control of him. Who knows if he is a hitter, bitter, etc — it takes time to work those kinks out of a kid — they are wise to wait until he’s 4 or so to do social engagements, if they ever do.

      1. They could make the engagement entirely private and release photos/videos later so that they can control the image a bit. Not to mention that 99% of the press would entirely shy away from commenting on a toddler perhaps being too rambunctious. They would probably talk about it in a teasing, jolly kind of way, but never like “wow that George is just a terrible little kid.” The Cambridges already get tons of leniency from the media and I’d be shocked if that leniency wasn’t tripled for an adorable toddler.
        I guess for me the other thing is just their own letter says they want him to be able to play with other kids – that’s why they want to take him to public parks. So then why not a public organization as well?

        1. They want him to play with other kids? Doesn’t he have extended family to play with? The children of friends? The children of peons on the estates? The mind boggles that he has to seek out strangers in public spaces.

  20. There is a delicate balance that must be kept. I maintain that they need to hold photocalls in order to bring the price and interest down. If they were more forthcoming in that way, then the demand would be much lower and would drive the market way down.

    Yes, George and Char are kids. But they are not ordinary children and they never will be. Paps can be crazy. I saw some the other day that were stalking Jen Garner and they are creepy. But, I have to give it to the stars who get it. They live their lives and they keep it moving.

    Here is something that I’ve been thinking about – right now people want to see them. They are interested in them and they want to feel kinship with them. But, if the Cambridge’s continue to stomp their feet then people will become indifferent and then angry. If William wants to rule anything besides Scarole, he needs to provide pictures of his growing family. HM’s life is well documented and people still love her. Charles as well. But, since George is here, people know nothing and have no connection. Once that connection stops, the trouble begins. Right now they (Will and Kate) need the press. Soon, the press will not need them and they will be eviscerated.

    1. One thing about this is driving me crazy, why would someone hiding in a trunk need to put up sheets to hide behind? You are in a trunk. Or is this some kind of hatchback situation?
      I too find it odd that there are ONLY Pap shots of G with Kate or Scarole. Not even any with the nanny anymore (at least that I’ve seen). This is very fishy. The beach is the most obviously tipped, either by Grim Granny or someone on their staff. Who the hell hides out in sand dunes on random beaches in hopes that G will show up one day?
      But like you’ve all said, Will and Kate get to look like parents of the year for protecting their children, when in reality they use them whenever their press gets a little too negative. Lazy royals? Trot out a photo op with George! Will quitting his precious new job early? The big bad paps are harassing my children!
      Rhiannon, please just hook up with Harry and be reasonable about your beautiful ginger heirs. Will and Kate can spend their time between Bucklebury and Mustique with cheese toast and no elbows on the tables.

      1. There have been some nanny pictures released recently. There are two of him and Maria walking to a park and another set was of him and Maria watching Harry’s helicopter take off. There seems to be a trend that when they’re in London, pictures of him and the nanny get taken, but when in Norfolk, it’s Kate and him. It may be because Kate is so recognizable/noticeable (more so than a 2 yr old toddler) that she doesn’t take him to public parks in London that would substantially increase the chances of them being spotted. But in Norfolk, she may trust the locals more to not take pictures or even notice, and thus takes him out more there.

        I think the letter explains the beach pictures when it says that the paps basically stake out Anmer and follow cars leaving it to places, so they don’t have to know where they will end up. It could be they’re lying and put it in because people have been speculating that the pictures were setup. But I wouldn’t be shocked if paps are indeed just staking out Anmer Hall a bit.

  21. Much ado about nothing. Should anyone trust paranoid William’s mouthpiece?
    What are they trying to cover up or distract the media/public from this time?

    It’s so obvious that the pictures of kate and george at the park earlier this year were sanctioned by kate. The photographer was about five feet away from george and was not stopped by her or the royal security.

    Whenever the Cambridges deign to appear in public they always seem so manufactured and going through the motions.
    Genuine is not a word I would use to describe either of them.

    If they retired, would anyone miss them? They have no individual achievements or have made any unique contributions to society. But their staff of 20+ are furiously working behind the scenes to inform William of this and that, so he can think about where, when, or never.


    This is the set of pictures I was talking about above. Kate and g were followed around the park being photographed at close range with a nice camera… Within a couple of feet and no one objected. Not royal security, nor Kate.

    And KP is trying to tell us that paps are stalking them? Bullshit. Kate either arranged it or didn’t object to being photographed for ‘waity is the new motherdiana’ pr.

    1. Exactly Kip, were these the kids who lured George out for the paps? If Kate was so concerned, why didn’t she alert the RPO’s and leave. Because she wanted those pictures to portray her as mother of the year, that’s why. It’s all a load of BS.

      1. Whomever was taking pictures of G was literally right behind him here.
        I think William will find the mole/photographer living under his own taxpayer provided, brand new roof!

        I wonder if he realizes they sell out the kid for midd pr, but it gives him an excuse to bully the media. So a win-win.
        It’s interesting that William has never been spotted or pictured with his son in public. Not even a sanctioned private photo snuck into a video background like Charles has done.

        I am a monarchist, but William and Kate are the best argument/hope for a republic in GB.

        1. Or we could have King Harry and Queen Chelsy. I think they would make some cute and smart kids. Or William would have to abdicate for Geroge. I think William is well aware of his duty. He just needs a strong women behind him. Kate was posing for photos when they were gf/bf. Kate looks at the camera on her wedding day at the photos and then complains about this. There is no consistency.

  23. Sadly, as long as there is money to be made, there will be photos of these children. Rhiannon is absolutely right: people want to relate to this young family, to feel some kind of bond, a simple fondness in the hope that William and Harry will lead happy and fulfilled lives. I think that this is partly due to the public feeling somewhat ‘protective’ of William and Harry after their mother died, the way in which she died, and the endless swirl of controversy that still exists today as well as the public’s seemingly insatiable appetite for more… perhaps our guilt in fuelling that interest is also in play. We feel we ‘know’ them because we have seen them grow up. I can’t imagine what it must be like to be on constant view, but I know I would find it a great strain.

    I don’t know what the European Royal families do, but they appear to have a decent balance of press coverage vs privacy/ living a normal life and enjoying everyday things. Perhaps it is the rigid class structure in the UK, not so overwhelming in other countries, that underlies the problems? I agree with many of the comments thus far; George enjoying the company of other children at a petting zoo with a couple of photos does no harm, nor do similar types of activities, as long as pictures are quick and unobtrusive. Of course the child should be able to enjoy simple pleasures with his family and other children. Staged opportunities appear stiff; the christening must have been puzzling to a 2-year old and maybe a bit frightening too.

    As for William and Kate, they could do with mentoring from those who are not in thrall to their positions and what could be gained from such an association. A little bit of common sense would go far. We are all flawed beings. It is naive to think that being born into privilege equals infallibility. As many have opined in this and other posts, just being ‘real’ and genuinely engaged in one’s work and family is what people hope to see.
    Game-playing by newspapers or other parties is pretty tiresome and self-serving.

  24. I get the distinct feeling that a holiday is coming up and they are trying to make sure pictures of it aren’t published when it happens. Why complain now? Why not complain at the time the photos were published? George is a future king (unless somehow we can unite and propel Harry into the position as Charles’ Heir!!) when he is outside in public areas it’s unreasonable to think that no photos of him will be taken. Although being unreasonable probably seems reasonable to William!! I agree that incidents such as paps hiding in cars and the like is creepy and needs to be stopped. But the royal family only continue as long as the British people wish it to; if the public become indifferent or disconnected from them support will stop. Does William (or any of those he employs) realise that the BRF is no longer all powerful; for the most part they are ceremonial hereditary figures representing a democratic people. And democratic people have two very important things – A vote and A Voice!!

  25. I think this letter makes a mistake in trying to tackle the issue of security *and* privacy.

    Ultimately, children or not, the royals are not private citizens. They share their family at engagements and official portraits, and since everyone on earth has a camera in their pocket nowadays you can’t expect to go to a public park and not be photographed. You can’t control how any photographed is published either, because if it’s not in a magazine it will be online. This isn’t a battle you can win.

    However, the issue of photographers intruding on private space is very serious. It should not be tolerated, and I would applaud the BRF if they pressed criminal charges against anyone doing so.

    Rather than focusing on the photographs the statement should have focused on the trespassing. This statement is a bit of a mish mash of demands.

    1. Huge mistake! This is classic William throwing his yet another temper tantrum and trying to win public sympathy. Afterall, his mother was murdered by the heinous British media.

      If they had any legitimate concerns over security, they should be privately addressed with the royal security office.

      Instead, William directs his staff to play the dead mummy card? This is at least the second time in three months he has played the stalking media/son of dead Diana card.

      I don’t think this is about protecting the kids, it’s about reminding the press to stay away from will/kate and their sham of a marriage. Has her mother left anmer yet?

      One thing he doesn’t understand that will come back to haunt him is his treatment of the royal press pack reporters and photographers.
      Paparazzi are one thing, but they only allowed four accredited photographers at the christening. He ignored them at the hospital when they left.
      These are the same people who cover up his dirty secrets and whitewash his relationship. And somehow fooled people into thinking waitybot was a fantasic choice.

      1. The public might have short memories, but those in the press won’t. And they will just bide their time and file things away for later use.

  26. I find it interesting that many of the listed instances of paps following PGtips have been used in suing Tanna specifically.

    Tanna has been barred from royal parks, one of which is 350acres around KP itself, yet Kate and Nanny insist on taking him to another smaller park that is non-royal and Tanna can’t be removed or barred.

    It’s like they are taunting him and daring him to take these pictures in places that he has easy access whilst eschewing the places he can not enter.

    By the way, those royal parks ARE public parks so Kate/Nanny sticking to those parks doesn’t mean that PGtips is being brought up behind palace walls. Royal parks are frequented by the public…..and the irony of it is that KP being situated in a park available to the public is the reason they ran away to Norfolk for privacy.

    PGtips growing up behind palace walls would be keeping him inside the 1acre garden attached to their wing of the Palace or keeping him inside the 40acres of Gardens inside BP.

    KP is as public a palace (and attached 350acre park) as you can get.

    Taking him across town to a 100acre smaller park that isn’t a royal park is stupid in my book. Complaining after the fact whilst repeatedly taking him to the unprotected park where Tanna can find him is stupid and arrogant and entitled to the extreme.

    Finally, how about all those times they use Tanna for exclusives that are then sold to or Hello Magazine?

    Tanna’s exclusives are sold worldwide. It wouldn’t surprise me, given his close relationship with Kate and the Middletons, if it is found that his pictures sell the most.

    So in conclusion, this is a salvo against Tanna more than anyone else.

    1. I think the problem with using royal parks is that while Tanna has been banned, it is highly predictable for them to go there and even easier for people to spot them (because even just normal members of the public will be more on the lookout for them due to proximity to KP). If they go to random parks, it’s more unlikely people will be at those parks waiting for them (especially if they switch them up). The part where this plan went wrong is probably (if the letter is correct) that the paps just stake out KP and follow their staff and/or wait for nanny and George to come out, so it doesn’t matter where they go since they’ll just be followed regardless.

  27. I see David Cameron has now waded into this fray in defense of poor Wills and Kate. Is this a foremost concern given his position? There was the obvious solution, Wills could have take himself out of the line of succession years ago.

  28. What I don’t understand is Kate said George was too noisy at Sandringham last Christmas. It may have been to much for the little guy but George seemed well behaved for the walk at the Christening. How are these young children meant to learn how to behave in pubic if they are never seen.

    1. There’s quite a bit of behavior difference between an 18 month old and a 2 year old, not to mention a huge difference between walking in between so many people (and being stimulated and distracted by them) vs having to sit through a church service. He WAS crying when he came out of the church after the christening, and struggled a bit (naturally) on the way back, which seemed to indicate that he had had enough.
      Of course I also wouldn’t be surprised if Kate and William just didn’t want to bring him along because they thought he was too young and it was unnecessary at that age, but felt like they needed a “better” reason for the public. Who knows! 🙂

      1. Well the reason W&K didn’t bring George to church on Christmas is probably because the Queen doesn’t like children in church until they are much older. James Wessex doesn’t even go to church on Christmas and he’s 7. Lady Louise didn’t go until 2011 when she was 8. We probably won’t see George or Charlotte at Christmas church until they are around that age as well.

        And I agree with you, Maggie, that there was a good 7 months age difference between George at Christmas and George at the christening. And those 7 months can be huge for a kid that young.

        1. I apologise, I did not realise the significance of the age gaps. I think George was crying because he was not used to the crowds. Lady Margarita was around five years old when she came with them to church at Sandringham.

  29. Bringing this over from CB because Jason talked to the Guardian, and CB is the only place I’m finding it.

    ‘The Guardian shed some light on some if the back room deals between the Palace and press and got an extra quote from Jason Knauf –

    He told the Guardian: “The Duke and Duchess simply expect publishers to do the right thing when it comes to protecting their children. They are happy to provide official photos, but it is not part of a deal. We don’t buy into the argument that giving out official photos stops the paparazzi problem.

    “Gentleman’s agreements are a thing of the past. They don’t work when you have overseas publications ready to print anything they like.”

    About the deals with photographers –

    In return, they are given access to a steady stream of images that have been sanctioned by the royal couple.

    These come from three main sources: official photographs taken by the royals themselves that are released several times a year and distributed free of charge to the international media, such as after Prince George’s christening; photographs taken of the children at official royal events by pre-approved “pool” photographers, usually from agencies such as Getty Images or Reuters, which are then distributed to all media; and images shot by trusted freelance photographers who are deemed to “play by the rules”, usually at polo matches or other informal events once or twice a year.’

    What W&K are seeking is a full photography ban. We’re not talking banning paps in trunks of cars. They want to ban every photographer they do not approve from taking pictures in a public place – where they are legally allowed to take photographs. Only pre-approved photographers who play along will be allowed to photograph at polo – a public place. If you are standing 100 yards away, not harassing, they will still ban you and your photos if they don’t like you.

    They are seeking a full photography ban by any unapproved (ie. doesn’t play by their illegal rules) photographer in any public place.

    This isn’t a pap issue. This is privileged people who have more privacy than any of us in their home lives demanding to have privacy in public places. We do not have privacy in public places, but they’re demanding that they have it. They are demanding to control all photographs taken. In public. Period.

    1. It’s interesting b/c Willy and Katie seem to be throwing back to the 1920s and 1930s with their request for “deference.” Back then, the “gentlemen’s agreements” mentioned were quite iron clad, drawn up by the Palace and agreed to by the media. It was the same here in the United States. The President held press conferences and made it very clear what was and was not acceptable to print. The public did not know the extent of FDR’s final illness, of Nixon’s drinking, or of JFK’s and Johnson’s philandering and JFK’s severe ill health. Unless a political figure or celebrity’s philandering or alcohol abuse became blatant and undeniable (like FDR’s homosexual Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles, who was forced to resign in 1943 for soliciting sex from Pullman train employees), the media ignored it. The royals made careful photo calls of their children and Queen Elizabeth (as Duchess of York) even wrote a foreword to a cloying book about the then Princess Elizabeth of York. Willy and Waity want to go back to that. Good luck to them with it.

      1. It is so ridiculous to expect to be able to enforce 1920’s or 1930’s style media blackouts (except for pre-approved photo releases) in a 2015 world with an international 24 hour news cycle. The world does not work like that anymore. If you want to wish for the good ol’ days back, you are more than welcome to, but that won’t bring them back.

        1. I’m assuming you’re not addressing me directly, b/c I have no interest in going back to the good ‘ole days. Even so, the careful manipulation by the Palace (and other sources for political news here in the U.S.) is quite skilled and amazing even today. Governments are hiring more and more PR personnel, so they can construct whatever they want and the media will buy it. Not to get too political but look at the run-up to the Iraq War. Even the so-called “liberal” news media made sure to have two pro-war people on for every one anti-war and made sure to make the anti-war people seem to be as far out of the mainstream as possible with their flag lapel-wearing nonsense.

          1. Hi Seth, no I was piggy-backing on what you had said about Kate and Will wanting to go back to the 1920’s or 1930’s. As much as they wish to, it’s unrealistic.

            I’m sorry, it wasn’t clear. The “you” was general and not specifically directed at you.

            It’s somewhat ironic that you mention the PR around the Iraq war. I’m in Canada and our media coverage was very different than that in the US. We get US channels as well, so we get to see both country’s media, which can be very interesting when there is a subject being addressed which is so polarizing.

          2. Hi Bookworm, I thought you were addressing in general, not me specifically. Well the war is a very stark example of how governments can shape the messages they want, even with the theoretical free flow of information with the Internet. The same thing applies to the royals. I find it interesting how much the P.R. industry has grown in recent years.

    1. Yep, no Pap shots on holidays, although really, how many shots of Kate’s bum do we want to see? Personally I am over this couple, and their laziness. I bet that the people who work with Petulant are not too thrilled either. He has reduced days already to fit in with his ahem, Royal work and now he is going on holidays a few months after he starts work.

      1. From what I understand the vacation is mainly for W&K and the kids. Carole is tagging along to help with anything. Mike may have wanted to stay back at home to run the business. James has Donna and a business too, he doesn’t need to be with his sister all the time.

        It also seems to double up as a girls holiday.

        1. Isn’t that why they have a nanny/nannies? To take care of the children for them when they want some alone time? Why is it necessary for Carole to tag along? Because Kate can’t deal with anything outside of her own personal care (i.e., caking on the make-up, brushing and twirling the hair, wearing jeggings and wedges). Heaven forbid she should act like a grown woman with two children and deal with her own staff and life.

          1. Just guessing again: maybe the nanny is getting some time off while in Mustique? Oit the entire trip but just for a few days. They are looking after two children afterall (one of which is an infant).

            Idk about Carole. I’m sticking with my guess. I personally don’t understand why one needs their mother so much around. I love my mom to bits but I can’t ever imagine giving her that much control.

          1. The article says she co-coordinated this. She’s a professional socialite, it’s not like she has anything better to do.

    2. It’s written by Nicholl, it must be true-ish.

      I have a question; whne does autumn start exactly? I live in a tropical country and our weather is divided into two: wet or wetter. It’s stated that Kate will be back to work on autumn, when is that?

      1. Technically autumn doesn’t start until September 22 on the autumnal equinox.

      2. Hi J. I had to smile at your comment “our weather is divided into two: wet or wetter”. That sure does sound like Auckland at certain times of the year! 🙂

    1. So to me, it kind of DOES feel like Kate maybe just went out so much with William because at the time, she was trying to get an engagement ring, because she really stopped doing it nearly as much (despite having RPO’s now to help protect her from unwanted pictures, etc.) right after her marriage. That being said, this article (and the comments of these “friends” if they are true) make me wonder if none of them have ever had children. A good father (and mother) has to cut down on his social activities so he can spend time with the tiny little human beings he helped bring into the world. If I had two kids, I’d be pretty pissed if my husband was always off hunting or drinking with his buddies. Obviously everyone should get time to do their own thing, but blaming Kate for wanting William to be involved with their family (or even the implication that it is Kate’s “fault” and not William’s choice”) is pretty sexist imo. It’s just typical omg that woman is so controlling and manipulative and whatever else. Some of William’s friends may not get it (again, if any of his friends even said this which I highly doubt) because they all come from upper class lifestyles that involve little interaction with the children. But maybe William and Kate actually do want to spend time with their kids.
      I honestly do think it seems as though both of them are invested in their children, and spending time with them. I don’t really think that’s the reason for the lack of work over the past few years since they also do things without their children in their leisure time; I think that’s just reluctance to be in the public eye. But yeah, I feel like maybe it’s not a stretch to say that the Cambridges do want to nurture and cultivate a strong family life.

      The only thing maybe is that it does kind of seem like even in their leisure time, they (esp Kate) have become very reclusive and do not attend parties and such nearly as often as they used to. I wonder if it’s because Kate doesn’t have any close girl friends and William’s friends were always rude to her before marriage (and now that she has the ring, she doesn’t need to worry as much about causing problems between William and them). Maybe William is just trying to be supportive of Kate because she feels uncomfortable with his group of people and it has nothing to do with the kids. I dunno. But in general I hate it when people blame a woman for “forcing” a man to “have less fun,” when all that is happening is that the guy is living up to his responsibilities and/or trying to make his wife happy (which can be a thing without it being forced!).
      Lastly, the article is definitely factually wrong about some stuff. Like, she didn’t attend Powell’s funeral because they had a joint appearance scheduled during it, and as William already had to cancel, she went alone to make sure they got at least one royal for the promised engagement.

        1. Kate for sure went to a ton of weddings in the first two years of her marriage.

      1. Except for two things Maggie. 1. William is not living up to his responsibilities. 2. He is Royal. He is far more upper class than any of his friends ever can be. Even with Diana’s close attention, he was still raised around nannies, footmen, police, etc. Willy and Waity have little staff but they do have some. A royal is far above anyone else in the social strata. Saying he has to attend to family is a wonderful excuse but I’m willing to bet it’s more smoke and mirrors than reality.

      2. Their relationship, particularly since 2007, has always been based on her putting up with him doing whatever he wants To A Point. Too many comments have emerged about her being stifling, controlling during those years to think it all lies. When he wants her to back off, she does. She runs home to mummy with the kids and stays there until he’s willing to have her around again. Why? Because it all gets her what she wants – the privileged life, status, and wealth she chased for a decade.

        If she’s starts to realize she wants him around more? She does something like letting paps take pictures of her and 1st baby on the way to Mustique – the same weekend he’s hunting in Spain with Jecca. I think she lets herself be a doormat to him most of the time, but when he does something that humiliates her (openly flirting with other girls while she was at a party with him, hunting with Jecca), she pitches a fit and yanks him back.

        He allows it because 1) he had to marry somebody at some point and marriage at 30 gave him full access to the trust fund 2) he trusts her enough to marry her even though he’s not in love with her 3) marriage has given him numerous excuses to avoid royal work and go on more vacations.

        Not a healthy relationship when you’re both happier apart.

        1. Willie has known to be a brat as a child because he knew he can get anything he wanted. The frequent cheating shows how little self control he has: he wants it therefore he gets it. I don’t think he cares about her feelings at all. Kate puts up with it because it gets her what she wants.

    2. I read that, and it seems like a ‘gloves coming off’ sort of article. It does not cast either Kate nor Will in a good light. Not just to mention the fact that Kate is portrayed as henpecking Will, but it alludes to the fact that Will likes to party and that Kate may have just been playing the game to get to Will. According to this article it sounds like Kate liked everything that Will liked and loved all the activities that Will loved and now that she is secure in her position, she doesn’t have to pretend anymore.

      This might sound terrible, but if for some reason Will and Kate were to divorce, who of their social circle would side with Kate? It sounds like she has alienated everyone even Will’s friends who could become her friends.

      1. That’s a pretty easy question to answer: Kate would be relegated to Bucklebury and her only friends would be her family. She cut so many people off so she could get close to William and she hasn’t exactly endeared herself to William’s friends enough for them to side with her should the mud slinging start. She would be back to taking pictures of Party Pieces merchandise while Carole berated her for everything she did wrong in her mind.

        1. I wouldn’t wish Carole on anyone, even Kate, should this marriage fail.

          BTW: some of the DM comments repeatedly said that German TV said the Middletons have definitely separated. Is this true? Can anyone German confirm the tv report, if not the truth of the MIddletons’ situation?

          Maybe this is why Carole has looked terrible in recent months.

          Maybe this is why Michael isn’t heading out to Mustique.

        2. Also if they do separate, the Queen gets custody of the children. That’s how it works in royal divorces. The wrath of Carole on Katie and everyone else around her would be unimaginable. And I think there is something wrong in the Midds’ marriage. The announcement that Michael and James aren’t going on the holiday. Also at Charlotte’s christening, they seemed chilly with each other. Time will tell.

          1. My god, I hope it’s not true. I’m not a fan of the Midds but to divorce right now is the worst that could happen.

      2. That is scarily like Diana acting like she loved Balmoral and all of the country sports when dating Charles then completely hating it once married.

        1. You took the words right out of my mouth Amy. It is like Diana and Charles all over again, except Diana’s mother kept out of it and let Diana lead her own life.

        2. In my previous comment, thinking about what would happen if Will and Kate were to divorce, I was thinking of Diana as well. She still had her group of friends in her corner. I know that there were off and on relationships in there, but she seemed to have people who would take her side.

          In the case of Kate, at this point, other than her family, she seems to be completely alone.

    3. I don’t know how much of this article is true, either. I don’t like the quips that W supposedly made or makes, though. Having to check with the wife about doing things. So old-fashioned and plain stupid.

      What does intrigue me, however, and again, who knows if it’s true — is the comment that suggests it is Kate who is forcing William to stay home. If the past is any indication of how things go, maybe it is Carole who is making such requests. After all, it was Carole who was supposedly the one behind getting W to finally propose. Could Carole be the one who is running the show in this situation, too? Am I being bad in thinking that Kate still can’t stand up for herself?

      As a mother of two, I don’t blame any wife of young children to want her husband home more, though.

  30. I read the letter from Jason and sorry but I don’t buy it either. I do think that hiding in the back of car is weird and a bit scary. Also staking out children’s play grounds etc. But the paps would not be there unless they have had a tip off. And Ma Middleton has been know to tip off the paps before so I don’t think she has stopped doing that. I think there is a definite campaign by Carole to be seen as George’s closest grandparent and that is why she likes to be seen in public with him. I do think the kids have a right to some privacy. I have a little vision of William finding out about the photos in People (in the US) and New Idea (in OZ and NZ). William going home and asking Kate what the story is… then Kate wanting to cover for her mother saying… “oh it was a pap hiding out”.
    Yeah, right?
    If it was a pap with a long distance lens that day at the beach then how did he know to stake out the beach?
    Smells like bull***t to me!
    And going back to an early comment of mine? I have said before that I think kate is the problem in the family… see the article in today’s DM about William not being “allowed” out to attend social gatherings. Kate is shortening his leash?

    1. I read another non sugar blog today which makes a good point. Jason attempted to explain the pictures of Carole and George on the beach as being taken by a pap hiding in a sand dune. This doesn’t explain the photos of Ma Middleton and George in a field (on the way home from the beach?) does it? Or did the “sand dune” get up and walk to the field?

    1. It is only gossip and rumor about the trip, right? Nothing has been confirmed and probably won’t be. Middleton’s usually go in July and January, not November. W&K may have slipped away after C’s birth for a tropical holiday that nobody caught. That could have been when the diving certification took place. They’ve both looked pretty tan for a rainy summer.

  31. I will be interested to see if there is any comment in New Idea about use of these photos that ere allegedly taken by paps. I can check the New Zealand edition of New Idea and report back.

  32. The difference between how William and Kate are “modernising” the monarchy versus how Princess Diana did it, is that William and Kate have forgotten the monarchy part. Their reactions to photos show that. I’m sure there are many parents who would love for their children to be able to play in any playground in their area safely, and pictures are not the dangers they are worried about. This whining to the press about photos taken in public areas, which is legal, is a perfect example of this. Somehow William and Harry had normal private playtimes with other children without all of this royally entitled nonsense. This article from a few years ago is so laughable it’s sad, but it shows the contrast between William and his mother Diana.

  33. Guess who didn’t turn up to VJ 70th Anniversary Services of Remembrance…

    William and Kate need to quit whining over what I see to be largely of their own making, and get out and do some work. They would then have much greater control on what the media writes about them. When there’s no story, there is a very real risk that one will be invented.

    The sheets in the car thing puzzles me too (thanks Amy). I should have thought that draping the inside of your car with sheets would make you more, rather than less obvious; doing so opposite a children’s playground would almost certainly (and very quickly) arouse justifiable interest in your activities. I’m also surprised that story didn’t make news at the time.

    Nope; not buying this, Cambridges. Release more family photos, be seen yourselves outside your “walled gardens and palaces”, and this problem will largely cease to exist.

    1. I didn’t catch that before either. Around here, parents wouldn’t hesitate to call the police about a suspicious person seeming to hide in their car around a park with kids playing in it.

  34. I am a journ student and ethics is a huge part of the curriculum. The rule with children is that photos that are zoomed in on the child (or the child being the only/main subject) is forbidden unless the parents give consent. The law may be different for other countries. William and Kate are within their place if they complain about the children being followed.

    On the other hand I think the Palace PR machine needs to be fixed. W&K needs to pop out of hiding and do what CP Victoria and Daniel does with Estelle. Remember how scared George was when they brought him to the hospital? It’s essential that he gets used to being seen by the public for them to develop warm feelings for the poor kid. Look at William; he is nearing forty but he can still mooch off the goodwill from his childhood days.

    If they truly want the paps to stop taking photos, they need to devaluate the price of photos. Going out a lot for official functions for a consistently long time is one way to do it.

  35. I think that there might be a really easy solution to all of this for the press. Ignore Kate, Will and their kids. Ignore them when they are on vacation. Ignore them when they are out and about in the city or the country. Ignore them when they want attention. Ignore them when they are doing events. Just ignore them.

    1. I agree bookworm and said the same thing on RD. They would do such an about face if the press stopped paying attention to them. Kate and Ma Midds didn’t go through all of what they went through to sit in the country (no matter how grand that life may be). Kate would suddenly become a working royal just to get the press back. Now William might enjoy it immensely.

  36. I am a couple of days late to this posting, but I have to say I am so sick of the royals. especially Will and Kate, and their constant bitching. I think it’s time to take off the “kid gloves” and get out the cameras. Seriously. I think everyone with any type of photographic device should just follow and hound the hell out of them. They can’t have it both ways…they simply cannot be public figures without exposure, and not just exposure on their terms. I don’t feel sorry for the kids. The kids should be exposed to it now and get used to it. If you want privacy, stay inside. I don’t think celebrities should be bothered by people asking them for autographs or for selfies. But if a celebrity is outside, they’re fair game for anyone with a camera. That is not going to change. By constantly bitching about it, Will and Kate are rapidly losing supporters and interest.

  37. I think the time has come for the Press to take William off his pedestal.

    William’s approach on this issue is inconsistent and he looks like a fool. So what if these children grow up behind palace walls or at their private estates? Isn’t that what previous royal children have done? If these parents insist on taking them to public places, then photos WILL BE TAKEN until such time a law is passed to forbid photography of ANYONE at a public place. It just isn’t realistic.

  38. Looking back at Petulant and lazy snowflake rare War Remembrance attendance -the disrespect towards his father, POW*DoC after reports of threesome carol meddleton residency at AH (running off household staff), taking over Prince George; see snowflake disrespectful behaviour towards HM DOE, Prince Harry (point 3:17 to 3:54) – Prince Harry trying to be cordial to km after her refusal to show respect to the Queen (BP greysuit men are also observing km!) – Prince Harry seem so concern…

    1. I just watched this. I think that Waity is terrified of the Queen and doesn’t know how to behave around her. Of Course this is no excuse for her to totally ignore HM. I think that when Charles becomes King and Camilla Queen ( because he will make her his Queen) then Waity had better watch out LOL.

      1. She looked sullen and somewhat put out. She did appear to step forward to receive QE’s attention, but QE didn’t see her (?) and moved in a different direction. Why she was standing so far behind William in the first place seemed a little odd. Once he bowed, she would have easily been able to move forward to pay respect ( had she been 3 steps behind, rather than 10).
        What struck me the most that day, was the interactions between her and Harry. Inside St. Paul’s, and out on the steps. More like chilly aquaintences, than a jovial family connection. Their relationship is markedly changed since the 2012 Olympics camaraderie.
        Something happened….

        1. I think Harry’s success with the Invictus Games and natural charm with people, as well as all the “negative”–read: BALANCED–stories about Willy and Katie over the last couple years and Katie’s wooden and inappropriate personality in public may have something to do with it. Also Katie has two small kids now. There’s no rule that you have to be friends with your brother-in-law; my father’s not close with any of his and vis versa.

          1. That is true Seth, but we have seen them look a lot closer and warmer to each other in the past than they did in this video. Harry at least tried, where as Waity looked bored and sullen.

          2. No I agree completely. I think Harry’s positive press and charm is annoying to Willy and Katie, who expected they would be praised for showing up to a “fun” royal event once a month and then left alone. I’m just saying that you don’t need to be close to your in-laws, that’s all. 🙂

    2. Ok, can someone please set me right on this…
      Did Kate not curtsy to the Queen in that clip? And she is the one with the mother who proclaims that Harry has no manners etc? Elbows off the table and say thank you at the end of the meal but can’t teach her daughter to show respect to a) the Queen and DoE b) her elders and c) she can’t even show respect for her husband’s family? And this is the husband who has to put up with Carole in his house practically all the time?????

      1. Yeah, it seemed weird that she just side eyed them. I’d understand if they didn’t have enough time to chitchat but she could’ve at least come close and look interested.

  39. She did not even acknowledge the Queen Cathy. So very very rude. She was behind Petulant and she did not move out. If I were petulant I would have made dragged her up to HM and then she would have had to curtsey to her. I think that she thinks that she is the Golden Goose now that she has provided the heir and the spare. However she should remember that people like to eat Goose and she is not immune to good manners. I skipped right to the end it looked as though Harry was standing all by himself outside on the right hand side when HM was talking to people.

  40. I honestly don’t believe media attention has ever bothered Catherine, from the first moment she captured their attention as William’s girlfriend. She doesn’t appear to have ever truly shied away from being photographed. I think she likes it.
    We know William only likes it it if he controls the content and/or gives permission – that’s entitlement from heir to the heir. I guess some of that stems from how his mother died, but he grew up with media presence and always despised it.
    I feel like it must be a real push/pull in their relationship. Her relaxed attitude towards being photographed and his heavy handed approach to wanting full editorial say in where/when/how.
    I really don’t get it, and can’t imagine it wouldn’t cause a wedge in their marriage, because truth is, the “unauthorized” pictures are always taken when Kate and Carole are present. Just kind of shaking my head over this one.

    1. I think you are right in all respects here. The British aspirational classes – sycophants all – fall over themselves to become close to things ‘royal’, craving the attention and notoriety it brings. Sad,really.

    2. I agree, Ray. Will keeps making it seem like he’s just protecting Kate, but really he is the one who hates the media. Saying you are keeping them away for your wife and children supposedly sounds better.

    3. After George was born I started getting the impression that Kate thought she was the main event (that it was ALL about her?).
      Or was it just an overload from too much smirking from Kate?
      I definitely think she deliberately placed her hand on the top of her baby bump to get the attention back on her after the service at St Pauls. (contrast that with the sullen little miss before the service!)

      1. I’m so with you on that, Cathy. I was thinking the same thing about Kate when she called attention to herself on the steps of St.Paul’s that day — putting her hand over her baby bump. “It’s all about me,” she seemed to be saying and on a day when everyone was honoring the military whose lives were lost — and those who were hurt. I also remember the photo of W&K walking into the Cathedral and Harry’s deeply moved facial expression. Kate looked like she was smirking .

        I’m really fed up with all her antics. Start working a bit, Kate. Do something to earn your fabulous keep. Oh, I mean once your maternity leave is up. Sorry, I am very annoyed today.

          1. She doesn’t eat lunch. If anything she’s drinking one of Pippa’s miracle blends because she’s got jeggings to get back in to.

  41. Well, the deal is this – the paps aren’t going to disappear, and no number of pleas by William will help. This sort of thing has gone on for ages, just look at President Kennedy’s kids. The parents just need to ramp up security, that’s all. “Don’t complain, don’t explain”…….

  42. I have admired this Blog as it presents such an educated and respectful discussion forum. (And at times very funny as well!)
    Thanks to all of you and of course KMR (May I call you that?)
    I am nervous to post my first response, as I am not sure it belongs with this discussion, or may have been discussed before. The Remembrance service brought back a question I have often wondered. Do the the Pentalant and Duchess Doolittle attend church other than for Official Events such as the one being discussed? I read somewhere that the Meddletons (I love the names you all come up with!) never have shown any interest in religion. Won’t that be an important part of WK duties when he ascends the Throne? Baptism is such a Royal Event. Is that all that is required? I am not being critical, as I do not believe one must go to church to be spiritual, unless you will one day be Head of the Church of England? Thanks for letting me post. I learn so much from KMR: the history provided is so educational and the comments so interesting!

    1. Welcome, elizabeth. Don’t ever hesitate to have your say or ask a question. So many commenters here are full of great and interesting info, and it makes for some fun conversations!

    2. Hi Elizabeth. Warmest welcome from a fellow royal watcher. This blog is not quite like many others; KMR brings what I consider a sense of reality that a lot of other commenters don’t. She is critical of the royals, especially William and Catherine, when she feels it calls for it and respectful when it is due. As you know from reading it, she also covers the other royal families that most of the American media ignores or forgets about. Feel free to comment on any post you want. If it’s a little harsh, don’t worry, we’re grown ups, we can take a little criticism. Don’t be nervous. Welcome aboard! 🙂

    3. Hi! 🙂 from what I recall, they integrated traditions from several different faiths into their wedding to represent different faiths of the people in the UK. So I don’t think they are just thinking Christianity now in regards to representing the people. I could be wrong but I think Prince Charles does not want to be Head of the Church of England, or he also wants a more diverse role in that regard.

    4. Welcome Elizabeth!
      You are correct. They never go to church except for official royal events or Christmas with the queen. When they can be bothered to do that.
      I read a little while back one of the COE leaders (Arch of Canterbury?) saying he wished Will and Kate attended more often, citing your same argument, that he will one day be head of the church. They may not be very religious, but it is another task that comes with the job. So they will probably continue to ignore it like every other duty.

    1. I feel bad for him in some ways. But I really have to question their business model. How big do they think the artisinal marshmallow market is? And really how many people want to pay 15 pounds ($30) for 9 marshmallows. I could maybe see having quirky marshmallows be part of your business, but your entire source of revenue? Who were they expecting to sell them to?

      1. That seems way too bloody expensive for mashmallows?? And this is the son of successful business people? Also, they have a notice that their marhmallow are not halal because of an ingredient they have that comes from pork. That would also mean that their products are not vegan or vegetarian. What a poorly researched product. Doesn’t he know that the only people willing to shell out that much for what he sells are hipsters who are mostly vegans? Lmao.

      2. He was/is probably thinking that Ma Carole is going to sprinkle some of her magical fairy dust on his business and make him a success the way Kate became a success by marrying William. However, Ma Carole’s fairy dust is running low if we’re to believe the rumors about not only her marriage having problems, but having to basically police/take care of her eldest daughter what seems to be 24/7.

        1. Handcrafted, made from scratch and conveniently has Instagram photos on them.

          But seriously, artisanal is the new selling feature for food. Artisanal cheese, bread, jams, pickles, etc. I believe they are called artisanal food craftsmen. I admit I get caught up in a bit, since both my husband and I are foodies who frequent farmer’s markets. It’s nice to support local business, but it can go a bit overboard.

  43. As much as it pains me to attempt to defend Kate, I think she actually did curtsy to the Queen at St. Paul’s. Around the time of the event, I saw a video that had another angle in it. After the Queen finished greeting the clergy, she turned around and faced where the rest of the family was standing. This shot which lasted only a second or two, showed what appeared to be the end of various bows and curtsies. Kate was almost off camera but it looked like she was coming up from a curtsy. It was just a split second but I think she did do it. The video referenced above, skips that part and goes straight to when the Queen has already reached the family. I don’t think William was bowing there so much as just lowering his head to hear what his grandmother was saying to him. I don’t remember where I saw the video with the other angles and quite honestly, I don’t care enough about either of them to go looking for it.

    1. You could be right about the bow in that video, it makes just as much sense that he’s lowering his head to speak to his grandmother. I’m glad to hear that Catherine did, in fact, curtesy. It would be shocking if she hadn’t. She was being a bit of a sourpuss that day, which made it easier for us to jump to conclusions.

    2. Hi, this is a week late.

      Kate often doesn’t curtsey or remembers to when she sees others do it. She didn’t curtsey at the Commonwealth Day gathering, and she also didn’t at Christmas (video on Youtube when she’s greeting the Queen at the car). Order of the Garter (yes, there was a time when proper duties like this instead of a hospital appearance counted to her CC tally) there’s a pictures of her and no one else curtsying because the proper time when Sophie and everyone else was doing what they were suppose to be doing she was being her usual absent minded childish giggling self, laughing at William’s attire – and I guess maybe then everyone else’s? Or was it the whole procession and day itself that she found ridiculous? Perhaps I’m being a bit of a cynic. Sorry. It does call into question though whether she sees any value in the traditions and the history that are part and parcel of and make up the British Monarchy/its heritage. Because this wasn’t the first time she had the giggles at this event, and other occasions. By all means, please love life and have fun, once is okay but annually (or when she bothers to show up) her having a case of the giggles is a bit much.

  44. Everyone has said so much that I agree with that I’ll try to be brief. They are not private citizens and neither are their children. Do their children deserved to be stalked, no. But they take public money to protect themselves and their children. Non royal Britans don’t have this luxury.

    One thing I don’t understand is that they moved to Norfolk for privacy but insist on taking George to these play parks. Kate and Will have access to thousands of acres of private land, plus the hired help and funds to creat their own play park. Finally they have relatives and friends who have small kids that George can play with. Instead of looking like whiny, entitled brats and ticking off the royal journalists why wouldn’t they search for a work around! Heck they don’t even need to think up a work around they can have staff do it.

    I honestly think this is less about the kids and more about their comings and goings being watched. We have already heard that his full time job isn’t really full time. They have been caught in so many lies and I think the only way to keep their stories from being found out as lies is complete control of their image.

    I could be wrong but I feel like both of them love to play the victim, especially Kate. William has always loathed the media but these whiny letters and legal actions only started when Kate came into the picture, if I’m correct. Could she be reminding him that he doesn’t want her to end up like her mother and using this as a way to keep him close and engaged in their relationship?

    That wasn’t as short as I thought it would be! Sorry!

      1. Ooooo Cathy, is a Meddleton accompanying him to keep him on the straight and narrow? To make sure his eyes don’t stray? To remind him of what he owes them by receiving Kate as his bride and getting to be a part of the joy that is the normal middle class Family Meddleton.

  45. Thank you for the warm welcome and also responding to my question! I am looking forward to joining you to discuss the new mystery best seller (only available here!) “The Disappearing Duchess” Anybody want to start the first chapter? Where is the Duchess? Hiding with her mother, Scarol to plot the next step in their Master Plan? Seriously, I am intrigued by what is really happening.

  46. Kate cant stand competition, with all those young georgeous girls at the wedding while she already looks like willuam aunt!!

  47. I would like to officially change the name of Mustique tp Must-scape. As in Must escape.
    W&K heading to Must-scape with Carole and Pippa because the strain of everyday life has been too much since the birth of Charlotte? How spoiled and pampered are they, anyway?
    And, how does W get away with all the time off from his every-day, look at me, I am just like anyone else job?! Oh, wait I know, he can and will get away with all this because he is who he is Royally, although he is eager to be an everyday bloke.

    A vacation with Carole would not seem very relaxing to me. As long as she has access to a toaster oven and can make those cheese toasties for W, I guess all will be peachy come November when they head off for some R&R.

    1. HAHAHA Must-scape. That’s great!

      I agree about vacationing with Carole. I’d hate it. But it seems like William and Kate can’t get along without her there. They almost always bring her along on their holidays.

      1. I know, KMR. Where they go, Carole goes!
        Some vacation. But, then when one is exhausted from so much work any time away would be great! Let’s all escape to Must-scape. If only…..

  48. Mary Elizabeth and I are supposed to be finishing a project today, so we can have a three day weekend. Instead, we are trolling the internet and visiting KMR. Check out this article.

    If this was mentioned on this blog previously, our apologies. We love Carole’s wave from the Royal Carriage. Isn’t she the best? The article is funny. BOAC — the airline Carole worked for chose their air hostesses for their looks! Really? Interesting!

    Also, Mike was a pilot and exec at the airline? We thought he was an air host. Were we wrong?

    Love the last line of the article, too. So, Carole only has time for Kate, William, George and Charlotte. How do her other kids feel about this? And, what about her hubby?

    Oh, and does anyone know if Carole’s magazine articles ever came out? We need to google that next.

  49. William and Kate don’t want people to see the fakies up close and notice their dark brown eyes and the fraud they are committing.

    William couldn’t save his mother? Oh, please, that media hound dying opened up more opportunities for Billy and his barren mattress to play the eternal victims.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top