[Sussex] Duchess of Cambridge

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

No problem with the Royal Family really. They do bring a lot of tourist money in and the Queen is a decent figurehead.

But the utterly sycophantic way the press report everything about them drives me mad. The world will stop revolving tonight on the news as this stuff is reported as if everything else suddenly becomes irrelevant. And if anyone else in the country said some of things Philip has come up with they would be arrested, but because its Philip, it’s “funny”.

And I would have rather more respect for the lot of them if they actually went out and got jobs


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes. Royal Movements seem to give the respectable media an opportunity to pretend they are channel 5 and the Daily Mail rolled into one....

 

[Surf's Up]

All day long...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Despite or perhaps because of my hatred of all things royal, I find myself strangely attracted to this woman

 

[GT49er]

Y,n,n,y,n,y,y.

Y ? - Y? Ffs - you are J. Corbyn and I claim my five roubles!

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Elected - yes. Indubitably cheaper - very debatable. Accountable - probably not.

Just as accountable as any MP, presuming it is an elected MP.

 

[Wrong-Direction]

..

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk

 

[BrightonCottager]

TBF, the birth was about 5th or 6th item on yesterday's BBC PM news on the wireless. I've avoided watching telly since then though in case my neighbours complain about the abuse I shout at it.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

..

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk

I appreciate that's trying to make a point but it completely falls flat.

Just logging onto BBC now (so less than 24 hours after the baby was born) and 4 stories are already ahead of Royal baby content.

That's how the news works.

 

[Questions]

Why the feck does she need THREE children? Two is quite sufficient.

In case one turns out like Prince Andrew or Prince Edward.

 

[Simster]

I appreciate that's trying to make a point but it completely falls flat.

Just logging onto BBC now (so less than 24 hours after the baby was born) and 4 stories are already ahead of Royal baby content.

That's how the news works.

No it doesn't (or shouldn't), and it doesn't in other countries. This royal non-story topped the BBC news page all day yesterday, relegating the carnage in Toronto to a side show even though that happened in the afternoon a few hours after the baby was born. It was a complete embarrassment and living proof that the BBC is a lick-spittle organisation that cow-tows to the establishment rather than doing it's job properly.

 

[highflyer]

I am not sure that I count the 'Metro' as an actual newspaper. But it's the only print media I look at on a regular basis and first four pages this morning were dedicated to royal birth nonsense.

They need a third one btw to be the disappointing 'waster/alcoholic/troubled marriage' one - it's an important component of keeping the royal family in the news.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

No it doesn't (or shouldn't), and it doesn't in other countries. This royal non-story topped the BBC news page all day yesterday, relegating the carnage in Toronto to a side show even though that happened in the afternoon a few hours after the baby was born. It was a complete embarrassment and living proof that the BBC is a lick-spittle organisation that cow-tows to the establishment rather than doing it's job properly.

When I looked at BBC news online at 9pm, The Toronto story was top.

Having checked the facts, the rental van mounted the kerb at 17.30 GMT. So not in the afternoon a few hours after the baby was born.

And, as I stated, there were at least 3 main stories above the baby news this morning, less than 24 hours later.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I would far rather watch the news about the Royal Family than another 'scandal' involving Trump or what the Kardashians are up to now.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Just an update for those panicking about the level coverage. In the 11 stories on the front page of the BBC News website, the baby is not one of them.

 

[junior]

You really will swallow any old Royalist cobblers.

I've highlighted the bit that is pertinent. WHY SHOULD THAT BE ALLOWED then? What it means is that his business has an advantage over competition in the area. He basically gets free money to reinvest in his business that others don't get, so not only is the duchy robbing the treasury of money they should be paying, but also he's putting more efficient firms out of business by using this unfair advantage.

I wonder if - by trawling through NSC - I could find some posts of you hypocritically accusing Palace or Leicester of cheating by not paying the inland revenue the same as everybody else?

The royal family bring in more to this country than they take from it.

 

[Simster]

The royal family bring in more to this country than they take from it.

This argument has been done to death on here, so I'll just leave it by saying I don't agree. That is absolutely NOT a statement of fact.

 

[Buzzer]

According to the Democracy Ranking, constitutional monarchies are, on average, more democratic than just about any other system of government. Whether that's by accident or design is debatable but it does seem to work quite well.

I get that lots of people resent the idea of having a king or queen ruling over them but whilst it's clearly working, I don't see any point in changing it. There's far more important things to worry about.

 

[Clive Walker]

The royal family bring in more to this country than they take from it.

False

 

[Mo Gosfield]

According to the Democracy Ranking, constitutional monarchies are, on average, more democratic than just about any other system of government. Whether that's by accident or design is debatable but it does seem to work quite well.

I get that lots of people resent the idea of having a king or queen ruling over them but whilst it's clearly working, I don't see any point in changing it. There's far more important things to worry about.

Like the price of fish.

 

[Coalburner]

In this country kings and queens don't rule, they reign.

 

[Surf's Up]

Nothing wrong with the royals that a fully loaded Kalashnikov wouldn’t put right