Monday, 10 April 2017

George and Charlotte to be Page Boy & Bridesmaid, Heads Together Engagements & A New Breton Top!

Who's ready for some serious cuteness at Pippa Middleton and James Matthews' wedding?


You may be thinking, what is Charlotte waffling on about? Unexpectedly, Kensington Palace released an official statement regarding the wedding confirming it will take place as previously reported on 20 May at St Mark's Church, Englefield. They revealed Prince George will be a page boy and Princess Charlotte will be a bridesmaid before confirming William, Kate and Harry's attendance on the day.


Below, the full brief statement:

'Prince George, 3, and Princess Charlotte, by then 2, will be attendants at the wedding of their aunt Pippa Middleton to James Matthews, Kensington Palace has confirmed. The wedding will take place at St Mark's Church, Englefield, on Saturday 20th May. The service will be attended by close family and friends, including the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry.'

With all the comings and goings at Pippa and James's London home of late, many were beginning to think the actual wedding date was earlier than suspected, but it seems that's not the case. Certainly, we didn't anticipate an official statement from the Palace confirming George's and Charlotte's roles in the wedding and Harry's attendance. It is not known why the Palace opted to officially announce the information. Royal commentator Dickie Arbiter described the move as " unprecedented. By all means say the Cambridges are going but as it's private why is it being officially announced".

BBC Peter Hunt

Emily Andrews shared the following:

Emily Andrews Twitter Feed

More from Hello!

'The wedding of the year will be officiated by the resident priest of St Mark's, Rev. Nick Wynne-Jones, while the reception will be held at the Middletons' beautiful seven-bedroom family home just seven miles away in Buckberry. The estimated £5.6million home of Michael and Carole Middleton has 18-acres of land, and so could accommodate a marquee to host the festivities.' 

Below, the Cambridges and the Middletons arriving at St Mark's on Christmas Day.


The announcement appears to confirm reports Kate will not have an official role in the wedding. More from the Telegraph:

'The statement appears to settle the question of whether the Duchess of Cambridge herself would be a bridesmaid, omitting her name from the list of official duties bestowed on her children.
Miss Middleton, the Duchess' sister, was maid of honour at the Royal wedding in 2011, becoming a household name thanks to admirers of her striking white dress and lively interaction with the Royal family on the Buckingham Palace balcony.'

For those asking if we'll see images on the day, the Palace are organising a media facility for the day. Royal photographer Tim Rooke confirmed KP are coordinating media with a limited number of photographers given permission to take photos (it looks it will be what's known as a ROTA arrangement, where a small number of press cover an event and there copy/photos are distributed among various outlets and agencies). There's going to be huge interest in seeing George and Charlotte (who will no doubt be adorably attired) for the first time since Christmas. Charlotte will be just gone two and George almost four.


Prince William served as a page boy at the 1988 wedding of Camila Dunnes.


And of course Kate as a bridesmaid at her Uncle Gary's 1991 wedding. If you haven't seen the candid footage from the day, click here to do so.


Are you excited to see George and Charlotte on the day? What do you think of KP making an official announcement about the wedding?

************

With less than a fortnight to go until the London Marathon, Kensington Palace confirmed several engagements for William, Kate and Harry during the interim. 


On first look, I presumed the above photo was taken last year during the time Heads Together was launched. It turns out that is not the case and Kate is in fact wearing a new stripe top. With thanks to Kate's Closet and CopyKate on ebay, Kate wore the £199 M I H Striped Wool Pullover.


The slim wool knit is sold out in Kate's colorway, but remains available (with a 56% discount) at The Outnet in navy and orange. It's also available in very limited sizes in black and navy.

The Outnet

On Wednesday, 19 April the Duchess will will host runners from Team Heads Together at Kensington Palace as they get ready for the 2017 Virgin Money London Marathon. Kate will talk to the runners about their reasons for taking part in the marathon and wish them luck with their final preparations. The runners will then take part in a training session with coach Nick Anderson.

The following day, Thursday, 20 April, William, Kate and Harry will officially open the Global Academy in support of Heads Together. They will meet students training to be the next generation of production staff, as flagship stations LBC, Heart and Capital broadcast shows from the new academy in Hayes, Middlesex. The shows will each focus on the mental health of young people, helping to generate conversations with the Heads Together campaign in honour of the visit.


More from the official press release:

'The Global Academy is a state school founded and operated by Global, The Media & Entertainment Group, designed to prepare students for careers in the broadcast and digital media industry, offering academic and vocational training. Ashley Tabor, Global’s Founder & Executive President, came up with the idea of the Global Academy to tackle the skills shortage and lack of diversity across the industry.
The Duke and Duchess and Prince Harry will visit the Heart Breakfast Show and LBC's Nick Ferrari Show – to see the programme in action and meet students helping to produce the material. They will each visit a classroom, where pupils are learning about the science of sound, the student radio station where pupils are working on a mental wellbeing project, and an audio project listening to EMI’s vinyl recording of early speeches of the royal family.
They will also join a roundtable discussion with Global presenters, LBC’s Nick Ferrari, Heart’s Jamie Theakston & Emma Bunton and Capital’s Roman Kemp, as well as students and people who have taken part in the morning radio shows, talking about the importance of having a conversation about mental health.'

And on Sunday, 23 April the royal trio will be cheering on Heads Together runners at the London Marathon. More than 700 Heads Together runners will take part in this year's London Marathon, raising money and awareness to change the national conversation around mental health. All 39,000+ runners in the event will be given a Heads Together blue headband which they can wear on race day with their own charity vest to help make 2017 the 'mental health marathon'.  They will meet a number of the Heads Together runners prior to the race in the Blue Start area, before cheering on runners at various points along the 26.2 mile route. Their Royal Highnesses will then hand out medals to some of the charity runners as they cross the finish line. Prince Harry, as Patron of the London Marathon Charitable Trust, will make the official presentations to the winners of the elite men, women and wheelchair races. The mass race begins at 10 am.


Prince Harry recorded a video message ahead of the day for those participating in the marathon, saying: "I'm sure it will be one of the most rewarding experiences of your life. William, Catherine and I will be there to cheer you on." Harry added: "You can all play your part in the biggest ever movement for mental health. Together we'll get the whole country talking about mental health. When we get our heads together we can achieve great things."


The BBC has also released details about 'Mind over Marathon', a two-part programme on BBC One which follows a group of 10 runners affected by mental health issues as they prepare to run the marathon. William, Kate and Harry were recorded taking part in a training session and chatting with presenter Nick Knowles for the show. The first part of the documentary will be shown on Thursday, 20 April at 9pm on BBC One, with the second part being broadcast on the following Thursday, 27 April. William will attend a screening of the programme on Tuesday, 18 April.


You can watch the trailer here (with a little appearance from Kate).


************

Kate's much-loved Monsoon Fleur Wedges have been updated in two new colours for the spring/summer season (with thanks to What Kate Wore). Kate debuted the pair during last year's India-Bhutan tour and has worn them a number of times since.


The Espadrille Wedges come in taupe and navy, retailing for £45. They are described: "The classic court shoe gets a warm-weather spin with our Fleur espadrille wedges. In a sumptuous suede effect with an almond toe." At present, they are available in most sizes at Monsoon.

Monsoon
Thank you for reading as always! :)

254 comments:

  1. Just out of curiosity, why aren't Will, Kate, and Harry running in the marathon? Is it a security thing? Personally I think its a shame since they are the ones hosting it, they should also participate in it as well. I remember Will and Harry running a marathon for a charity a couple of years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello,

    Yes, it came down to security issues. The Express has an article covering the story here:

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/755363/royals-running-london-marathon-stopped-over-security-fears-prince-william-harry-kate

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can imagine it would be a security nightmare - probably almost impossible to prevent sniper attacks and so on.

      Delete
    2. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:03

      Indeed. The cramped space with so many different people so closely on them would not work at all. Makes very much sense.

      Delete
  3. Thanks for the post Charlotte! I can't not wait for the wedding!! I'm not surprised that KP official announcement about the wedding, since George and Charlotte are going to be in it. I can not wait for pictures, or even better if they have Videos of it! I would love to wake up early again and watch a Live Royal Wedding!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I just watched both videos. You can tell Prince Harry is passionate about Heads Together. I don't think I've listen to him speak often before (besides some of his interviews with the press. Remember when he on tour for the war the 2nd time, and he gave some interviews then.) But I most say, I do like his accent! :)

      Delete
  4. Well this press release is just baffling if you ask me. If you have wondered in the past why the royal press corps often feel like pulling its hair out, look no further than today and this statement!

    Isn't this a "private family matter" and a Middleton family matter at that? And isn't it up to Pippa and James to confirm the date of their wedding? I can't believe James doesn't have a public relations firm a phone call away. And making a public statement about what their children are doing in a private capacity? Isn't that strictly forbidden? I mean, how is it possible for the press to know the Cambridge rules from day to day, they keep changing!

    First, a certain KP staffer needs to learn how to spell or at the very least how to proof read.
    Second, a press release from KP should not be titled "The wedding of Pippa Middleton". Pippa and James, or Carole and Michael for that matter, could easily have released a statement confirming the date and location of their wedding, and saying that "they are delighted close family members will be included in the wedding party."

    Normal protocol would then have been for a Cambridge/KP aide, when questioned by press, to confirm that George and Charlotte would be in the wedding party. And to confirm the W/K/H attendance if they so desire. But since when do William and Kate do a press release to announce they're attending a private event?

    This shows again what is now an absolutely staggering lack of experience and protocol among the KP staff, and another neck snapping move by the bosses. I would like to think maybe it's a glimmer of hope, maybe they're trying to be more relaxed about these things. But I sense it's more a misguided attempt to control, and in doing so they're sending out mixed signals once again. They can't have it both ways.

    We shall have to wait and see their conduct the next time a "private family event" comes up...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha ha Claudia - I agree that I was left scratching my head. I don't understand these things at all for the reasons you pointed out. Who runs their PR and why is it run by a bunch of amateurs? They really need to grow up, the lot of them. William included.

      Delete
    2. Not to mention their staff are paid by Charles' office. Who deducts salaries as a business expense. Seems a bit mixing up of business and pleasure. Plus one would think that as the Middletons apparently hired a publicist for the family wedding, the publicist could have put out the press release. Who hires a publicist for a family wedding?

      And I noticed the spelling error as well. How embarrassing. Her name!!!

      Delete
    3. Anonymous in Colorado10 April 2017 at 23:09

      Well.....I'm choosing to focus on the positive (to me at least ;-) which is that we have confirmation of the wedding date, attendance by the Cambridges & Harry, & that George & Charlotte will be there in all their rosy Cambridge-cheeks glory.

      :-)

      Delete
    4. I'm sure KP ended up putting out this statement because it was decided that it was the best way to handle the interest and speculation surrounding the wedding and the subsequent interest generated by 5 members of the Royal Family attending. Furthermore I don't feel as if W&K are trying to have it 'both' ways. This is a high profile wedding and G&C are playing a high profile role. Merely confirming such through a statement does not contradict W&Ks consistent wish for privacy for their children. Just to add if I were Pippa I'd hire my own photographers to photograph the guests and the arrivals from the best vantage points and have them sell their photos to the newspapers in exchange for a charity donation to say the BHF. It might not keep the paps away but it will stop them from making any money.

      Delete
    5. Honestly Rosman it's laughable! Let's remember this is the same William who has had official royal photogs BANNED from covering official royal engagements if they dared photograph him *in public* at a friend's wedding! Who has consistently refused comment on any private activity. So before anyone thinks it's being made into a big issue, no, William has always chosen to make this an issue.

      In the spirit of being positive ;) I will again say I hope it is a sign that perhaps they are turning a corner. Time will tell. We won't know till the next time something comes up.

      If they were seeking to simply confirm attendance, that's normally done discreetly to the regular reporters over the phone, with the only attribution, "a KP aide confirmed."

      Next BP will be issuing releases on the Tindall siblings... or that chap Eugenie is seeing. The Middletons, Carole in particular, should be more savvy by now. This is a fine line with the public as well...

      Delete
    6. What is wrong with paps making money Jo ? They are also human beings, no? Presumably with families, kids etc. This is how they chose to earn money. And celebrities as well as royals *need* paps for them to be able to have their lifestyle. Actually they need paps more than paps need them, probably.

      In fact, as an economist I would argue that paps making money is far more efficient and better for the economy because that money is far more likely to find its way back to the economy than giving money to the BHF which in all likelihood would be used to pad up the salaries of some rich executives or middle-rung managers. What exactly would that money be spent on by the BHF do you think ? Either salary bonuses or "Raising awareness" for heart disease.Through more $10K dinners. As if we need to raise more awareness.

      So while the pap is likely to spend the money buying groceries, thereby giving back to producers, the executive is likely to buy another Hermes bag, thereby giving to the ultra-rich. The more money flows to the middle class, the richer middle class becomes and so on. It is always smart to question ones preconceived positions, I think.

      Delete
    7. Claudia I think this is KP trying to micro-manage the press rollout in their signature bumbling blundering way, and I think that Pippa and James have washed their hands off it, leaving it to those "who know best". Or in this case, who do not. All this has done, it seems is ticked off a bunch of reporters, including Dickie Arbiter who seems irritated at the inappropriateness of it all. And provided us with some fodder to discuss. I am sure that Charles will notice it as well and this will be yet another thing to hold against William.

      I reiterate, I do hope that Pippa has tremendous fun, Kate looks smashing, kids look positively candy-like in their cuteness and Meghan decides to show up in a knockout dress, and the paps get many pictures of all of it, and we have a ball on the blog ! That is all I wish for LOL.

      Delete
    8. Think we're going a bit of topic but will respond. I disagree strongly that's Royals need the paps. The British press overwhelmingly reject the use of their photos. To say W&K need the paps is to suggest W&K need coverage in European and American rags. They don't. Royals are a matter of national interest in the UK and if our press can go without so can popsugar etc.. Furthermore I agree that charities can be inefficient but never the less I'd rather a charity executive get a salary rather than someone like Niraj Tanna get a pay check. I just hope Pippa has a great day tbh.

      Delete
    9. I have to wonder if this story was about to be scooped and William wanted to beat the reporter to the punch? The release has such a feeling of haste, rushing it out without thinking about proper form and protocol, or even spelling...

      Delete
    10. Think we're going a bit of topic but will respond. I disagree strongly that Royals need the paps. The British press overwhelmingly reject the use of their photos. To say W&K need the paps is to suggest W&K need coverage in European and American rags. They don't. Royals are a matter of national interest in the UK and if our press can go without so can popsugar etc...Furthermore I agree that charities can be inefficient but never the less I'd rather a charity executive get a salary than someone like niraj tanna get a paycheck. I just hope Pippa has a great day tbh.

      Delete
    11. 1. Middletons announce date of wedding (if it has to be announced at all)
      2. KP confirms George and Charlotte are in wedding party.

      That's all that needed to be said. Personally, I don't understand why any of it was announced. It's a family wedding, supposedly, with a restricted guest list.

      The Queen, Prince Philip and Charles (plus other royals) were at a Mountbatten wedding not that long ago (and Charles gave away the bride). The Mountbattens are Philip's family just as the Middletons are Kate's but that wasn't blared from the rooftops by Buckingham Palace or Clarence House.

      Delete
    12. Actually, I think this press release is a good idea, no matter whose office releases it. It puts to rest once and for all, the daily growing speculation of "Will they or won't they?" and "Who's going and who isn't." That's what everybody's been dying to hear and now we know. Now the only question is "Will Meghan show up or not"

      Delete
    13. I wonder if people would have the same concern for paps if it was the wedding of their own family member? Doesn't EVERYONE try to control every aspect of their own wedding?

      If not for the media frenzy and the speculation/anticipation about the wedding, there would be no need for KP to say a word. They didn't do this to *bring* attention to the day; they did it to take control because of the children, and Amen to that.

      Delete
    14. Honestly, royalfan, if it were a member of my family or even my own wedding I would have zero problems with a bunch of photogs taking pictures from a couple of hundred feet away. What is the big deal. Seriously. Kate and William have been to numerous weddings and the bridges/grooms have rolled with it. I would have done the same.
      FWIW I doubt that Pippa gives two figs one way or other. This is all William and Kate.

      Delete
    15. Maggie - Minneapolis11 April 2017 at 05:19

      Royalfan - I think what most people are criticizing is not any desire by Pippa or Jakes to "control every aspect of their own wedding" - the criticism is, at least mostly, directed at the use of official staff that is publicly funded for the purpose of public royal business to do any such controlling.
      And come on, there are a TON of things with frenzy/speculation that KP refuses to comment on. Lol most things, actually.....
      The Cambridges chose not to announce specific due dates for either pregnancy (and reportedly wouldn't even tell their staff the due date which would have at least helped them organize the waits better), and waited hours to announce either birth, despite both decisions forcing all that media/members of the public to camp out longer outside while waiting (and in the case of George, in the brutal summer heat during an already very long almost month-long wait outside the hospital). I don't blame the Cambridges for wanting that privacy, but my point is they have very, very clearly never felt much need to announce something just to mute frenzy/speculation.

      Not to mention, most of the major hoopla/speculation about date/location/Cambridge participation in the wedding occurred when the engagement was first announced/when Emily Andrews first scooped the correct date/location - aside from a few articles triggered lately by the new set of pap pictures outside of Pippa's home, the speculation has mostly died down and would have mostly died down again. If KP had confirmed these things earlier (i.e. before or as soon as any speculation begun), I think maybe it would be more fair to give some allowance for them trying to mute frenzy/speculation because they would have beaten the media to the punch, but what has KP stopped, attention wise, by doing it now? All it does is guarantee a huge new batch of articles announcing the now certain cuteness of very young/popular little royal children participating in a wedding.

      Delete
    16. Maggie - Minneapolis11 April 2017 at 05:27

      But mostly, agree or disagree about the efficacy of this muting media frenzy, I just don't see how KP can do things like ban from royal events any photographers that take legal pictures of the royals attending weddings due to them being "private" events (even though the law says they aren't), but then justify using a public royal office to address anything about that same "private" event. That seems to indicate that this isn't a private event, or that KP *should* be discussing/addressing things about any matters of the royals deemed entirely private by them, which makes it harder to justify things like expressing anger when others also say things about the private lives of royals, whether it's through taking pictures of "private time" on public lands/publicly-funded tours, or whatever else.


      Also it's just an inappropriate and odd use of resources (for lack of a better phrasing atm). I don't want to delve too deeply into politics, but there's a reason that there is soooo much criticism around the world about things like Ivanka Trump getting a West Wing office (and that's as the daughter of the President!) or heck, all the criticism directed towards a major Trump aide for using a public interview while being a representative of the White House to promote Ivanka's fashion line. It's just mixing things in inappropriate ways that can easily snowball.

      Delete
    17. So the KP staff work for Kate. And if Kate wants to put out an announcement about her (royal) children attending her sister's wedding then who is to say that's not okay? When you bash the KP office... you are actually criticizing William and Kate. They haven't done a "poor job" for William and Kate -- they have done what William and Kate have asked them to do.

      I think it is interesting that folks try to see the staff and W&K as separate... KP is William and Kate (and Harry). Basically Dickie Arbiter is upset that W&K made an announcement about themselves and their immediate family -- her sister (his sister in law) aka Pippa, his brother aka Harry, and their children aka George and Charlotte.

      Delete
    18. Not too long ago (a year and a half, to be exact), all the publicity was about Pippa's devastation over her breakup with Nico Jackson. Good on her that she has already found another soulmate who happens to be a millionaire, and with it comes all the publicity. Would KP be so involved in her press if she had fallen in love with, say...a sheep farmer from the Lake District? I understand there is interest, as there always is with celebrities (though her celebrity seems to be a perfectly round derriere), but she is not a royal. As Claudia so elegantly noted above, what's next, the Tindall's siblings? I do hope she finds happiness in her life, but my interest in the royal family is not only their fashion choices, but the history and their contributions to charity of which Pippa plays no part.

      Delete
    19. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:10

      It is a bit odd. And I agree that it was a bit "much" to have a full press release. But I'm thinking, it's not unusual that royals are beforehand confirmed to be at funerals and memorial services. Sometimes they are there in an official caapacity and in the CC, so that makes sense. But they are also at times confirmed to be there even when they are there in a private capacity. So it's not THAT odd that they confirmed their attendance and such. But the actual releaase is a bit odd.

      Delete
    20. Moxie I personally think the point of a communications staff is to offer advice and guidance and make sure both press and public relations are handled in the best possible way. And this is making some reporters heads spin trying to keep up with what's ok and what's not ok.
      Tom Sykes made some good points: "he won't listen to advice and hires people too scared to give it", adding "Communicating this to William, in particular, is impossible, who continues to act with extraordinary hostility towards the press. He and Kate sometimes appear to go out of their way to make the lives of the UK’s phalanx of royal reporters difficult"

      Delete
    21. Rebecca I'm glad to see you today :) I went to bed last night wondering, hmm.. where's Miss Rebecca? Usually you post early and often ;) So I'm glad you're here and ok. X

      For me personally, the biggest issue is the first point I made, the press corps trying to keep up with the ever changing rules. No matter where you stand on this, and who you think should have released the info or if it's all much ado about nothing, you have to see by now how the press feel that they're on a merry go round.

      Perhaps they're relaxing about these things a bit, I hope so, but until we see if it continues it makes for a very confusing job. When everyone from Peter Hunt at the BBC to Emily Andrews at the Sun and all the royal photogs and correspondents in between, have the same "Huh???" reaction to a press release from KP, something is not right.

      Delete
    22. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 15:33

      I agree Claudia. It was clumsy, and that is worth discussing.

      Delete
    23. There is a difference between freelance paparazzi and the royal press photographers.

      Moxie, they may work for William and Kate (and Harry), but they aren't paid by them. Their job is to manage the royals, not play second fiddle to Pippa's PR team she hired for her wedding. I'm getting a bit sick of it all, frankly. She's getting married. It should be about love and commitment not who's going to outshine whoever, and having it heralded throughout the realm.

      She hired a PR flack. To say she doesn't want publicity is laughable at this point. She's got it in spades and I'll I've got is she's so insecure she's banning anyone she thinks is better looking than she is from the wedding -- if she can. And if anyone says that this is just a friends a family wedding now, I've got a bridge to sell you.

      Delete
    24. Rebecca, I was thinking the same thing! Good or bad, it's not completely unheard of to confirm the royals at a 'private' event that is going to attract attention.

      Delete
    25. bluhare, they are hired and paid by the funds William will inherit - temporarily - Duchy of Cornwall. Charles has managed it for so long that folks forget - Charles will not control it when he becomes King. So I guess it depends how you see the Duchy -- as a gift of the people, or a royal trust fund - with no conditions. And Charles is working hard to get it to be the latter. I think what might be confusing folks is that, apparently, William doesn't distinguish between his blood royal family, and his married family. The KP announcement came from either William, Kate, or indirectly, Kate's mother.

      Claudia, it's always been very hard for me as American to understand the unusual relationship of the royals with the press. I suppose it would be impolite(?) for the press to simply state that KP is an immature and self-involved operation? There are no "rules" for covering statesman, as dictated by statesman, (if that is what you want to call William in his role as royal) in the US. Because, quite honestly, that is counter to the whole idea of a free and independent press. I'm not sure what the consequences are if you don't follow William's "rules" -- how is it that he has the power to "ban" or restrict folks/press from events? That would be a dictatorship, no?

      The comparisons to the Tindall's are illogical.. they are not waiting in the wings to sit on the throne as William and George are. The correct analogy would be a press release on the Parker-Bowles/Shands (and previously Spencers) and Mountbattens and Bowes-Lyons families. Did Clarence House issue a statement when Mark Shand died? That would be the equivalent - only in this instance - it's a more celebratory event for KP.

      Delete
    26. However, William does not control those funds now, Moxie. His father does.

      I don't care if William enjoys the Middletons as his family. That is actually quite lovely that they've brought him into their fold, so to speak. He's really lucky that they all get along without any conflict. I wish that was true with my in laws!

      However, William used his business office, which normally refuses to comment on their private lives (with the notable exception of Harry's message about Meghan recently and William's letter re photographers and his children). They don't announce the weddings he and Harry have ushered, and there are a lot of those. Yet they announce the wedding of Pippa, when the only participants are the children whose privacy he so zealously defends. And Pippa has PR for her wedding. Seriously, you can't make this stuff up.

      Delete
    27. Moxie I couldn't agree with you more. William and Harry are grown men now and the need for kid gloves long gone.

      However, just as the White House issues press credentials for the WH briefing room and official events, KP, BP and CH issue press credentials for official royal engagements. So William can give his staff a list of people he doesn't want accredited and it's done, the photogs in particular have been complaining about this for years. I wish the press would grow a very large pair and take them on about this. In fact, when The Sun published photos of William and Kate before they were engaged, (2004?) William went berserk and they banned The Sun, including none other than ARTHUR EDWARDS, from covering official events. This was one of the few times CH had to backtrack with its tail between its legs and lift the ban.

      The UK also has the Press Complaint Commission (PCC) and the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso) - which has the Editors' Code of Practice - and the royals can and have complained to both and frequently been upheld. The Duchess of Cambridge filed a complaint after photos were published of George on a police motorbike. I thought this was a very foolish move, these were harmless and quite charming photos.

      Roy Greenslade writes about these things for The Guardian and did an excellent piece after that, questioning the wisdom of Kate and William's press strategy, that long term they were doing much more harm than good. Let me see if I can find it and do a link ;)

      KP reiterated then that the Cambridges have a "zero tolerance policy" on intrusion of their privacy and "the privacy of their family." Which leads me back again to my very first point, this release is in complete contradiction to what they have been insisting upon in the past, and is it any wonder that the royal press corps don't know what's up & what's down when it comes to covering the Cambridges?

      Delete
    28. bluhare and Claudia - you have expanded on your points beautifully. bluhare your remarks about William using his "business" office for personal use is an interesting perspective and I hadn't really thought of it that way. Claudia - would love links on press relationships. Interesting that press credentials are controlled by the royals - and not some other 3rd party entity. I was unaware how that worked.

      Very enlightening conversation. I wonder if the announcement isn't a precursor to images from the event being sold to some publication in an exclusive arrangement - much like the Tindalls did. They know the privacy is going to be violated, so they violated it first to prevent backlash on the Matthew/Middleton family. Time will tell.

      Delete
  5. Zora from Prague10 April 2017 at 22:43

    I admire the way Harry has grown into a really good speaker - almost an actor! :) I also like the Marathon trailer. What a worthy cause, hope it achieves its goal!
    Looking forward to seeing George and Charlotte in their wedding roles ;)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks, Charlotte, for the exciting updates! So it's been confirmed...I'm so ready for some cuteness overload! :) It's interesting that KP released an official statement, but I'm glad, as I'm not left wondering about the details & speculating.
    That pic of William as a page boy is priceless!
    Good to hear they'll be cheering on the runners at the London Marathon & doing more engagements leading up to it. It's a shame they're not participating in it, but with the security risks, it's understandable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And of course William was a mischievous little pageboy at Andrew and Fergie's wedding... https://au.pinterest.com/pin/94716398388535810/

      Delete
    2. Yes! Who could forget cheeky William in that sweet little sailor's outfit & pulling faces :) I wonder if we'll see a similar performance from either of his children, but I'm sure they'll be well behaved ;)

      Delete
  7. I can't wait to see the pictures - it will be so much fun. But mostly I hope that Pippa gets to enjoy her day with all her heart and without a care in the world. God knows that she has earned it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree with other commenters on the mixed messages that are sent by KP....for example: why not send a note of congratulations about Rebecca Deacon's wedding, who actually WORKS there? The way the release reads its as if Pippa/James are part of KP, which they aren't. I could understand if they wanted to just announce that the 5 royals will attend, but the wording is beyond strange.

    A few questions:
    1. Will we see the Cambridges at Easter? I can't remember if we see them at Church on Easter Sunday.
    2. Will we get Charlotte's 2nd birthday pics in early May, or will we have to wait until Pippa's wedding?

    Lots of exciting things to come, looking forward to the marathon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good point, Nina. Rebecca at least work(s)(ed) there.

      Delete
    2. I would think we would see her official 2 year old pics, and then wedding pictures and maybe a new family picture. Then more then likely we will see them of, correct me if I'm wrong, Trooping of the Guards? When they are on the balcony??

      Delete
    3. From the number of their wedding photos that were released, I think Rebecca wanted almost zero press coverage and KP announcements, and I don't blame her. :)

      Delete
    4. Surfer Girl, I completely agree. There were virtually no pics, so I am guessing she preferred no public visibility.

      Plus, then as employers, you start down a slippery slope. It's easy to give a shout out to a valued and favored employee but what about that one guy/girl that might be good at their job but no one really likes? Now are you playing favorites with employees? Because in the long term W/K will have a large number of employees.

      Delete
    5. That is true...I definitely didn't think about it from Rebecca's perspective. Maybe she is the one that didn't want the publicity.

      Delete
  9. So now we are going to argue about a press release. When people always complain we don't see the kids much. In as much as some people hate and will never admit it, there's a lot of interest in the wedding even if you personally aren't. And in my opinion it's never a bad thing to hear from KP. Also top members of the RF in fact 4 heirs will be in attendance. There'll be huge media coverage .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. It is much better to receive official confirmation from KP than to hear media speculation over and over. I think it is wise to choose a set group of photographers for the occasion, ones they trust and respect.

      Delete
    2. Maggie - Minneapolis11 April 2017 at 03:51

      There was a huge amount of speculation and interest in other weddings, like Melissa Percy's or Guy Pelly's for example, and whether or not the Cambridges and/or Harry would attend (well mostly about whether Kate would - the others were more obvious) - esp since Kate has been pregnant for some of the big society weddings and people always want to see her even more then. But did/would KP EVER confirm anything about those weddings? Or organize media for them?
      Also not sure what this has to do with not getting to see the children....we would get the same number of pictures (or possibly lack thereof) of the kids at the wedding whether KP did PR work for the Middletons/Matthews or not.

      Delete
    3. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:11

      I do agree that it's kind of nice to just get the facts straight up instead of all the speculation articles.

      Delete
    4. Sarah Maryland USA11 April 2017 at 18:28

      I'm Sarah do you know how shady that is if they get to pick and choose which photographers get to go take photos? Guess we can count on Chris Jackson being there since he is engaged to Kate's assistant
      Freedom of the press that is all I have to say

      Delete
    5. Maggie, apples and oranges. With the other weddings you refer to, it was a question of snapping a photo of W&K arriving, etc. With Pippa's wedding, ANY photo will be worth a great deal of money.

      Delete
  10. Queen of the Sun10 April 2017 at 23:18

    With the amount of coverage given to the comings and goings at Pippa's place in the last few days the media/paparazzi has indicated that they see Pippa's wedding as fair game.
    If left to their own devices I can chaos emerging at the wedding with 100's of photographers, so I do not blame KP for taking the reins.
    I understand that it unusual for KP to make a statement about what is a private event. But it would have been inappropriate for Pippa's PR to release a statement confirming G&C participation. So I can understand why they did it the way they did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My thoughts exactly, QOTS. I think this was a move to get rid of photographers who were suggesting an earlier wedding date and stalking the comings and goings at the Middletons' residences. Coming from KP that puts a lid on the speculation. Now they can all go home until May 20.

      Delete
    2. Good point. If the Middleton's issued a statement about G&C, they'd be "cashing in". I agree with you and I do understand the need for KP to "take the reins", as you put it.

      Delete
    3. I agree also, also Royalfan I liked your statement up above about "control for their children." The attention is already there, so why not stear it positivly? I do not mind the press release of the wedding. Whenever KP officialy announces anything I am happy, bc they are seldom and rare. Especially when it comes to the children. Will and Kate knows how much we want to see them, and how mucy money the press would get if they didnt release the pictures theirself.

      Delete
    4. I agree. Media management.

      Delete
    5. They have already done the cashing part just fine!!

      Delete
    6. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:12

      Good points.

      Delete
    7. The only logical answer about that, to me, it that that has something to do with the setting up of uber security that will encompass and permeate the venue. Media management for that purpose, makes sense. And since the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th heirs to the throne will all be there all at once, will they create a "no fly" zone over the property for a day or more like they did after George's birth? Will the local horseback security be utilized again? And will Fiona Cairns be doing the cake?

      Delete
    8. I think, upon reflection, that they would have to have a "no-fly" zone over the estate for at least a week. And, I also am more convinced than before that the security will incorporate the help of the local constable including the horseback units.

      Delete
  11. Wow what negativity on the press release. Yes it is a private event but with massive public interest so it is reasonable to release the facts and the arrangement for the photographers is reasonable as well. The public interest will be met. I really don't think it is necessary for a zillion photographers to be covering the event. The elephant in the room -will Meghan be there. My pick if she is she won't be at the service.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The point is that KP doesn't have to be the ones releasing the facts. It could be the private parties' PR firms, which have been held on retainer.
      I do hope Meghan is there !!

      Delete
    2. I think you'll find that outside the Kate blogs and forums most people don't care.

      Delete
    3. She will not be there, but I already talked about this on Mad about Meghan ;)

      Delete
  12. Hurray! The real story here is that we know the date of Pippa's wedding; we know that the Cambridges will be in attendance; and that there will be some adorable pictures of George and Charlotte to follow! Don't know much about KP protocol, but think that this was a step in the right direction to at the very least stop some speculation. George and Charlotte are after all Pippa's nephew and niece, who are after all heirs to the throne, so its plausible that KP would be involved. It also might be an attempt to stop lurking photographers waiting to get candid shots or a scoop of some sort. In light of the terrorist strikes, can only imagine that security is of paramount concern. It is my hope that the bride has a wonderful wedding and the Cambridge's have a memorable family event. cc

    ReplyDelete
  13. Can't imagine people here would like KP making press releases for a member of the Markle family. And I don't want Meghan at the wedding it's too much for a first appearance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Courtney from NC11 April 2017 at 00:19

    Don't know why Will and Kate bother any more because it doesn't matter what they do people find something to pick at. I try to skip the passive aggressive, argumentative posts but sometimes it just floors me. They are most certainly dammed if they do and double damned it they don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maggie - Minneapolis11 April 2017 at 03:47

      I can understand the frustration of Kate and William sometimes getting criticism on both ends for certain issues, but in this case, is there ANYONE who thought, or more to your point, demanded that Kate and William ever use KP to announce things about the Middletons? I really don't know how it can be thought that *any* pressure was put on them to release a statement about a private event. Ending speculation may seem like a good cause but it's not like they usually do that (heck speculation goes on for AGES about the children's potential participation in tours but isn't confirmed until a very very short time before any tour).
      Basically...you have said it's damned if they do, damned if they don't - and I'm wondering how they would have been damned if they didn't, in this case?

      Delete
    2. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:13

      They really are always damned if they do or don't. With everything. (That doesn't mean you cant question some decisions.)

      Delete
    3. I definitely agree.

      Delete
    4. Robbie from Hampton VA USA11 April 2017 at 14:12

      What is the norm in Great Britain for married sister of the bride being or not being matron of honor? In the USA it would be proper and the norm. BTW, totally agree with Courtney from NC!

      Delete
    5. Maggie, you miss the point. It is NOT about the Middletons, but about George and Charlotte, children of William and Kate. It is only about Pippa and James if you choose to be negative about this event. The media have been making it a free for all for the last few weeks so totally appropriate. The same people who are criticising KP for talking the action are the exact same who always criticise and I bet would find fault if they didn't take charge.

      Delete
    6. Courtney from NC11 April 2017 at 22:06

      Eva - Thank you! You nailed the point I was trying to make. When they don't release info they are slammed, when they do, well look at that! They are slammed. Everyone acts like William is the petulant one in the equation and he may be but he definitely isn't the only petulant one in any equation concerning the public or royal photogs.

      Also, this may be unprecedented but honestly this whole situation is new. Social media, popular royal's sibling marrying into money, the wee heir to the throne and his adorable sister, constant pap attention and speculation on social media. Never happened before so an unprecedented press release makes sense. The misspelling was ridiculous but other than that...

      Delete
    7. @ Eva B: If it isn't about the Middletons than why does the press release begin: "Miss Pippa Middleton and Mr James Matthews are pleased to confirm that their wedding will take place at St. Mark's Church, Englefield, on the morning of 20th May". Tbh I found your response to Maggie in which you suggested she must be choosing to be negative far more negative than her original post. Unlike you she expressed her opinion politely (without ascribing motivations to other posters) and even sympathized with Will+Catherine.

      Delete
    8. Eva B

      You nailed it for me.
      Always the same pepple critise those who have a different opinion than yours.

      Maggie's opinion is just as valid as yours, fight her arguments not herself.

      Delete
    9. Rebecca - Sweden12 April 2017 at 09:07

      You do have some good points Courtney :)

      Delete
    10. *Then not than. Sorry, autocorrect!

      Delete
  15. Maggie - Minneapolis11 April 2017 at 00:37

    You know KP has messed up when even Dickie Arbiter is confounded by something they've done! :P
    In all seriousness...the Cambridges forced a park (or something similar) in Canada to take down a tweet (posted after the fact so no security issues even) in regards to Prince George and Princess Charlotte playing there, even though they were on a trip funded entirely by various taxpayers. DURING a public engagement, William and Kate refused to allow photographers to follow them all the way to the top on a hike in Bhutan despite having them do most of the trek as well (bc no easy PR without getting pictures taken first). But yes, by all means, it's okay to use their publicly-funded office to release statements on behalf of non-royals, along with using those same taxpayer-funded staff members to spend time/effort organizing the media for a private event. Let's not forget that Prince William has, in the past, threatened to ban any photographers from working at official royal engagements if they also took (completely legal!!) pictures of the royals attending "private" weddings. So this just seems mind-boggling to me.
    And let's be clear - this was NOT just a statement confirming the attendance of several members of the BRF (which even that would be odd since they have never done that for a private event before i.e. any other weddings of private individuals attended by members of the BRF). But it is definitely more than that anyways - the official press release from KP literally speaks FOR Pippa and James, not the Cambridges and/or Harry (it starts "Pippa Middleton and James Matthews are pleased to confirm..."). James Matthews and/or the Middletons should pay for PR to take care of this if it was necessary. And I'm not sure attendance by any BRF members needed to be officially confirmed, but if it did, then it could have been done without releasing a statement or anything. And again, I'm not thrilled about KP seeming to be the ones organizing the media for the day. It's not their job.
    I also just don't get KP from a PR standpoint. For one thing, they mispelled Middleton in the title of the original press release (LOL!). But also, why release this statement on the same day as announcing new engagements for the Cambridges and Harry? Papers that would have been written about the London Marathon and Heads Together, thus at least a little increasing the spread of their mental health campaign, are now being filled with stories about George and Charlotte and the inevitable cuteness of their impending participation (which I am admittedly excited to see pictures of). If you're going to do work for non-royals too, at least do it in a way that doesn't hurt the thing that justifies using public funding for these employees.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is exactly what I think. If Pippa and her fiance wanted to have the public known when and where their wedding takes place they could have made their own statement. KP following the statement could have made an announcement, that William, Kate, their children and Harry are looking forward to visit the wedding of a close family memeber and friend in May. The children are excited to play a role in the wedding party.
      This course of actions was mentioned in many comments on several blogs and I can't wrap my mind around why they did not do it this way. It does not give a shady feeling for the Middleton's using KP Press ressources and ends the rumors about the Cambridges.
      They would still have been criticised because they always are but not to this extent.

      Delete
    2. That would have been the best way to do that, I agree, 07:48.

      Delete
    3. Julia's wording on that is appropriate also.

      Delete
  16. If nothing else KP definitely keeps us on our toes, like it or not. I don't know if they are purposefully being obtuse about one thing and then not another or if they don't have a clue. Glad to hear the children will be part of Pippa's wedding. I would have been surprised if they hadn't been given how close I think the families are. And Pippa has paid more than her fair share as fallout from her sister's celebrity and for years and years, so it seems even more appropriate considering that. She may not have a worldwide Westminster Abbey extravaganza but now her wedding will also be in the history books. Julia said that married woman are not usually in the wedding party so that makes sense that Kate will be a guest only. Will William and Harry be ushers? I think Fiona Cairns will most likely do the wedding cake as she still sells cakes on Party Pieces
    website. What do you guys think? Will Donna Airs and Meghan be there? Will any of Pippa's former beaus? (like both William and Kate had at their wedding). Where will they honeymoon? Will they become pregnant right away so their children can be close in age to George and Charlotte? (and, no, I didn't just have two cups of coffee. lol)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha ha .. great questions surfergirl. And I agree with you that Pippa deserves a lifetime of fun, fancy private jets and a long love-filled marriage, after all she has been through. The universe owes her that.
      Okay, one by one: I think Donna will be there if she is still with James. If she doesnt show that would mean that their romance is not serious enough and Carole will likely never give her consent. I think all of everyone's ex-boyfriends will show up. How can they not - such a small circle. I think that yes they will have babies straight away. Given how close she is with Kate I would surmise that they are planning to get pregnant together so that the kids can grow up together.

      Delete
    2. Peter Hunt edited the credit for the source of his retweet headline. It originally read, source:" MEDIA FACILITY FOR MEMBERS OF....The Royal Family who etc. There is no reference to Kensington Palace as a source. Apparently, the other reporters retweeted his (edited) retweet without questioning its authenticity. It provided a great opportunity to malign the Middletons and KP as it was.

      Delete
    3. I would be very careful with what you are suggesting Anonymous 16:00. Multiple times you have suggested that Peter Hunt made it up. And now you are suggesting that he is doing so to malign the Middletons and KP. Be very careful of what you say Annie from San Diego.

      Nobody has maligned the Middletons here. Nor is the criticism of KP's wording "maligning". It is legitimate criticsm. I wish you would stop posting here and go back to your usual alias on your usual blog..

      Delete
  17. Can I access that sidebar thingy from my IPhone to go to the new blog? Is that blog up and running already?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which new blog?

      Delete
    2. Charlotte's newest addition to her "Bentley of Blogs" fleet, "madaboutmeghan.blogspot.com".

      Delete
  18. hey charlotte I though its private but KP release that information on pippa wedding looking forward to that family event cant wait too see those two kids un in the wedding I think the birthday treat for princess charlotte will have to wait until the wedding

    ReplyDelete
  19. Although, bridesmaids have a different definition in the UK than here in the states, I still think Princess Charlotte is much too young to be a bridesmaid. I have seen two-year olds drafted into being junior bridesmaids/flower girls in several weddings, and it usually is not successful. Either the child flatly refuses to walk down the aisle after much anguish on the part of all concerned, OR the child's mother is forced to accompany said child down the aisle, causing much awkwardness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:16

      If you choose a kid that age, you sign on on the consequenses. I am a huuuuuge kid lover and for me one of the best things with kids in the bridal party is all the shennanigans and small mistakes that happen.

      Delete
    2. Charlotte is very young, and will only have just turned 2. I suspect she will likely need an escort to walk down the aisle (to offer guidance and support). There may be an adult walking with George and Charlotte. And, since they will follow the bride (instead of leading, as is done in the US), having guidance would be important to ensure that they don't walk on Pippa's dress. I have walked young flower girls down the aisle before, and they feel more secure with an adult helping them. Both had just turned 3 years old and one was shy while the other was feisty.

      Delete
    3. I had a 2 year-old (walking together with her 7 year-old cousin) at my wedding and it was just fine. It's possible that Catherine might walk George and Charlotte down the aisle and act as Matron of Honor to her sister. If she were to do so, I am guessing that it won't be announced but will simply "happen." I'd love to do a poll on "Will she won't she?" It would be almost as good as betting on it or who will attend.

      With the photos controlled, P&J and W&C avoid the press frenzy over a "pert derriere" supposedly "upstaging" the bride. That's not what happened at the Royal Wedding of W&C. That's the story the press told--essentially false news though it wasn't labelled as that in those days--which spread like a wild fire in mainstream and on social media. If you are upstaging the bride there is conscious intent and obvious passive or aggressive jealousy involved. I know of what I speak. I've witnessed it more than once. None of that was evident from Pippa on Catherine's big day.

      Delete
  20. Thank you Charlotte as always!

    Wondering if anyone has thoughts as to seeing the family at an Easter church service? And also - any bets on or thoughts about Meghan attending Pippa's wedding with Harry?

    ReplyDelete
  21. With the children involved, I can understand KP stepping in here given all the speculation and anticipation that is in the air. And let's not forget the people that are part of the Middleton's community. Can you imagine the madness as the day approaches?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, great that you understand royalfan. Because Dickie Arbiter, former press secretary to the Queen doesn't. You might want to have a word with him to fill him in.

      Delete
    2. Maybe Dickie Arbiter can call some of his palace connections find out who approved the PR, get the scoop and fill us in!! :) cc

      Delete
    3. Well, Mr Arbiter worked for the Queen and is currently 77 years old, so I would expect him to find KP operating slightly differently in 2017 (assuming this was legit).

      Delete
    4. royalfan, I did not write that 03:45 comment. Someone is using my handle, slightly altered. Glad I decided to check in today.

      Delete
    5. Zora from Prague11 April 2017 at 19:45

      CeCe :) and thanks for your positive comment above!

      Delete
    6. @Notme, thank you for confirming. I'm noticing more of this activity lately. Various identities with folks agreeing with themselves. Ha!

      Delete
    7. Ha! indeed. It is a virus that seems to be spreading.

      Delete
    8. This is really funny. Heaven forbid someone take your handle, notme! How many have you had now? Perhaps you could resurrect an old one.

      Delete
  22. I think that Meghan doing a first appearance at Pippa's wedding would be a real scene stealer. I don't think Meghan would do that. Harry may insist though, who knows. It would definitely speak volumes on his part about the seriousness of his relationship with Meghan
    if he does bring her to that wedding.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree surfergirl, this isn't the time or place for him to "confirm" his relationship with Meghan. I would think that out of respect to Kate and to the Pippa, that Harry would not make this about him and his relationship, but let it be about the bride and her wedding. cc

      Delete
  23. I love the footage I've seen of Prince William at the wedding of his uncle Prince Andrew. He looked adorable in his little sailor suit, especially when he walked out at the end with his hat drooping off the back of his head and during the ceremony as he fidgeted with the little sword he wore. I can only imagine how he views it today.

    I'm glad the date of Pippa's wedding has been confirmed so the paparazzi don't have an excuse for harassing the Middleton's and their neighbors (not that they wont). I am absolutely thrilled Prince George and Princess Charlotte will be participating. I'm a bit surprised by the controversy surrounding the press release (but understand it). I'd be curious (if anyone knows) how weddings in which Prince Harry and Prince William were page boys were handled by the press and the palace. I'm thinking particularly of the wedding of Diana's brother in 1989. There is coverage of Harry's role as a page boy in what seems to be a professional news report https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eaKln-mQ9Q

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How they were handled is largely irrelevant to this discussion thread and the present situation regarding the press release as there was no Internet or social media as there is today. Whatever was released didn't get the feeding frenzy it garners today.

      Delete
    2. Anne, Sorry, I hadn't seen your post when I posted mine below about Diana'a brother's wedding. Great minds think alike! I can't remember how announcements were made in the run-up to that wedding, but I can only assume that as Dickie Arbiter calls this latest statement 'unprecedented', they didn't handle it like this back then - even at the height of Diana mania!

      Delete
    3. I am not the only poster to wonder about how the wedding of Diana's brother was handled in 1989 (See Helen H and Ali below). I take your point about the difference with social media and the Internet today, but I want to say that I felt hurt by being told my question was "largely irrelevant to this discussion thread."

      Delete
    4. Courtney from NC11 April 2017 at 22:13

      But it isn't irrelevant because everyone is talking about how unprecedented everything is with this situation. Looking at past situations that mirror this most closely is always relevant.

      Delete
    5. I'm sorry you were hurt Anne. I know there was no internet etc, but God knows royal protocol is pretty standard over the decades! After all, it was quite a story that they were not using the BP easel to announce George's birth!

      Charles Spencer married the first of his wives ;) in 1989, she was Victoria Lockwood. The Spencers are a fairly grand family so I'm not sure they would have needed or used BP, but there could have been some assistance.

      Are you on Twitter? You know who would be great to ask, that Marlene Koenig, she runs a blog called Royal Musings I think. She has news clipping filed for all major royal events, so I think could easily find out what the announcements were for Charles Spencer. Judy Wade and Jennie Bond are also on Twitter, they both covered Diana in those years and might know.

      I think it's a very good starting comparison, but agree with others that Dickie Arbiter would know as well as anyone else, and he made his reaction quite plain.

      Delete
    6. Anne +1.
      Philly your comment came across as snooty and dismissive bordering on rude. I hope you didn't intend it that way!

      Delete
    7. Thanks for posting the 'Youtube' link, Anne, it was interesting to watch. I remember the spread of photos in 'Hello' at the time.

      Delete
    8. Philly the frenzy surrounding Diana was 100 times more than that surrounding Kate or William. Nobody outside of these royal blogs actually care about Kate. Most of the country did follow Diana in her heyday. She was relevant to people day in and day out and brought the monarchy to the forefront of news.

      Delete
    9. I think a lot of people ARE interested in Kate, and many women like to see what she is wearing.It's not really possible to compare the interest in Diana versus Kate as the digital world has changed so much and most people have a camera/video facility on their mobile phones to capture royals and celebrities out and about etc. and inform the world at large of a 'spotting' within seconds.(via social media).

      Delete
  24. It's certainly weird and slightly amateurish, but of course we can all be flexible and roll with it. It's good to know the information, no matter how it came. I'll be very happy to see the photos and videos and whatever comes from the wedding.

    Very happy too, to see the heavier level of participation in the Heads Together campaign leading up to the marathon race. I was starting to be afraid they were dropping the ball, though THAT would have been the strangest of all things lately. Anyway, they aren't, and I'm looking forward to the series of events.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I bet George and Charlotte will make very cute additions to the wedding party! I'll reserve my comments about how the PR is going with this family (so I don't "rile everyone up" ;p) and just say I am looking forward to the next month for the engagements coming up and what the rest of Spring will bring for the royals. Will be nice to see how the children have grown since we last saw them! I can't believe George is FOUR this year!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Julia from Leominster11 April 2017 at 07:38

    My feeling is that this is an important matter - James and Pippa are private individuals and Kensington Palace should not be making announcements about their wedding. By the same standards, what publicity they allow is up to them, but due to the historic nature of the future king's presence, photographs are reasonable. (There are early photos of the queen as a bridesmaid.)
    I tend to agree with bluhare that having the Middletons announce the date would have been appropriate (if the palace helped set that up, we probably would never have been the wiser.) Then the palace could have announced that due to enquiries, the children will be participating. That would have kept the private Middleton/Public royal distinction that is important to a lot of us.(And although I'm no one to talk here, proofreading would have been nice. In my working life, I'm much more careful.)

    I don't think it's unusual to have a two year old as an attendant - although some avoid children in the wedding party (I'm mentioning no names.) I would assume Donna Air will attend if she and James are still together, as seems to be the case, and I would even think Freya might be in the wedding party as James has spoken of being close to her - which is nice.

    Meghan is more of an unknown. I would be surprised if Harry is an usher but William might be. (But I've been surprised before - although guessing fairly close so far on this wedding.) I think it would be nice to include Meghan and this girlfriend of the best man - can't think of her name - just because there have been these claims about Pippa excluding them - which I suspect is silly - at least I hope so, unless there simply isn't room for partners.

    Making announcements may have happened because of the private location of the church left people wondering if there would be photos but still could have been handled more carefully. I also thought Pippa's proper name was Philippa but maybe I'm wrong - I would have expected that to be used given the formality of the announcement.

    I hope to see William and Kate at Easter. I'm beginning to feel that is quite important. The only time they've been seen at Easter services is in Australia. I wouldn't expect to see them at the Maundy Service though. I suppose we shall see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pippa's name is Philippa Charlotte and I agree with you, no way should a royal palace be using a knick name (imagine an official KP release calling Catherine "Kate"!). So unprofessional, not to mention the misspelling of her last name! Awful and very unusual. I think we are right to be a bit surprised by the nature and tone of this whole announcement.

      Delete
    2. Zora from Prague11 April 2017 at 19:51

      Julia, I had the same thought about Pippa/Philippa.

      Delete
  27. Eve from Germany11 April 2017 at 07:39

    This is certainly one truly unprecedented move!! Boys and girls belonging to the Royal Family have been bridesmaids and page boys for generations - but never (at least to my knowledge) has it been OFFICIALLY announced that one of them was in attendance at a PRIVATE wedding. And why should it. After all, it´s the BRIDE and the GROOM´s wedding - THEY should be the center of attention, right? It´s absolutely NOT KP´s job to announce the wedding date of a PRIVATE person - no matter how related to the Royal Family! I mean, they can do what they want, but then they can throw their "beloved" Royal Protocol out of the window and stop "hiding behind it" whenever it pleases them. I agree that a statement about "what´s what" certainly ends speculation, but this could have been done e.g. via the usual media channels (there are enough trusted royal reporters who could have been given some information). Revealing information about Pippa Middleton´s wedding is just not anything KP should be releasing official statements about. It´s just not their business. But there again, at least KP´s press office has us wondering again.... Sometimes reminds me of a reality tv show production company - no rules except "keep them talking out there about us"....

    ReplyDelete
  28. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 08:20

    I think it IS valid for KP to be involved, security wise, to keep a coordinated and controlled presence of media outside. I mean, it's the 2nd, 3rd, 4th AND 5th in line to the throne there so it's going to be VERY high security.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hahaha did anyone notice! Apparently they need spell check at KP. In the header of the release they misspelled Middleton-Middelton. That's really bad from a professional standpoint. But gosh it made me laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  30. On a totally unrelated issue ... when I got home tonight my very first "KATE" purchase was waiting for me. My Kate Spade earrings arrived - and I can tell you in person, they are breathtaking. I love, love, love them. Best earring purchase ever. ❤❤❤

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 13:52

      How great. Hope you get lots of use of them :)

      Delete
    2. Congratulations! I hope you enjoy wearing them.

      Delete
  31. Hmm, there seem to be two Jos on here so I will clarify myself as "Jo in Ireland" from now on :) I only wanted to send up some prayers that the London Marathon will not be the scene of any terrorist shenanigans. I imagine the police presence there will be huge!! I hope that it will be remembered for good things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll join you in that sentiment, I remember all too well the images from that horrible day at the Boston Marathon.

      As you said, I suspect security will be impressive and hopefully there will be only good things to talk about!

      Delete
  32. I think William should do his own thing given the extraordinary role of the press disrupting his life and ultimately contributing to the loss of his beloved mother. We are talking about a written press release providing information about an upcoming wedding that many people are interested in with two future kings attending. It's no big deal to announce their participation!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is a big deal when you start the press release with "Miss Pippa Middleton and James Matthews are pleased to confirm ..." They are private citizens and tax-funded Kensington Palace should not be making statements on their behalf. The Queen, Prince Charles and many senior member of the BRF attended a wedding recently and there was not a single press release, so your argument about two future kings attending is flawed.

      Delete
    2. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 15:37

      It could have been handled so much better.

      Firstly, not write the press release on behalf of the couple. That is as amateurish as the Middelton spelling mistake. The whole thing seems rushed. Which seems odd to me. What could be the rush? Someone had gotten a scoop that the kids were in the bridal party? Hardly the scoop of the year and already guessed by alot of people. There is something that doesn't add up.

      Delete
    3. Sara from Canada11 April 2017 at 19:28

      I agree, Rebecca. I believe, if they are trying to to moderate hype for whatever unknown reason (maybe a security issue?) to us (b/c that certainly is not always the case, e.g. the royal births), it would been more appropriate to make royal family the subject of the sentence. Something like this: "Prince George & Princess Charlotte will be attendants at an upcoming family wedding on May 20th. . ." Don't mention the bride & groom (everyone can figure it out). . .and then this type of press release would have been "saved." And the point they felt they needed to be make, would have come across without this press distress!

      Delete
  33. It suddenly struck me that the royal family has been in exactly this situation before - back in 1989 when Princess Diana's brother (then Viscount Althorp) married Victoria Lockwood and Prince Harry acted as a page boy. Whatever protocol was used back then regarding announcements should be equally relevant to Pippa's wedding - if not more so, as I believe the press and public interest in Diana back then was far more feverish than it is in William and Kate today. Dickie Arbiter of all people should know what that protocol was and if he is unhappy with this statement, I can only assume that KP and BP didn't get involved back then. I totally agree with him and Claudia's post above that KP should not be making announcements on behalf of Pippa Middleton - she is not a royal.

    I can't wait to see George and Charlotte in all their finery! What a treat! I agree that Charlotte is very young to be a bridesmaid, but I guess we'll only get to see pictures of them going in and coming out of the church, so we won't see any fidgeting or tantrums during the service (unlike William at Prince Andrew's wedding!)

    For those wondering, I would almost bet my house (almost!) that we won't see Meghan at the wedding. She may have been invited to the private reception afterwards (when the press have gone), but I think Harry will attend the service on his own. It's a little sad, I think, and puts Harry and Meghan in a difficult position regarding invitations if and when they tie the knot.

    Any thoughts on what Kate might wear given that it looks like she's attending as a guest and not as Matron of Honour? I'm thinking it will be a repeat that isn't too bright in colour, so my top contenders would be: the pale blue Catherine Walker suit from the Netherlands trip (needs a hat though); the dove grey McQueen from the church service on the NZ/Oz tour; the Jenny Packham lace overlay dress from the Somme but with nude accessories; the blush lace overlay McQueen shift dress last seen at a Buckingham Palace garden party I think. (Won't bet on any of them though - I've only ever been right once!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Helen H good point about Viscount Althorp. Maybe someone else will remember the details.

      Delete
    2. Helen, I like your choices on repeat contenders....all very worthy and perfectly muted!! cc

      Delete
    3. Totally agree about the repeats. I'd LOVE to see that Dove Grey McQueen.

      And you have me thinking, I wonder if George and Charlotte will also be in "repeats" from William's pageboy days. Any pics of Zara or other BRF girls in flower girl/bridesmaid dresses? W&C seem to love having George dress up in retro outfits. It'll be fun!

      Delete
    4. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 18:08

      I doubt that Nina. Isn't the outfits generally choosen by the bride and groom? If the kids were just guests, then maybe. But in the bridal party with probably other kids, they will be in new costumes/outfits designed to fit in with the wedding theme.

      Delete
    5. I would like to see her repeat the light blue and lace overlay Temperley London dress from the 2012 SE Asia Jubilee Tour. The one that I believe she wore to a tea party in Malaysia that was reminiscent of a Wedgewood pattern. She wore pearl hair adornments in what is still one of my favorite updos of hers.

      Delete
    6. I would love to see that dove grey McQueen again. That was beautiful!!

      Delete
    7. Courtney from NC11 April 2017 at 22:38

      Lyla - I would love to see that ice blue Temperley as well. Also, from the same tour, the purple Prabal Gurung or even then floral Packham she wore to polo in California.

      Delete
    8. @ Courtney: I forgot about the printed Prabal Gurung, I actually like that dress more than the one I suggested!

      Delete
    9. I'm not aware of any announcements being made when Diana's brother got married, but that was a different time ... there was no social media to feed the frenzy and make people feel entitled to know every snippet of information. Generally speaking, there's something to be said for reporting on an event AFTER it happens. What a concept. ;-)

      Also, the Middleton's inspire a lot more press interest because they are a self-made success story, an attractive family, and the unprecedented scenario where a future king marries a girl he fell in love with at university. (And not one selected by an elder royal relative...OR girlfriend!)

      Delete
    10. Your points about the Middletons are very good ones, in my opinion, royalfan.

      Delete
  34. Oh my gosh. Why in the world would KP make an announcement about Pippa's wedding?????????????????

    Do they want it to be counted on their list of official engagements?! What PR person wouldn't have stood up to William and Kate to tell them how inappropriate it is??! Honestly I have no idea what to say. Their attendance is a private family affair and has nothing to do with their (so-called) professional public service to the state.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Helen, I like your "guesses". Any of those would be perfect, in my opinion. Although, knowing how they decked out in new "custom" duds for the Royal wedding, I don't think they will do anything less for Pippa. Will Pippa wear her Royal wedding earrings? Will Kate? That would parlay the sweet provenance of those pieces and create a nice family tradition. Would love to know who is catering the reception and would love to know the menu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope Pippa does wear Kate's earrings. It could become a Middleton ladies tradition.

      Delete
    2. Both Pippa and Kate had earrings designed for the Royal wedding. They were very similar but different. Maybe Pippa will wear hers and not Kate's, although wearing Kate's and starting that tradition would be nice. I hope she at least wears one of those two pairs.

      Delete
    3. Surfer Girl, I hadn't thought about Kate lending Pippa her wedding earrings - for her 'something borrowed' maybe. That would be amazing!

      Delete
    4. Both Kate's and Pippa's custom diamond earrings designed for the Royal wedding are shown side by side and explained at Huffpost,
      5/22/15, Sarah Karmali, "Update, Kate and Pippa Middleton's Wedding Bling". Pippa's had a floral motif to match the flowers in her hair. Kate's had "leaves" to match the Halo tiara and acorns to match her Coat of Arms.

      Delete
    5. That' "Up Close", not "Update".

      Delete
    6. Catherine's wedding earrings are a part of royal history and I doubt they will be worn by anyone but her. Didn't she re-wear them fairly recently-with the red outfit at Trooping or OOG Ceremony? That would further identify them more with royals and less with the Middletons and the wedding.

      Delete
    7. Courtney from NC12 April 2017 at 16:26

      I had never seen a picture of Pippa's earrings before today. I honestly like them better than the ones designed for Kate.

      Delete
    8. yes, she did wear them then.

      Delete
  36. Eve from Germany11 April 2017 at 16:18

    This is unbelievable.... KP took down the message on twitter!! What the heck is going on over there? Did they have the apprentice on the subject - or maybe an Easter holiday intern? LOL..... I really wish I could have been the famous "fly on the wall" inside KP just before they took it down.... Would have been interesting to know who made them.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe it's some new people doing things with deacon leaving. Seems a mess

      Delete
    2. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 16:57

      What do you mean. KP never put it on twitter? It was just sent out to the press and they tweeted about it.

      Delete
    3. Eve from Germany11 April 2017 at 17:53

      @Rebecca: I´ve heard KP had the message on their twitter feed and then it was taken down/disappeared. It´s not on there (at least last time I checked). I must admit I didn´t check KP twitter feed when Charlotte broke the news here, so I cannot swear it was originally on there, I assumed it was because usually they use twitter for official statements.

      Delete
    4. Rebecca - Sweden11 April 2017 at 20:58

      I was watching twitter that whole time and never saw it pop up at any time from KP themselves. All the royal reporters copy-pasted text into their own tweets except for Peter who made a screen capture of the actual document/press release and tweeted.

      Delete
    5. Rebecca can you still find it on "Peter's" twitter feed? If yes maybe you could look and see what it looks like? I would check but have no idea who Peter is.

      Delete
    6. Rebecca I found it. On Peter Hunts twitter feed but not on the @kennsingtonroyal twitter feed. How odd.

      Delete
    7. Rebecca - Sweden12 April 2017 at 09:10

      Here: https://twitter.com/BBCPeterHunt/status/851470423741083649

      Delete
    8. Rebecca-please see my comment above. Peter edited the source from the header in his tweet before sending it. It was headed "FACILITY FOR..." etc.
      It was an email originally and I saw no reference to KP as the source.The other reporters mostly just retweeted his edited version.

      Delete
    9. Rebecca - Sweden12 April 2017 at 18:39

      I saw the reporters all tweeting at the same time. Actually, they tweeted about an hour before peter (Example: https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/851458534978072576)

      They all seem to have tweeted the information from a press release. This is often how they do on twitter. They get a press release (and sometimes an embargo time) and at that time you get lots of same/similar tweets from all the royal reporters based on that press release. Sometimes they write it themselves, sometimes they take screengrabs of the press release.

      Delete
  37. For those of you who are interested, I have just opened my blog on mental health.
    The web address is: shatteringthestigmaofmentalhealth.blogspot.com.

    I just finished one post and I'm getting ready to work on another one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow! That's great Sarah. I'll be right over.

      Delete
    2. Cara, Australia11 April 2017 at 23:17

      Thank you for sharing Sarah. Your blog is an integral part of the campaign to break the stigma surrounding mental health issues. You should feel so proud of your efforts!

      I didn't know about the workplace mental health first aid officers courses - I went looking for one for primary school aged children. There wasn't one listed but I may contact the organisation and discuss further with them. As a primary school teacher, my colleagues and I are seeing more and more mental health issues in young children, and these issues are barriers to their learning and development. I would LOVE to do a course similar to the one listed for teens, as these children deserve the best care possible.

      Thank you and best of luck with your fab blog!

      Cara

      Delete
    3. Congratulations, Sarah! I very much look forward to visiting the blog.

      Delete
    4. Julia from Leominster12 April 2017 at 01:13

      Thank you for telling us, Sarah, I will check out your posts.

      I hope those at Head's Together might too - there is much you could contribute for them - particularly, how people can respond when someone raises the issue of mental health and courses that can be taken - this is something that Head's Together hasn't addressed enough. It's lovely to say people should talk but such conversations must be handled with care, discretion and wisdom or more damage could be done.

      But I do believe the attempt to normalise mental health issues is extremely important and long overdue. Sadly, as this new biography of Charles shows (and is still out there amongst Camilla and Charles close supporters - I've met a couple of them) mental health is still used as an excuse and in that process, treat people with issues in a derogatory way.

      Delete
    5. Your blog is really good, Sarah, I wrote a comment as I am a teacher and like Cara I happen to deal with students struggling with mental issues, like eating disorders. Thank you for your answer, it was really useful for me.

      Delete
    6. Thank you SARAH,
      I have visited your blog and will do so regularly in the future and will share and comment if appropriate.

      Delete
    7. Courtney from NC12 April 2017 at 16:23

      I have several doctor's appointments today but wanted to say that I am so glad you started the blog and shared the link with all of the Duchess Kate Blog! I will most certainly be checking your blog out later today.

      Delete
    8. Zora from Prague12 April 2017 at 17:30

      Sarah, I'm really happy you've got your blog started! I'll definitely be a regular reader. Congratulations and best wishes!

      Delete
    9. Thank you to all who have checked out my blog on mental health or are going to do so. I look forward to writing more entries in the days ahead and starting supportive and helpful conversations. I'm working on a Twitter page to accompany the blog, and will share that very soon.

      Delete
  38. I find this announcement interesting but not necessarily unprecedented. I just think Pippa's marriage and position is unique. She is the sister to a future queen and her nephew is a future king, both associated with Kensington Palace. I looked back to see when Camilla' children got married and it was in 2005 and 2006. I don't think there was an announcement from Kensington Palace, but there were no children of Charles and Camilla in the wedding. Also, Princess Diana did not have any sisters or brothers get married after she did, so Prince Harry and Prince William were not in their weddings. Well, Charles Spencer got married for the first time after she did, but I don't think the Royal family was as inclusive of in laws as they are now---so maybe it is unprecented. I am shocked by the announcement, but in a happy way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Julia from Leominster12 April 2017 at 01:03

      Quite honestly, there is nothing unique about Pippa, simply most relatives of heirs and their partners don't seek the type of attention she has. I would term her a celebrity, created because of her bridesmaid's dress and a great many attempts at self-promotion that have kept her in the public eye, including writing a book, television appearances, and various other efforts. Most of spouses of monarchs have siblings and most stay more out of sight although Camilla's children have also put themselves forward at times.

      Charles Spencer is the godson of the queen so his situation is quite different than Pippa's the families once were much closer, not brought together by marriage. I don't believe the palace made any announcements at the time of his first marriage. Whilst his marital career has been abysmal, his efforts at self-promotion seem mostly related to supporting his stately home, something many owning such homes have to do.

      I think the royal family is trying hard to be nice to the Middletons but that doesn't make them unique - or royal. Trading on Middleton unpopularity - for people dislike people who seem to put themselves forward, republicans have seized on "Princess Pippa" making a tease of her. I hope following her marriage, she will retreat quietly in the background, if not age will do that for her - she is of the moment.

      My own opinion is that all relatives of royals whether aristocrats or commoners, should keep a low profile. That doesn't mean they can't be close to their relative, merely, that they should remember the royal family IS unique and must stay that way to survive, or there is no point. Self-promotion is one of my concerns about Meghan - although I admire her charitable interests. But should she make the transition to being a princess, I hope her family can be contained. They are already causing massive issues.

      Delete
    2. Agree....seems much ado or a happy event. Do we really care? We have the information. Yay a wedding and the kids. I think all of the gasping about precedence may be taking the winds out of the sails of some who are sticking the rules in a world that is rapidly moving past the rules in such matters. 2017 is not 1917 or 1947 or 1967 or 1981 1985 or even 2011.

      Settle down it is an anouncement about ONE event not the entire court circular. Let us be happy for happy news.

      Delete
    3. I want to speak to the idea of in-laws or relatives of royals dropping out of sight or ever putting themselves forward because of their random accident of birth. This greatly disturbs me because it prevents those individuals from ever taking on any creative, self-fulfilling, entrepreneurial pursuits unless those are applied to a charity. I find that both unjust and unfair. What are they to do? Give up on their own lives and passions for quiet lives of self-effacement?

      Worse, this ideal is more stringently applied to women (outmoded and sexist) than men like the example of Earl Spencer which is mentioned above. Though James Middleton gets a lot of it too for his series of attempts to establish himself. Anything anyone of the affluent middle class or lower classes might do is seen as self-serving. The gentry doesn't need to be self-serving. They've already got full service.

      Almost every successful person goes in a zig-zag path of numerous failures and setbacks much like a game of Snakes and Ladders before achieving the pinnacle of his or her achievement. They have to fight for themselves and their ideas and do the hard work. You can't do that without getting criticism along the way.

      Such achievement is often achieved beyond a person's 30s and 40s. Luckily, most of them get attention once they are established. Then their stops and starts from humble beginnings are held up as laudable. But ordinary people like the Middletons (and now the Markles) get picked apart both before and after their successes because of their connections to royalty.

      I say that any person connected to the royals (even those who are a little too loud and proud for the traditional Brit) is preferable to the dated example of the Queen Mum staying mum. The QM's ideas fit her time and social strata better than they do today's. The worst thing that could happen to Meghan and the royals is that she be muzzled by the House of Windsor should she agree to take Harry (and all that such a choice means).

      I say: Be who you are in spite of whom you or your sister marries. Bring your best gifts to the table as you live your life. We get only one (that we know of). Don't let anyone put you in a corner or hide your light under a bushel. Be radiant.



      Delete
  39. Has anyone commented on/remembered William's antics at Andrew & Fergie's wedding? He was so cute and the photo of the Queen chasing him as he dashed after the coach bearing A & F off to their honeymoon is one of my favorites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Julia from Leominster12 April 2017 at 01:04

      I remember it very well - I wanted to be part of that crowd - but had to work! It was a most delightful ceremony - if only the marriage had been as well.

      Delete
    2. Tammy from California12 April 2017 at 16:18

      JO! I have been looking for that footage on youtube for forever! I loved when the Queen ran after him!

      Delete
  40. I think they made the announcement because they are organizing the media for the event and I think they are doing that because a) they don't want too many photographers there for George & Charlotte's sake and b) for security reasons. In light of recent events and considering that number 2-5 in line for the throne will be in attendance, security will surely be immense and having only a small and hand-picked number of media people there surely helps with that.
    That said, the statement could have been worded more carefully: without the 'Pippa & James are pleased to announce', using Pippa's given name (which, if people on here are aware of it, KP should certainly know) and obviously without the spelling mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Was the KP account hacked?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't you think KP would have made a statement then? KP also released a bunch of dates for new engagements. It is highly highly unlikely it was hacked. We would have known by now.
      But I do understand where you are coming from. The entire statement was so mystifying and strange that seems like the only reasonable explanation, doesn't it.

      Delete
  42. bingo, Alimai. That really, given the wording, the spelling and the unprecedentedness of it all, makes the most sense. Even the format looks like it was done in haste. I think that is really a possibility.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Donna Air never seems to be at events in which Kate & William are present. (or the Middleton parents are present, though she has been photographed at a function with Pippa) It's a though she is a persona non grata until/if she & James Middleton become engaged. It will be interesting to see if she is at the wedding.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I see Stephen Fry is doing one of the Heads Together films. Some years ago he made a documentary 'The secret life of a manic depressive', which deals with his life living with bipolar disease. It is well worth watching.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Julia from Leominster12 April 2017 at 16:04

    The more I think about this, the more what concerns me is the poor and unprofessional wording of this announcement, quite apart from the misspelling. Any formal announcements about Pippa's wedding are almost certainly in her parents' names and refer to her by her full name.

    The palace would have done better to make a statement saying: We have received enquires about the presence of Prince George and Princess Charlotte at the wedding of Miss Philippa Middleton on May 20. After verifying with the Middleton family, we are pleased to say the children will be participating in the wedding ceremony. Due to this interest, we have been asked to clarify what the position of photographers will be...

    This would make it clear the palace is responding to questions, not making announcements on Pippa's behalf in a semi-official way that violate etiquette. What concerns me is that if they make statements at this casual level here, what will they do in the future. We've already seen poor wording from them in the past and statements which reflect questionable judgement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca - Sweden12 April 2017 at 16:24

      I agree. And on that issue I think we SHOULD blame KP and not the royals themselves. Unless they hastily wrote it and sent it out from the staff computer when they went to the bathroom (which seems highly unlikely). So while I think the royals are at fault at times, (and also in how they choose their staff), there is a staggering amount of amateurish behaviour at KP. And I get it, it's not a high paying job so it probably doesn't draw the biggest names. But it's odd...

      Delete
    2. Julia your wording is spot on and agree with your general take on the issues around this subject.

      Delete
    3. Excellent suggestion Julia. Again, you pay the price for inexperienced staff.

      I also think at this point they need a background, closed door meeting with the royal press corps to clarify for *them* what guidance they can expect in the future on "private family events" ;)

      Delete
    4. Sarah Maryland USA12 April 2017 at 18:09

      Doesn't the royal family pay employees badly anyway? So maybe they can't attract actually decent people to work for them because they are so cheap with the pay?

      Delete
  46. Tammy from California12 April 2017 at 16:16

    I can't wait to see these cuties on Auntie Pip's big day.

    The media has grown OLD and TIRED with me. I read that the statement was made in regards to the CHILDREN, and the wedding they are going to be in. The media likes to chew, dissect, imagine, foretell, pick-apart EVERYTHING. They make something out of NOTHING. The Cambridge children are going to be in a wedding. That wedding is their aunt's wedding. It doesn't mean KP is going to start announcing things for the Middleton Family, it doesn't mean taxpayer money is now being spent there: it means the children are going to be in a wedding.

    SHEESH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  47. Hello,

    I've received several queries from readers who are concerned about the press release from KP and its authenticity. I asked four reporters and photographers who all confirmed it's legitimacy. They all received the email from KP. The Telegraph contacted KP directly to further enquire about Prince Harry and asked if he would have a plus one. Naturally, they declined to comment on that and confirmed they will be releasing no further info on guests.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Thanks, Charlotte. Clarity is so cool. :)

    ReplyDelete
  49. Eve from Germany12 April 2017 at 17:34

    My goodness - what a storm in a teacup this email/announcement/information or whatever it was that KP sent out has become! I must correct my earlier statement, I thought it was first spread via Twitter which apparently is wrong, so I apologize for maybe adding to the general confusion!

    In all seriousness - with all the crazy bombs, terrorist attacks and the lot nearly daily on the news now - I am just simply CRAVING for a real good princess-style/royal-style wedding! If Pippa wants everything to be as private as possible I am the last one to object, it´s HER day and that of her future husband after all. But lots of photos/footage of outside the church, happy people smiling, a beaming bride in a dreamlike gown and an equally beaming groom - honestly, it would be such a welcome treat!!! I don´t want any intrusive pap pictures, just a few trusted photographers doing their job... sigh... I hope Pippa has some sympathy for me/us! ;-))))

    ReplyDelete

Comments are most welcome! Constructive discussion is always encouraged but off topic or hateful remarks will not be published.

We ask you use a name when posting (a pseudonym such as the name of a royal you like or anything you wish). If you do not wish to use the sign in options, simply select the "Name/URL" option on the drop down menu and insert your name, and if you wish the country/state you're from. You can leave the URL blank.

If there are a large number of comments, it is necessary to click the 'Load More' button at the end of the comments section to see the latest additions.