Buckingham Palace has ‘veto power’ on the footage from QEII’s funeral

British taxpayers had to foot the bill for Queen Elizabeth II’s state funeral. I sort of understand why that happened – she was the sitting “head of state,” and there was such a combination of police, military and international figures in attendance, it absolutely makes sense that the government picked up the tab. But one would think, hey, this is basically a taxpayer-financed operation, we should get the coverage we want. Nope! What people got was a highly stage-managed event with few disruptions or human moments, and even those blips will be forever banned from the airwaves. That’s because the BBC gave Buckingham Palace a veto on the use of footage from the funeral.

British television channels gave Buckingham Palace a veto on the use of footage from Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral, indicating the complicated relationship around the media’s coverage of the monarchy.

As part of an agreement with news broadcasters, the royal household was given the right to request that particular pieces of footage from the funeral services at Westminster Abbey and Windsor Castle were not used again.

Royal staff sent messages to the BBC, ITV News and Sky News during the event with the timestamps of footage they wished to exclude from future news broadcasts and social media clips. As a result, five short pieces of video featuring members of the royal family were removed from circulation.

Although the sections were relatively brief, the decision to give the palace a veto on what footage could be used has caused unease among some journalists who worked on the coverage, in ongoing tension at British media outlets between marking the death of a major national figure and allowing news coverage to be shaped by the royal family.

The palace provided guidance on what footage and photography would be considered acceptable, with a particular request to avoid intruding on the grief of individual members of the royal family. Other pieces of video, such as a man lunging at the Queen’s coffin while it was in Westminster Hall, were also not used by broadcasters.

[From The Guardian]

Kind of wonder if Buckingham Palace requested that the BBC and other broadcasters remove all of their lingering shots of Prince Harry looking like a king, or all the times the cameras focused on Harry and Meghan in general. It bugs me to think that BP might have wanted to remove footage of Prince George and Charlotte though – yes, they’re little kids, which is why they shouldn’t have been at the funeral in the first place. In any case, the whole idea of Buckingham Palace getting veto-power on what’s shown from a taxpayer-funded spectacle is… pretty sketchy. Revolting, even.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and Cover Images.

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

31 Responses to “Buckingham Palace has ‘veto power’ on the footage from QEII’s funeral”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lizzie says:

    Like when Camila snapped at Kate when Charlotte cried? Too bad, it’s all over youtube.

  2. Becks1 says:

    So I can understand the government wanting some veto power (like the person lunging at the coffin or anything else that might have been deemed a security risk.)

    But for the royal household to have veto power? Nah. You want veto power, pay for your own damn funeral.

    wonder if the clip of William letting Harry and Meghan pass was one of the things that got cut.

    • Chloe says:

      Maybe i have finally lost it but i wouldn’t be surprised if any footage that clearly shows meghan and harry (but especially meghan) was completely cut out if they use clips in the future. Sort of an attempt to erase her so to speak.

  3. Merricat says:

    Veto power over photographs. Not fascist at all.

  4. Snuffles says:

    The real story isn’t what they vetoed, it’s the fact that they were allowed to veto at all and will probably do it again in the future, repeatedly.

  5. Chloe says:

    The bbc is more and more taking the shape of state media. The likes of which we see in Russia and North Korea

  6. Jais says:

    Outrageous. Disgusting. Fascist. Chilling.

  7. sparrow says:

    This is interesting and backs up something I felt during the funeral – it was as if the event had been directed by the BRF not the BBC. There was nothing much of Meghan – at one point the camera blocked her out with a candle – surely this was too amateurish for an otherwise brilliantly produced broadcast. There was huge focus on Kate’s arrival. My partner noticed the imbalances, and he isn’t overly interested in any of this. I remember when the BRF went mad at the BBC newsreader who announced the queen mother’s death in a burgundy tie, not a black one! This time, Huw Edwards, the BBC anchor, has been praised for his appropriate behaviour and poise (despite the little hitch of wearing a black tie slightly prematurely). It made me think the BBC felt chuffed it had won royal approval and happily allowed the broadcast to be dictated by Charles. Another interpretation is the BBC, being under Tory attack, felt being in with the BRF a timely move.

  8. girl_ninja says:

    Too late. So many of us have seen and captured the footage. We saw that nasty, miserable lot disrespect H and Megs.

  9. Chantal says:

    Unfortunately for them, coverage extended beyond the BBC and other outlets will not be so easily bullied by Charles the Tyrant. Its only been a few weeks and his “kingly” problematic behavior and demands are becoming even more problematic. And sets dangerous precedents.

  10. tealily says:

    The royal family actually does this with all footage of them, including footage from the BFI and BBC archives. None of it can be aired without their approval.

  11. Tessa says:

    Will Charles pen episodes be censored

  12. Jan says:

    Yesterday in the Netherlands their Royal family was booed by the crowd, I’m shocked, because they’re loved and modern, guess people are getting fed up with all this superior beings.
    One African leader, President of Ethiopia refused to ride the bus to the the Queen’s funeral, people are laughing at the African leaders that were on the bus, saying nothing has changed.

  13. Lau says:

    French program Quotidien showed some of the images which were cut :

    • Bananarama says:

      Firstly, thank you for this because I’ve been waiting for a compilation.

      Secondly, so the British Royal Family used all of their influence, shadow power, and gravitas to compel the fully taxpayer-funded state media broadcast institution to remove some shocking and potentially horrifying moments from the funeral recording, including *checks notes*……extremely minor royals touching their faces for a split second.

      So they will mobilize this ridiculous censorship machine for things that may actually SLIGHTLY humanize these ridiculous people while pretending there’s nothing they can do for the other significantly more serious situations we all are aware of.

      This is why “recollections vary”, the history is changed the second it’s made to align with script.

    • SAS says:

      Thanks @LAU, pourquoi indeed.

  14. jferber says:

    I wonder if BP also had veto power for the walkabout? I tried to find video of the beginning and end of the foursome’s event, where Kate rushed to be with the boys and Harry went back to open Meghan’s car door and when Kate stared daggers at Meghan in an open-leg position that frightened Meghan and Harry stepped in between them to protect Meghan. I CANNOT find that footage at all. So their new princess acting like a devil has disappeared. Poof.

    • sparrow says:

      I found a video – “body language analyst reacts the royals at Windsor Castle” on youtube, where some “expert” talks about the first bit of the event. I don’t know what he actually says because I muted the sound. The bit of the four getting out of the car and assembling themselves for the approach to the gates is there. I didn’t realise how lovely Harry was at that point, he had his arm wrapped round Meghan’s back. Kate obviously didn’t get the memo to be kind and inclusive, or try and look like it, because god does she want to dominate; taking herself far to the side and marching off as if she knows protocol without being told. Jealousy, your name is Kate Middleton.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      jferber, there are two videos of the end when they are standing at the car. The first shows a side view of Wails face as she stares at Meghan. The second video actually shows Wails face full on. I’m telling you that if I had been Meghan I would have stepped back, too. You’ll find them on twitter.

      If I was a member of the brf, I would stay far, far away from Wails. I don’t think there’s anything that she wouldn’t do. That stare says it all.

  15. The British Monarchy under Charles and supported by William has become an authoritarian regime. It’s a dictatorship. Everything unpalatable to them is censored.

  16. jferber says:

    Thanks Sparrow and Saucy & Sassy, I’ll look them up.

  17. RoyalBlue says:

    Dictators are gonna dictate.