Royal and Other Magazines (PdeV, Majesty, Hello! etc)

[florawindsor]

what are the trustworthy English papers? i read the news every day on the internet, but i don't know which to trust. i guess Guardian&Times are trustworthy, but how about others like Mirror/Telegraph/Mail/Sun/Independent, etc?

 

[tetel16]

point de vue & royals

 

[Claire]

I read a rumour on another royalty forum that Majesty's editor Ingrid Seward uses her magazine to promote Camilla at all costs, in order to continue getting invited around to Highgrove for scoops.

 

[carlota]

what are the trustworthy English papers? i read the news every day on the internet, but i don't know which to trust. i guess Guardian&Times are trustworthy, but how about others like Mirror/Telegraph/Mail/Sun/Independent, etc?

i know that the mirror and the sun are quite gossipy...

 

[Lady Jennifer]

I wouldnt call Majesty pro-camilla. I think they're very balanced. they cover members of the royal family and that's what she is now. but really, back in the 80s 9 out of 10 issues had a diana close up on the cover. and I dont think they've done 1 with just camilla yet.

I agree. Even in the 90s Diana was on almost every cover.
Now Royalty....its so so. Its still (I think...its been a while since I bought it/saw it) every issue Diana is on the cover....now that might be because Diana's picture still sells, I don't know. The facts in the magazine are off sometimes....its not organized well, but that is just my opinion of course.

 

[Harry's polo shirt]

I read People magazine alot, here in the states. I am not aware of one of their stories being proven untrue. If they do edit something-they mention it pretty promently in the next issue..usually it is just a correction of someone's name in a caption.

 

[Tosca]

Italian magazine "CHI" is pretty reliable, and carries great pictures of royals, as well as household and international celebrities.

The trashiest among Italian mags are "novella2000" and "eva3000 express" with lots of paparazzi style pics and harsh comments.

 

[betina]

what about se og hor (norway and denmark) and prive (netherlands)?

oh no not se og hoer. They are so mean to people whether they are royal or not. After the divorce of Alexandra and Joachim they throw mud in Joachims face and was really mean to him.
None of us know what happened in that marriage.

 

[Elspeth]

The thing that bugs me about Majesty, which I think is otherwise a pretty good magazine, is the constant attention given to Princess Michael and the almost complete absence (unless there's been a wedding or a funeral in the family) of the Gloucesters. I gather Ingrid Seward is a pal of Princess Michael's (or, more proably, vice versa) but there's no need to make it quite so painfully obvious.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Re;

I quite like seeing Princess Michael in Majesty and I think that they give a good equal share to each member of the Royal Family. Of Course, recently, Camilla has been a focus but they have their seasons. I liked their 'Royal Jewels' series which gave a brilliant over-view of many different RFs.

 

[pollyemma]

that's a really good point. I'd never really thought about it but yes, they do have a disproportionate amount of princess michael coverage.

i guess it's a mutually beneficial arrangement. one of my friends is a producer of a tv program which interviewed PM about her book the Serpent and the Moon. a Majesty magazine profile of PM is part of the 'media packet' they received.

this same packet went out to thousands of media outlets world wide. that's definitely good exposure for Majesty.

things like that make it well worth Majesty's while to keep covering PM extensively and positively.

 

[Lady Jennifer]

I never noticed that about Princess Michael (the amount of coverage). The one thing that slightly bothers me about Majesty is it really doesn't cover All the Royal Families. I know its a British Mag. so they will cover the BRF more than any other, but it seems they slack off with other Royal Families. I know that some Royal Families protect their privacy but I would think there would be some news on other families. I do like when they do their series of articles on certain subjects...like the Palaces, the jewels, etc.
It must be hard after a while to keep coming up with the something new every month...I guess they really rejoiced when the Royal Weddings happened last year & now with the upcoming births!

 

[pollyemma]

I didn't say the coverage was extremely high. just disproportionately high.

 

[kelly1972]

I am a fan of Majesty and Hello for articles on all of the ruling royalties. They have wonderful picture and are quite balanced . As for Royalty the magazine, I'm not a huge fan. As far as I know about the British papers they are tabloids like the Globe and the National Enquirer are in the Us and Canada.

 

[pollyemma]

I am a fan of Majesty and Hello for articles on all of the ruling royalties. They have wonderful picture and are quite balanced . As for Royalty the magazine, I'm not a huge fan. As far as I know about the British papers they are tabloids like the Globe and the National Enquirer are in the Us and Canada.

I'm with you. Hello is great for pictures.

There are rumors about Royalty not always following the most ethical business practices. but I don't know if that is true or not.

 

[iowabelle]

The thing that bugs me about Majesty, which I think is otherwise a pretty good magazine, is the constant attention given to Princess Michael and the almost complete absence (unless there's been a wedding or a funeral in the family) of the Gloucesters. I gather Ingrid Seward is a pal of Princess Michael's (or, more proably, vice versa) but there's no need to make it quite so painfully obvious.

I think the Gloucesters live quietly, while Princess Michael likes attention. Plus, she's got books to sell and she needs the free advertising.

 

[maryshawn]

Are "Hello" and "Hola" "sister" magazines, published by the same firm? I like "Hello." The articles and interviews and photos all seem very well done and there's much more substance than "People," which gives about 3 pages of coverage, at best, to any issue or person.

 

[Katrianna]

I didn't realize those things about Royalty. I like because it does cover European Royal families a little more than Majesty. Ingrid Seward, Majesty's editor her late husband was a very close friend of Prince Charles so I'm sure that may explain why it covers the BRF extensively.

 

[Warren]

Are "Hello" and "Hola" "sister" magazines, published by the same firm?

Yes, owned by the same publishing House. Started off in Madrid, then a UK edition was launched. I saw a documentary on Hello! and the Spanish owners a few years ago: at that stage the magazine was put together in the Hola! offices in Madrid.
.

 

[norwegianne]

When it comes to news articles, I wouldn't place much trust in anything from http://www.femalefirst.co.uk Anyone that manage to get the basic facts concerning royalty wrong, can't be relied upon to get the final details correct either, in my opinion.

 

[Margrethe II]

What magazines to trust?

My response = None

"MII"

 

[Jil]

I subscribe to the magazine , "Royalty Monthly". It seems to lately show movie stars and models on its cover. The last issue I got had Claudia Schieffer (Spelling?) on the cover! Inside it talked about her once dating Prince Albert of Monaco. I do not understand why this magazine whould put movie stars and models on its covers! This is suppose to be a magazine about Royalty! I do like the articles and photos in this magazine. Here in the U.S.A., we don't hear many stories about any other royals besides England. Occasionally we hear about Monaco Royalty. I like to read about other royalty besides the British Royals. I get sick of hearing about Camilla and Charles. I do not care if she wears a tiara for the first time in her life! That is the kind of news we hear in the U.S.A.! I did hear that the couple will make a trip to America, but I did not hear when that will happen. Heard that on the tv news.

 

[waywellian]

Royal magazines

Hi. I know I've come to this discussion very late but I'm really heartened to see I'm not the only one who's frustrated at the fact Royalty magazine has started to put movie stars and celebrities on the cover and inside pages. Truth be told I've bought Royalty religiously since 1987 but, for the first time since then, I've cancelled my subscription. Jil, do as I did and let them know of your frustration as it is wrong that we pay - or, if you bought a 12 month subscription - have paid for a magazine titled 'Royalty' which then goes on about celebs (and, in a recent copy, the funeral of a politician - Robin Cook - who few outside Britain would know of!).

Personally, I don't reckon many magazines these days are that great for royal stories. You're better sticking to the web for stories and images. I just think that, sadly, the cult of here-today-gone-tomorrow celebrity has taken over big time and has knocked the royals out of the spotlight.

Just my own opinion.

Joanne
www.theroyalist.net

 

[Pink Tulip]

Hi. I know I've come to this discussion very late but I'm really heartened to see I'm not the only one who's frustrated at the fact Royalty magazine has started to put movie stars and celebrities on the cover and inside pages.

I agree with you Joanne. I've just started buying Royalty magazine (its $11 in Australia) and I couldn't work out why they have celebrities inside. The first one I bought had a pic of Scarlett Johansson on the cover and pictures of fashion parades inside that had nothing to do with royalty. At least one of their fashion reports has Marie-Chantel in it.

 

[Jo]

I agree. I hate it. I don't like celebs. That's why I watch royalty.

 

[Layla1971]

I think you're better off searching the net ad coming here!

I used to buy countless magazines just to pay alot of money for a few pics and a false story, it's better to come to this forum.

 

[pollyemma]

I think you're better off searching the net ad coming here!

I used to buy countless magazines just to pay alot of money for a few pics and a false story, it's better to come to this forum.

I completely agree. why get magazines when you can use the internet to see as many photos as you want of the royals you like. why wade through a 5 page story on princess michael on your search for one photo of Madeleine in Majesty when you could get reams of them here.

plus, i think a lot of the posters are a lot more knowledgeable than many so-called "royalty experts."

 

[Layla1971]

plus, i think a lot of the posters are a lot more knowledgeable than many so-called "royalty experts."

Yeah! The people who post here know about royalty out of genuine interest, and don't have hidden motives to create some good headlines like most writers....

 

[Yennie]

Maybe Billedbladet is the best, what the DRF can expect...but a serious newspaper, doing good research??

Well, I would say not bad are:
...
Svensk Damtidning (Swedish)

Sometimes these mags are real treasures. But to be honest, most of the pics we can also see online (*coughing*)
And in spite the fact, that most gossip rags are 100 times wrong, they are also one or two times right. E.g. the mags have prognosed a divorce of Alexandra and Joachim...and I´ve also written one day before, that this is a lie. But they were right. We shouldn´t forget, that also Royals are denying and lying to us. So IMO the mags, who work more with sources, informants, speculations, digging in the dirt have also their right to be. When e.g. ppl like Alexandra and Joachim play the show of the happy couple to us and a mag is proving them wrong, it´s for me ok. I don´t want to be fooled, but at the same time I also don´t want to be fooled of the mags (and some of them work only with this principle)

True, they does get it right sometimes, but too often the magazines are wrong.
I haven´t read any magazines, other than the swedish ones, enough to say anything about them.
But I agree with you Lena, of the swedish gossip mags, Svensk Damtidning is a little "better" than f.ex Se & Hör.

However, SvD did a huge misstake in the late 90´s claiming for several years that crownprincess Victoria had a reletionship with Niclas Svedin, when Se & Hör wrote that she was dating Daniel Collert. It was quite funny, in the same week Se & Hör and SvD could run stories about Victorias romantic weekend, but with different men
And as we all know, Daniel Collert was her real boyfriend so I guess they are not completely trustworthy...

 

[Dennism]

And as we all know, Daniel Collert was her real boyfriend so I guess they are not completely trustworthy...

No? Not trustworthy? Going out on a limb there, Yennie?