General News for the Cambridge Family Part 3: March 2017-September 2022

[Lumutqueen]

https://www.etonline.com/kate-middl...-article-about-meghan-markle-prince-harry-and

A Tatler spokesperson spoke to Entertainment Tonight about the Kensington Palace denial and said: “Tatler’s Editor-in-Chief Richard Dennen stands behind the reporting of Anna Pasternak and her sources. Kensington Palace knew we were running the ‘Catherine the Great’ cover months ago and we asked them to work together on it. The fact they are denying they ever knew is categorically false.”


So Tatler is countering their denial.

I mean they’re not are they.

Kensington Palace has said this;

“This story contains a swathe of inaccuracies & false misrepresentations which were not put to Kensington Palace prior to publication.”

KP are not denying they were unaware of the Catherine the Great cover, nor that they worked together. KP is stating that parts of the article itself weren’t put forward for approval prior to publication. That sparked the denial, not that they didn’t know the article was coming.

There are some truths in the Tastler story. Otherwise the Kensington Palace would not be rushing out to try to kill the story, and do some damage control.

I don’t see how you come to that conclusion, when Tatler liaised with the Palace about the cover and the contents. What’s likely happened, is Tatler never ran the final print version passed KP, and this has sparked the denial.

There’s no damage control to be done, if what’s being said isn’t true.

 

[ACO]

I mean they’re not are they.

Kensington Palace has said this;

“This story contains a swathe of inaccuracies & false misrepresentations which were not put to Kensington Palace prior to publication.”

KP are not denying they were unaware of the Catherine the Great cover, nor that they worked together. KP is stating that parts of the article itself weren’t put forward for approval prior to publication. That sparked the denial, not that they didn’t know the article was coming.

I actually agree with you. They knew of the cover story and collaborated with them (to some extent). So what is and isn't a reveal by a "source" is up for debate. The issue is that it would seem Tatler didn't run the final version by KP and the backlash of the article has caused them to want to distance themselves and clear up some content. Understandable but also fascinating.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I actually agree with you. They knew of the cover story and collaborated with them (to some extent). So what is and isn't a reveal by a "source" is up for debate. The issue is that it would seem Tatler didn't run the final version by KP and the backlash of the article has caused them to want to distance themselves and clear up some content. Understandable but also fascinating.

Absolutely! And I cannot help but think what a colossal mistake they have made. They had input and go ahead from the palace, chose to publish without, and have now burnt any bridges they made with the RF in doing so.

I’ve literally just this minute got the Tatler copy through the post, if anyone wants pictures of the article let me know.

 

[miss whirley]

I actually agree with you. They knew of the cover story and collaborated with them (to some extent). So what is and isn't a reveal by a "source" is up for debate. The issue is that it would seem Tatler didn't run the final version by KP and the backlash of the article has caused them to want to distance themselves and clear up some content. Understandable but also fascinating.

Well, Tatler says they asked KP to collaborate, they didn't say KP agreed to. Since Tatler is now trying to cover itself, if it had been a joint project they would say so. So Tatler worked on the project solo after not receiving feedback from KP. It sounds like the closest sources they could find were "a friend of Donna Air, James Middleton's ex gf".

Tatler has been writing snarky, superior than thou articles about Catherine, Carole for years, and more recently Meghan too. So this article was their usual faux-nice venom to the ladies. But this time Tatler got pushback from the KP and other papers, so they're huffing. Needless to say I can see why KP didn't want to collaborate with them. Tatler's brand of aristo condescension isn't what the Palace wants to be associated with right now as they work to appeal to middle-class UK during a pandemic.

 

[TLLK]

However, the palace seldom seems to follow that rule when it comes to Catherine/William...just everyone else. How many times has the palace spoken out when an unfavorable story comes out about this couple?

Keep in mind that this is Kensington Palace aka The Cambridges which is issuing the comment, not Buckingham Palace/ Windsor Castle-QEII or Clarence House-The PoW. The Cambridges are free to issue a statement when they're the subject of an article.

 

[Tarlita]

Another lot of Twaddle and BS from a media outlet and it is becoming very tiresome.
Just because something is in print doesn't make it TRUE, especially when it comes to royals.

Anyone can clearly see from photos of Catherine over the last several months that she enjoys her role, her duties and events/engagements. Catherine engages with people beautifully and it clearly shows.

There have been times when her children were very young you could clearly see that she had a bad night with them. This was also clear with other Royal princesses when their babies kept them up half the night. But that is not the case now. Quite simply Catherine Has Not looked tired to me all year.

I really hope that Prince William will do what Princess Caroline of Monaco/Hanover, has done and take the media to court Every time they print/publish a false article.
All these nonsense madeup stories about Royal women have to stop!

 

[poppy7]

Another lot of Twaddle and BS from a media outlet and it is becoming very tiresome.
Just because something is in print doesn't make it TRUE, especially when it comes to royals.

Anyone can clearly see from photos of Catherine over the last several months that she enjoys her role, her duties and events/engagements. Catherine engages with people beautifully and it clearly shows.

There have been times when her children were very young you could clearly see that she had a bad night with them. This was also clear with other Royal princesses when their babies kept them up half the night. But that is not the case now. Quite simply Catherine Has Not looked tired to me all year.

I really hope that Prince William will do what Princess Caroline of Monaco/Hanover, has done and take the media to court Every time they print/publish a false article.
All these nonsense madeup stories about Royal women have to stop!

Well Caroline and her children too sue over photos. And privacy laws are different in France. Yes I know she lives in Monaco now but lived in France for years.

Also yes the media treat royal woman, nag all women, badly. Appalling at times and because they are 'pretty'and look good in a dress and are more 'worthy' of media coverage. It is appalling.

 

[Osipi]

If there's one thing I can say about the Cambridges is that they're resilient no matter what is thrown at them. They've beautifully proven time and time again that they're more than adept at not only being full time, hands on parents to their children but diligent and enthusiastic when it comes to their royal roles and engagements and duties and responsibilities.

They're very much a happy couple with a happy family in my eyes. I go by what I see rather than what someone decides to print. ?

 

[Betsypaige]

Absolutely! And I cannot help but think what a colossal mistake they have made. They had input and go ahead from the palace, chose to publish without, and have now burnt any bridges they made with the RF in doing so.

I’ve literally just this minute got the Tatler copy through the post, if anyone wants pictures of the article let me know.

So, no one actually knows how Kate feels, but this article could have come across much differently had Tatler chosen to take a far less toxic, aggressive tack. Instead of a profile of Kate, this seems to be almost a way to dirty up her well-earned lovely image - as if Tatler thinks she’s too boring as is. In fact, it also seems to be their way of countering articles on Meghan, almost as if they think Meghan has gotten the shaft, so let’s make Kate out to be a self-centered shrew. Problem is, no one will buy it.

So like I said - everyone would understand if Kate were feeling overwhelmed, but she’s never expressed that sort of seething anger and resentment. It’s a stupid article because it’s unbelievable.

 

[Tarlita]

Forgive me for saying/including most of us on these forums get excited and very keen to see various royals attending their events, doing their engagements and we on these forums are delighted with that simple reporting of seeing them arrive. What they wore, who they met etc.
It is not boring to us. But for some reason certain sections of the media feel that that kind of reporting is too boring and prefer to set up their own narrative about personal lives.

When most of us are patiently waiting for the next bling fest which gives us a great thrill to see beautiful works of art that is jewels, most of which are over a hundred years old.

 

[Hallo girl]

So, no one actually knows how Kate feels, but this article could have come across much differently had Tatler chosen to take a far less toxic, aggressive tack. Instead of a profile of Kate, this seems to be almost a way to dirty up her well-earned lovely image - as if Tatler thinks she’s too boring as is. In fact, it also seems to be their way of countering articles on Meghan, almost as if they think Meghan has gotten the shaft, so let’s make Kate out to be a self-centered shrew. Problem is, no one will buy it.

So like I said - everyone would understand if Kate were feeling overwhelmed, but she’s never expressed that sort of seething anger and resentment. It’s a stupid article because it’s unbelievable.

I think you have nailed a few good points there.

 

[Lumutqueen]

So I’ve read the article and it’s genuinely the most hilarious thing ever. No wonder KP are trying to distance themselves from this train wreck.

It’s an article full of contradictions, it praises Catherine as Catherine the Great, kingmaker whilst also tearing her down saying she lacks passion, projects an aura of blandness and lastly suggest that she goes through motions to appease her husband.

It insinuates a lot, sources, friends, confidants, courtiers etc even calling on a medium who apparently visited KP. It comments on her weight, and claims she’s perilously thin like Princess Diana but then lavishes praise on her for supporting William.

People were right, the running theme through the entire article is about how Carole has got her children to the top and does everything she can to mimic Catherine’s royal lifestyle.

The Kate in Numbers section says it all frankly.

This could have been SO good.

 

[Fem]

Well, I recommend the "article" to everyone, it's quite a wild ride!

I knew they were going to go with their old "Carole the Mastermind" spiel, because it's what they do since forever, but they were quite aggressive in this, even dragging Pippa into this mess. The medium part was absolutely the best though

It was a mess, it seemed like three different people wrote it and each of them had a different opinion about Catherine. The author couldn't decide between praising her or insulting her, her husband, her family and the Sussexes. Just all over the damn place.

I agree Lumutqueen, no wonder KP doesn't want to have anything to do with this. But I can see some people who are very anti-Cambridges running with this, so it's gonna be a fun couple of days at least...

 

[tommy100]

I've just read it for the 5th time and honestly I don't think its that mean to Catherine. It is though a take down of Carole IMO (and a pretty rubbish article to be honest)

The things said about Catherine are predictable and clearly come from "sources" who aren't close friends but know just enough. I wonder if the comments about "workload" were from someone quite genuine who thinks the level of work W&K now have to do is too much.

I honestly think the worst parts are about Carole and I wouldn't be surprised if they all come from one or two people she has annoyed enough they were always going to speak out. Was James' split from Donna Air a bad one because it sounds like there is some bitterness there.

 

[Rose74]

The Tatler piece is really quite interesting, isn't it? Whether you agree or disagree with some of it, it makes for a read. It reminded me that the coverage of the Cambridges has been quite a bit more positive over the past couple of years than it sometimes was previously.

One difference is the Harry/Meghan romance and the temptations for many to draw all sorts of comparisons. Another difference (that I think may be impt) is that Catherine Quinn came on board a couple of years ago as personal secretary to the DoC.

I felt Ms Quinn was a real asset and during her time there we saw Kate getting more positive coverage and also taking on a broader range of interesting tasks. Ms Quinn departed last November, and I imagine this Tatler piece-- in the works for "months" is one of the first new big pieces to come out after Ms Quinn's departure. Not blaming Ms Quinn in anyway, more wondering if the coverage and types of projects the Cambridge's take on will revert back a bit now?

 

[Somebody]

Having finally read the article. I'd say the main reasons KP responded to this piece are that it primarily paints Catherine's mother Carole (and to a certain extent Pippa as well) in a bad light. They probably except that this is part of 'their job' but don't want their family members to suffer for their choices (i.e., marrying). And the second is that I presume that Tatler would normally be taken a bit more seriously than the tabloids.

And regarding all those 'friends'. I think anyone could come up with ideas as 'they are unhappy about the way H&M are handling all of this and would rather not have to shoulder the royal burden for their generation alone' (which of course is put more dramatically as in poor Catherine cannot bring the children to school these days because she is so busy - well, she couldn't anyway as the schools are closed).

But what about that psychic story? I never heard of it before; has this been reported before? If not, where would this idea come from?

 

[miss whirley]

I've just read it for the 5th time and honestly I don't think its that mean to Catherine. It is though a take down of Carole IMO (and a pretty rubbish article to be honest)

The things said about Catherine are predictable and clearly come from "sources" who aren't close friends but know just enough. I wonder if the comments about "workload" were from someone quite genuine who thinks the level of work W&K now have to do is too much.

I honestly think the worst parts are about Carole and I wouldn't be surprised if they all come from one or two people she has annoyed enough they were always going to speak out. Was James' split from Donna Air a bad one because it sounds like there is some bitterness there.

There might be. When Donna and James broke-up (Dec 2017), Donna went on a romantic vacation with her new boyfriend Ben Carrington the same month (Dec 2017). I wonder if James thinks there was some overlap between the two relationships? Add to that he was going through a bad depression at the time, I wonder if the Middletons have a frosty view on how things went down..This set usually tries to stay friends with their exes, we'll see if Donna gets an invite to James' wedding, that will be a good indication on how much bitterness is there.

 

[Somebody]

I mean they’re not are they.

Kensington Palace has said this;

“This story contains a swathe of inaccuracies & false misrepresentations which were not put to Kensington Palace prior to publication.”

KP are not denying they were unaware of the Catherine the Great cover, nor that they worked together. KP is stating that parts of the article itself weren’t put forward for approval prior to publication. That sparked the denial, not that they didn’t know the article was coming.

I don’t see how you come to that conclusion, when Tatler liaised with the Palace about the cover and the contents. What’s likely happened, is Tatler never ran the final print version passed KP, and this has sparked the denial.

There’s no damage control to be done, if what’s being said isn’t true.

Yes, indeed. The fact that they twisted KP's response into something that obviously isn't true at all probably is an indication of how they wrote the article.

We don't even know whether KP provided any input (I don't see evidence of it); I suppose Tatler would have claimed that in their response if true. While the exaggerate on the KP denial, they only claim 'we asked them to work together'; and such a request can be denied...

 

[Rose74]

I haven't read the psychic story before, either. Tatler likes to seem quite insidery, doesn't it? And aren't the Middleton family supposed to be quite friendly with the editor? I imagine a lot of quotes were from people who had permission to talk to Tatler, perhaps there was some misjudgment about how some of it would come across. I do wonder about the denial now, the overall politics of it is rather curious and interesting.

 

[KellyAtLast]

You are correct that is their joy. They have a royal work life and a private life. Within that private life they have a tight knit circle of friends who do not betray them, William was known to set traps for new' friends' to see if they could be trusted, any tip offs to the press and they were out. They know they need the press to promote whatever charity or event the are leading on at the time but they do not want stories about themselves in the papers every day.
They do not need that kind of press and do not encourage it. I personally think they have found a decent balance with regards the press.

Maybe this is one of their traps. Tell the story to a friend and see if that friend leaks it anywhere.

 

[tommy100]

I'd always heard that the editor was friendly with Catherine.- I found this quote about him:

Much has been made of his connections. There is a transparent brand-building exercise that involves the repeated mention of his great-grandfather, First World War Field Marshal Earl Haig, and the fact that he went to St Andrews University and studied history of art there at the same time as Kate Middleton, and Prince William, who did geography.

Were they friends? "Not super-close," he says. He met William "a couple of times" before, but uni was "a small circle" and he went on "a few holidays with Kate". When? Where? "The summer I graduated, we went on two holidays together, back-to-back in France. I think she's lovely."


It doesn't sound like he was besties with Catherine merely that they were at the same uni at the same time and went on a few holidays. I suspect these were big group holidays, given that Catherine doesn't seem to have all that many friends from uni maybe some of those common connection people have drifted a little or feel bitter they aren't still on amazing terms with the future Queen.

[...]

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

This seems to be a re-hashing of all the old attacks on the Middletons, with the added twist of "the increased duties are weighing on Catherine," spun to make her seem like an out-of-touch, privileged whiner. I think Tatler is just wheeling out these old attacks for an increased audience now that there is a renewed interest in The Royal Family, particularly in the United States, and many people will not have heard these tired criticisms before now. For those of us who have followed The Royal Family for decades, it is nothing but a reminder of the personal attacks that Catherine and her family have endured for nearly twenty years now without putting a foot wrong or voicing a word of complaint.

 

[Sun Lion]

Richard Kay is now helping in the push-back on the Tatler situation.

(Remember the push-back help he provided on the Rose situation last year.)

I like his articles - he writes about something without being inflammatory.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-snobbish-claims-sparked-palace-fury.html

 

[TLLK]

Richard Kay is now helping in the push-back on the Tatler situation.

(Remember the push-back help he provided on the Rose situation last year.)

I like his articles - he writes about something without being inflammatory.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-snobbish-claims-sparked-palace-fury.html

Thanks for sharing Sun Lion.

his seems to be a re-hashing of all the old attacks on the Middletons, with the added twist of "the increased duties are weighing on Catherine," spun to make her seem like an out-of-touch, privileged whiner. I think Tatler is just wheeling out these old attacks for an increased audience now that there is a renewed interest in The Royal Family, particularly in the United States, and many people will not have heard these tired criticisms before now. For those of us who have followed The Royal Family for decades, it is nothing but a reminder of the personal attacks that Catherine and her family have endured for nearly twenty years now without putting a foot wrong or voicing a word of complaint.

Yes HighGoalHighDreams there are likely many new royal watchers who are unaware that these comments about Catherine and her family have been around for years now.

 

[yukari]

Well, Scobie posted interesting info:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1265673680564170752

Omid Scobie
@scobie
Replying to @TheBlogtini
Yes, all rather silly. Especially during this particular moment in time. However, royal sources told me yesterday that KP first learned about the feature on Tuesday morning, which contradicts Tatler's claims.
10:58 PM · May 27, 2020·Twitter Web App

I thought this was how tabloids will turn back to their earlier "Lazy Kaity" narrative, but apparently they go further to "modern Mrs Bennet" and "Wisteria Sisters" all over again

 

[EvaH]

Wow. Kate has literally almost 2 decades of bad press behind her especially by upper blue blood class women. Carole was never forgiven for ensuring her daughters' future/entrance in the upper middle class crowd through education/sending her daughters' to the right schools to make the right connections.

Ever since Kate came on the scene she had bad press: from luring the Prince in with her whorish ways (e.g the lingerie catwalk), to keeping him at her side by being always available (for sex - cue waity katy) to being a stupid blank wood stepford wife (her early years of marriage and being absolutely useless in India), to running to mommy while pregnant with George and cutting William further from his family, to all the articles about how Carole wanted to keep both William & George under her thumb and separate them from the RF etc. People really have a short memory.

Things only got slightly better after Charlotte was born, then she was bland again when smart & ambitious & driven Meghan arrived and then she was good again when the Sussexes image started to suffer. No Sussex now so they can go back to Kate.

This is typical anti Kate piece. I think the Sussexes have their own issues and no time nor need to spend money on dissing the Duchess of Cambridge.

 

[Jacknch]

Posts containing speculative conspiracy theories or seek to bring the Duke and Duchess of Sussex into the discussion have been edited or removed (including responses). Please stick to the facts as we know them and avoid speculation, rumour and gossip.

 

[Hallo girl]

This seems to be a re-hashing of all the old attacks on the Middletons, with the added twist of "the increased duties are weighing on Catherine," spun to make her seem like an out-of-touch, privileged whiner. I think Tatler is just wheeling out these old attacks for an increased audience now that there is a renewed interest in The Royal Family, particularly in the United States, and many people will not have heard these tired criticisms before now. For those of us who have followed The Royal Family for decades, it is nothing but a reminder of the personal attacks that Catherine and her family have endured for nearly twenty years now without putting a foot wrong or voicing a word of complaint.

You are correct it is a reminder of how vile the media was to Kate and her family over the years, it was shelved in the past few years but they obviously they need another target so it is back out again.

 

[Betsypaige]

Richard Kay is now helping in the push-back on the Tatler situation.

(Remember the push-back help he provided on the Rose situation last year.)

I like his articles - he writes about something without being inflammatory.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-snobbish-claims-sparked-palace-fury.html

I like Kay also!

Wow....the article seems far worse than I even feared. This seems a hatchet job on Kate - and for some reason, her family. Automatically that makes it worthy of nothing more than lining a bird cage. This reeks of a vengeance piece, a way to counter certain other articles that have been written over the last months. Otherwise, why the attack on Kate’s mother and sister? Oh and criticizing Pippa for sounding like the Queen sounds like an attack on HM as well, as if there’s something wrong with it. Perhaps the article is also a way for Anna Pasternak to gain attention for her book on Wallis Simpson and eventual movie. How low can you go bringing Diana into it? How dare she try and tarnish William’s relationship with his mum? I’m surprised Charles wasn’t dragged through the mud...

Instead of a profile of Kate, this seems to be almost a way to dirty up her well-earned lovely image - as if Tatler thinks she’s too boring as is. Like I said yesterday, everyone would understand if Kate were feeling overwhelmed, but she’s never expressed that sort of seething anger and resentment. It’s a stupid article because it’s unbelievable.

 

[Claricecolin]

You are correct it is a reminder of how vile the media was to Kate and her family over the years, it was shelved in the past few years but they obviously they need another target so it is back out again.

I ask as I have before why is this tolerated? Why is the price that women marrying into the BRF so high? Why are the women just supposed to shut up and take it? Since the other target is gone just revert back to the "work shy, social climbing" thing again?