Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
The Duke And Duchess Of Cambridge Have Taken Legal Action Against Two Paparazzi Photographers
63 Answers
http:// www.tel egraph. co.uk/n ews/ukn ews/pri nce-geo rge/111 35797/D uke-and -Duches s-of-Ca mbridge -issue- warning -over-i ntrusio n-into- Prince- Georges -privac y.html
Are the Duke & Duchess right to expect privacy from watching cameras, when they choose to allow their nanny to walk young Prince George in public parks?
Or is this just a reasonable reaction by Prince William taking into consideration his mothers untimely death, fleeing the paparazzi?
Are the Duke & Duchess right to expect privacy from watching cameras, when they choose to allow their nanny to walk young Prince George in public parks?
Or is this just a reasonable reaction by Prince William taking into consideration his mothers untimely death, fleeing the paparazzi?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.William has direct experience of the Paparazzi in a way his father never did. He also had a far more 'normal' childhood than his father did which is doubtless why he wants George to have as normal/usual a childhood as he can.
Surely *any* parent would object to their child being stalked and photographs being sold around the world earning the snapper lots of money, all at the expense of their own peace of mind?
Surely *any* parent would object to their child being stalked and photographs being sold around the world earning the snapper lots of money, all at the expense of their own peace of mind?
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
AOG - "Then don't you think before he had seen what a rarefied and stilted upbringing his father had, he would have first noticed his upbringing, and took measures himself to withdraw both himself, his wife and children from the limelight, and live an ordinary life in a four bedroom semi.?"
Even though your example is deliberatly extreme, I think the reality is the William accepts the destiny of his birth, but still wants to spare his children the worst excesses of the trappings of royalty, in terms of its interaction with the media.
Even though your example is deliberatly extreme, I think the reality is the William accepts the destiny of his birth, but still wants to spare his children the worst excesses of the trappings of royalty, in terms of its interaction with the media.
What Svejk and jth said.
William is doing the best for his infant son and he, Kate and Harry have 'normalised' the Royal Family to a greater extent, in line with many of the European Royal Families.
The Cambridge's have been more than accommodating when it comes to posing for photos etc so beyond that there really is no need for these vermin to pursue them whilst they raise their son in as ordinary an atmosphere as they can provide for him.
William is doing the best for his infant son and he, Kate and Harry have 'normalised' the Royal Family to a greater extent, in line with many of the European Royal Families.
The Cambridge's have been more than accommodating when it comes to posing for photos etc so beyond that there really is no need for these vermin to pursue them whilst they raise their son in as ordinary an atmosphere as they can provide for him.
ChillDoubt - "The Cambridge's have been more than accommodating when it comes to posing for photos etc so beyond that there really is no need for these vermin to pursue them whilst they raise their son in as ordinary an atmosphere as they can provide for him."
Have you any idea the sort of syndication fees or exclusive rights candid photos of famous people fetch on the paparazzi market?
Why else do they camp out in parks, or outside nightclubs, or indeed anywhere where the 'right' photo can be a pension for life.
There is no limit to the appetite of the public for 'candid' shots of famous people, and demand means supply.
Anyone can get 'official' shots, usually free of charge, what magazine editors want is the shot their competitors don't have - and that is what this fuss is all about.
Have you any idea the sort of syndication fees or exclusive rights candid photos of famous people fetch on the paparazzi market?
Why else do they camp out in parks, or outside nightclubs, or indeed anywhere where the 'right' photo can be a pension for life.
There is no limit to the appetite of the public for 'candid' shots of famous people, and demand means supply.
Anyone can get 'official' shots, usually free of charge, what magazine editors want is the shot their competitors don't have - and that is what this fuss is all about.
Anyone can get 'official' shots, usually free of charge, what magazine editors want is the shot their competitors don't have - and that is what this fuss is all about.
------------------------
How about you get a sense of perspective? We are talking about a 1 year old boy, not some celebrity slapper showing a flash of gusset as she alights from a vehicle.
What 'shot' that their competitors don't have would be the Holy Grail of pictures in regards to a 1 year old?
Bar a picture of him vomiting on his nanny or having his index digit up his nose to the second knuckle, what would be that one spectacular that they're hoping for?
Do enlighten me! This should be interesting.......
------------------------
How about you get a sense of perspective? We are talking about a 1 year old boy, not some celebrity slapper showing a flash of gusset as she alights from a vehicle.
What 'shot' that their competitors don't have would be the Holy Grail of pictures in regards to a 1 year old?
Bar a picture of him vomiting on his nanny or having his index digit up his nose to the second knuckle, what would be that one spectacular that they're hoping for?
Do enlighten me! This should be interesting.......
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.