Why Do Royal Weddings Get So Much Attention?

[Jack21222]

How arrogant can you get.

Don't underestimate me.

 

[cristo]

It's also estimated that 2.5 billion watched Diana's funeral.

Exactly, and that was in 1997; live internet streaming has advanced hugely since then.

 

[JaredJames]

Exactly, and that was in 1997; live internet streaming has advanced hugely since then.

I was actually surprised it was streamed live on YouTube.

 

[Jack21222]

http://foreign.peacefmonline.com/news/201007/65135.php

If that's true, it's a very good reason to keep them around.

And why is the information in that article a good reason to keep them around? The royal family made all of that money by exploiting 3rd world countries through colonization, and instead of giving that money back, they keep it and blow large amounts of it on a wedding.

If that's not the very definition of evil (robbing from the poor and spending it on yourself), then I don't know what is.

 

[JaredJames]

And why is the information in that article a good reason to keep them around? The royal family made all of that money by exploiting 3rd world countries through colonization, and instead of giving that money back, they keep it and blow large amounts of it on a wedding.

If that's not the very definition of evil (robbing from the poor and spending it on yourself), then I don't know what is.

A minute a go the complaint was about tax payers footing the bill, now it's a shame they paid it themselves (they didn't, but an odd complaint indeed).

Yes, the Queen was involved in all of that.

If we're going to blame the queen for that, we should blame the descendants of plantation owners strung up for what their relatives did. All non-sense.

My point about keeping it around is that it's a nice cash reserve to have associated with the country, even if the country doesn't own it.

 

[qspeechc]

I'm HIGHLY skeptical of that number. You're saying a solid 29% of the world's population watched this? According to http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/med_tel-media-televisions which cites the 2003 CIA factbook, you're claiming that more people watched this ceremony THAN TELEVISIONS THAT EXISTED IN THE ENTIRE WORLD a few years ago.

You know it's quite easy to google "wedding two billion" as I did? One of the results you get is this one:

http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/862021-the-royal-wedding-2011-the-biggest-tv-audience-in-history

As you will note, Princess Diana's funeral in 1997 had 2.5 billion viewers, and take into account that the world population was smaller and even fewer people had television sets in those days.

 

[Jack21222]

A minute a go the complaint was about tax payers footing the bill, now it's a shame they paid it themselves (they didn't, but an odd complaint indeed).

Yes, the Queen was involved in all of that.

I haven't read the entire thread. It's WORSE that the taxpayers are paying for it, in my opinion. If the royal family is as ridiculously wealthy as your source claims, why should they rob from the citizens to shower themselves with MORE riches? The solution is not to waste money on frivolities.

When so many people are struggling around the world, the solution isn't to rub it in our faces. I'm surprised you Brits are taking this lying down. When Marie Antionette said "if they can't afford bread, let them eat cake," the French people at least had the common decency to behead her.

My point about keeping it around is that it's a nice cash reserve to have associated with the country, even if the country doesn't own it.

Confiscate the nice cash reserve and kick the queen to the curb.

 

[xxChrisxx]

Confiscate the nice cash reserve and kick the queen to the curb.

No.

So there.

 

[lisab]

Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

 

[JaredJames]

I haven't read the entire thread. It's WORSE that the taxpayers are paying for it, in my opinion. If the royal family is as ridiculously wealthy as your source claims, why should they rob from the citizens to shower themselves with MORE riches? The solution is not to waste money on frivolities.

Something interesting I just found, it seems the queen and charles are footing the bill for the wedding, the tax payers are paying for transport and security.

http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/how-much-did-royal-wedding-cost-royal-wedding-expenses-2782157.html

I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but they bring huge amounts of tourism to the country. It's like throwing out Disney.

You might want to look up how taxes work, it isn't theft. You're just throwing utter non-sense around now making up straw men.

When so many people are struggling around the world, the solution isn't to rub it in our faces. I'm surprised you Brits are taking this lying down. When Marie Antionette said "if they can't afford bread, let them eat cake," the French people at least had the common decency to behead her.

Did she really say that? (Not as far as anyone knows.)

Who's rubbing anything in your faces? You don't have to watch, it's only because people want to that they are broadcasting it. That's like saying "with all the poor in the world, HP shouldn't rub their computers in our faces". Supply and demand.

 

[JaredJames]

Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

And they had etiquette lessons.

 

[Evo]

Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

Some needed to be told what a hat is.

http://royalwedding.yahoo.com/photos/sets/1087/Best-hats-of-the-royal-wedding-guests.html

 

[cobalt124]

...it's for the British to decide, and most of the British public are in favour of keeping them...The British royal family is a part of British culture, it's a part of Britain. Take away the royal family and

you take away a very large part of British history and culture.

Too right.

...Prince William looked so much like his mother, in his reserved and shy looks.

He has the Windsor features though

As a comparison, the World Cup Final was estimated to have only 700 million viewers. The claim is that THREE TIMES as many people worldwide watched some stupid wedding than the world's most popular sport's championship game.

Yes, if not more.

When Marie Antionette said "if they can't afford bread, let them eat cake," the French people at least had the common decency to behead her. Confiscate the nice cash reserve and kick the queen to the curb.

It's different, and No!

Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

And in the opinion of a mere man, how to choose one! (Evo beat me to it)

 

[Evo]

I heard that the middletons are paying $100,000 of the costs, the Royals the balance, and tax payers transportation and security.

At least Kate had a beautiful, elegant dress. That fiasco Diana wore was the ugliest wedding dress I've ever seen. I was shocked and disappointed when I saw the thing, I was expecting something elegant, instead it was a gawdy creation of huge poofs on her arms and a tacky neckline.

 

[drizzle]

I heard that the middletons are paying $100,000 of the costs, the Royals the balance, and tax payers transportation and security.

At least Kate had a beautiful, elegant dress. That fiasco Diana wore was the ugliest wedding dress I've ever seen. I was shocked and disappointed when I saw the thing, I was expecting something elegant, instead it was a gawdy creation of huge poofs on her arms and a tacky neckline.

So true, but that lady's beauty and shy looks wasn't letting anyone to take their eyes of off her.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I don't think it's easy to calculate viewership based on the number of television sets in the world. For instance, we have 2 televisions sets and there are 3 people living here. This complicates matters. But you're still not done. QEII didn't watch it on TV so you have to subtract 1, but Kate and William brought a small portable and watched most of it before he turned it to the cricket game so you have to add 2. Anyway, in order to make a stab at a scientific number, I surveyed the members of my household, a typical family and then extrapolated to the population of the world. It turns out that nobody saw the wedding.

 

[Alfi]

Congratulations to them both, and best wishes to them.



lol

I surveyed the members of my household, a typical family and then extrapolated to the population of the world. It turns out that nobody saw the wedding.

In my survey, 100% watched :)

 

[elabed haidar]

its just a wedding why the big fuss?

 

[Shaun_W]

God this royal wedding crap reminds me how backward we are in Britain compared to many other parts of the developed world. Yanks and other foreigners might have been watching in large numbers, but they sure as hell weren't going "hey look, this Britain place looks like a really good example of a modern democratic country". It's all a bit of a novelty to them.

 

[JaredJames]

God this royal wedding crap reminds me how backward we are in Britain compared to many other parts of the developed world. Yanks and other foreigners might have been watching in large numbers, but they sure as hell weren't going "hey look, this Britain place looks like a really good example of a modern democratic country".

What you mean by the fact we removed any power they had and replaced it with what has been one of the worlds best governments, all whilst not having to resort to wiping them out in some way? Yep, stinks of bad example...

It's all a bit of a novelty to them.

And it wasn't to us?

 

[nucleargirl]

I want a fairytale wedding... I want a prince! and ride in a carriage... and a pretty dress... sooo jealous...
And William has such a regal nose! its probably the best looking nose I have ever seen!

 

[AlephZero]

Some of the guests needed remedial lessons on how to wear a hat.

The essential characteristic of the British upper class is that you behave at all times as if nobody except oneself exists. Therefore, the concept of "lessons" is meaningless, since by definition teachers do not exist.

Miss Manners is only for the peasants.

 

[AlephZero]

Luck isn't really needed ths time, and William and Kate actually want to get married.

So did Charles and Di. The only problem was that they got married to each other.

 

[Lacy33]

The essential characteristic of the British upper class is that you behave at all times as if nobody except oneself exists. Therefore, the concept of "lessons" is meaningless, since by definition teachers do not exist.

Miss Manners is only for the peasants.

LOL! Well said!

 

[AlephZero]

Even though his father, the King of Yugoslavia, passed away, the Crown Prince can't ascend to the throne because the Yugoslavia he's Crown Prince of ceased to exist 4 months after he was born. But he doesn't lose his Crown Princehood just because his kingdom no longer exists.

But given the political (in)stability of Eastern Europe, it's quite possible he will get a chance before he's too old to care either way.

Whatever, I'm farily convinced that the law of conservation of nonsense is just as fundamental to the way the universe works as conservation of energy. So by the same sort of argument that predicts the existence of the Higgs Boson, there must also be a "nonsensical" equivalent to black holes. That would explain the stable existence of things like crown princes of nonexistent countries quite neatly. (It might also explain things like the Tea Party, if a mini-nonsenical-hole starts to grow...)

 

[Alfi]

its just a wedding why the big fuss?

Well ... your wedding and my wedding is 'just a wedding' ...but this one ..IS a BIG deal.
An election for another President in the United States ...big deal .. it's just an election.




I'm SO glad no a$$hole group made it a problem for the happy well wishers.

 

[Lacy33]

So did Charles and Di. The only problem was that they got married to each other.

Exsqueeze me! Di was the real deal AND she was a wergin... echem. And she loved :!) Charles in her little girl way.

 

[Shaun_W]

What you mean by the fact we removed any power they had and replaced it with what has been one of the worlds best governments, all whilst not having to resort to wiping them out in some way? Yep, stinks of bad example...

The queen is still the head of state. We had a massive ceremony today to celebrate the marriage of someone who will probably be the next head of state solely due to bloodline. A lot of fuss was made that one of the partners in marriage is a "commoner".

Now I don't think that they should be killed or any harm committed towards them but I think that we should do away will all of this nonsense and become a republic.

And it wasn't to us?

A hell of a lot of people in Britain take this stuff very seriously.

 

[gb7nash]

I just can't get over the woman who quit her job to fly out to Great Britain for this. I don't think she was even invited to the wedding either.

 

[JaredJames]

The queen is still the head of state. We had a massive ceremony today to celebrate the marriage of someone who will probably be the next head of state solely due to bloodline. A lot of fuss was made that one of the partners in marriage is a "commoner".

Now I don't think that they should be killed or any harm committed towards them but I think that we should do away will all of this nonsense and become a republic.

They do no harm and bring in a lot of tourism. Do away with them and you lose a lot.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost

The UK has little going for it so far as tourism goes, they are one of the major attractions.

Besides, they still have no power. It's all ceremony and ritual.

A hell of a lot of people in Britain take this stuff very seriously.

Doesn't change the fact it's a novelty event. If it happened often, it wouldn't get anywhere near the attention.

The fact one of them was a commoner really is something new and a major novelty.

 

[Alfi]

Doesn't change the fact it's a novelty event. If it happened often, it wouldn't get anywhere near the attention.

The Royal wedding ... reduced to a 'novelty event'.

Without actually knowing ... just let me guess ... JaredJames is an American.

I'll let him back up his 'fact' in any way he can.

 

[lisab]

The Royal wedding ... reduced to a 'novelty event'.

Without actually knowing ... just let me guess ... JaredJames is an American.

No, Jared isn't American.

 

[Alfi]

No, Jared isn't American.

I'm surprised. Perhaps my prejudice is showing. My apologies.

 

[Shaun_W]

They do no harm and bring in a lot of tourism. Do away with them and you lose a lot.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/29/royal-wedding-tourism-boost

The UK has little going for it so far as tourism goes, they are one of the major attractions.

Besides, they still have no power. It's all ceremony and ritual.

I didn't say that they should have their wealth and assets stripped from them. I would like them to be divorced from the state so that we have an elected head of state, and that they no longer receive taxpayer money. They can keep everything they own. They could whore themselves out for tourism. Hell, I don't even mind paying for them if it brings in revenue. As long as we are a republic.

Doesn't change the fact it's a novelty event. If it happened often, it wouldn't get anywhere near the attention.

The fact one of them was a commoner really is something new and a major novelty.

I know. It is why many (rightly) consider us ... less socially advanced than other countries. Class is a pervading issue throughout Britain and was brought to the forefront today again.

 

[lisab]

I'm surprised. Perhaps my prejudice is showing. My apologies.

...but I'm sure he was using "novelty" to mean "rarity".

 

[JaredJames]

The Royal wedding ... reduced to a 'novelty event'.

Without actually knowing ... just let me guess ... JaredJames is an American.

I'll let him back up his 'fact' in any way he can.

I'm Welsh.

Check the definition of 'novelty' in a dictionary.

These are one off events that don't occur often. It's something of a novelty for the British public to celebrate this.

 

[JaredJames]

...but I'm sure he was using "novelty" to mean "rarity".

Correct, a 'one off' or particularly rare event.

My gran has been around nearly 80 years and has witnessed three big marriages like this (Queen, Charles and now William).

Hard to consider it anything else.

Aside from the Jubilee next year, we rarely, if ever celebrate anything about them.

 

[nucleargirl]

I'm Welsh.

aww JNJ, I commend your efforts to stick up for old Blighty.

 

[JaredJames]

aww JNJ, I commend your efforts to stick up for old Blighty.

I actually have something of a dislike for the royals and a class system such as we have.

 

[Lacy33]

I'm Welsh.

Check the definition of 'novelty' in a dictionary.

These are one off events that don't occur often. It's something of a novelty for the British public to celebrate this.

Here! Here! To the Welsh :!) And just a spot more Champaign please... {hic}

 

[JaredJames]

I didn't say that they should have their wealth and assets stripped from them.

I don't think I did either?

I would like them to be divorced from the state so that we have an elected head of state, and that they no longer receive taxpayer money. They can keep everything they own. They could whore themselves out for tourism. Hell, I don't even mind paying for them if it brings in revenue. As long as we are a republic.

That's exactly how we operate now, I don't see how such a sweeping change would change anything.

They have no power, they exist for ceremony. They are our "show piece" if you like.

 

[Lacy33]

At least now we know for sure she in not a wergin. {hic}

 

[Alfi]

I'm Canadian. bty

It was a nice Wedding. As Large as it should have been.
Glad they shared it with us. World wide.

the crowds roared as they kissed ...twice.

Well done ... Very well done.
Best wishes to you both.

 

[JaredJames]

At least now we know for sure she in not a wergin. {hic}

Kate?

Think we knew that a while back...

I remember a few years back there was a news report of William returning from somewhere (army related or something) and it was the first time they'd seen each other in ages. They both entered a small room (I think it was a bathroom), spent a good few minutes in there and then left together.

 

[Shaun_W]

I don't think I did either?

You suggested it when you said that we'd lose "the lot" if we were to do away with them. I do not see why tourism revenues would be wiped out or even go down slightly should we switch to having an elected head of state.

That's exactly how we operate now, I don't see how such a sweeping change would change anything.

They have no power, they exist for ceremony. They are our "show piece" if you like.

They have power - the queen is, after all, the head of state, and the prime minister has to kiss her hand. This is from the Guardian:

What powers does the Queen have?
The Queen has the right to rule: the people of Britain are not citizens, but subjects of the monarch. Most public servants must swear an oath of loyalty, or make an affirmation of their loyalty, to the crown.

Although the Queen is politically neutral, she has the right to be consulted and to "advise and warn" ministers. Otherwise her residual powers - the "royal prerogative" - are mostly exercised through the government of the day. These include the power to enact legislation, to award honours (on the advice of the prime minister), to sign treaties and to declare war.

But royal prerogative is the subject of controversy, because it confers on governments the power to make major decisions without recourse to parliament. When Edward Heath brought Britain into the EEC in 1972, parliament was not consulted until afterwards. Similarly, Margaret Thatcher used royal prerogative to go to war in the Falklands in 1982.

The Queen has two individual powers that could cause a political crisis if they were ever exercised. She may refuse a government's request to dissolve parliament and call an election, if she believes a government can legitimately be formed. She also has the right to choose the prime minister: a formality in the case of a clear majority, but potentially controversial after an inconclusive general election. This almost happened in February 1974, when Labour failed to win an overall majority but the Conservatives considered power-sharing with the Liberals.

I'd simply like for us to become a republic.

 

[Lacy33]

Kate?

Think we knew that a while back...

I remember a few years back there was a news report of William returning from somewhere (army related or something) and it was the first time they'd seen each other in ages. They both entered a small room (I think it was a bathroom), spent a good few minutes in there and then left together.

Well i know for sure nothing happened in there. Where would one go to make oneself more comfortable. I'm sure it was just a long hug and plans to commit to one another for the future. Today!
But just in case her sister wore white today along with the little flower girls to fluff over any question of who should be wearing white.

 

[cristo]

There was an interesting statistic that Nicholas Witchell (royal correspondent for the BBC) mentioned on the news today, that 80% of the British public are in favour of the royal family. This should put in perspective the (few) shouts for a "republic". This is the one thing that sets us apart from the other western countries: no other country could put on a spectacle like that. I, for one, do not want to join the herd!

 

[JaredJames]

Exactly, Britain is one of the few places that have a functioning democracy and a monarchy in such beautiful equilibrium.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Shaun, don't forget Her Majesty is also Queen of Australia, and her representative, the Governor-General did exercise these prerogatives in 1975 when he dissolved parliament and sacked the Prime Minister. So there is precedent.

 

[CheckMate]

Exactly, Britain is one of the few places that have a functioning democracy and a monarchy in such beautiful equilibrium.

That's weird, I thought monarchy was the anti-democracy and that democracy was the anti-monarchy.