The first problem with royal reports being dribble-jizzed all over our papers and telly is that it exists at all. That it’s seen as Vitally Important That You Pay Attention To These Rich Dullards.
But lets park that, and not linger on the pacifying effects on the national psyche.
What kind of journalism is royal reporting ? Because, essentially, what the royals do is deadly dull. A typical ‘appointment’ sees a Windsor arrives, a Windsor inspects some non-controversial thing, A Windsor nods, A Windsor leaves in a fast car ( about 45 minutes later). They usually say nothing, or if they do, it’s excruciatingly tedious. Surely journalists stare at one another after with ghastly realisation that they have to confect some guff around…THAT ?
And if they do say something that can be used as a feeble quote – “my brother would never let me live it down” the press present this cold turd to us as if Oscar Wilde and Martin Luther King had been brainstorming over a bottle of buckfast.
And there’s never any context, let alone criticism- when opening an NHS hospital none of the reporters ever say – “this is the only time the Windsor family are in an NHS hospital because despite the hugely positive message royal endorsment of NHS would send would send… they landrover off to the clutches of expensive private care when they need treatment…”
Weirdly, it’s not only me who is appalled by the press – but the Windsor family themselves clearly treat them with contempt. So not only do royal-hacks have to write 2000 words of fawning copy based around Prince Harry having a ball-achingly boring look at some red squirrels – they have to do it knowing that the very people they’re sooking up to, can’t bear the sight of them. I mean, imagine for a second, you’re life’s work is devoted to praising dull toffs who won’t deign to speak to you because they despise you. Bloody Awful – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4397667.stm.
It would not surprise me, if many of the hacks are much more cynical about Das Feudal Circus than their deferential copy suggests, but they need to pay the mortgage, and they get nice trips around the world at license-payer / Daily Mail’s expense. At least, I hope that’s the case, it’d be much more shocking if they were actually in a sycophantic thrall to The Firm.
Enough sympathy for the red-faced boozy royal hack pack…it’s us – the viewer, the reader, the citizen – that our sympathies lie. I mean, those BBC reports are insulting to our intelligence.
Consider today’s bilge..
The royal says not a thing. It’s entirely choreographed. It’s completely unenlightening. Nicholas Witchell ( who scabbed during the 1989 BBC strike, and who Prince Chaz described as ‘an awful man’ ) tells us she’ll really remember it ( without a shred of evidence). It’s not news !
The point is, Nicholas Witchell pre-chews everything here, he brightly beams about how brilliant it was that a posh women had a short visit to a set, and then tells us it’s memorable.
It’s not important to us at all. And it pushes other stories from the news agenda. Not only that, after reports about the fucked up world, this sugary baby food gently suggests that despite the rest of the news – EVERYTHING IS FINE, because The Posh People Find that Things Are As They Should Be When They Are Presented For Inspection. Be good serfs. Don’t question those above. They’re nice and you should fawn to them
How can this be news ? How can these people consider themselves journalists ?
What I’m saying is, I can’t bear Nicholas Witchell masticating with the royals.
Masticating with Kate.
Masticating with The Queen
Masticating with Prince Harry
Masticating with Prince Chaz
Masticating, dear viewer, over you.
One thought on “Reporting on the Royals…”
LikeLiked by 1 person