sycophantic coverage of royals on BBC

[puzzlebobble]

I can't be the only one who feels sick every time a story on the royals comes up on the BBC? Today's one on Harry in Africa is particularly nauseating.

I thought that the BBC had to be impartial, but they're clearly not on this issue.

[bindeweede]

Only slightly away from the Beeb, but I came across this from the British Council -
www.teachingenglish.org.uk (http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk)

We all love 'em - don't we?

http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/files/teacheng/royal_ws.pdf


Sorry, it is a pdf , and I have no idea how I could convert it into something else.:-[

Oh, and isn't Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not "The Queen of England"?

Does it matter? But I'd have thought The British Council might have got it right.

But I could have got it wrong.


[Seren, thanks for pointing out the wrong link. Now corrected]

[puzzlebobble]

Yuk.

and it's only going to get worse. Can you imagine what it'll be like when william gets married? I think I might have to emigrate.

[puzzlebobble]

Do you think they'd allow a pro-republic protest outside the wedding?

[bindeweede]

Yuk.

and it's only going to get worse. Can you imagine what it'll be like when william gets married? I think I might have to emigrate.

Sorry, I'm rambling now - not uncommon - but I remember I went on a day-trip to France when Charles and Diana got married. I had quite a nice time in Boulogne (spelling?). Very nice cheese shop up near the castle......

[puzzlebobble]

Very wise.

I went to my cousin's wedding near Strasbourg a couple of years ago. They do good weddings in france; sat all day in a vineyard drinking wine and eating cheese.

Maybe we could suggest they have the wedding abroad. Las Vegas maybe.

[bindeweede]

Very wise.

I went to my cousin's wedding near Strasbourg a couple of years ago. They do good weddings in france; sat all day in a vineyard drinking wine and eating cheese.

Maybe we could suggest they have the wedding abroad. Las Vegas maybe.

Rather warm. Antarctica? "Cool". Hate that word.

[Mulder]

The royals generate useful tourist revenue for the economy. Since this country makes next to nothing these days, they get my vote.

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

The royals generate useful tourist revenue for the economy. Since this country makes next to nothing these days, they get my vote.

But they could do it a lot cheaper and without so much personal privilege. I'm afraid that argument falls into the trap of the Excluded Middle 8)

[seren]

Bindeweede your first link is wrong, it's a for-sale domain with ads on it. I think you need to add "UK to the end?

I have a real soft spot for the British Council so I was dreading opening that PDF. Actually, apart from the "Queen of England" thing, I didn't find it too bad. It does ask questions about the "worth" and reasons for having a royal family, it's not like it's a love letter or something.

If you're teaching in a commonwealth country or in the UK, the royal family are going to be well-known and (urg) even loved. Random people on the street in India know about our royal family, I can vouch for that! Plus the Council is British (there's a subtle clue in the name, I realised ;)) and its remit is to represent and promote British culture and society around the world, not just teach English.

For non-commonwealth countries it just seems really irrelevant, though.

[puzzlebobble]

I don't buy the tourism argument.

Firstly, it's taken as read to be true but I've never seen any working. Secondly, if public hanging was good for tourism it wouldn't make it right.

Antarctica is a good idea but wouldn't we get stories about how heroic harry saved Princess Margaret from a polar bear etc?

I think it's unbelievable that our next head of state is a proponent of homoeopathy.

We have loads of 'royal societies' such as the Royal College of Physicians or of-course the 'Royal Society'. What exactly do these societies gain from patronage of the royals and why do the royals think they are even vaguely worthy of the association?

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

If we could fully open up all the royal residences such as Buckingham Palace, maybe we could even get more tourists....

I'm far from a behead-the-royal-family type, however I think we desperately need to re-evaluate what their role is in society today. I'm sure most of them are decent people at the end of the day, despite living an entirely separate life from the rest of us. I don't think they deserve to be unfairly treated, however we do need to look at what they really do for the country as opposed for themselves.

[Cuddles]

Oh, and isn't Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not "The Queen of England"?

Yep:

Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_titles_and_honours_of_Queen_Elizabeth_II

[ZERO]

Antarctica is a good idea but wouldn't we get stories about how heroic harry saved Princess Margaret from a polar bear etc?



Only if someone provided a polar bear, they are not native to the Antarctic. ;)

Anyway, you have all been had. The proper heir to the throne lives in a small house in Australia.
(If Tony Robinson is to be believed.)

[puzzlebobble]

Maybe it was a republican polar bear with a strong backstroke.

[filippo lippi]

This morning the "news" on the Today programme was that Lt. Wales had taken part in some mock hurricane rescue thing.::)

[puzzlebobble]

Spiffing, isn't he marvelous.

Do they really not have anything better to report?

And do you think people are actually interested in this?

[Admin]

The royals generate useful tourist revenue for the economy.

But do they?

There's the architecture of London etc. which I'm sure brings in many tourists and even the royal heritage that goes with it (Henry VIII, Elizabeth I) but how many tourists actually get to see or meet the Royals or come here expecting to?

Americans etc. don't come to Newcastle because we have a royal family or Carlisle, Skegness or Littlehampton for that matter, yet the chances of meeting or seeing a royal are about the same - zero.

I object to the notion of royalty for other reasons but I don't really buy this idea that they bring in tourists. Even if they do, does it justify their unelected position and status?

[Graham Lappin]

We should not forget that Prince Philip is just such a great ambassador for the UK.

Quotes:

"If you stay here much longer, you'll all be slitty-eyed"

"British women can't cook."

"Everybody was saying we must have more leisure. Now they are complaining they are unemployed."

... something about throwing spears at each other ....

And all this for just a few tens of million pounds a year. What a bargain.

[Julia]

Inbred tossers, the lot of 'em. I wouldn't pay the Windsors in washers. And the argument that the Royal Family generate income from the tourist industry doesn't hold water - as Republic, the UK's main anti-monarchist organisation points out:

"Won't our tourism industry suffer without the Royal family?


There is no evidence for that. Tourism income may even increase in the absence of a monarchy. Revenue from royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle currently make up less than 1% of Britain's total tourism income. That income is concentrated almost exclusively in London. There is no benefit for Scotland, Wales or regional England.

Britain is quite capable of bringing in tourists without the help of the royal family - just compare visitor figures for Windsor Castle and Windsor Legoland. In 2005 Legoland attracted almost 1.4 million tourists, Windsor Castle was visited by a little over 900,000. Buckingham Palace saw 110,000 pass through its over-priced doors.

Of course, if the monarchy were gone we would be able to have more tourists visiting Buckingham Palace, as they would be allowed full access to the site all year round.

France has been a republic for over 130 years and now attracts three times as many foreign tourists as Britain. The Palace of Versailles far outstrips Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace combined as the biggest tourist attraction in Europe.
It is insulting to Britain to suggest we need one family to attract tourists. We're better than that."

www.republic.org.uk (http://www.republic.org.uk)

[Graham Lappin]

Inbred tossers, the lot of 'em. I wouldn't pay the Windsors in washers.

Not a Royalist then Julia ;D

[Julia]

No, I prefer corgis...