Playing the royal birth

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

93Devil said:
He's the future King. It's a big deal.

Wait unit the Queen kicks the bucket and they have a King. Then wait until Charles kicks the bucket and the have a King they really like.

The coronation of Price William will make the 2012 Olympics look like a block party.

93Devil had it right.

I remember hearing something during some news coverage years ago, I think either upon William's 18th birthday or else an anniversary of Diana's death, in which a TV commentator or British Royals expert tried to explain something along the lines of the question **** Whitman asks.

"Everyone in the world wishes this young man well," she said.

And really, that's about the gist of it. People are interested in the royal family, and in Prince William, in particular. People like him, care about him and want to see him succeed, (both to the throne and just in general).

In short, people are rooting for him. You know, kind of like a sports team...

I'd bet the birth of this couple's baby is a story people actually were looking for in the media, even the New York Times, much more than just about any other thing the NYT had on its front cover. I'm also willing to bet many more people actually read the paper's story on them -- even despite its inside play -- than read just about any of the other offerings.
 
LongTimeListener said:
I saw a lot of this talk on FB yesterday too. People going to great lengths to demonstrate not caring.

If you don't care, why would it be worth mentioning? And why would it be worth pondering where it was in the New York Times?

A little bit of snob appeal to being above it all, I think.

Pretty much this.
 
Sorry, ****. The stuff you care about doesn't mean Jacques Merde in the big scheme of things. Not more than two or three people in the entire world care what you think about this.
 
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
**** Whitman said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

This is also about a real princess having a baby. If you have not noticed what the common theme is with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Brave, The Little Mermaid, well there is one, and most women in America have dreamed of being a princess or being treated like a princess.

I know. It makes me want to puke. My daughter is being kept far, far away from princess culture. I hate it. It's sickening.

Do you actually not allow her to watch Disney? Are Brave and Tangled forbidden in your house?
 
93Devil said:
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
**** Whitman said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

This is also about a real princess having a baby. If you have not noticed what the common theme is with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Brave, The Little Mermaid, well there is one, and most women in America have dreamed of being a princess or being treated like a princess.

I know. It makes me want to puke. My daughter is being kept far, far away from princess culture. I hate it. It's sickening.

Do you actually not allow her to watch Disney? Are Brave and Tangled forbidden in your house?

"Brave" is terrific. The message is precisely what I want her to receive.
 
SpeedTchr said:
Sorry, ****. The stuff you care about doesn't mean Jacques Merde in the big scheme of things. Not more than two or three people in the entire world care what you think about this.

This is an odd post. This is a journalism message board. We discuss topics relevant to journalism here. Story play is a topic relevant to journalism. What I think about it isn't important because it's what I think about it. But the news value of the royal family in 2013 North America seems like a relevant topic. Obviously, newspapers had to ponder that question this week.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
93Devil said:
Brave is considered a princess.

My issue isn't with princesses generically. It is with the specific princess culture of living a life of luxury and waiting for her Prince Charming to come. Those stories are corrosive. Brave is not such a story. It is the antithesis of such stories.
 
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Brave is considered a princess.

My issue isn't with princesses generically. It is with the specific princess culture of living a life of luxury and waiting for her Prince Charming to come. Those stories are corrosive. Brave is not such a story. It is the antithesis of such stories.

Like grinding your way through college and becoming a professional photographer is something a modern woman would aspire to do. Start a career for herself rather than trolling parties looking for a man to latch onto.

Or maybe something lower level like working with children or becoming a nanny. That might be noble as well.
 
93Devil said:
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Brave is considered a princess.

My issue isn't with princesses generically. It is with the specific princess culture of living a life of luxury and waiting for her Prince Charming to come. Those stories are corrosive. Brave is not such a story. It is the antithesis of such stories.

Like grinding your way through college and becoming a professional photographer is something a modern woman would aspire to do. Start a career for herself rather than trolling parties looking for a man to latch onto.

Or maybe something lower level like working with children or becoming a nanny. That might be noble as well.

I'm not quite following you here. Are you agreeing with me?
 
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
**** Whitman said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

This is also about a real princess having a baby. If you have not noticed what the common theme is with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Brave, The Little Mermaid, well there is one, and most women in America have dreamed of being a princess or being treated like a princess.

I know. It makes me want to puke. My daughter is being kept far, far away from princess culture. I hate it. It's sickening.

There's a big difference between the little kid who wants to dress up like Cinderella and the teenager who walks around with "Princess" on her shirt.

Don't deprive your kid of the fun stuff because you're worried that it will impact her 10 years down the road.
 
Mizzougrad96 said:
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
**** Whitman said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

This is also about a real princess having a baby. If you have not noticed what the common theme is with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Brave, The Little Mermaid, well there is one, and most women in America have dreamed of being a princess or being treated like a princess.

I know. It makes me want to puke. My daughter is being kept far, far away from princess culture. I hate it. It's sickening.

There's a big difference between the little kid who wants to dress up like Cinderella and the teenager who walks around with "Princess" on her shirt.

Don't deprive your kid of the fun stuff because you're worried that it will impact her 10 years down the road.

But it seems like those Disney movies plant an idea of feminimity in girls' heads at a very early, impressionable age that I think could be developmentally dangerous: You are defined by your hair, your clothes, your Prince Charming. I like "Brave." She was a princess because she was the king's daughter. But she was active and confident and not defined against her ability to attract a mate.
 
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Brave is considered a princess.

My issue isn't with princesses generically. It is with the specific princess culture of living a life of luxury and waiting for her Prince Charming to come. Those stories are corrosive. Brave is not such a story. It is the antithesis of such stories.

Like grinding your way through college and becoming a professional photographer is something a modern woman would aspire to do. Start a career for herself rather than trolling parties looking for a man to latch onto.

Or maybe something lower level like working with children or becoming a nanny. That might be noble as well.

I'm not quite following you here. Are you agreeing with me?

Look into the backgrounds of Kate and her deceased mother-in-law.
 
93Devil said:
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
Brave is considered a princess.

My issue isn't with princesses generically. It is with the specific princess culture of living a life of luxury and waiting for her Prince Charming to come. Those stories are corrosive. Brave is not such a story. It is the antithesis of such stories.

Like grinding your way through college and becoming a professional photographer is something a modern woman would aspire to do. Start a career for herself rather than trolling parties looking for a man to latch onto.

Or maybe something lower level like working with children or becoming a nanny. That might be noble as well.

I'm not quite following you here. Are you agreeing with me?

Look into the backgrounds of Kate and her deceased mother-in-law.

Yes ... and she worked her way up to ... being someone's husband!

I don't understand your point.
 
Do you think once you are a Queen or a Duchess that all you do is sit around all day and eat bon bons?
 
These are very successful women. Just because they married well, does not make them less of a person.

I cannot stand Toddlers and Tiaras either, and my daughter is in soccer rather than dance because of this, but the idea of a princess also gives a woman the idea of how you are supposed to be treated by a man or an idea of proper ways to treat people.

There is so much more to that message other than kissing their ass.
 
93Devil said:
The idea of a princess also gives a woman the idea of how you are supposed to be treated by a man.

Which is not the message I want my daughter to internalize.

Here is how I want her to be treated, and how she should aspire to be treated: Like an equal.
 
**** Whitman said:
93Devil said:
The idea of a princess also gives a woman the idea of how you are supposed to be treated by a man.

Which is not the message I want my daughter to internalize.

Here is how I want her to be treated, and how she should aspire to be treated: Like an equal.

I get that, and I applaud your intentions, but I think you're overthinking it a bit...
 
I think you are spiting the face on this.

Do you let her watch Doc McStuffins but not Sophia the First?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top