Prince William media coverage ridiculous

Written By: - Date published: 9:43 am, January 19th, 2010 - 48 comments
Categories: Media - Tags:

The media coverage of Prince William’s visit really has gone a step too far. Aside from dominating TV, radio, and the newspapers, every time I check out stuff.co.nz I’m presented with an excited “LATEST: Prince William gets into car“.

I know it’s easy journalism. But for goodness sake, as evidenced by the ten people who showed up to greet William when he arrived, most people in New Zealand really don’t give a damn.

But nice to see the disaster in Haiti has dropped of Stuff’s main page. Problem solved there is it?

48 comments on “Prince William media coverage ridiculous ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. big bruv 1
    19 January 2010 at 9:49 am

    What about the thousands who turned up to see him at the opening of the supreme court?

    And please, show a bit more respect for our future King.

    • toad 1.1
      19 January 2010 at 10:53 am

      At least some of them were protestors, bruv.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.2
      19 January 2010 at 1:34 pm

      He’s not our future king. He’s the future king of England. Basically, there’s a reason most people don’t give a damn about the Windsors – they have absolutely no impact upon their lives and they stand for an outmoded form of dictatorship.

      • Hugh 1.2.1
        19 January 2010 at 1:36 pm

        He’s the King of New Zealand as well. The law’s pretty specific that the two titles are separate, albeit held by the same person.

        You can argue he’s not truly of New Zealand, but in a legal, titular sense, it’s pretty cut and dried.

        • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1.1
          19 January 2010 at 3:02 pm

          The law is filled with legal realities (legal persons (corporations), legal heads of state (a foreigner), doesn’t make them any less fictional though. The reality is that he is not and never will be “our” king.

          • Hugh 1.2.1.1.1
            19 January 2010 at 8:03 pm

            This would be true if the notion of what ‘New Zealand-ness’ was and who can and could not be said to be a “New Zealander’ was entirely uncontroversial, but I don’t think we’re there yet.

    • travellerev 1.3
      19 January 2010 at 1:39 pm

      Sorry but Oh Yuk.

  2. Peter Johns 2
    19 January 2010 at 9:50 am

    I think it was refreshing to see a popular young man who will one day be our King here, (assuming he does not go the way of his mother). The visit has been a success for all concerned, Prince William, Royalty, John Key and people have received him well, even the Al Blacks were impressed!!!!

    This is just another post of pure jealousy. At least he was treated with respect unlike when the Queen visited while HC was PM. All that visit will be remembered for was for rudeness she showed.

    Sure, Haiti is a still happening event but there is no real ,new news, coming from there at present so deservingly so Price William is on the front page.

    Long live Prince William.

    • Rich 2.1
      19 January 2010 at 7:22 pm

      assuming he does not go the way of his mother

      What, wiped out in a car crash by a pissed driver, while coked off his face and snogging his dodgy millionaire boyfriend?

      Be kinda well, viaduct at least…

      • gitmo 2.1.1
        19 January 2010 at 7:30 pm

        Wow a new low.

          • gitmo 2.1.1.1.1
            19 January 2010 at 10:28 pm

            I doubt you would know reality if it took a dump on your doorstep.

            • travellerev 2.1.1.1.1.1
              20 January 2010 at 9:50 am

              During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell

              “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

              Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. George Orwell

              Denial is not a river in Egypt. Anonymus

              Dickhead

  3. vidiot 3
    19 January 2010 at 9:52 am

    FFS come one.. turn up to meet the future king with Sizzlers, at least get some real sausages in to that lanky future king. Loved the other image of him hard at work on the BBQ whilst our glorious leader was chugging back on a brewski.

    http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/GYI0059319397_300x270.jpg

  4. Sanctuary 4
    19 January 2010 at 9:54 am

    Ah, big bruv, according the Radio NZ’s reporter on the ground the “crowd” to see him at the Supreme Court was 1-200 at best, and I am unsure if she was counting the Republican demonstrators.

    Prince William the Balding is showing every sign of being as a big an out of touch buffoon as the rest of his inbred clan.

    Republic! Now!

    • Bright Red 4.1
      19 January 2010 at 10:05 am

      “and I am unsure if she was counting the Republican demonstrators.”

      and the ministry of justice protesters. there were 30 of them at the front and 70 round the corner according to their press release.

    • Bill 4.2
      20 January 2010 at 9:31 am

      The BBC reports said 100 public were there. Interestingly the ABC reports never said anything about the crowd at the Supreme Court but they did mention the republic protest and,in the same article, reminded people that only 12 turned up at the airport. The Sydney Morning Herald however said an enthusiastic crowd of over 2000 greeted him at the Supreme Court.
      Looks like your report is coloured by whether you are a republican or monarchist….truth being the first victim!

  5. Graham 5
    19 January 2010 at 10:20 am

    Guess it depends who you believe, NZ Herald reports “a crowd of 3000 to 4000” at the Supreme Court. I wasn’t there, so I don’t know who’s right.

    “Prince William the Balding … an out of touch buffoon … his inbred clan”. You know, every so often I read comments here about play the ball, not the man (or similar), then I read comments like this and I chuckle. Yes, he’s balding. So what?

    But to the real point – the article claims that “most people in New Zealand really don’t give a damn”. Well, clearly SOME people don’t, and that’s fine. But a lot of people DO in fact give a damn – including the republicans, who took the time to turn up and make their point.

    You may not be in favour of the monarchy, you may feel that we should become a republic, and that’s your right. But please, don’t claim to speak for “most people in New Zealand” when you don’t.

    • Michael Foxglove 5.1
      19 January 2010 at 11:07 am

      I’m not a republican. I’m a constitutional monarchist. Doesn’t mean I’m happy to put up with nonsense media coverage of events no one cares about.

      • Graham 5.1.1
        19 January 2010 at 12:33 pm

        I understand that, but at the risk of playing Devil’s Advocate, some people obviously do care about it.

        I personally couldn’t care less about who Beyonce is bonking, if anyone, but that doesn’t stop loads of magazines reporting it and loads of people buying those magazines, so obviously some people do. And the fact that I’d rather immerse my head in a bucket of diarrhea than read some of them, doesn’t change the fact that other people are fascinated.

    • travellerev 5.2
      19 January 2010 at 1:50 pm

      Actually it is perfectly acceptable to give a member of a royal family a nickname. The list of nicknames throughout the medieval feudal history is huge and some of them are very unflattering indeed. Hell, you didn’t count as a monarch until you had one.

      Let’s face it the English royal family and those of other Nations for that matter are but a remnant of that dark and cruel time in which a small little elite around indeed a family of inbred buffoons out of touch with reality had absolute power over everybody else so let’s keep up with the tradition.

      William the Balding, Harry the Soldierboy, Charles the Green, Camilla the Horse. LOL.

      And what about Anne the prude and Sarah the saucy.

      Give me a break. Any feudal slave had at least the nickname game to give him solace in his little hut waiting to be raided or killed for some perceive royal slight. Let’s enjoy it I say.

  6. Peter 6
    19 January 2010 at 10:22 am

    Now, when will John ‘man of action’ Key make Republic noises ??

    I’d be happy to lend him my copy of the mini series “To Play The King”

  7. infused 7
    19 January 2010 at 10:31 am

    Foxglove… sounds like a porno… or something used in a porno… I might have to suggest this 😀

  8. Edosan 8
    19 January 2010 at 10:43 am

    I was at the Supremem Court yesterday, I would say around 3,000 people were there at the height. Difficult to tell though because they were stretched out around the front of the building.

  9. Scott 9
    19 January 2010 at 10:49 am

    The opneing of the Supreme Court builidng would have drawn a sizeable crowd, even without the presence of William. So hard to say how many people went to see him.

  10. prism 10
    19 January 2010 at 10:53 am

    Prince William seems a nice sort of young man literally!
    He could be a very suitable figurehead for New Zealand if we retain the monarchy. If you consider what is likely to happen if we go for a Republic – people like John Banks, Michael Laws etc going for, and possibly getting, the role of President, the heart sinks.

    The form that a republic takes seems odd – you expect something that is both people and country responsive, but other republics don’t seem to deliver that. The USA seems to have a system where the President replaces the crowned king or queen and there are groups of ‘nobles’ who stay for decades as controllers of their various portfolios.

    Australia’s politicians are so numerous with state and federal systems and aggressively self-interested – having a relatively distant leader who stands aside from the mosh pit of daily politics is an advantage.

    I feel that being for a republic instead of a monarchy is regarded as being modern. I know Bruce Jesson, whose opinions I have great respect for, thought being a republic would make NZ better. He though could see possibilities that the barriers of our continuing interest in neoliberalism and open border internationalism prevent us attaining.

  11. Tigger 11
    19 January 2010 at 11:14 am

    The aprons were bogus – Key didn’t man the barbie, the event was catered. Photo-ops like this are so jaded as to look buffoonish.

  12. ghostwhowalksnz 12
    19 January 2010 at 11:15 am

    The Aussie media have reported that up to 50 foreign ( ie UK) media followed the Prince into the new Supreme Court but only 2 local media were allowed inside. The rest of the locals were kept outside.
    Seems like we are just a backdrop for the really important people.

  13. Rob 13
    19 January 2010 at 11:18 am

    I doubt if the opening of a supreme court would have attracted a crowd at all without the Prince… Maybe a couple of politicians, judicary etc….

    plus the protesters….

  14. Hymn & Himself 14
    19 January 2010 at 11:59 am

    C’mon you guys!

    Like the standard – flag unfurled above – the Brit Prince’s visit is flag-flying.

    Media intensity..so what! Adds up to freebie enzed promotion.. A news diet of Haiti-Haiti-Haiti would be horrid. And do nothing for those sad souls.

  15. Danyl Mclauchlan 15
    19 January 2010 at 12:45 pm

    I have no interest in the monarchy, or the prince. But lots and lots and lots of people are obsessed by the monarchy. If you looked at the most popular stories on the stuff site during the visit, most of them were about William. It’s not unreasonable for the media to cover events that huge numbers of people are obsessed with, even if you and I have no interest.

  16. tc 16
    19 January 2010 at 1:32 pm

    Whatever the monkeys can find to fill up the space and avoid having to, heaven forbid, actually research/write a piece of journalism……..prince willy/M jackson/Tiger/zoo animals…….as long as it’s a celebrity/person of notoriety…..sweet as, lunch everybody !

  17. SJ Hawkins 17
    19 January 2010 at 1:44 pm

    Each to their own Michael. Some people watch Shortland St too. Go figure.
    Amusing that you think so much of the media coverage that you decided it needed coverage on this blog though, don’t you think?
    By the way, I walked past the court and saw maybe 200 people there. It’s possible there were more at some stage, but I doubt the 3000-4000 claim.
    I guess the fact that the media are lazy hacks is a view held irrespective of political persuasion. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find a very similar post on a right-wing blog somewhere.

    • Rich 17.1
      19 January 2010 at 9:37 pm

      They had 12 people for His arrival in Auckland.

      The ABC reporter wound up making “we want you(r) willy” signs and handing them round the women present.

      Also, it occurs to me that a lot of those 12, like the Governor General, were being paid to be present. Really.

  18. Daveski 18
    19 January 2010 at 2:46 pm

    At the risk of surprising some of my sparring partners, I have no time for the monarchy as such nor see any relevance to our future. While not underestimating the legal and constitutional difficulties of becoming a republic, I hope it is a matter of when not if.

    In terms of the coverage, I don’t see this as pro monarchy as such but just another element of the cult of personality – after all, he is the son of the Queen of Personality Cults. We tend to have a fawning attitude at the best of time to “celebs” even those manufactured by the media themselves.

  19. abc 19
    19 January 2010 at 3:23 pm

    For those pro-republican people. At what point does one essentially cut off their history? NZ is what it is because of England, hence the term NZ European. Just because the monarchy doesn’t dictate our lives doesn’t mean we should cut it loose. What benefit would NZ get?

Links to post