It's what the internet was made for.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I wonder what The Royal Family thread’s resident monarchist, @TYL159, thinks of all this hoopla?
The Daily Mail have never done an article on that either and that's been on Twitter loads.
Maybe not directly … but they let the comments section run wild
They know there’s more than one way to
The comments section always runs wild unless it's moderated and you have to pay for that.Maybe not directly … but they let the comments section run wild
They know there’s more than one way toget their clicksskin a cat.
The RyanAir tweet was deleted and I also saw this.
Are we really going to keep pretending that they are helpless and can't defend themselves against media attacks? Let's not forget the edits made to the Catherine the Great vanity Fair article post-publication. And yet, they couldn't extend the same courtesy to Meghan?
Are we really going to keep pretending that they are helpless and can't defend themselves against media attacks? Let's not forget the edits made to the Catherine the Great vanity Fair article post-publication. And yet, they couldn't extend the same courtesy to Meghan?
It sounds like much more than some made up rubbish someone sent to a crazy gossip date if Ryanair and foreign press are alluding to the story. They ignore all the other guff these sites print about actors in the closet, affairs and fake babies, unless there is some truth to them, or they have heard it from media sources. It does also sound like William has got his lawyers on the case again. Apparently he has an injunction out protecting his right to a family life because of reports about his affairs. (Not defamation though) But as others have said, as long as they are consenting adults (proper consent, not Uncle Andrew consent) and Kate is letting him do it, then it's up to him. They wouldn't do the same for Meghan as she and Harry just aren't as important. They protect William to protect the Crown. The rest are cannon fodder. Andrew is only protected by being The Queens favourite and because in any decent society, sleeping with trafficked minors is far, far worse than accusing your own family of racism and being really irritating!
I think protection against racist coverage should have happened, but if you look at it most of the nasty stuff was in the comments not the articles themselves. The three times journalists (using the word loosely here) went wrong there should have been push back. In one case someone lost his job though. Making it clear that this type of journalism is not exactly the standard that they expect would have been a good thing. They missed the mark there.
For the rest I agree with @LoopyLou47. They protect the crown. H&M are too far away to ever play an important role and H has been so basically since George was born. Of course they won’t jump in front of them. Why anyone, especially H was surprised about that I don’t know. In the end it’s HMTQ, Charles, William and George. The rest is there to support them and doesn’t get nearly the pr protection they get. Camilla and Kate are just lucky to have married the right men. And the rest is too boring to talk much about.
For the rest I agree with @LoopyLou47. They protect the crown. H&M are too far away to ever play an important role and H has been so basically since George was born. Of course they won’t jump in front of them. Why anyone, especially H was surprised about that I don’t know. In the end it’s HMTQ, Charles, William and George. The rest is there to support them and doesn’t get nearly the pr protection they get. Camilla and Kate are just lucky to have married the right men. And the rest is too boring to talk much about.
I'm not sure if Harry would have been surprised. He's been brought up knowing he was a spare part all his life. Apparently the QM used to treat Charles and William much more favourably than the other children. I think he just resented it and Meghan came along and whispered I his ear about how terrible it all was. Margaret was the same, as I suspect was Andrew, but he got treated much better by his mother than Charles did, so that probably made up for it.
If the book by the Robert Lacey and also thingy the Bodyguard … Ken? … is any indication Harry has always been well aware of his place in the pecking order.
As I already posted previous monarchs have had more colourful private lives as have many US and French Presidents. It is just tittle tattle promoted by Meghan maniacs on twitter. It is hardly as if Meghan has been a nun and Harry a monk in private either
I don’t always agree with your opinions, but respect to your for actually answering that.
That is very true! I was watching a documentary on the Kennedy brothers a few weeks ago and apparently they were both sleeping with Marilyn Monroe during the same period. Sometimes they would be having it off with their mistress and their wives would only be next door.
The Queens Annus Horribilis was headlined as ‘one’s Bum year’ by a newspaper, which still makes me laugh
JFK also slept with Jackies sister
He was a dog!
Yes a but the sister was even worse in this case.
That is true. Why would you even go there? Princess Anne allegedly was shagging Camilla's husband, and that's icky enough, and one of Phils mistresses was apparently Princess Alexandra, the Queens cousin.
Yes I have heard about Ann, and Phil shagging Alexandra is rather nauseating then again her Dad would shag anything in a skirt or trousers.
Prince Michael of Kents father Prince George was well known for his various trysts with both women and men and spent a lot of his time languishing in opium dens etc
- Status