If the Royal Family is upset by the media hounding Prince George, why are they feeding the frenzy?

If the Palace wants George left alone they should stop trying to build his profile

Nash Riggins
Friday 14 August 2015 18:13
Comments
Prince George photographed for his official Christmas picture
Prince George photographed for his official Christmas picture

Kensington Palace has just come out swinging, this time against the international media for harassing Prince George and his new-born sister, Charlotte. According to the Royal Family, George has become the paparazzi’s “number one target”, and his parents are enraged.

Seedy photographers are hiding in car boots, stalking George’s nanny, burying themselves in sand. They have even tried to lure the boy out into play parks by using other children as decoys. It's all rather appalling, and as the Palace is keen to point out, we – the hungry consumers of such photos – are to blame.

This is true. Yet the statement from the Palace is probably the most hypocritical act of guilt-trippery in the history of royal public relations.

The Royal Family publicity machine clearly knows that the British people are hungry for photos, and tries to satisfy an insatiable global curiosity by releasing a handful of photographs every few months. That’s great, although what else are they but a tease? The Palace is dangling photos in front of the Monarchy's adoring fandom, and then wondering why they swoop in for more.

If the family wants Prince George left alone, they could start by resisting the urge to send batches of images to every single media outlet on planet earth whenever he loses a tooth. They’re perpetuating global interest in the poor kid, and that interest is what goes on to fuel gross invasions of his privacy. This tweet is a good example:

To be clear: it is not okay to take photos of children without their parents’ permission. Never. It’s not allowed in the country’s primary schools or sports clubs, and so it’s difficult to rationalise snapping unauthorised images of the Prince.

But do you honestly think the Royal photographer asks a two-year-old whether he wants his picture taken and distributed to the global media? Either way, this boy has absolutely no control over his image – and he never will. That’s not fair, and it’s not right. But as they say, heavy lies the crown, and until the UK starts to reassess its obsessive relationship with the Monarchy this isn't going to change.

In a perfect world, the media could leave George and his young sister alone. The royal siblings could go to the park and play with other children without anyone giving them a second glance, and everybody could treat them as though they were perfectly normal. But the thing is, they’re not normal – and so the Palace is wasting time even asking us, or the media it so regularly pacifies, to make believe.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in