HBO’s The Princess was a very well-done documentary, made entirely from archival footage of Princess Diana and the royal family, plus commentary at the time. They showed clips of Prince Charles’s famous Jonathan Dimbleby interview (which happened first) and then clips of Diana’s Panorama interview. The Panorama interview, as we well know, is now considered “off limits” and the BBC has promised never to air it again following the Dyson investigation. The investigation showed that Martin Bashir used significant deceit to land the interview. To Prince William, that means the interview itself was fruit of the poisonous tree and Diana’s narrative should never be seen or heard ever again. So… how did The Princess get to use that footage? Other documentaries are using it too. It’s interesting, because you would think that those documentary filmmakers would have to license the footage in some way. The Mail columnist Ephraim Hardcastle had a fascinating little blurb about it:
BBC director-general Tim Davie, pledging to banish Diana’s Panorama interview to the equivalent of Room 101, seems to have left the door ajar. Sunday night’s Diana biography, The Princess, on Sky Documentaries, included footage of the Bashir encounter.
Ahead of the 25th anniversary of her death, Foxtel in Australia transmits Diana: The Ultimate Truth. A segment focuses on the notorious interview.
The BBC insists it will not let any part of the Panorama interview be screened.
Prince William, who warned that it ‘holds no legitimacy and should never be aired again’, can only powerlessly throw his toys out of the pram.
“Prince William, who warned that it ‘holds no legitimacy and should never be aired again’, can only powerlessly throw his toys out of the pram.” Well, well! Looks like William’s tantrum about Diana’s interview hasn’t gone over so well in the British media. Even Andrew Morton blasted William, and now here’s a Mail columnist insinuating that William is a childish loser with no authority. Fascinating. As for The Princess and the filmmaker’s reasoning for using the Panorama clips, there was this interesting piece in People Magazine:
The filmmakers behind the latest documentary capturing the life and tragic death of Princess Diana are defending themselves. The Princess, which premiered on HBO on Aug. 13, includes a clip of Diana from her infamous BBC Panorama interview in 1995. The sit-down has since been discredited after it was found that deceitful methods were used to secure the interview with Diana. Following the inquest in 2021, Diana’s son Prince William stated his “firm view” that broadcasters and the media should never allow it to be shown again.
A spokesperson for The Princess tells PEOPLE, “This feature documentary tells the story of Princess Diana exclusively through archive footage from the time, without commentary from today. This interview is shown briefly, in context, as a moment of historical record.”
This piece was written by Simon Perry, People’s Chief Foreign Correspondent. He knows better than to write “The sit-down has since been discredited…” The interview was not “discredited.” Nothing Diana said during the interview was demonstrably false. The Dyson investigation didn’t even prove that Diana was coerced to say anything in particular during the interview. All the investigation found was that Bashir lied to her to GET the interview. Anyway, I absolutely think it’s interesting that after William’s big tantrum about the interview, he got a promise from the BBC to never air it again… and yet all of these documentaries were somehow able to use the footage. And The Crown will dramatize it.
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Instar.
-
- DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES Visiting the Shri Swaminarayan Mandir Hindu Temple in Neasden, North London. Wearing a garland of flowers. COMPULSORY CREDIT: UPPA/Photoshot Photo UG 013280/E 06.06.1997,Image: 502657612, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: World Rights – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries call Photoshot Global HQ – London + 44 (0)20 7421 6000 , also New York Office Tel : + 1 646-429-8731 and Hamburg Office Tel +49 (0)40 530 240 5959, Model Release: no, Credit line: Photoshot / Avalon
-
- Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, and Diana, Princess of Wales, visit Canada. Edmonton Alberta Legislative Building,Image: 536837362, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Photoshot – sales@photoshot.com London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Florida: +1 239 689 1883 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251, Model Release: no, Credit line: John Shelley Collection / Avalon
-
- Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, and Diana, Princess of Wales, visit Australia Princess Diana in Tasmania The princess is wearing the Spencer family tiara and a dress by Bruce Oldfield. State Reception in Hobart,Image: 549283325, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: WORLD RIGHTS – Fee Payable Upon Reproduction – For queries contact Photoshot – sales@photoshot.com London: +44 (0) 20 7421 6000 Florida: +1 239 689 1883 Berlin: +49 (0) 30 76 212 251, Model Release: no, Credit line: John Shelley Collection / Avalon
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge visit the London Bridge Jobcentre and speak to people looking for work in London. Pictured: Prince William, Duke of Cambridge BACKGRID USA 15 SEPTEMBER 2020 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- North America Rights Only – New Providence, Bahamas -20220325-The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge attend a reception hosted by the Governor General of the Bahamas Sir Cornelius Alvin Smith, at the Baha Mar resort on the island of New Providence in the Bahamas to with meet community leaders and people from across the Bahamas’ many islands, on day seven of their tour of the Caribbean on behalf of the Queen to mark her Platinum Jubilee -PICTURED: Prince William -PHOTO by: PA IMAGES/INSTARimages.com Disclaimer: This is an editorial, rights-managed image. Please contact INSTAR Images for licensing fee and rights information at sales@instarimages.com or call +1 212 414 0207. This image may not be published in any way that is, or might be deemed to be, defamatory, libelous, pornographic, or obscene. Please consult our sales department for any clarification needed prior to publication and use. INSTAR Images reserves the right to pursue unauthorized users of this material. If you are in violation of our intellectual property rights or copyright you may be liable for damages, loss of income, any profits you derive from the unauthorized use of this material and, where appropriate, the cost of collection and/or any statutory damages awarded For images containing underage children: Be advised that some Countries may have restricted privacy laws against publishing images of underage children. Inform yourself! Underage children may need to be removed or have their face pixelated before publishing
-
- Earl Spencer leaves after speaking at the Isle of Wight literary festival,Image: 208423546, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: , Model Release: no
Just because the BBC won’t air it doesn’t mean the won’t sell to it – esp considering the calls to cut gov funding to the Beeb as the TV license keeps going up as does the amount of money the BBC pays its ‘talent’ and top tier managers.
Also the producers of this show likely got permissions months ago before Peggy got pissy.
“before Peggy got Pissy” – just what I needed this morning.
Correct me if I’m wrong, just because the BBC promised never to air it again on any of their channels, doesn’t mean other media outlets can’t use it. I’m not even sure anyone can legally forbid it’s use. Did Charles and William think it would be scrubbed from the internet? The internet is eternal.
The most they can do is try to discredit it, but that’s clearly not working. People are able to see the nuances of the situation. Just because shady tactics were used to get the interview, doesn’t mean what she said was false. Diana was ALWAYS going to talk. Bashir was just desperate to be the one the land the interview.
Other channels can’t legally use it without licensing (permission) from the BBC.
Not exactly. They could argue fair use and go to court to see who wins. Of course, in the UK, it would be the royals. But elsewhere, particularly in the US, the royals would likely lose.
People is truly carrying the royals water. I thought they replaced that British editor but I guess they found an American suck up. Next they will be trying to push that Diana was perfectly fine with Charles and Camilla and knew the deal from the start. And of course they ignore the way Meghan was treated. I hope they go out of business and soon.
Yes they’ve become unreliable sucking up and ignoring certain facts. Maybe they’ve always been like that?
Yes, of course, and blame Diana for accepting Charles’ proposal not that he proposed to her. Also, that DIana “knew what she was getting into” which has become cliche by Charles and Camilla spinners/fans.
@Tessa – thank you for that, it really made me think.
When you hear someone dismiss a person by saying, “They knew what they were getting into”, you are hearing them admit that they know it was an abusive situation.
If they did not believe that it was an abusive situation, they would not be berating the other person for knowingly “getting into it”!
With that phrase the speaker is
1. Pillorying the abused for mentioning the abuse
2. Reversing the roles of the abuser and the abused
3. Removing the abusers accountability for the abuse which they have already clearly stated they believe happened
It is to acknowledge the abuse, but dismiss it, even apparently to the point where they would blame themselves for “getting into” the situation rather than place the blame and accountability squarely on the abusing person or institution where it belongs.
Deep down it means I know they were abused but I don’t like them so I don’t care.
I checked out of People ages ago when they kept giving friendly press to cults like $cientology & the Duggars. No credibility to me at all
It makes the BBC look stupid for pledging to never show the interview again. And to see most of the British press being in favour of this decision is interesting. I wonder if a different journalist was involved, would the press be outraged about the blatant censorship?
LOL at the image of William as nothing more than a child throwing a tantrum. It’s funny because it’s true.
BBC may never air the interview again, but they sure as shit are going to license it to other outlets. I think that’s why they were willing to say they wouldn’t air it again in the first place…..it was bc the BBC knew other outlets would always be interested in it.
Netflix should buy the rights to it and air it simultaneously with Season 5 of The Crown.
The BBC not airing it makes showing clips from it a valuable tactic for others documenting Diana because they know people will want to see what they can’t see elsewhere. They basically increased the value of using footage from the interview.
The Royals and Streisand-Effect
Name a more iconic duo
The key moment from the interview that they used was Diana talking about Chuck and Cam’s affair. Considering he had admitted to it himself, there’s no way anyone can say the clip of the Diana interview was filled with lies. She spoke the truth. Prince Pegs-a-Lot is just pissed off that the media aren’t heeding his warning, and probably worried they will start ignoring other embargoes on topics related to him or his family.
I don’t know how his ascension to Prince of Wales will go. Prince of Wales-Pegs-a-lot. The Welsh may get offended.
Bulliam is so out of touch. Harry isn’t calling for the interview’s banishment. Only those who don’t like the truths she told don’t want it to see the light of day again. #SuitcasesFullOfChaz #PrinceOfPowerTrips
This!
Ditto!!!!
Sir Pegs-o-lot can yell that this is discredited all he wants. The more he throws his toys out the pram in a hissy fit, the more enjoyable it’s going to be to watch the press eventually turn on him. Cause they will turn. TOB is just making enemies and the fact he, the FFK of England, is being described as a whiny baby throwing a tantrum, proves it.
is being described as a whiny baby throwing a tantrum, proves it.
Very strange of the press to report honestly on Prince William.
Haven’t seen the Fail poke WillieWoodPegger like that in a while. Usually it’s deference and pretending he’s a statesman (big laugh). Calling him a baby in a pram having a temper tantrum is a refreshing change. The media natives are getting restless–they’ve been keeping too many secrets for too long.
It’s only a matter of time. William is stretching his media influence thin trying to simultaneously silence Diana’s history and keep his dirty secrets from being revealed. He’s desperately trying to control EVERYTHING, but it’s not going to work. He no longer has anything to offer in exchange and constantly dragging his kids out ain’t gonna cut it. The British media is losing clicks and revenue and they want their pound of flesh.
William is clearly not liked by the press. There are constant little digs like this in the their articles about him. They do it to Kate too. But not Chuck and Cam.
OMG WillieWoodPegger made me laugh out loud!! Thanks @harper
The press are pushing back bc 🥚 couldn’t give them anything on M&H for the jubbly. Now they’re all going broke and many are on strike because the rags aren’t paying for saccharine stories about the lames. If the strike continues and the rota rats keep losing money, the dam is going to break and all the shit about 🥚 and ☠ will come out. They need that ad money and nice camb stories don’t get clicks.
@ Harper, your name choice for TOB is a thing of beauty!!!
I imagine that the Fail calling-out TOB is a precursor for what is to come? I hope that they finally open the floodgates as they have nothing to live off of and the H&M appearances are few and far between.
Though I know that it won’t stop the BM of their constant attacks, but you can only rewrite the same article so many times.
Pleeeeease let me borrow WillieWoodpegger name. 😂😂😂😂😂
Howling at WillieWoodPegger…chef’s kiss
Harry should have had an equal say both are her children William imo is a disgrace
Harry already had his say: at the time the Dyson report was published, both Harry and Peggy issued statements. Peggy used the opp to discredit what his mother said in the interview supposedly because of the tactics Bashir used to get her to agree to it, and called his mother “paranoid,” and that the interview was the cause of the split between his parents (the m0r0n!).
Peggy said in part:
“It is my view that the deceitful way the interview was obtained substantially influenced what my mother said.
“The interview was a major contribution to making my parents’ relationship worse and has since hurt countless others.”
OTOH, in his statement, Harry said his mother was very honest and, in general terms, decried the uk media’s “culture of exploitation and unethical practices” that ultimately led to her death and, very importantly, he pointed out that these very same practices continue to this day by the uk media.
Harry said:
“Our mother was an incredible woman who dedicated her life to service. She was resilient, brave, and unquestionably honest.”
BTW: notice that Harry speaks of “Our mother;” but TOB refers to “my mother.”
He’s such a failure of an excuse for a human being.
EXACTLY!! I hate it when peggy’s fans insist that Harry disapprove of that interview too. How convenient of them to use his name when it benefits them. Harry called out the unethical journalism but did not discredit her words.
Side note: Peggy’s belief that the interview causes the waleses to split are just so laughable, he apparently forgot that his father straight up admitted that he was “bullied” into the marriage by Philip. Claimed that he didn’t loved her when they got married.
Did peggy forget about that bitter truth? His mother protected him by insisting that they were in love. She thought that it would be hurtful to her boys to hear that they weren’t born out of love.
Serious question for Celebitchy Legal Eagles conversant in British intellectual property law: what is the BBC’s right to control the use of the Panorama interview? Is there a fair use doctrine that allows other outlets to use parts or all of the interview? Okay, that’s 2 questions, and I probably have more and follow ups. It’s just very hard for me to believe that a piece of media that’s been in the public domain for more than 25 years can be locked away.
#PrinceofPegging can just rage away, he’s got no rights to Diana’s life and truth.
I’m not a lawyer but I think Fair Use applies here. I like to watch reactors on YouTube who react to TV shows and movies and monetize their content. They alway say they are limited to 10 minutes of Picture in Picture. Even then, they rarely have their videos taken down. The worst that happens is the video gets demonitized.
Ooh, I am hoping the CB lawyers will weigh in too. Could someone, for example, take the VO from the interview and lay it over different footage? Or re-record her exact words and narrate them over different archive footage?
I’m sure there’s a transcript that exists, as well.
BeanieBean, when all of the hoo-hah started up about this interview, I went online and searched for a transcript. I found one and put it in a Word document, so that if someone TRIED to scrub the internet I would have it.
Oh, I like this idea.
I nominate either Olivia Colman or Sarah Lancashire to be the voice over for Diana.
Excerpts of the interview were shown some years ago in the film the queen i would like to see will even try to cut that from the film
If Bill could do something about his huge sense of entitlement, he might be a tad more likable. Maybe.
Simon Perry is an absolute disgrace for saying the interview has been discredited! Just because William threw a fit about it, and it was supposedly obtained by unorthodox means, doesn’t mean Diana’s truth holds no legitimacy. She said the same things in her book as she did in the interview!
It’s as close as they can get with saying Diana has been discredited. Pretty shameful stuff.
Charles said he was involved with Camilla over a year before Diana’s interview. Also, Diana said much of the same as she did through the Morton book. Will cannot confiscate the Morton tapes.
Yeah, “discredited” was a large overstatement. You would think someone who uses words for a living could have made a small effort to explain that the interviewer’s way of securing the interview with Princess Diana has been found to be deceptive, but the content of the interview (which is there in plain view) represents Diana’s opinions, and many of what she said has been expressed before. The fact that he just made that blanket statement is absurd.
I, for one, have never seen the whole interview and I found the excerpt above to be fascinating, especially the way things turned out. I’m also amazed that she referred to herself, or grouped herself, with the “strong women” of history. I’m actually pleased at that. And her face when she talks about the Firm suggests that she’s seen SO much, and has been subjected to SO much among those people. No wonder they don’t want more people to see this interview, it’s chilling.
I’m dying to look 20 years into the future to see the state of the RF. The Queen is on the throne because people either don’t care or respect her for putting in the work. Charles has put in the work but is slowly chipping away at his own legacy with all that shady business before he even gets to be king. William … has done nothing and represents nothing except the prime specimen of the entitled childish panicky Elder Millenial White Man who grew up with the assurance that the world is his but now sees the times changing quickly. He thought people’s goodwill after his mother’s death would last a lifetime. What a fool. It would be sad if I cared.
@Emmi omg Ikr lol
Egg and I are the same age so Im like please just let me live long enough to see his failures continue 🤣
But although I’m glad to see it all burn it is sad to see Chucks goodwill go with it. Cause as much of cowmilas tampon he likes to be, you can’t discount the “Prince’s Trust”. Not defending but he had the making of being a Pegs in Boots yet he “didnt” (lol as we’re finding out as of late, at least not in public 😉)
I thought I had read that the BBC would no longer license any part of the interview to be used by media. Does anyone else remember reading that? That interview has become so iconic and so historical, the BBC’s action makes it appear to have been censored by the palace. Diana is not a “poisoned source.”
Wow – that short clip from above is so incredibly powerful. I can’t imagine why her son would want to silence her voice unless he’s taken a path similar to his father.
William is honestly so… uneventful. He was born with silver spoon, had good education but he doesn’t seems to do anything extraordinary. Don’t you think he resent that Diana wanted him to be king and skip Charles? Don’t you think he’s dismissing his mother’s words because he couldn’t live up to her expectation? During her last 2 years she was constantly planning to make the world a better place. Thus her landmind campaign and was going to produce documentaries on her humanitarian missions. William on the other hand, seems to be living in his bubble. The only brilliant thing he had done was told his mother to get rid of her clothes. I couldn’t care less about what he thinks. He was a sweet boy but he had been totally windsorized. Those long walk with Philip and afternoon tea with betty proved to be fruitful.
Anyway, here’s a link to the full panorama interview. Facebook shut it down but I saved it beforehand just in case.
https://t.me/Panorama_DianaPrincessOfWales
What’s sad is that, Peggy trying to shut his mom speaking her truth down has less to do with the manipulation, or even helping his dad. But it 100% has to do with falsely convincing the public that he has just as much influence as his little brother! Narrator: he in fact does not have even 1% of influence that his brother has in spade!
This is interesting. You maybe on to something, I rewatched the interview and at a loss of his protestations. Princess Diana was harder on the press coverage she received, was not happy how they kept writing about her wardrobe.etc.
One must recognize that William is allowed to feel the way he does, she is his mother.
It would be mature if William concedes that Harry has the same right.
It’s quite possible that some of the BBC’s agreements with foreign broadcasters already baked in the rights to the interview and they can’t rescind it without paying for it. The background to Tory stooge William’s rant is that the Tories are on an anti BBC kick and trying desperately to convince the British public the BBC is as bad as the tabloids and deserves no special reputation.
Totally agree with this. I am so angry that he is trying to stifle honest reporting. First he had the Beeb omit information in the documentary “The Princes and the Press” where it was found he was leaking stories about Harry’s mental health. Now, he’s got the Beeb to shut down the Diana interview. This type of censorship is dangerous.
I don’t need William telling me what to watch, I’m quite capable of switching channels if I’m not enjoying a programme. IMHO what makes this a dangerous precedence is William is happy for all the crape printed about his brother and SIL but, one honest piece about his appalling behaviour towards his brother and he wants the lot shut down. And don’t even get me started on the super injunction preventing the public finding out about whatever was happening in Norfolk. William doesn’t pay my license fee and I think I have every right to watch informative documentaries on a family who my taxes support. If we’re not careful this infantile FFK will have libraries burning books!
Since even the Queen hasn’t any power she can ACTUALLY use (for instance, she has the power to dissolve parliament – but if she were to do so independently, it would cause a constitutional crisis and she would be forced to retract…no doubt followed by legislation to dissolve all the powers held by the crown, and possibly the dissolution of the monarchy itself) it follows that her successors are equally powerless.
But they do have influence, admirers and the ability to share some of that influence, fame, approval and goodwill with helpful “subjects”. And of course to remove it, as coldly, swiftly and brutally as they like.
But that’s about the extent of it.
In other words, to those for whom the Royal Family’s good or bad opinion holds negligible or no value at all, the RF have no power whatsoever.
Here is a link to the Panorama interview.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x83ztxw
Thanks for the link!
Thanks!
Ooh ya better watch out, Prince of Pegging, the media’s coming for you sooner rather than later.😆