Media coverage of Prince Phillips passing.

[Deleted member 26715]

Maybe you could relax about people who don't share your admiration for the late Duke? And perhaps stop pretending that what he did in his role as consort was 'work'. Being married to a monarch is not a job.

I don't have any particular admiration for the man, he made his choices, although when taking it on he role, he would have had no knowledge of the intrusive nature of the press these days.

But you are correct it wasn't a job, it was a way of life, it was 24/7, but that is not the point, what I don't understand is both yours & others obvious enjoyment of pulling apart a 99 year old dead man.

As said it's got to be a slow day over on the dark side & you're all coming out of the woodwork looking for fresh meat.

 

[Deleted User]

I can't see why anybody cares about anything like this, I know this is just an unimportant internet forum but I assume the comments are genuine?

Surely people have more important things to occupy their minds in the real World, I know I do. (I know I've commented so I'm as bad I suppose)

 

[matticus]

I guess you didn't see what he said after the murder of sixteen children and a teacher, then? It's included in the article Tribansman linked to upthread.

Did he say: "that was a great job, even better than when I killed a tiger."? Or
"I really hate children. And teachers. I hope they died painfully."

Because if not, I can't say I'm bothered.

 

[Edwardoka]

I can't see why anybody cares about anything like this, I know this is just an unimportant internet forum but I assume the comments are genuine?

Surely people have more important things to occupy their minds in the real World, I know I do. (I know I've commented so I'm as bad I suppose)

Anything to open another front on the culture war bollocks innit. I'm firmly of the opinion that if you don't have anything nice to say about someone who just died it's best not to say anything.

The media embarrassed themselves over this, but that was always going to be the case.

 

[Mugshot]

But you are correct it wasn't a job, it was a way of life, it was 24/7, but that is not the point, what I don't understand is both yours & others obvious enjoyment of pulling apart a 99 year old dead man.

I've made a couple of posts, I don't know if I'm included in what you're saying here.

But, for my part, I don't feel particularly sad that a 99 year old man, that I didn't know personally, has died. I have some sympathy for his family that have lost a father, grandfather etc, and more especially I feel sympathy for his wife, who has lost a husband of 73 years, or so.

However, I do not believe that he was a nice person, for all the mealy mouthed platitudes that he was of his time, he was only joking, he did it to make people feel at ease, and so on, the man said many things that I find to be unacceptable, he also engaged in activities that I find to be barbaric and has sought to ensure that they have continued in his children and grandchildren.

I dislike the narrative that is pushed that we are a nation in mourning, we are not, having wall to wall coverage doesn't change that.

I also believe that he was an immensely privileged individual, who may have done some decent things, but with his vast wealth, extraordinarily powerful position and long life, he could have done far far more.

I take no pleasure in the fact that the man is dead, but I will not mourn his passing. Saying as much does not equate to dancing on the man's grave.

 

[Deleted User]

Anything to open another front on the culture war bollocks innit. I'm firmly of the opinion that if you don't have anything nice to say about someone who just died it's best not to say anything.

The media embarrassed themselves over this, but that was always going to be the case.

Especially when they are so far removed from knowing that person I can't see why it matters to be honest, as for the media I just don't watch things that don't interest me.

 

[theclaud]

I don't have any particular admiration for the man, he made his choices, although when taking it on he role, he would have had no knowledge of the intrusive nature of the press these days.

I'm sure he underestimated it, but he was not passive in press relations, and has some claim to have opened the lid on the modern era of press scrutiny of royal lives. All the same, he wasn't a victim of the press in the sense that Diana was or Meghan is, and was in practice much more sheltered and protected from external scrutiny than most of us can ever hope to be.

yours & others obvious enjoyment of pulling apart a 99 year old dead man.

Pulling apart? I've not much to add to what Mugshot just posted, but it's not primarily about the person, but what it reveals about the nation.

it's got to be a slow day over on the dark side & you're all coming out of the woodwork looking for fresh meat

This is a very odd and somewhat paranoid view about people who are connected only by cycling posting on various areas of a forum, as they have been doing for years.

Anyway, if I may be serious for a moment, I found the picture posted upthread of the queen at the funeral sad and poignant, and the images of the royal family holding a socially-distanced funeral wearing masks symbolically important. She is a human being, her husband is dead, and it's the middle of a pandemic. None of this makes a Duke of Edinburgh Confectionery Mix with Baby Dolphins and less idiotic.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Anyway, if I may be serious for a moment, I found the picture posted upthread of the queen at the funeral sad and poignant, and the images of the royal family holding a socially-distanced funeral wearing masks symbolically important. She is a human being, her husband is dead, and it's the middle of a pandemic

If only you had the self control to stop there.

 

[theclaud]

If only you had the self control to stop there.

If only you had the self control to stop telling others how and what they should post.

 

[Badger_Boom]

However, I do not believe that he was a nice person, for all the mealy mouthed platitudes that he was of his time, he was only joking, he did it to make people feel at ease, and so on, the man said many things that I find to be unacceptable, he also engaged in activities that I find to be barbaric and has sought to ensure that they have continued in his children and grandchildren.

If we condemn everyone who takes part in activities, displays berhviours or holds views we find personally to be barbaraic or objectionable then we really won't have many people left to interact with.

 

[Fab Foodie]

I can't see why anybody cares about anything like this, I know this is just an unimportant internet forum but I assume the comments are genuine?

Surely people have more important things to occupy their minds in the real World, I know I do. (I know I've commented so I'm as bad I suppose)

I think your post Shep (with no disrespect) highlights a key difference sometimes between your word view and that of many others on here.
We can all live in our bubble as this stuff floats by and accept what we see at face value, and even if we don't we can accept that directly these things don't particularly affect my world.
Others (and this is hard to explain) see the same information and feel a need to challenge it as to whether it is true, and even if it is whether there are other narratives to share and be considered, because ultimately all information, debates and conversations have an impact, maybe not to them directly, today or tomorrow, but will impact others, the society and views that surround us. This is a debate about the media. OK it's regarding a 99 y/o bloke in the media eye who's died. The way the popular media reports this is of interest. Because the popular media informs much of what people believe and as we have seen with many items on CC NACA the popular media has an agenda which impacts the health and wealth of the nation.
Nobody in the media seems to care that trillions of pounds have been siphoned offshore as a result of Brexit. It doesn't impact me directly does it...or maybe it does?
We have a population fed with misinformation, lies, jingoism, sleaze and history tells us that this never ends well for the average guy, and when it finally hits home it's too late.
So yes, these things matter, they are symptoms of a bigger malaise and some of us feel the need to clarify and inform as it might just help us/our families/or some ordinary Joe in the future.
So while we are happy that some live in a world where these things are seemingly of little import, please don't feel the need to criticise those who are trying to make things a little clearer, better, more honest and more bearable for all and every conversation counts....

 

[Fab Foodie]

If we condemn everyone who takes part in activities, displays berhviours or holds views we find personally to be barbaraic or objectionable then we really won't have many people left to interact with.

That's a topic worthy of it's own thread....

 

[Ian H]

Thanks for that. Did you read the Morning Star article linked above? Makes some good points; Prince Andrew brought Epstein to his shooting party events. So I guess everyone there was not only pro killing endangered species, but supporting sex trafficking too. What a revelation, it certainly opened my eyes!

Is the next revelation going to be about sex with endangered species? I think we should be told.

 

[matticus]

All the same, he wasn't a victim of the press in the sense that Diana was or Meghan is, and was in practice much more sheltered and protected from external scrutiny than most of us can ever hope to be.

I think through the public/press circus around Charles*, Diana, Camilla, William, Harry, Meghan and now their children, he's seen a lot more of the effects of press scrutiny than anyone posting here. Have you tried to empathise with how that would affect your family?

(*that's without mentioning the other Prince. Something to do with York, name escapes me for now ... )

Pulling apart? I've not much to add to what Mugshot just posted, but it's not primarily about the person, but what it reveals about the nation.

That's a pathetic shield to hide behind - if you're going to slag someone off, try having the balls to stand by what you write.

 

[Pale Rider]

I think your post Shep (with no disrespect) highlights a key difference sometimes between your word view and that of many others on here.
We can all live in our bubble as this stuff floats by and accept what we see at face value, and even if we don't we can accept that directly these things don't particularly affect my world.
Others (and this is hard to explain) see the same information and feel a need to challenge it as to whether it is true, and even if it is whether there are other narratives to share and be considered, because ultimately all information, debates and conversations have an impact, maybe not to them directly, today or tomorrow, but will impact others, the society and views that surround us. This is a debate about the media. OK it's regarding a 99 y/o bloke in the media eye who's died. The way the popular media reports this is of interest. Because the popular media informs much of what people believe and as we have seen with many items on CC NACA the popular media has an agenda which impacts the health and wealth of the nation.
Nobody in the media seems to care that trillions of pounds have been siphoned offshore as a result of Brexit. It doesn't impact me directly does it...or maybe it does?
We have a population fed with misinformation, lies, jingoism, sleaze and history tells us that this never ends well for the average guy, and when it finally hits home it's too late.
So yes, these things matter, they are symptoms of a bigger malaise and some of us feel the need to clarify and inform as it might just help us/our families/or some ordinary Joe in the future.
So while we are happy that some live in a world where these things are seemingly of little import, please don't feel the need to criticise those who are trying to make things a little clearer, better, more honest and more bearable for all and every conversation counts....

Us gullible folk are grateful to you as plain seeker and speaker of the truth, but I don't think Phil is your best example.

Rarely can any life have been subject to so much coverage, both during it and after death.

Nor was it all sycophantic, the gaffes, shooting a tiger, etc, were all well covered.

As a last resort, you might have to accept the help he gave to servicemen, charities, businesses, and Duke of Edinburgh Award participants was genuine.

There really isn't a great deal to slag him off about, which is why there isn't a great deal of slagging off going on.

Apart from the terminally green-eyed, who cannot bear that he met more interesting people and had more interesting experiences in a month than they will have in their whole lives.

It's all just so unfair.