It is a very tired and vindictive practice. It is particularly indulged in by lazy elements in the media. It is caricature journalism. It is usually directed at members of our Royal Family.
The first step is to try to paint the target as a caricature. In Prince Philip’s case, this has centred on taking obvious examples of humour received as that and categorising these as “gaffes.” In Prince Charles’ case it is to suggest he is “potty”.
{youtube}IpMPMtEiD3E{/youtube}
The caricature used is thus of someone who is claimed to be "gaffe-prone” or not all there.
In relation to Prince Philip the technique is to ask someone what the Prince just said, usually a witty comment and then beat this up as the latest "shock gaffe".
I expect that a computer programme will soon be developed to do this.
…..republican royal watchers…
Some of these “journalists” are, as one openly describes himself, “ republican royal watchers”. Behind the veneer of their caricatures lurks an agenda, to remove the Crown from our crowned republics.
The purpose is malevolent; it is unremitting. It is to increase the power and role of the class of which they are an integral part in some politicians’ republic.
The unfortunate result of caricature journalism is that even fair and experienced journalists find it difficult to ignore something which has been artificially manufactured as newsworthy. This contrived capture of the news is something which serious journalists should consider carefully.
Should they be mere tools in the hands of people who abuse the privileges which the media enjoy for the most important reasons? Worse, should they give oxygen to the political agenda behind the lies and exaggerations these politician journalists indulge in?
The two princes are of course more substantial people than these caricatures. But some journalists never let the truth get in the way of a headline. The public is beginning to see through this robotic campaign. They recognize both for the formidable men they are.
….Highgrove: beautiful and important….
The recent interview Prince Charles gave to Alan Titchmarsh about the gardens he designed and developed at Highgrove is a case in point.
[continued below]
The programme is about an important contribution the Prince has made not only in creating a beautiful, comfortable garden, but more importantly his campaign against the destruction of habitats that took hundreds of years to develop, and his argument that the “chemical agro –industrial approach” is not durable. You may not agree with this approach, but it should be discussed.
The programme is not about two or three witty remarks which support the lazy tired caricature some journalists want to push down the public’s throat.
The BBC's Mr. Tichmarsh begins this fascinating programme by saying he was given an exclusive invitation to visit a country house deep in the heart of the Cotswolds was given an exclusive invitation to visit a country house deep in the heart of the Cotswolds to meet the man who spent the last thirty years creating one of England’s most important contemporary gardens.
Highgrove is an estate of incalculable beauty and purity of purpose, a beacon for all things organic.
It is also the passion project of arguably the best royal gardener in history.
As Bunny Guinness reports in “Highgrove: a garden fit for a Prince of Wales” ( Daily Telegraph 21/9), it is difficult to imagine the Prince of Wales without his gardens.
“If you want to understand more about any person, look at their garden – it so often reflects their personality and ideals.”
“You will see a very relaxed, grounded side to his nature. Like any gardener who has worked a piece of land for a period of time (and the Prince does physically work there), he obviously feels there is a big part of him there.”
This report explains the highly original and organic approach the Prince adopted – well before it became fashionable.