Royal pregnancy

A board for news and views on what's happening in the world

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Fugitive » 04 Dec 2012, 07:11

I think they would have preferred to protect themselves and us from this frenzy of reporting for a good while yet as they hadn't even told the Queen but this wasn't to be. Far too soon to announce such a public a pregnancy but they had no choice did they? It's going to seem like a very long one :(
User avatar
Fugitive
 
Posts: 757
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 08:27

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Oojamaflip » 04 Dec 2012, 09:33

Suff wrote:
I am very, very happy for them and will make a point of completely ignoring the media fest over it.....



I agree on both counts.
<>< The reward that outdoes all others is the peace of knowing that you did the right thing ><>
User avatar
Oojamaflip
 
Posts: 255
Joined: 28 Nov 2012, 07:06
Location: Here, inside your screen

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Workingman » 04 Dec 2012, 11:29

We do not blame the Royal Couple - as we have all made clear to those who actually read what we write - but we do blame the media.

A selection of today'e front page headlines.

Sky - Pregnant Kate Spends Second Day In Hospital

BBC - Second day in hospital for Kate

Telegraph - Could it be twins for the Duchess?

Guardian - Duke and Duchess expecting first baby

Daily Mail - 'It's a period of rest that she needs' and Is this what the Royal baby could look like? and How new Royal baby will bump Uncle Harry into fourth place in the line of succession and many many more....

The Sun - Kate on a drip

Enough already.
User avatar
Workingman
 
Posts: 21750
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 15:20

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Suff » 04 Dec 2012, 12:44

Workingman wrote:If you can. :P


Course I can, I use a news portal and it's easy..
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand Binary and those who do not.
User avatar
Suff
 
Posts: 10785
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 08:35

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Teaspoon » 04 Dec 2012, 17:38

I don't understand why there could not have been an injunction to stop the press from publishing anything until the Royal family were ready. Footballers manage to gag the press, surely the Royals are in a better position to keep things under wraps. If not, it really brings home what little privacy they have :cry:
User avatar
Teaspoon
 
Posts: 71
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 10:09
Location: Suffolk

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Workingman » 04 Dec 2012, 17:55

I suppose that there could have been some sort of injunction, though with her going to hospital it would have been difficult.

What might have been more difficult would be to stop speculative stories: Is Kate pregnant? When did Kate first know? Could it be twins for the Duchess? Is this what the Royal baby could look like?

They are already out there... and not all by Tabloids. :evil: :evil: :evil:
User avatar
Workingman
 
Posts: 21750
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 15:20

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Suff » 04 Dec 2012, 19:11

Teaspoon wrote:I don't understand why there could not have been an injunction to stop the press from publishing anything until the Royal family were ready.


Oh yes and what an abuse of public power that would have been spun as by the press once they got a chance. The republican knives would have been out and plenty would have decried the use of that power, denied to so many othes. That so many others wouldn't need it as the press couldn't care if they dropped dead tomorrow is a moot point....

Better as it was.
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand Binary and those who do not.
User avatar
Suff
 
Posts: 10785
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 08:35

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Workingman » 04 Dec 2012, 19:47

My Republican knife is firmly in its sheath over this.

I am as happy with the news as I would be for any stranger. Having a baby is a wonderful experience. Will and Kate have every right to enjoy it as much as I enjoyed my two.

The mediafest, however, is another thing, and I will hate every story and every photoshoot and every speculation until the pregnancy is over. I do not, for one nanosecond, blame Will and Kate for that.
User avatar
Workingman
 
Posts: 21750
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 15:20

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Weka » 05 Dec 2012, 10:14

it was the second item on our main news. first item as an MP being disowned by his part over some funds missing from him mums estate. but that was about a 2 min item, the the other news came on and didn't leave the screens till about 5 mins later. apparently, according on one expert, she could be having twins. oh please :roll: Yay for pregancy, babies etc, boo hiss to the media. let them enjoy it as a couple. the rest of us really don't need to know anything more except name, time, and weight when it arrives. i certainly don't want to hear a blow by blow delivery account.
Everything happens for a reason
User avatar
Weka
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 04:37

Re: Royal pregnancy

Postby Oojamaflip » 05 Dec 2012, 11:10

Weka wrote:. . . i certainly don't want to hear a blow by blow delivery account.


Weka, it won't be messy - just Kate's dainty little cough and the baby will arrive, looking cherubic and freshly bathed, smelling of sweetness and wrapped in swaddling . . . oh, am I getting my stories mixed up? Tis the season . . .
<>< The reward that outdoes all others is the peace of knowing that you did the right thing ><>
User avatar
Oojamaflip
 
Posts: 255
Joined: 28 Nov 2012, 07:06
Location: Here, inside your screen

PreviousNext

Return to News and Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 112 guests