As we discussed on Friday, the Cambridges’ press secretary Jason Knauf issued a lengthy letter threatening the press and photographers regarding what William and Kate believe are “unauthorized photos” of Prince George. They believe that they should be able to control access to George completely, even when he is out in public with his parents, his nanny or his grandmother. You can read Jason Knauf’s letter here.

While I agreed with the general assessment that there’s a need to dial down the creepy pap-stalking of a child, I also felt unsettled by William (in particular) and his need/desire to control every aspect of the press coverage around himself and his family. This need/desire is especially odd considering he married into a family perfectly willing to call the paparazzi, set up pap-strolls and manipulate the press at will, but in William’s mind, that’s different, I guess. Anyway, The Daily Beast’s royal guy Tom Sykes has an excellent analysis of what this Kensington Palace letter means and how many in the media aren’t buying it, nor do they care. Some highlights:

Is the letter a bizarre pity-party move? “Kate and William’s bizarre decision to publish what effectively amounts to a ‘poor us’ letter begging for their kids to be left alone was treated with derision by the paparazzi photographers whose activities the palace is seeking to curtail, and the stonehearted British press pack who make a living from writing about the royals seemed equally unmoved. American magazine editors were also unimpressed, predicting that the self-pitying comments—which bewailed the possibility that Charlotte and George risk growing up “behind palace gates and in walled gardens” (I know, poor them, right?)—would not affect the appetite for snatched pics of the Royal prince and princess.”

The curious case of the paparazzo in the trunk of his car: “Take away the dramatic mood music, and what are we actually left with here? Hiding in a car might be considered a strange way to pass one’s time, but, you know what, it’s a free country. And when you break it down, really, what did this guy do that was so terrible? He put some sheets up in a car? Did he really, “create a hide stocked with food and drinks to get him through a full day of surveillance,” or did he just buy some snacks at the garage on his way to a job?”

The trade-off: “If this is as bad as it gets, in return for a ten-bedroom house in London, a twelve bedroom house in Norfolk, a blanket exemption from inheritance tax and untold millions in private earnings from vast landholdings across the UK, many people would accept the deal.”

On prominent paparazzo says: “Their bark is bigger than their bite. As long as pictures are taken legally I can’t see how they can stop it.”

One royal commentator says: “Frankly no English media organizations publish those pictures and the people who do don’t care what they think, so they need to calm down a bit.”

One senior royal correspondent says: “There was a way to write such a letter with some dignity. This wasn’t it. The tone is all wrong; self-pitying rather reasonable. You can tell it wasn’t written—or edited—by an English person, it is so over the top. They don’t understand how spoiled they sound, and how much they give the impression they resent their position, which is unattractive, given its immense importance in British life.”

Jo Piazza, a former gossip columnist, says: “It will be interesting to see if this public shaming strategy will work. Unfortunately as long as demand exists for these photos, paparazzi are going to continue to find creative ways to take pictures of the prince and princess. Celebrities, and make no mistake, that is what Will and Kate are, have long tried to shame the photographers into not taking pictures of their kids. It has worked in that large publications no longer publish unauthorized photos. But other outlets do, so the pictures will continue to be taken. It is a question of supply and demand. It is by no means right or moral, but at the end of the day, the demand is there and there is a market for these kinds of pictures… George and Charlotte are the most popular babies in the world, by far. They are really the only babies the public will truly clamor for photos of.”

[From The Daily Beast]

Sykes sees this as “risky strategy” in which William and Kate are trying to “shame” gossip consumers who like to see photos of celebrity babies, although he also thinks that Will and Kate might start suing just to see if they can get away with it. Here’s my problem with that: just in 2015 alone, there have been some sketchy “paparazzi photos” taken of William, Kate, George and Carole Middleton in Mustique, in Norfolk and in London. I put “paparazzi photos” in quotes because in some of those instances, it seemed more like just a regular person snapped a few photos on their phone and then sold the photos to an agency or something. I mean, how in the world DID Kate and George get “pap’d” in the middle of Mustique (and why didn’t William make a fuss about it)? I really want to know if that was really a paparazzo taking the photo or someone else. And if it was just an average person… then what’s the end game? As I said, when you’re in the public sphere, anything goes.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet and Pacific Coast News.