Last week, the Telegraph published a column by Joanna Rossiter called “A Rare Misstep for the Duchess of Cambridge?” I read it on the Telegraph’s site before it was deleted hours later, and nitpicky doesn’t even begin to describe the column. Like, y’all know that I’m critical of Kate. I love to make keen jokes and button jokes and all of that. But the Telegraph column was, frankly, insulting and ridiculous. The premise of the piece was that Kate was too political because she “co-authored” a CNN op-ed with Dr. Jill Biden about child development and the early years. That CNN piece was pretty vague and apolitical, and it was clearly the product of Kensington Palace staffers working with Dr. Biden’s staffers to create something soft-focus for both women to put their names on as part of their joint event during the G7 Summit. Rossiter’s premise was:
“However important the cause, she is in danger of falling into the same trap as the Sussexes; she has risked aligning herself too closely with a sitting political party. It’s impossible to imagine Kate penning this sort of article with the likes of, say, Melania Trump. Her decision to do so is a tacit endorsement of the Bidens.”
Rossiter completely missed the fact that Kate would never have “co-authored” the CNN piece or done the joint event with Dr. Biden unless she was requested to by the government and likely by Buckingham Palace as well. As I noted in my coverage of the G7 summit (June 11-13), it was notable how ALL of the Windsors were being rolled out in service of Boris Johnson’s administration. The red carpet was absolutely rolled out for the Bidens in a way that the Trumps did not get and that was the point, a new post-Trump era in the British-American “special relationship.” It wasn’t that Kate was in danger of becoming too politically aligned with the Bidens, it’s that she, William, Charles, Camilla and the Queen are all being used as pawns by and in service of the Conservative Party.
Still, as Ellie Hall (friend-of-the-blog) noted in Buzzfeed, Rossiter’s piece about Kate was not the first time that Rossiter had been critical of a royal woman’s “politics.” Rossiter also wrote Telegraph pieces about how the Duchess of Sussex supported “all things woke” and was too closely “aligned” with left-wing politics. Those Telegraph columns are still in their archives, never deleted. So why did Rossiter’s piece get deleted? The Telegraph isn’t saying – they refused to comment to Buzzfeed’s requests for clarification but one source at the paper said it was “ludicrous” to suggest that the column was deleted at the request of Kensington Palace. KP also declined to comment.
Of course it’s absolutely possible that the “invisible contract” had been invoked and that the Telegraph got some exclusive in exchange for taking down the Rossiter column. But from where I’m sitting… if I was an editor with the Telegraph, I would have argued for it to be taken down too. It was a seriously stupid column.
Pulled by the Palace? The Telegraph swiftly deleted a mildly critical op-ed about the Duchess of Cambridge today—just hours after it was published. The article claimed Kate had compromised her “stringent political neutrality” by writing a joint article for CNN with Dr Jill Biden. pic.twitter.com/LeBbp7Bz5x
— Omid Scobie (@scobie) June 17, 2021
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.
So it was a stupid article -taking the Trumps out of the equation because they were an embarrassment and I don’t blame anyone for avoiding them – but when Kate met with the Obamas, was that an endorsement? When Harry and Michelle Obama promoted the IG, was that Harry endorsing the Obamas? When royals met members of the Bush family, were they endorsing them?
It’s diplomacy and government relations etc. It’s part of what the royals are supposed to do – engage with world leaders in that kind of soft diplomacy.
So yes, it was stupid. But interesting that it got pulled so fast while equally stupid articles about Meghan are still up.
Curious it got written in the first place.
yeah, the ‘criticism’ of the article was dumb as hell.
first, like, what is it exactly that royals are allowed to do that isn’t deemed political or controversial? the fact that royals don’t seem to do anything at all substantive in society is a major reason why their support among young brits is dwindling. early years (or whatever it is) isn’t controversial, and neither is speaking out against racism, for example.
second, meghan’s name keeps popping up in articles that have nothing to do with her, and it’s seriously infuriating at this point. it’s also pretty transparent – like, will people not read the thing if meghan and/or harry aren’t mentioned? everything by the british media seems to be framed as a cautionary tale or a ‘take that’ against the sussexes. ffs.
third, i do think the palace had a hand in getting this taken down since it came out right as kate was unveiling her project. the more shit like this happens, honestly, the more i really resent kate. the coddling of one duchess and her mediocrity vis-à-vis the routine demonisation of another duchess for daring to be her intelligent ambitious self is gnashing.
“first, like, what is it exactly that royals are allowed to do that isn’t deemed political or controversial?”
Nothing. Open hospitals and smile at babies. No heavy lifting required.
Oh apart form the queen, she gets to influence the laws of our country.
The article may have been stupid, but that’s not a reason to pull it. Outside of potential defamation, writing a critical opinion that is unfair is something the media are allowed to do.
If I was a resident of the UK I would be concerned that the media is so easily controlled when the royals don’t like something.
@Nic it is VERY concerning. This article is stupid like I said but we all know that’s not what it was taken down – someone at KP made a phone call. And that’s disturbing. We saw it with Tatler, we saw it with the string of articles two years ago about the “rural rivals” and how some parts were edited out, etc. And of course the media blackout re: William. Those incidents dont speak to a free press.
Excellent points. So much for freedom of the press…where the royals are concerned.
Stupidity has never been the reason they pull or ask for retractions of stories. They simply won’t allow William or Kate to be presented in a negative light, yet they will allow the press to print the most ludicrous lies about others to deflect or cover up their own “missteps” It’s disgusting that they pull this relatively mild ( and I agree, dumb) criticism when Meghan was/is accused of basically causing global warming with a plane ride and an avocado. It’s just another example of their hypocrisy and I am glad that it’s now getting called out, noticed and reported on.
There is so much to criticize Katie Keen for, valid criticism that *should* be shared by journalists, but this piece wasn’t great, and the fact that it was pulled..yiiiiiiikes. I wonder how many “Kate is saving the monarchy!” pieces will be will getting soon to make up for it?
Exactly! It’s the kind of narrative that literally helps no one. We can nitpick Kate all day long but I’m with her here. Can you imagine having your boss tell you to do to do a fluff project, only to be told afterwards that your “decision” to get involved in the project put the entire company at risk?
Imagine being a world leader (or world leader-adjacent) and being told how baffling it is that you have thoughts on….politics. No wonder Kate is so saccharine and vague; god forbid she tell us her favorite color and potentially restart the Crusades!!! Thank goodness we can substitute progressive thinking with buttons.
If the article isn’t defamatory then there was no reason for it to be removed the way it was. Plenty of unfair and unjust opinions are published all the time and for KP to have this article pulled is the sign of country that does not have freedom of speech. (I know the UK doesn’t have a written constitution, but they do pretend that they are a democracy and so this article falls within the purview of legitimate media opinion).
Removing the article was wrong, especially as it was done in such a secretive way. This isn’t the first time William has forced the media to keep silent about things and it is a very dangerous precedent to set.
I wonder what Dr. Biden is thinking in that last pic while Kate is talking to her. Dr. Biden’s facial expression leads to believe that I would love for those cartoon bubbles to pop over their heads with her thoughts.
Well Kate never puts a foot wrong you see, not even her pinky toe. So can’t have anything “negative” overshadowing the launch of her Big Buttons Center now can we?
This. I’m not buying the idea the Telegraph pulled it willingly because they saw, only after the fact, that it may have been a stupid article.
A Twitter commenter noted that Dr. Biden was in the UK as First Lady of the US, not representing the Democratic Party. The palace should have made that clarification instead of pulling the article. But this is the standard MO when keen buttons is criticized.
I would hope they deleted the article because it was inane. I also think the Palace tried to make a statement by having Kate do something substantial with Jill, while avoiding her even being in a photograph in the vicinity of Nagini or Melania. That was the point. No reason why the same step couldn’t have been taken with Melania’s “Be Best” nonsense except that they wanted nothing to do with the Trumps other than going through the motions.
but if they deleted it due to an editorial decision that it was ridiculous and should never have been published, they shouldn’t hesitate to say as much
To clarify, I think it was an editorial decision after they got one or more complaints. Because the article was inane, it is easy to delete.
No level of inanity is beyond the Telegraph. They’re coasting on their previous reputation as a legitimate broadsheet newspaper, but long since have become a seriously unhinged propaganda rag.
I read this article and wondered what the author thinks it’s actually ok for members of the royal family to do because frankly everything is political. If co-authoring an op-ed with the wife of a foreign politician is political, surely doing an event with her is too? And considering the fact that ‘early years’-related issues are a hot political issue in the UK at the moment (child poverty, the government refusing to pay for food for starving children until a footballer shamed them into it, numerous reports that have shown how the pandemic has negatively affected young children’s education, vocabulary, development etc., the government’s childcare voucher scheme being useless and so on), how is Kate ‘allowed’ to do early years at all? How were the trio ‘allowed’ to do anything related to mental health when, once again, the terrible state of mental health services in the UK is down to chronic underfunding by the government? How is Camilla ‘allowed’ to do sexual assault stuff when rape charges and convictions are at an all time low and the justice system needs a complete overhaul?
The only way the royals can avoid being political is to say literally nothing, see literally no one, and if that’s the case, what is the point of them?
Exactly. Well said.
There is no point to them.
Imho, pulling this article once again highlights the differing treatment of the press for the 2 duchesses. So thrilled that the Sussex’s left Salty AF Isle.
Well, you have to get rid of the evidence in order to neither complain nor explain, I guess.
Yeah I thought it was a bit of a nitpicky article. As for the removal, maybe the Telegraph realised it was dumb and they removed it or it was removed because Kate was set to reveal her “centre” and didn’t want this article on their website.
I have no sympathy what so ever in regards to what is written about kate the great. If that article was written about meghan it still would be running, and on more papers than the telegraph. Frankly I don’t care, about mean girl kate. Sorry and no harm no foul to those who do.
Talking about her passion project with an expert in education and visiting head of state is ‘too political’ but showing up maskless to be photographed at a murder victim’s vigil and then ducking out before the police rock up is praise-worthy. Fine.
Why bother writing a several hundred word article when The Telegraph could just run ‘WE DON’T SUPPORT WOMEN’ in big bold letters on one page and call it a day?
Right, the scheduled pap stroll with private photog and videographer wasn’t ‘political’, when other women were arrested for showing up to the same vigil? Kate using another woman’s death for her own PR isn’t considered ‘political’?
I will never not be angry at that, both that Kate did it and that the press let her slide. And what has she said about women’s safety since then? Nothing, as far as I know.
And that The Met let her slide, because ‘she was working, it was official’ and that’s why they didn’t arrest her. All while KP was saying it was a private visit that just happened to be caught by her press team. Anyone else, like the other women at the event, would have been arrested.
If it was a lousy article, it wouldn’t have been published to start. Someone up the chain would have re-read it, edited it, and sent it up the chain for approval.
It was approved, published, then it was pulled hours later.
That’s what I think. Columnists can’t just post articles to the website without approval from someone and so this was deemed acceptable initially. And then KP complained and it was removed within hours.
Dumb opinions get published all the time and often it generates clicks for the paper’s website so they don’t care if it is a bad opinion. Removing this article only showed that someone at KP is scanning the media and making calls very quickly.
Nah, I think KP made a call to the Telegraph.
Of course they did.
They may have pulled the article, but screenshots last forever. Also, I’m amazed that The Telegraph allowed the article to be published in the first place. Surely an editor must have read this before it was published? It’s was an absolutely ridiculous article, but of course, it got pulled, but articles about the Duchess of Sussex by this same unhinged woman are still up on the Telegraph site.
The issue I think it’s the clearly preferential treatment the Bidens got and the Trumps didn’t get.
Also the fact that the same type of article with Meghan is still up, it’s suspicious.
sorry, but what is happening to Catherine face, it looks like the left side of her face is folding in the first pic. anyways Meghan was getting blasted left and right with fake stories and nothing was done. this proves it. what Catherine did was not fake it was in real time she co sign this. and the courtiers pulled it cause of political issues.
The smoking and the running are aging her rapidly and she looks like melting wax when she’s not smiling (manically).
Was an article about Meghan ever pulled for being inane? If the answer is no, that’s the issue.
Exactly. How many ridiculous and down right racist, misogynistic and hateful articles have been published and not removed about Meghan? People justifying this are perpetuating the idea that Kate, the white future Queen, should be protected at all costs.
If I see a Telegraph story flagged up, I go over to their site to read it, but of course it’s subscribe only to access the full article. I do this about once a week. Every time I think, shall I pay to read these articles, and then decide, no thanks, I can do without spending money on their hatred.
I love you Brits in here of course, but I’m really starting to think a vast swath of them are fricking morons. The royals and media ones particular.
Kate wouldn’t have written an education op-ed with Melania like she did Dr. Biden, because Dr. Biden’s a TEACHER you fools.
I can’t even with these people.
This.
Kate could have ‘written’ an op-ed with Trump Trophy Wife #Infinity regarding internet bullying. W&K insist they are anti-cyberbullying, they’ve said so for years, and that was one of That Woman’s ‘projects’. The courtiers chose not to make that happen, but the US president and Dr. wife who openly like Harry? KP has to do something about that.
because they are busy trying to be Meghan and Harry
The funny part is that Kate and Melania have far more in common than either would have with Dr. Jill Biden, a woman with a PhD and decades of experience in education. The other two basically made their life goal to marry a rich man so of course they wouldn’t write an article together because which one of them would have the capacity to actually do any work?
It is political that the Cambridges hid away from the Trumps when they did the state visit, but made sure they were seen with the Biden’s so that they could ride the coattails of a popular couple. As future head of state and consort, they won’t be able to pick and choose which leaders they have to meet but they made themselves scarce and forced people like Sophie to deal with them.
The Royal Family are the biggest celebrities, they are worst than the Hollywood they pretend to hate
Quite. The most ridiculous thing about the story is that the air headed Kate could be a co author of anything to with a woman who has a PhD in education, let alone anything relating to education!
Quite. The most ridiculous thing about the story is that the air headed Kate could be a co author of anything with a woman who has a PhD in education, let alone anything relating to education!
There is so much to unpack here! First, the glaring difference between the media’s treatment of Meghan and Kate.
Second, it was political! CNN is the most liberal leaning network. Quite a choice for an op-ed, considering its authors. Maybe this was on Jill’s request? There are way more neutral forums they could have chosen. That was sending a message.
Third, is the actual op-ed itself. Kate certainly toed the line here, but less so than in previous vague actions on the topic of early childhood. I’m not so sure she is being used as a pawn, in service to conservatives. Early Childhood is not on their radar. Perhaps to build a bridge to the administration, but on early childhood specifically? And CNN? I guess we’re looking at the big picture.
Fourth is their obvious copy-catting. There is a noticeable difference in W&K’s choices since M&H came along and left the fold. They know they must relate to a younger, hipper, and socially aware audience. They can’t skirt around the issues of our time, as they previously got away with.
I’m sure if KP had the article taken down, they did so indirectly.
It was a dumb af article for sure, but what really bothers me is that it wasn’t removed for being dumb, it was removed because KP can not even have 1 slightly salty article written bout keen, not one. Imaging if this was all Meghan had to put up with. People love to praise keen, but she couldn’t even handle one thing that wasn’t even that bad written about her. She wouldn’t last one day in meghans shoes, not even one day.
It is highly suspicious that articles mildly criticizing the Duchess of Cambridge are corrected (Tatler article) or completely removed, while new articles trashing the Duchess of Sussex appear almost daily. What does this say about the British Press, Royal Family and British Society? The answer is deeply disturbing.
William’s autocratic tendancies, and his control of a free press, are extremely concerning.
They constantly nitpick Meghan so when you do it to one duchess you have to do it to the other (theoretically speaking). Difference is Kate gets protected at all costs because she’s white. Don’t get me started if Meghan was monoracial or darker skinned. When you’re a WOC they just don’t want you to exist.
I was surprised to learn that Dr. Jill and KM co ed an article. Main reason been one is and intellectual and the other is not (no trash here). tbh, I have not read the article but wonder if its possible that the article was published too rapidly or without authorization? And Ms. Biden asked it to be removed for been not up to her standard of quality. It was removed a few hour after its publication.