Fogbow

British TV ‘allowed monarchy to censor coverage of king’s coronation’
Royal spin doctors imposed ‘extraordinary restrictions’ on covering King Charles III’s accession, says ex-head of Sky News

Jim Waterson Media editor
Thu 14 Sep 2023 18.00 BST

British television channels agreed to let Buckingham Palace censor television coverage of King Charles’s coronation, according to the former boss of Sky News.

John Ryley, who stepped down in May after 17 years, said the monarchy imposed “extraordinary restrictions” on channels covering this year’s ceremony, including demanding the “Orwellian” right to retrospectively ban footage after it had been broadcast.

Reading from an agreement between the palace and broadcasters marked “private and confidential”, he told an audience at the Steve Hewlett Memorial Lecture how the palace controlled coverage: “The royal spin doctors had the opportunity to censor any pictures from the coronation before they could be replayed on the day … And the royal spin doctors dictated which clips of the footage could be shown in future broadcasts in what they called with an Orwellian phrase: ‘a perpetuity edit’.”

Ryley’s decision to speak out has broken the omertà around the secret agreements between British television and the royal family over coverage of formal events. His comments confirm many details previously reported in the Guardian about how Buckingham Palace controlled coverage of Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral and King Charles III’s coronation.

This included a WhatsApp group where royal courtiers would tell senior editors at the BBC, ITN, and Sky News in real time if the royal family wanted specific pieces of footage removed from circulation.

Ryley told the audience in London the royal family regularly escaped real scrutiny by broadcasters.

He said he regretted that Sky News made the “bad decision” to provide Prince Charles with a full list of questions before an interview with the future king in 2017: “If a viewer had interrogated us about whether that was entirely in keeping with our core values of being honest with our audiences it would have been hard to mount a robust defence. Imagine submitting a list of questions to a top politician or business leader. Maybe in a puppet state.”



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... n-coverage

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:34 am IIRC, when she got coronated, Queen Consort Camilla became just plain Queen Camilla. Maybe the thread head needs chaging?

A consort is the title for the wife or husband of a monarch. In the past consorts have mostly been queens consort. A royal consort has no constitutional power but supports their spouse in his or her duties as sovereign. There are a several other titles for queens.

Mrich wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 11:57 am

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:34 am IIRC, when she got coronated, Queen Consort Camilla became just plain Queen Camilla. Maybe the thread head needs chaging?

According to the site Royal Collection Trust
https://www.rct.uk/collection/themes/Tr ... en-consort

A consort is the title for the wife or husband of a monarch. In the past consorts have mostly been queens consort. A royal consort has no constitutional power but supports their spouse in his or her duties as sovereign. There are a several other titles for queens.

Her Majesty The Queen (formerly HRH The Duchess of Cornwall) supports her husband, formerly The Prince of Wales, now His Majesty The King, in carrying out his work and duties. She also undertakes public engagements on behalf of the charities that she supports.

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 12:52 am

Mrich wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 11:57 am

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 12:34 am IIRC, when she got coronated, Queen Consort Camilla became just plain Queen Camilla. Maybe the thread head needs chaging?

According to the site Royal Collection Trust
https://www.rct.uk/collection/themes/Tr ... en-consort

A consort is the title for the wife or husband of a monarch. In the past consorts have mostly been queens consort. A royal consort has no constitutional power but supports their spouse in his or her duties as sovereign. There are a several other titles for queens.

I know that's how it's normally done, I just seem to recall they were going to do it differently for Camilla and drop the "Consort' from her title, in part because QEII had said she'd like to see her called "Queen Camilla" at one point. I dunno, I could be spitting into the wind.

Either way, the late Queen made it abundantly clear that she wanted Camilla to go by Queen Consort, and even released a statement to mark her Platinum Jubilee that read, “When, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes king, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me. And it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service.”

"Queen Consort Camilla” is and was incorrect. Queen Camilla is a queen consort

It is not prostate cancer, but was discovered during his recent treatment for an enlarged prostate.
The type of cancer has not been revealed, but according to a palace statement the King began "regular treatments" on Monday.
Buckingham Palace says the King "remains wholly positive about his treatment and looks forward to returning to full public duty as soon as possible".
He will postpone his public engagements and it is expected other senior royals will help to stand in for him during his treatment.
No further details are being shared on the stage of cancer or a prognosis.
Although he will pause his public events, the King, 75, will continue with his constitutional role as head of state.