Sky News boss: Media is ‘too supine, too incurious, too compliant’ about royals

Here are some photos of King Charles and Queen Camilla from the past week. They were busy too, just like Prince William and Kate. Nothing lights a fire under the Windsors’ asses like the Duke and Duchess of Sussex getting attention, I swear to God. Charles was doing events in Scotland last week, then on Saturday, he stopped by Dumfries House to open up a new farming center, then he and Camilla went to the Doncaster races, where one of the royal horses was racing (the royal horse lost). This was actually Charles and Camilla’s first time at Doncaster? Also: Charles and Camilla look like they’ve aged dramatically all rather suddenly. Charles is really looking like his father too – there were some photos from Doncaster where he just flatly looks like Philip now.

Meanwhile, the former head of Sky News has spoken out about the “Orwellian” demands of the Windsors in regard to special events (QEII’s funeral, the coronation) as well as their nastiness towards any reporter or broadcaster attempting to speak directly to a royal figure.

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.”

In his speech – in memory of Hewlett, the broadcaster and writer who died in 2017 – he demanded more scrutiny of the royal family from British journalism, saying broadcasters were now “too supine … too incurious … too compliant” when it comes to the monarchy: “Topics such as why King Charles didn’t pay any inheritance tax on the fortune he inherited from his mother or the fact the Duchy of Cornwall doesn’t pay capital gains tax should be examined properly. The reporting needs to be far more rigorous.”

He also explained how Buckingham Palace reacts when journalists try to ask questions directly to royal family members: “You already know – perhaps you don’t – that spin doctors at the royal palaces freak out when a broadcast journalist doorsteps a member of the royal family. Haughty emails, phone calls, and even a summons for a head of news to a meeting can swiftly follow. I’ve experienced this treatment.”

[From The Guardian]

I wonder if Camilla has her own WhatsApp group with Piers Morgan, Jeremy Clarkson and the other dregs of British media. It would make a lot of sense – a streamlined way for Camilla to sow division within the family and spread her talking points. Anyway, yeah, the British media’s open collusion with the Windsors is far beyond “the invisible contract.” Everyone should be ashamed here – the media outlets who go along with it in exchange for access, the Windsors who spread their dysfunction, racism and sexism far and wide, and the British public for never questioning why this situation persists.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

65 Responses to “Sky News boss: Media is ‘too supine, too incurious, too compliant’ about royals”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. North of Boston says:

    I could go the rest of my natural life without ever seeing Charles’ tongue ever again. Why must he have it on display so freaking much?

    He’s giving Kate and Will a run for the money on the gurning and yucky facial expressions front.

  2. Tessa says:

    That hat looks so bad on Camilla.

    • Carmen says:

      Everything looks bad on Camilla.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      No it doesn’t, Tessa. It overshadows her face.

    • Renae says:

      Camilla looks bad under the hat. Poor hat is just fine.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Tessa, that’s the first hat that she’s worn that I like. Whether it looks good on her? meh.

    • Beverley says:

      I have to wonder how one can amass so much wealth and status yet not invest in a decent bra. Does no one love her enough to say anything?

      • Renee says:

        I think she’s a horrible person but will give her a pass on the bra situation. Once I turned 60 I refused to be uncomfortable and have never found a truly supportive bra that’s comfortable. My attitude is it’s a natural part of my body and I don’t really care what anyone else thinks about it. Maybe that’s where she’s at.

  3. Amy Bee says:

    Whatever, where was he when Harry and Meghan was telling the truth about the relationship between the press and Palace? He let his anchors and panelists go on air and deny that was taking place and attack Harry and Meghan for speaking out.

    • Khaki Graham says:

      My question exactly!

    • Interested Gawker says:

      Waiting for their boss to give new orders. They ran out the Sussexes, blackmailed countless reporters and Queen Elizabeth is dead. The guns are turning on the rest of the BRF now. The only interesting aspect of this is how Camilla will fare; will she be protected because she worked with the Daily Mail so frequently or will that mean nothing to Murdoch, DM is a competitor to him not necessarily an ally.

  4. I beg to differ about the royal horse losing. The Horsilla did win she took the crown. Of course the invisible contract remains intact. Doubt that will change because it works so well for the Royals in their minds. Also the new hat Horsilla is wearing looks like one that Mr Ed wore in the 60s. Glad she is taking fashion notes from another horse.

  5. Ms CP says:

    What do you expect from the ”left overs” ? 😳

  6. Caribbean says:

    No wonder they want to destroy Harry and Meghan…they spoke without permission

    So image if the RF were not permitted to have so much control, how much more horrible they would show to be?

    They have control and yet we see some much pettiness, racism, disfunction, laziness, and greed, along with bad photos. AND ALL THAT IS THE EDITED VERSION? Yikes.

    • CherryBerry says:

      Right? I’d like to know what was edited out. Also it seemed some settings in the queens funeral and the coronation were done purposely. At the funeral they angled the camera so that there was a long candle covering Meghan’s face. They did the same at the coronation with Prince Harry and Anne’s feathered hat. I wonder if was Anne asked to wear that or if she knew what she was doing?

  7. ArtHistorian says:

    Finally! Someone outlining how the Windsors are leaning further and further into authoritarianism when it comes to people now bowing and scraping for them. When this is how they treat even heads of news corp. then it is no wonder that they unleased the storm on someone like Ngozi Fulani when she spoke about her experience of racism at BP.

    Before he became King, a commentator (can’t remember who) with some insight into Charles’ office said that Charles is very authoritarian and that he doesn’t like it when people disagree with him. And this has certainly been proven right.

    This kind of behaviour is completely unacceptable from a ceremonial HoS who is funded by the public.

  8. Brassy Rebel says:

    This is good news. At least a few journalists seem to be questioning their role as royal mouthpieces. It’s still too early to know whether actual change will come of it. But the public needs to demand more transparency and accountability. Of course, what they really should be demanding is an end to the monarchy.

    I really love Camilla’s hat in these photos. And that’s the closest I will ever come to complimenting her on anything. But one of the best things about the hat is how the shadow obscures her face. 😆

  9. Jais says:

    I’d imagine Camilla texts many many people in the media. But I think they all do really. Or at least have someone in their court do it. I could see Camilla doing it herself though.

  10. Snuffles says:

    One of these days, someone in the press is gonna snap and expose these people for filth. This kind of ass kissing coverage is boring and doesn’t bring them clicks, viewers and therefore profits. The scales will tip and they will realize they make more money actually reporting instead of being royal PR.

  11. Caroline says:

    I think the average British person is as responsible for their awful media as I am for Fox News as an American. I don’t like holding an entire people responsible for the actions of the elites just as I don’t want to be held responsible for everything Trump did.

  12. Alicky says:

    Americans: You’re so full of optimism and ingenuity. It’s why I’ve traveled 3000 miles here to talk about my environmental prize!
    John F. Kennedy: I’ve heard of this one. You still like him, right? He’s taught us so much!
    September 11: It’s September 18, but I’ll name-check your big day!

  13. Maxine Branch says:

    This old man Charles and his old wife Camilla deeds will continue to eat them from the inside. These are two disgusting beings.

  14. Roo says:

    Why are they both looking so tired and raggedy? It’s not like they work hard or are food deprived? Too much anger, jealousy and hatred eating away at them?

    • booboocita says:

      They look like people who got everything they wanted and found out it wasn’t what they thought it’d be. Chucky Boy is king. He’s got a crown and fancy robes and a sh*tton of money — but he’s still not loved and revered. Camilla got her crown and victory over Diana — but she’ll never be more than the side piece, detested and detestable. She’s not respected, let alone loved.

    • CherryBerry says:

      Probably a life led in excess. Too much drink, rich food, and they don’t seem like the type to run or exercise.

  15. Becks1 says:

    Charles looks like he’s lost some weight, so I think that’s why his face looks more like Phillip’s here. Camilla’s suit is nice, the hat does not work with it.

    As for the comments about the media…..the media can always say no. SkyNews can say “no thanks, we’re not going to air your coronation then.” The royal family needs the media coverage. they need people to see the pomp and spectacle. The media has the power here to say “nope, we’re not going to abide by this authoritarian agreement” and instead the media says “sure, that’s fine, as long as we get pictures of the big hats.”

    The British media IS too complacent when it comes to the royals and I’m not sure why. If they are sitting on a scandal, spill it, the scandal will make up for all that “access” you’re going to lose in terms of clicks. If they are sitting on something that’s so big it threatens the monarchy itself – well all the more reason to share it, talk about “public interest.”

    • Satish More says:

      Becks

      I think the simple culture of deference to the royals plays a big role in the media heads’ complacency. Brits are raised to believe that the royals are “above” them, and that they should “grateful” that the royals are even willing to let their silly little newstation broadcast their lofty royal events. I think even Brits who are sick of the royals still deep down believe they are their “betters”. It’s ingrained in them.

      I think the young people in the UK (ages 16-17 and below) are the first to not be force fed that mentality as much. I think they will be the generation that abolishes the monarchy

      • Mary Pester says:

        SATISH MORE, I’M A BRIT and I’m also a veteran. I served under the queen, but NOT ONCE have I ever thought ANY of the Royals was better than me or the people I served with, did I admire the Queen, only in as far as she was on the throne for 70 year’s, as a mother? No, because in my eyes she didn’t earn my respect for that. NONE of the Palace dwellers is better than anyone, especially the people that get up every day and work for their livings, and don’t get houses, cars planes, helicopters, jewels and unlimited wealth handed to them. They need to GO, the monarchy should and MUST be abolished, then the millions waisted on the sovereign grant every year, could help pay for schools to be rebuilt along with hospitals and trained staff, or stop children going hungry every day

      • Satish More says:

        Mary Pester

        I just saw your reply. I am extremely glad that you do not view the royals as your “betters”. And perhaps I could have articulated my point differently. While perhaps those alive in the UK today don’t view the RF as their “betters” (although my grandparents generation certainly did, with my grandparents having been born in 1910) I DO believe that Britains general ghastly obsession with class still pervades most age groups, as it has been a core element of British culture for centuries. So while you might not view the RF as better than you, let me ask you this; do the majority of those in your age group (not you specifically) still show deference if they were to meet a Duke or earl? Or Countess? Or whatever silly royal title? Because I live in Ireland, and I have spent quite a bit of time in England and Scotland, and from what I’ve seen, most still DO show deference to the “titled class”. Even though titles are usually inherited, not earned. And THAT is evidence that many DO still view the aristocracy (if not the RF specifically) as above them. So as much as we are slowly but surely discarding those antiquated mentalities, they’re not quite gone yet. And after all, the monarchy IS still there, isn’t it?? Don’t the people of the UK have the ability to abolish it? Yet they havent…also, I’m not sure how old you are, but do you feel that you are in the majority, regarding your views on the RF, for your age group?
        My grandparents are deceased, but when they were alive, them and all their friends would skin me alive if they saw some of my comments on this site…😆

      • Satish More says:

        Mary Pester

        I just saw your reply. I am extremely glad that you do not view the royals as your “betters”. My comment was specifically regarding those in charge of the various British media sources,
        who tend to be aristocrats, and so it is in their interesr to perpetuate the notion that the upper class are “better”. And perhaps I could have articulated my point differently. While perhaps those alive in the UK today don’t view the RF as their “betters” (although my grandparents generation certainly did, with my grandparents having been born in 1910) I DO believe that Britains general ghastly obsession with class still pervades most age groups, as it has been a core element of British culture for centuries. So while you might not view the RF as better than you, let me ask you this; do the majority of those in your age group (not you specifically) still show deference if they were to meet a Duke or earl? Or Countess? Or whatever silly royal title? Because I live in Ireland, and I have spent quite a bit of time in England and Scotland, and from what I’ve seen, most still DO show deference to the “titled class”. Even though titles are usually inherited, not earned. And THAT is evidence that many DO still view the aristocracy (if not the RF specifically) as above them. So as much as we are slowly but surely discarding those antiquated mentalities, they’re not quite gone yet. And after all, the monarchy IS still there, isn’t it?? Don’t the people of the UK have the ability to abolish it? Yet they havent…also, I’m not sure how old you are, but do you feel that you are in the majority, regarding your views on the RF, for your age group?
        My grandparents are deceased, but when they were alive, them and all their friends would skin me alive if they saw some of my comments on this site…😆

  16. Eurydice says:

    Interesting they use the word “Omerta” to describe the agreement between the RF and the British media – Omerta is the Mafia code of silence.

  17. Noor says:

    The royals wanted to preserve the fairy dust , hence the censorship of coverage. But alas the wind of change has swept them away.

    • Snuffles says:

      Pre-social media they might have been able to do that, but it’s not possible now and people can see what they are doing.

  18. Hail says:

    We saw this play out when BP threatened to cut of future access to William and Kate if ABC News followed through with their story on Prince Andrew. Same thing with the BBC documentary, the CBS 60 minute interview, netflix documentary and again with the ABC Micheal Strahan interview. The royal family is a mafia group.

    • Snuffles says:

      And I absolutely LOVE how the American media laughed in their face like “Bitch, please!”

      • Becks1 says:

        One thing I am interested in knowing is if the GMA/ABC news had the clip of Michael Strahan saying the palace asked for the interview in its entirety before commenting and that was something that ABC news never does before Anderson Cooper said it, because the wording was so similar it made me laugh. It was like ABC News was saying “we stand up to the palace too!!!!” I mean I’m sure they did say no, but it was funny that Michael Strahan wanted to make sure they got credit for the same thing as 60 minutes.

  19. JMOney says:

    Until the gerontocracy (aristocracy/billionaires/House of Lords/ Tory members & voters) have zero need for The Monarchy, the monarchy will endure in some form.

    That’s the only reason. All the Daily Mail/The Telegraph/The Sun turn on the monarchy its over. Yes it really is that simple but until then they are all in bed together and refuse to do anything about it.

  20. ML says:

    Omg, John Ryley is unhappy with the royals and their treatment of him! A whole litany of questionable practices and bullying on how they spin their public appearances and then the nastiness that follows…”I’ve experienced this treatment.” Notice that there is absolutely no mention of H&M, this is against the BRF currently in GB!

    • Eurydice says:

      The BM make money off of the bullying of H&M, and they’ll accept the RF’s questionable practices and bullying against themselves as long as there’s something to be gotten in return. But maybe the BM aren’t getting the returns they want anymore. Something has changed.

  21. Mary Pester says:

    OMG I so hope the judge in Harry’s court case reads this and has a serious rethink on where he said “Harry couldn’t prove there was an invisible contract between the Palace and the press, Harry didn’t need to prove it, because the retired head of sky news has just done it for him! And could someone explain why, when I read” the Royal horse lost! “, I immediately thought of bullyam in the US, 😂👑🐴, because once again Charlie BACKED the wrong horse

  22. Ace says:

    I think it’s funny how this guy is talking now about it, after he’s retired, while he worked for years as Sky News director and didn’t say a word about the BRF behaviour. Maybe if he had, he could have pushed against it? But no, he followed their rules and now he’s out of the business is cashing in with these “revelations”.

    This is why the whole of the BM is garbage.

  23. Wild Bill says:

    Yawn. When this guy was in a position to demand change he bended his knee for 17 years.

  24. QuiteContrary says:

    Camilla was going for jaunty in that hat, but ending up looking jaundiced.

    Ryley is right, of course, about the supine British media. They seem to lack any sense of journalistic ethics when it comes to the royals.

  25. Well Wisher says:

    If the former Sky News boss, Mr. Ryley, received everything he desired, would this item be available to public via his speech??
    The media called in favours regarding Harry & Meghan, they were rewarded with her leaving and then the other side decide to call the shots, in lieu of a viable, soluble tit-for-tat as protection.
    The situation as described ensued….
    Too bad, sh*t happens….

    This is not a morality tale, there are no good guys, only people seeking to increase and protect their territories…

    For the buying public – Carpe Diem!

  26. smee says:

    About effing time.

    That hat looks good on her, which isn’t that easy to do.

  27. MSTJ says:

    There you go UK. What a vision to behold. Your Tampon King and his former mistress, now wife. Hip hip hip – Hooray!!! How comical they look – two corrupt, colluding mafia bosses. 😞

    As for the Sky boss, after profiting nicely from within the system, he waits until after he’s pushed out to talk and ask others to do fix the problem. Coward looking to be recognized as a hero. What a disgrace. Nothing he says is surprising. He couldn’t stay and fix the system from within yet people like him wanted Meghan, an American wife of the spare to endure abuse and somehow fix the monarchy from within. They sit in their elite ivory towers and pass judgement on ordinary people using their media propaganda. They can all bug off with their monarchy and classist system, and the arrogance that led to their Brexit decision.

  28. JEB says:

    Ok, one nice thing-I like Camilla’s suit, it looks nice on her-just ditch the hat.

    And as an American I just want to say-this is exactly the relationship Trump and the GOP wants with our media. Trump won’t even show up to debates and can’t speak coherently-if he gets elected it will be control and censorship of the media for sure. So wake up USA and vote or this is what you’ll end up with, along with a host of other awful things.

    Glad to see the U.K. media taking baby steps to expose this b.s.

  29. Cel2495 says:

    Christ! They both look awful! Eww, charles teeth and tongue! Repulsive. Are we surprised ? We should not be.. these people are the worst. I hope they keep exposing them for the fraud that they are!

  30. KC says:

    I think this is very good news because Prince Harry’s attorney can probably get a warrant for information on WhatsApp between the royal family and the media as well as the racist police officers about his case. If he found out that King Charles was secretly communicating this way since 2017, there’s no telling how long communication from the royal households have been doing this and what type of communication has been exchanged between these three parties.

  31. Lily says:

    I watched a documentary on Queen Victoria. Even she was a spoiled brat.

    I despair. Even if the royals stepped down there still are too many spoiled rich kids running around. I really think society isn’t going to grow up any time soon.

    No wonder the aliens don’t want us to know about them. They probably fly past this planet holding their noses.