The Palace and the Press

There have been many changes in the relationship between the press and the palace over the years. The pendulum has swung quite in the opposite direction of the days since speaking out against the royal family was contained to a soapbox in Hyde Park known as "Speakers Corner". In the current half century the press has sold millions of papers by splashing ghastly pictures - like the infamous photo of a topless Duchess of York having her toe sucked by her financial adviser - all over their covers. Radio and television increased their audience by taking a similar path. It's big business these days. Think of all the people who watched Prince Charles marry Lady Diana Spencer (750 million viewers). Of course when Queen Elizabeth II's parents married on April 26, 1923 in Westminster Abbey the service was not broadcast over the radio as it occurred to either Queen Mary or the Dean of the Abbey (I've heard the story both ways) that the service might be listened to by men in pubs wearing cloth caps. (Gawd fahbid!)

How did things get so out of hand? Well, it all began with Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother who was quite adept as using the media to promote her happy, stable family life to the people who were in a state of shock after Edward VIII abdicated. In those days Commander Richard Colville, Royal Press Officer, gave the press exactly what he wanted them to have. The press was grateful for never before had they been privy to this sort of exposure to the royal family. Of course the advent of newsreels in movie theaters and televisions eventual entr�e into the average household was a great boost to the PR of the royal family who, since the introduction of the Magna Carta in 1215, had gradually relinquished all of their power until they were reduced to mere figureheads.

The next event to blur the line between royalty and celebrity occurred in 1948 with the appointment of a BBC Radio Court Correspondent. This break through was followed by live television coverage of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953. By sharing the most sacred of royal ceremonies, coverage of all royal events became a matter of course. The British Press was still respectful of the royal family and reported only what the Royal Press Officer provided them with. This was all about to change.

It was during the coronation coverage that Princess Margaret was spotted with Group Captain Peter Townsend, a divorced man. While the American Press reported this immediately, the British Press waited. The palace soon sent Peter Townsend to Brussels so he and Margaret could have a cooling off period. When he returned in August of 1954 - 13 months later - the press went wild. In the Times opinion Princess Margaret's relationship with a married man would be damaging to the monarchy while more liberal papers, like the Mirror, suggested Margaret should not be forced to choose between love and the monarchy. Princess Margaret was the first member of the royal family to be subjected to this "Hollywood" type of coverage.

In the end Princess Margaret chose her duty to the Commmonwealth and the church's teachings (maintaining her royal status) over marriage to a divorced commoner. Princess Margaret, no doubt because of her beauty, youth and lively personality, continued to be the darling of the tabloid press. In 1964 she became the first royal victim of the paparazzi when Ray Bellisario photographed her in bathing suit. When the Sunday Express published the photographs the palace instructed editors to no longer buy Mr. Bellisario's photos. The editors obliged.

With the retirement of the conservative Commander Colville in 1967 the palace replaced him with William Heseltine. Mr. Heseltine and Prince Philip agreed that the Queen and her family ought to make themselves more accessible to their subjects through the use of television. Queen Elizabeth had some television exposure as she'd begun televising her annual Christmas message on the BBC in 1957. (The delivery of this annual speech via radio was a tradition started by her father, George VI.)

However, what Prince Philip and Mr. Heseltine had in mind was extremely different. Their idea came to fruition when the BBC aired a two-hour program called "Royal Family" on June 21, 1969. An overwhelming 68% of Britain's population tuned in to watch this documentary of royal family life. This broadcast along with the airing of his Investiture as Prince of Wales pushed Charles to the forefront as royal star taking some of the pressure off of Princess Margaret. The attention to Charles grew and he was soon purported to be the world's most eligible bachelor. The tabloids were forever featuring Charles and his dates on their front covers in hopes of being the first to break the story of the future Queen.

Though the spotlight was shared with other members of the family over the years, the first person who managed to steal the royal limelight from Charles for an extended period was Diana, Princess of Wales. The world fell in love with her at first sight and to this day has not fallen out. Diana breathed fresh life into the royal family, as she was a beautiful and compassionate woman with a common touch. This was refreshing to a public who'd began thinking of them as being out of touch and complacent since John Grigg first aired these, his feelings, in 1957. (It should be noted that at the time, he was not only ostracized by the press, but was punched in the face by a man on the street upon expressing these opinions.)

Diana also introduced a new aspect to the palace-press relationship, she spoke directly to them. This set a precedent as until that time it was the palace press office that handed out information be it official or "leaked". The true friends of the royal family would only speak on behalf of their Royal Highnesses when given permission to do so. Diana was the first to do this face to face of her own accord. She was photographed "leaking" information to reporters and we now know who leaked Andrew Morton all of her "secrets" for his biography's of her.

Following his wife's lead, Charles tries it in a much more formal way by allowing Jonathan Dimbleby to follow him around for a year. (Maybe this is more like Madonna's "Truth or Dare"?) This culminated in an ITV documentary and an authorized biography - the story of Wales' from Charles point of view. It might have all worked out well for Charles had he not admitted to adultery. Nothing else he had to say even came close to overshadowing that admission. It haunts him to this day. Diana followed suit a year later with her own televised interview with Martin Bashir of the BBC. In this one hour program Diana also admits her adultery. Unlike her husband, however, Diana's other admissions - that she doesn't see herself as Queen of England, that she doesn't see Charles in the "top job" (King) and her famous summation of her marital woes, "Well, there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded" - were equally titillating.

Now it's time to pass the torch to the next generation of the royal family. They have the benefit of having seen the effects that the media had on the lives of their parents, grandparents and even great grandparents. They must now choose how much of their private selves they wish to share with the media. Based on Prince William's first press conference, where he used a mere 39 words to describe his and his brother's, Harry, disgust at the betrayal of their mother's, Diana, Princess of Wales, memory, I'd say the pendulum is about to swing back.

Thanks again for all the great letters in support of Queen Elizabeth and for the plethora of information about your favorite books, authors and web sites. It is greatly appreciated. I feel like I'm now the holder of a treasure map and am planning to spend the long, cold winter exploring the "gems" of information you have so generously imparted on me.

Next week I'd like to try my hand at writing about something currently in the news - perhaps, the Queen's visit to Italy?

All the best,