‘The Crown’ will add scenes to reflect the ‘deceitful nature’ of Diana’s interview

The Crown’s Season 5 is coming out this fall, likely November. You’ll know it’s about to drop because Clarence House will begin telegraphing how Netflix is trying to destroy Prince Charles and Peter Morgan doesn’t know anything, and how this and that nitpicking detail is incorrect. Nevermind that The Crown has always gotten the broad strokes right, and nevermind the fact that Peter Morgan actually soft-pedals a lot of the more scandalous stuff. Season 5 will cover Charles and Diana’s separation and divorce, as all of that stuff happened during John Major’s tenure as prime minister. In 1995, Diana sat down with Martin Bashir for the infamous Panorama interview. Diana and Charles’s divorce had not yet been completed and she worried that she would soon have to adhere to a non-disclosure agreement.

In the years since that important interview, Charles and the British right-wing have worked together to invalidate the interview by any means necessary. They succeeded by arguing that Martin Bashir told Diana a bunch of lies and Bashir manipulated her terribly. I have no doubt that Bashir was especially sleazy, but I also have no doubt that Diana said exactly what she wanted to say how she wanted to say it. Well, we’ve known all along that Peter Morgan was going to feature the Panorama interview narrative in this season of The Crown. Now that all of this Dyson report sh-t has gone down, sources claim that Morgan is adding some extra details to the scripts to reflect what we know now about Bashir’s methods.

The Crown is set to make some changes to the upcoming fifth series in order to reflect what is now known about the infamous Panorama interview with Princess Diana. The interview, which aired in 1995, saw the Princess of Wales sit down with BBC journalist Martin Bashir to discuss her split from her husband Prince Charles. It was during this sit-down chat that Diana uttered the famous words: “There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded.”

However, the Netflix period drama, which had always planned to dramatise the interview, has now stated that, following a report in 2021, the circumstances surrounding the interview and the “deceitful” behaviour will also be written into the scripts to make the full-story clear to viewers.

The report, conducted by Lord Dyson, concluded that Martin had undertaken “deceitful behaviour” in order to secure the interview with the royal, and that this was subsequently covered up by the BBC. Since then, the BBC said it would “never again” show clips from the interview.

Director-general Tim Davie said: “Now we know about the shocking way that the interview was obtained, I have decided that the BBC will never show the programme again, nor will we license it in whole or part to other broadcasters.”

[From Hello]

I wish the BBC hadn’t folded but I understand why they did – there was significant pressure from Charles AND William, and the papers took the royals’ side. The British media wants to help Charles and William gaslight and erase a dead woman, so what choice did the BBC really have? Especially when they know Bashir was playing fast and loose. That being said, I’m curious about how the Crown will deal with it and if Peter Morgan really is making significant changes to that storyline. Whatever he does or does not do, it will still be picked apart by Charles working in concert with the British media.

Photos courtesy of Netflix, Backgrid and Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

108 Responses to “‘The Crown’ will add scenes to reflect the ‘deceitful nature’ of Diana’s interview”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Rapunzel says:

    Whether Diana was manipulated or not, she told the truth. I sure hope Morgan isn’t going to portray the situation differently.

    • C-Shell says:

      My money’s on Morgan. Bashir and the BBC are going to come off looking deplorable, and Diana’s victimization by just about everyone in her life will be heartbreaking. That’s a compelling story.

      • Henny O says:

        All the British media went after Diana to get an interviewer; magazines, newspapers and networks. They all used bullying tactics and tricks in their playbooks to win her over. Diana was determined to tell her story anyway. Bashir won because he worked her OWM damn brother. People tend to forget that. He is a full a*se snake who refused to house her at Althorp when she asked for help when the press was hunting her after her separation from Prince Charles. He now wants to act as her saviour, now that he is corrupted by the palace (Prince Charles and William) and the right-wing media, his former enemies, who haunted him for years after Diana’s death, for scorning the RF and the press in his Diana – funeral-address.

        The other press/journalists were jealous of Bashir and tried to take him down for years. It was only when they had the right right-wing government and BBC leadership on their side, and after corrupting Charles Spencer and William, and after they pushed hard for that Dyson investigation (he’s a Prince Charles man), they succeeded in their plot to take Bashir down (I’m not saying that I agree with all his tacticks to get the interview).

        Allegedly, it’s all a cleanup job for Prince Charles’ upcoming reign. Shame on William and Charles Sp. and the BBC. But they can try, they will fail to eraise Diana’s voice. She said what she wanted to say no matter who interviewed her or broadcasted it. I’m glad Harry stayed out of this witch hunt. The others will regret it in due course.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Henny O, so much of what you wrote I personally believe to be true too. Diana wasn’t manipulated. Diana wanted to do an interview. Countless people/broadcasters wanted to interview her. IMO, she wanted to do the interview with the BBC especially,one way or another, the biggest UK broadcaster and Bashir didn’t seem to have close ties with the Firm/BRF. Charles Spencer was the middleman for the interview. Yes, Bashir showed Charles Spencer forged documents. CS had been a broadcaster/journalist for more than a decade prior to the interview. He had every opportunity to investigate things himself before setting up an interview between Bashir & Diana. His crying foul after the fact and his sister is no longer alive to dispute events is effin sketchy. This link contains the note Diana wrote saying Bashir didn’t show her documents and didn’t tell her anything she didn’t already know. You have to scroll down a bit for it.

        I don’t believe this has been about Charles’ reign though. It was about the Firm’s/BM’s fear about the Sussexes doing an interview after they left and how there would be so many similarities between their experiences. Thus all the gaslighting.

    • equality says:

      Yes! Just because he lied doesn’t mean Diana did. I think PC is trying to make it seem that she was paranoid and over-reacting to things.

      • Southern Fried says:

        As did William her own son, the loser son. Calling his mom paranoid is unforgivable in my eyes.

      • MeganC says:

        Does Bashir make money every time the interview is aired? If so, I’m fine with BBC shelving it. Diana was rightly concerned they BRF was spying on her and Bashir shamelessly and needlessly exploited her fears to secure the interview.

      • HennyO says:

        No, the rights are with the BBC. He was a BBC employee at the time (and even was rehired after he left years later). They made a financial deal to get him out after the Dyson report.

      • Nlopez says:

        I agree with southern fried. It was horrible for William to call his mother paranoid. We’ll never know, but I think he had a love/hate relationship with his mom. He loves her, but he seems like he’s always been sneaky and surly.

      • HamsterJam says:

        Her oldest son calling his mother paranoid after the paparazzi literally stalked her to death??? That takes some mental gymnastics.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        The son of Diana, who is the FFK, called his mother paranoid. The 2nd son of Diana, who moved away for the sake of his, his wife’s and his son’s mental health & well being, called his mother unquestionably honest. Diana’s first son should not make mention of his mother ever again and his wife needs to stop cosplaying her.

        Do y’all remember when Diana’s brother was heralded for his eulogy speech at her funeral? He was praised for giving it to the British Media/BRF. Hmmmm..what’s changed. “Diana’s Goodness Threatened the Media” (the royal system as well). “Blood Family Will Protect Sons” Epic fail on the Earl of Spencer’s part regarding his nephew Prince Harry. It only pays for Charles Spencer to protect William.

      • Nick G says:

        @agreatreckoning omg I haven’t read/listened to that speech in so long. It brings me right back to how we all were feeling right after her death. As usual, I can’t read it without tearing up.

  2. Wiglet Watcher says:

    Even if you only take away small, less scandalous bits of Diana’s interview it’s still damaging to Charles. Even if there was no interview what unfolded then and after and now is all incredibly damaging to Charles.

    They can’t leave a woman they mistreated that has been dead for over 2 decades alone. Harry has to burn that place to the ground to get them to leave him and his family alone.

    • Chloe says:

      I hope they also feature the making of andrew mortons book: diana in her own words. She was the source for that book. Try rewriting that m.

  3. C-Shell says:

    Can’t wait for this. Also can’t wait to see the agonized twisting and turning Charles and his mouthpieces perform. The Crown is NOT a docuseries, but they surely treat it as one.

    • Jan90067 says:

      To me, that’s telling me that The Crown and Morgan have a lot more RIGHT than “broad strokes”. If it wasn’t on the mark more than not, The Tampon King to be would not be so scared sh!tless about it. He’s “afraid” it will make him and his pet Rottweiler look bad? Well, they WERE awful to Diana. They tried to decimate a young, inexperienced girl they just used and tried to throw away.

      It’s to Diana’s credit she was canny, and a quick learner with a natural intelligence to help herself against those two POS.

      I hope Series 5 & 6 burns the HELL out of TRF.

  4. Tessa says:

    Will it play down the damage caused by Charles in his 1994 interview and also the content of his authorized biography based on his confessions to dimbleby the consequences of the interview caused the Parker Bowles divorce

  5. Becks1 says:

    I think the Crown will handle it well. Bashir WAS sleazy AND Diana wanted to give an interview and said what she wanted to say and I’m thinking (hoping?) the crown will thread that needle well. It wasn’t like Diana was some naive young girl by that point who was bullied into giving an interview. She WANTED to give an interview and say her piece.

    It’s obviously more convenient for the royals to remember it differently though.

    • Jay says:

      More convenient, but in a way I think going with the narrative of “Poor Diana was all alone and in distress, then this big bad reporter manipulated her into giving all these private details” looks worse, doesn’t it? It risks making her more sympathetic, IMO.

      And even if they try to call her “paranoid”… I mean, is it paranoid if she was right? The audience knows that Charles admits to the affair and eventually marries Camilla. And we all just saw with our eyes how they treated a pregnant and potentially suicidal Meghan. I think most of the audience at home won’t view her as unreasonable, especially given what we now know.

      • one of the marys says:

        This is the clincher for me. We have an up to date, real time example of how awful the RF and tabloids can be. They have no credibility or standing to complain about how they’re portrayed in the coming seasons. And Charles refuses to learn. He needs to keep quiet and keep out of it because anything he says will bring more attention

    • Nic919 says:

      Bashir being sleazy doesn’t undo Diana saying there were three in the marriage and other comments she made in that interview. Charles and William don’t understand this. And the BBC can only gaslight the UK because the rest of the world has seen this interview and it will be available on social media in some fashion.

      I’m sure the Crown will show just how much of a victim Diana was, and it won’t really matter what people think of Bashir.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      Yes and yes.
      The only argument against this interview is Bashir was sleazy about how he got Diana to agree to him getting the interview. The rest is Diana was going to give an interview. Didn’t really matter who. The BBC was and is very large so it reaches more people.

      This woman took the opportunity that she knew she wouldn’t always have. She said what she needed to say. And good for her.
      Why isn’t William more upset about his father admitting an affair publicly? For driving his mother into so much turmoil and deep depression? I guess that’s acceptable to him and justifies calling his deceased mother paranoid among other things.

  6. HandforthParish says:

    To be fair I understand why they added it.
    Bashir utterly manipulated her to get more juicy details. At the time everyone was shocked by her candour- knowing what she had been told behind the scenes explains a lot of it.
    I don’t think it whitewashes the situation, it just shows that Diana was always paranoid, and in this case, justly so.

    Incidentally she really threw her children under the bus in that interview. I remember watching it live as a teen and thinking that even though she clearly had been silenced and stifled by the RF, the way she spilt her secrets without even warning her sons was pretty awful.
    They would have been crucified at school.
    I remember her even saying her divorce was between her Charles and didn’t involve W & H, and then adding that W was her ‘rock’ through it.

    • Tessa says:

      Diana said she did not want a divorce she never talked about divorcing Charles. She also said she loved Charles in that interview

      • Truthiness says:

        Yes, Diana loved Charles til the end and was so wistful about what they could have been. I’m sure Will discussed his “freedoms” with Kate before marriage just to avoid a replay.

    • HennyO says:

      Reminder – Charles FIRST gave an interview about his adultery. Did he informed William and Harry, or even Diana… and the queen, for that matter? Don’t blame Diana for things she did or didn’t do, or what her tormentors did to HER first.

      • Emmi says:

        Bit of a weird argument. „But he started it!“ I haven’t used that tactic since I was a child. She did what she did and no, it wasn’t her finest parenting moment. None of us know what her life was like because we didn’t live the insanity but just because Charles had horrible father moments, doesn’t mean she needed to follow suit. She had already absolutely trashed him in the book.

      • Tessa says:

        Diana did not trash Charles she told what happened in the Morton tapes Charles more or less confirmed her claims Charles friends like Nicholas soames were leaking stories to the media Diana wanted her side of the story out there

      • Tessa says:

        I think her post accident care appalling some heart specialists said she could have been saved had she had been taken to a hospital sooner the ambulance bypassed a hospital 10 minutes away

      • Emmi says:

        She absolutely trashed him. We have no idea if all of it was true. I assume it was. But she did what she did, no matter if we think she had the right to. It’s just a fact and I don’t know why we have this tendency to deify her just because the rest of the family mostly acts like garbage people.

      • Tessa says:

        Diana put up with that marriage for 10 years before dimbleby I do believe she was human and i liked that she was not perfect I do think the royal family have family members who blame others for their own decisions what bothers me about prince charles is that he has spinners and. Sympathizers like penny and Ingrid who trash Diana posthumously thankfully she got her side out to counter Charles spin

      • Tessa says:

        Sorry meant to say before Morton book

      • Bex says:

        @Emmi it’s a bit disingenuous to reduce it to childish as if HE didn’t do it first. He had an entire interview where he held a pity party for himself. He said he didn’t want to get married. He said he loved Camilla the entire time. He lied and said he didn’t seek out Camilla “until the marriage was irretrievably broken” despite getting blow jobs from Camilla the night before the wedding (per Penny Junor).

        Also, it’s funny how it always comes back to the kids when it’s Diana because her parenting is one of the things that can’t be discredited. It’s as if you ignore all of the newspaper articles, leaks etc that Charles sanctioned. It’s as if you ignore the 20 year PR push THAT STARTED THE DAY SHE DIED (where Penny Junor, Charles, biographer/mouthpiece, hopped on American AND Britis TV and said Diana was psychologically damaged) in order to hold her to a HIGHER standard than their father.

        She’s not deified. She’s dead and all of us with eyes and ears have seen the decades long smear campaign. That family chose to cast her as “the problem” and have done so since the beginning. The fact that despite what we know, when people DEFEND her, it’s always turns into “well, she’s not perfect” as if ANYONE said that is laughable. She’s dead, and her name is being tarnished by the very same people who selected her as a pliable broodmare when she was 19.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Emmi, where in the interview did Diana ‘absolutely trash’ Charles? I’m genuinely curious because Diana praised him in the interview and came across as respecting his honesty in the Dimbleby interview/book re:Camilla? She was far more kinder than I would be in that situation. So, please, what is the example of Diana ‘absolutely trashing’ Charles? Absolutes can be problematic.

        @HandfortheParish, Diana wasn’t paranoid. She was living things in real time. Charles was cheating on her. The Firm was monitoring her every movement. The British Media were putting out headlines that made her out to be some melodramatic, insecure, insipid, non intellectual and crazy person. (sounds
        very familiar with current affairs)

        At no time in the Panorama interview did Diana throw her kids under the bus. She spoke of working things out timing wise to protect them. We have to remember, Charles & Diana were SEPARATED for almost three years when she did that interview. As Tessa said above, Diana didn’t speak of divorcing Charles during the Panorama interview (or keeping W & H out of things). Bashir brought up the speculation. Diana didn’t want a divorce and mentioned how the British Media discussed it more than they did. fyi, Diana didn’t say anything about William beling her “rock” in the Panorama interview. That came from Robert Jobson after Diana’s death. Then replayed by the BM and Tina Brown(in her Diana book), then re-replayed by the BM and Jobson/Brown in their later books. You might be conflating things due to all the misinformation out there. It is really quite fascinating how Diana said all these things AFTER she died and RR’s reported them in books they were selling. I’m sure Jobson was just being completely innocent & “truthful”. It had nothing to do with the rehab of Camilla. /s

    • Candy says:

      I’m sure it was a hard decision. I think she knew she was a target and this was her chance to get her story on record. That interview and Morton’s reporting are the reason we really know anything about Diana’s story. No one else around her was going to be willing to share her story, they were too establishment, even her friends and family.

      It’s easy to say that she should have kept her quiet dignity. But that’s hard to do after being cheated on and gaslit for nearly 20 years.

      I loved Diana when I was a kid. She was a 90s Queen! As I get older, I appreciate seeing her from my perspective as a grown woman. She was much more self actualized and was really coming into her own after the divorce. That is why the interview is so significant.

    • S says:

      William was raised in that culture. Discrete infidelity is common to them. Calling his mother paranoid reveals his vulnerability and anger regarding her. I am sure he felt fundamentally abandoned, that he wasn’t loved enough for her to stay. It must be twisting to be raised royal, especially in Williams position. By necessity he will identify with his father. Harry has a softer fate.

    • kirk says:

      Since I never watched this back when it happened, I sat down today with videotape of the broadcast somebody put on FB.
      As far as “she really threw her children under the bus,” my view is she did NOT. She continued to profess love for Chuck (gah) who already did his own interview saying he didn’t love her. Haven’t ever ‘deified’ Diana; only interested in her as she relates to Meghan. Came away from the Diana interview thinking the same about her as I have watching the evolution of Harry – beaucoup social and emotional intelligence despite lack of schooling.

      • Flowerlake says:

        I did watch it then.

        Was admittesly still a teenager, but old enough to understand.

        Can’t remember even thinking she said anything bad about her sons or that it was even a narrative.

    • Isabella says:

      Neither has ever said this.

      “They would have been crucified at school.”

  7. Tessa says:

    William using paranoid In reference to his own mother imo was deplorable Charles had confessed publicly his relationship with Camilla over a year before Diana interview so Diana was accurate in the interview Diana would have done an interview no matter what

    • Tessa says:

      The boys imo were also impacted by their father and his confessions including his revelation to dimbleby that he never loved Diana the Parker Bowles children also were impacted by Charles confessions

      • Snuffles says:

        Right. Have we ever heard how the boys reacted to Charles’ interview? Why only Diana’s? And why was only William so enraged to the point of shoving her? It’s strange that we never heard how Harry felt about either. Maybe we will get it in his memoir.

  8. Tessa says:

    Diana was spot on not paranoid Charles confessions impacted his sons as well as Camilla ‘s children Charles told dimbleby he never loved his sons mothet

    • Lucy says:

      Right? Is it “paranoia” when everything you are worried about is actually happening?

      • HandforthParish says:

        Well her paranoia was that she was going to be murdered by the RF because she was a ‘problem’.
        I think we can all agree that she was treated appallingly but died because of a drunk driver and no seatbelt.

      • Tessa says:

        I do not think the cause of her death is that clear cut Diana always buckled up her sisters said so to the media the security guard and sole survivor has amnesia and cannot remember why he let the alleged drunk driver take the wheel and did the guard check the seat belts the ambulance driver transporting Diana bypassed a hospital 10 minutes away

      • Tessa says:

        I think her post accident care appalling some heart specialists said she could have been saved had she had been taken to a hospital sooner the ambulance bypassed a hospital 10 minutes away

    • Tigerlily says:

      @Tessa I can’t recall where I read it but yes Camila’s children were negatively affected by Charles’ interview & confession. Plus I think both Camilla & Andrew Parker Bowles were content to carry on as they were. Chuckles’ ‘confession’ forced APB’s hand I believe. APB felt he then had to pursue a divorce. And Charles could pursue his PR fantasy of him & Cam being star crossed lovers.

  9. Snuffles says:

    It still won’t change the content of that interview. And The Crown will clearly cover it extensively. So, despite them forcing the BBC to yank it, it will live on forever on Netflix with its dramatic reenactment.

  10. Aurora says:

    I would love to know Harry’s thoughts on this censorship.

  11. WiththeAmerican says:

    How tragic they really are erasing reality and rewriting history. To the victor go the spoils. These people are sickening.

  12. Miranda says:

    I just do not understand Charles and the RF pretzeling themselves over their portrayal in The Crown. They’re not fooling anyone by pretending to care that Diana was manipulated by Bashir. The whole world already knows that they never gave a damn about her emotional wellbeing, and just in case anyone forgot, they reaffirmed their indifference by treating Meghan the same way.

    • Chrissy says:

      Yup! Also, Charles’ desperation to change the narrative is also very telling. The fact that the BRF acted exactly the same way towards Meghan, and drove Diana’s youngest son to walk away from his privileged circumstances, because of the same gaslighting and also, racism, just shows how rotten the British Monarchy is. The inhumanity and entitlement is unbelievable. Add the active participation of Diana’s eldest son. The whole rotten institution deserves to be burned to the ground. They need to wake up over there and make it happen.

      • Lurker25 says:

        @Chrissy – “the inhumanity and entitlement… The active participation”
        This makes clear how Britain colonized most of the world, doesn’t it? It wasn’t superior military skills, strategic thinking, weaponry, naval armadas, and whatever else they’ve been telling themselves and the world. It’s the inhumanity to create systematic structures of enslavement, oppression, large-scale plundering. It’s the entitlement to believe you OWN North America, most of Africa, the entire Indian subcontinent, Australia/Oceania, chunks of the middle east…
        What Russia is doing to Ukraine was a normal Tuesday to the British 150 years ago.
        I don’t mean to threadjack! It’s that seeing the rotten values of the very top of the hierarchical structure explains a lot about the active participation of the entire populace. This is who they are. All that British gentleman/honor system/etc. rigmarole was a structure to paper over the lack of a real value system.
        We see that so clearly in the BS “protocol” and rules that were forced on Meghan to prove that there was some majestic royal way of being. Turns out they are crass, cash-in-paper-bags, hollow, vindictive, garbage people.

      • Jais says:

        ❤️this comment

      • Sera Quill says:

        @Lurker25 – LOVE this comment.

      • Nick G says:

        @Lurker you are so correct. Add to this the mental and emotional devastation over a great deal of the world and the destruction of the self worth, self regard and self determination of so many cultures in the name of British supremacy. You begin to see how the people of Great Britain have and keep their perspective of the royal family and its reign over the nation.
        But the colonies woke up a long, long time ago. Interesting to see if Britain itself will.

  13. ShazBot says:

    Honestly, this is probably why they’re freaking out about Harry’s memoir.
    They don’t care what he’ll say about Camilla now…they care about the 90s and him sharing his thoughts/experiences/views of it all because it’s going to throw a wrench in their rewriting of history.

  14. Tessa says:

    The interview cannot really be censored various biographers have quoted it and analyzed it totals cannot censor what is in books

    • BeanieBean says:

      I was hoping the entire transcript exists somewhere. It’s disturbing to think they’ve now taken her voice. Bad enough they hounded her to death, but not letting anyone hear what she had to say? That was a very important interview, no matter how Bashir got it.

      • kirk says:

        Suppression of historical document is troublesome. Even if it was initially obtained by deceit, the content has intrinsic value that can be verified elsewhere. Looks like someone took video of the show here – https://www.facebook.com/PrincessDianaforever/videos/princess-diana-panorama-full-interview-with-martin-bashir-bbc-november-20-1995/2821878244736584/

      • Agreakreckoning says:

        I recommend that anyone that wants to keep the video as a receipt to do so outside of the links. Record the video as a separate entity from the link. Like taking an image? A tech from AT & T explained to me how if the source of a video edits the video, it doesn’t matter when you recorded it, you are still using the source for the replay. Any edits will be part of the replay/recording. Lol..I had this conversation after Philip’s funeral and the kerfluffle between Kate/William on the walk after the church service.

        @BeanieBean, the full transcript of the Panorama interview does exist. I actually saved it to a word document over a year ago. It was during discussions here and people were attributing words to Diana that didn’t come out of her mouth. It was a quick reference that took 5 seconds of time to save Now, curiously?, two days ago you could still retrieve from BBC archives. As of today, the BBC site is fiving a 404 message. Even though I have it saved, when I read this story today, (did a quick search-some articles have been disappearing)-received a 404 message. Yep, yep, nothing to see here. /s With current events and declarations by certain nefarious authors…Diana brought up in the Panorama interview that she was considered a threat to the monarchy. That she wanted to bring them down. Diana had words about that. “Diana’s out to destroy the monarchy” they said. D8mn, sounds familiar. It’ was bewildering to her to be accused of that because it was her childrens future.

        Apoligies for any duplications/weird things. Cat is mad and antsy about fireworks.

      • kirk says:

        Wow. Now that I’ve actually watched the interview, I’m thinking a transcript would be lacking a lot of data. Seeing Diana’s delivery and how she responds to questions is really interesting.

  15. Tessa says:

    Royal family not totals

  16. Amy Bee says:

    Hopefully they will explain why Diana felt she needed to do the interview she was being smeared in the press by Charles. The Times of London has a report that William is frustrated that the BBC didn’t address the false narrative of the interview. He and Charles Spencer believe Diana was deceived into doing the interview but that’s not true. As some have been saying the Crown might become the only source of Diana’s interview which is unfortunate. The Royal Family and Charles Spencer have succeeded in silencing Diana.

    • SURE says:

      I don’t understand Charles Spencer’s motivation.

      • Amy Bee says:

        Maybe guilt and also his desire to protect the Royal Family.

      • Chrissy says:

        Also, to protect his livelihood. His family profits from being linked to the BRF. Who’s going to visit Althorp, the home of the young Diana, if the Monarchy is directly linked to her continued vilification and death? I wonder what her sisters think of all this. Diana must have at least confided in her eldest sister, Sarah, about what she was going though.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        This is all about protecting himself – remember he was also involved in setting this interview up (he was initially the middle man), then sat back and let his own sister be thrown to the wolves over it even after her death.

      • Agreakreckoning says:

        @SURE, MONEY. Charles Spencer may have a high net worth. That doesn’t equate to available cash. A problem for lots of aristos that don’t work.Asset rich, cash poor. Okay, I’ll admt (proudly) I’ve never read one of his books. Are they good? Is he a successful author? He turned the Althorp estate into Dianaland years ago saying all proceeds would go to a charity in her name. The first year, Charles Spencer was like oh noes we can’t do that, we have to recover the costs of setting up Dianaland. We can only donate maybe 10%. The year prior to when everything would be relinquished to William & Harry (dresses (a big thing for Dianaland from my understanding), Charles Spencer sent the collection of dresses on an international tour to benefit the charity. Where the dollars went is questioned.

        Charles Spencer has sold stories about his sister for a long time. He’s sold out Diana for years.

    • Snuffles says:

      How have they succeeded? I know they are TRYING to silence Diana but with the internet and social media, that’s impossible. Are they going to erase Andrew Morton’s book? Or the recordings of Diana that were made for it? No. People will never forget.

      • Amy Bee says:

        The BBC has agreed to never to air the interview again. I see that as successfully silencing her.

      • Snuffles says:


        They blocked one interview from airing on the BBC. Her words and other recordings are still out there. It’s an empty victory in my opinion.

      • Amy Bee says:

        I’ll also add that the BBC admitting that there was dishonesty in how the interview was obtained has convinced many including William that the interview should be discredited and not believed.

  17. Tessa says:

    William is a sellout but then again he treated his brother and sister in law badly

  18. Mslove says:

    Harry honors his mother by continuing her charity work and by helping others.
    Bill called his mother “paranoid.”
    Enough said.

  19. Talie says:

    OMG…when that first trailer drops. All hell is is gonna break loose. You already know Elizabeth will nail it. There has been no other actress who has gotten the physicality like her.

    And if they really are dropping the projects Harry & Meghan have been working on, look out!

    • Nyro says:

      They always hire short women to play her and it throws things off because her height is a big part of who she is, imo. I can’t explain it but, for example, Kate is taller than average yet I don’t really think of her height at all. Diana’s height made her regal, imo. The fact that they tried to make her look shorter in portraits with Prince Charles is significant.

      • Green girl says:

        Yeah, Diana was TALL. It’s even more remarkable when you consider how her wedding dress just about engulfed her. That was a lot of fabric!

        I don’t think shows like the Crown and biopics in general need to be lookalikes of the people who are portrayed, but I do think the Actors need to nail the mannerisms and presence of the people they are portraying. I need to believe an actor really is Diana or Charles, etc., for the time they are onscreen. I can’t wait for this season!

      • HandforthParish says:

        Her height is really interesting because when she was young she was clearly self conscious and as a result slightly gawky with it. I bet she grew up hearing she wouldn’t find a man because she was too tall and not dainty enough.
        Of course the fact that Charles was clearly annoyed by her height didn’t help.

        After her divorce she clearly embraced it and her stride and posture became much more powerful.

  20. Jessica says:

    I love Elizabeth. She is fantastic. Watch her in the night manager and Tenet. It is almost scary how much she looks like Diana..down to the mannerisms in this season.

    • Julia K says:

      Elizabeth and Tom Hiddlleston had terrific chemistry in “The Night Manager”

      • one of the marys says:

        The Night Manager was so well done and just brutal to watch. I don’t think I ever thought about bodyguards the same way. That said her wardrobe was stunning. I always wondered if she contributed to the styling at all because she was dressed fantastic.

    • CC says:

      She’s great in ‘Widows.’

  21. florencia says:

    Based on that header photo I thought for a second that Gwyneth Paltrow was playing Diana!

  22. Fancyhat says:

    I continue to find the RF’s anger at The Crown to be misplaced. It’s a hagiography for that family. Nazi ties ignored as well as covering up Phillip’s affairs.

    The people who should be upset are the Kennedy’s for smearing JFK as an out of control abuser

  23. S808 says:

    What they’re doing to this woman, even in death…..the circumstances were suspect but she said what she wanted to and I hope that does not get lost. Glad Harry is putting a book out, Meghan needs to do so too.

  24. Jay says:

    I won’t hold my breath waiting for Peter Morgan to show us a fully realized female character, much less Diana having full agency and wanting to get her side of the story out. I tapped out on this series early when a show called “The Crown” kept spending way too many hours on how hard life was for Churchill and Prince Philip.

    BUT in a way, presenting Diana as naive and manipulated by unscrupulous journalists makes her more sympathetic, not less. And the audience has the benefit of the knowledge of subsequent events. I mean, Charles can’t exactly try to deny he had an affair with Camilla. So they can paint Diana as vulnerable, or even paranoid, but we all know she wasn’t lying, you know? Painting Diana as a helpless victim does them no favours, in my opinion.

    And it’s also notable that all of the royals still have pretty cozy relations with the same media that are being portrayed as the villains here. It’s all very well to say that poor Diana was all on her own and dealing with clever and manipulative reporters, but I think people might wonder why, if she was so vulnerable, she didn’t get more support. And it’s harder to explain why the whole family continued to deal with these same media entities for decades to come.

    And even if the BBC won’t license it, we’ve all seen the clips from this interview and they will circulate online forever. Not even the royal family can do anything about that.

  25. anna says:

    this was the goal all along. they saw how a new generation saw how awful charles was to diana (and they only showed some of it) in the last season, and they wanted to stop that from happening with the new season. they are so ridiculous.

    • Lurker25 says:

      After all they did to Diana, after the H &M Oprah interview, after all the crisis managers and social media managers they hired … They STILL haven’t heard of the Streisand effect.

  26. Bettyrose says:

    The crazy thing is the Crown was meant as a historical drama. Netflix didn’t force the RF to keep writing new seasons for them. We were always going to be fascinated by the Diana storyline and it was always going to be uncomfortable for Charles, but banishment of an American Duchess has made the Crown feel a thousand times more relevant to current events.

    • Jaded says:


    • Chrissy says:

      Yup, they tell on themselves all the time. To this day, they are still smearing a beloved dead woman and tripping themselves in their idiotic short-sighted treatment of Harry’s family. They can’t seem to get out of their own way. God forbid they admit it and own up to it and strive to do better.

  27. Jaded says:

    The more Charles and William try to deflect, deny and shame Diana’s legacy, the worse they look. There are enough of us who were around for the entire debacle from start to finish and we know. We know how Diana was set up as nothing more than a suitable brood mare. We know Charles and Camilla never stopped sneaking around behind Diana’s back. His comment about having an affair with Camilla only when the marriage was “irretrievably broken down” is pure bullshit. Diana was smeared, gaslit, lied to, humiliated, and it almost broke her but, like Meghan, she fought back and told her story. I really hope Harry speaks to this in his memoir. His father and step-mother behaved abominably and continue to do so with William’s cooperation.

  28. L4Frimaire says:

    This has been so well documented that whatever version the Crown comes out with will be scrutinized and criticized. It seems like the only sustained traction the royals are getting in the press lately, or ever really in the past few years, is something to do with Diana and her legacy, or bashing Meghan and Harry. Everything else they do, they bury themselves under this goal or do something so tone deaf like the Colonial cosplay tour. William announced his award ceremony the week Harry gives a speech at the UN but no one cares that much about it because they’re focused on the Sussexes. They think it’s Meghan’s bad influence getting Harry invited to the UN and collaborating with international organizations. The royal brand right now is erasure and attacks of women who are either dead or minding their business on the other side of the world.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      @L4Frimaire, the beauty of this sentence of yours seems to have gone unnoticed and underappreciated.

      “They think it’s Meghan’s bad influence getting invited to the UN and collaborating with international organizations.”.

      Meghan, through her obvious devious behavior, made the UN/Mandela family invite Prince Harry-who’ve they known for a long time and pre Meghan-make a speech about Mandela. If that’s not evidence of a bad person…………..lol, I don’t even know how to finish that sentence.

  29. February Pisces says:

    No one would believe Charles if he said Diana was ‘paranoid’ of course he was chat sh*t about her. But with William saying it, it add more credibility, because he is her ‘golden boy’ after all. He threw his dead mother under the bus to protect the institution that destroyed her. He must have so much rot in his heart. I wonder what cards charles played here.

    Poor Diana, if it wasn’t bad enough that she was betrayed by everyone when she was alive, but to your own son throw you under the bus when your dead really is the worst betrayal of all.

    • Tessa says:

      I think William is counting on still being the “golden prince.” He has changed (or maybe got worse–he had shown signs of not so nice behavior) because he behaved badly to Harry and Meghan. Charles enabled his behavior. And I wonder about what was said to him (re: the Lacey book) during those teas with the Queen when Philip left them alone to talk about his ‘legacy.’

  30. HamsterJam says:

    I was in a car in California with 3 brits when the news came over the radio that Diana had died. I said, “No way that happened, it must be a mistake”. They were just silent.

    The BM had been bashing her daily for MONTHS for going out with Dodi, the son of the Harrod’s owner. The BM sure changed their tune fast after she died.

    I have been through that tunnel, I only know because I asked why it had a torch, a kind of Statue of Liberty carved light over the entrance. They said, the French put it there for Diana, because this is where she died. They showed me the exact place the accident happened.

    Untrained drivers that are in a curve and think that they will not make it almost always end up either spinning out, or grazing the side of the wall with the side of their car because they don’t understand the point of adhesion. Your tires can either steer or break, they can’t do both.

    The point of adhesion is where your tires stick to the road. If you are steering and your car is sliding your tires have lost adhesion.

    The best way to get control back is to counter steer, move the wheel slightly to the opposite side of where you were trying to steer. This allows the tires to get more in line and will take you out of the slide.

    Except, that won’t work if you are sliding into a wall, there is no room for the counter steer, so here are your choices:

    1) hit the breaks
    2) hit the gas

    1) is the favorite of untrained drivers everywhere. You think you are loosing control? Loosing adhesion? The car is sliding? Hitting the breaks will guarantee you go completely out of control. Your tires can not steer and break at the same time. Breaking when you are driving in a straight line is fine, in a corner, you will lose all steering control.

    2) a trained driver would hit the gas, accelerate slightly, this will give added traction to the tires so that they can steer a bit more tightly and the car will obey

    That car could have easily taken that corner at over 120 mph.

    They drove straight into it. The entire front of the car gone.

    This was not a missed corner, this was a guy who drove straight into a wall

    • SadieMae says:

      Yes to all of this. The driver was driving at a high rate of speed and doing so into a tunnel at night, which was irresponsible (I understand why Dodi and Diana wanted to get away from the paparazzi, but given that they’d already been photographed extensively together and their relationship was no secret, was it really worth risking the lives of a car full of people just to try to “lose” the paparazzi? Whether they ordered the driver to do so or whether he took it upon himself, it was reckless…) and also he was drunk. Defensive and crisis driving is a skill, and sometimes you have to do something that goes against instinct (like turning into a skid). You have to have your wits about you. Which means not getting liquored up before you get behind the wheel. Probably the adrenaline of the chase impaired the driver’s judgment too – people don’t think as clearly in a situation like that. It’s like the pilots who go into a stall and instinctively pull the plane’s nose up instead of pushing it down to gain speed and get control again. You’ve got to be on your game. Sadly, in this case an extremely avoidable accident happened, partly due to the hounding of the paparazzi and partly due to bad driving and bad choices by the driver. (Even if Dodi and/or Diana and/or the bodyguard told him to drive that way, he should have refused to. Especially since he was drunk – they may not have known it, but he certainly would have! But, as apparently with the Kobe Bryant case, sometimes drivers/pilots make bad choices when they’re trying to defer to/impress important clients.)

  31. DevinALoveland says:

    Sharon it’s Devin. please baby get a hold of me somehow…

    • Tessa says:

      I doubt very much Diana told Henri paul to drive that way why were not the police called with the paparazzi lined up that way