Before Christmas, we heard the gossip that Princess Beatrice had quietly set the date for her wedding to Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi. It still hasn’t been announced, as of yet, but we should be hearing something official soon, and the gossip is that the wedding will be in early June. We’ve been hearing for months that Beatrice wouldn’t be “allowed” to have a splashy, fancy wedding like her sister or her cousins. Which seems unfair, but also… smart, because Beatrice’s father is a rapist who used her as an alibi. But here’s something I wasn’t expecting: the media won’t show any kind of live coverage of the wedding?
The BBC will not be showing full live coverage of Princess Beatrice’s royal wedding, it was revealed today. ITV also refused to say whether it will televise the marriage – with royal experts suggesting that after the Prince Andrew controversy it could even be held privately. The BBC said it will not offer extended live footage and will instead offer ‘news coverage of the wedding across our services’, rather than a live link replacing normal programming.
Princess Eugenie’s wedding to Jack Brooksbank was broadcast by ITV in 2018 and pulled in three million viewers. Princess Beatrice will marry Italian property developer Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi later this year. Buckingham Palace has yet to confirm the wedding date and venue but it is expected to be in late May or early June so it does not clash with Royal Ascot. ITV refused to comment on the coverage for Beatrice’s nuptials ‘until our teams are fully back in place next week’, according to The Mirror.
St George’s Chapel in Windsor has been tipped for the ceremony. Under normal circumstances, the national broadcaster is offered the rights to a royal occasion for free. However, the BBC’s controversial Newsnight interview with Prince Andrew over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal may have affected its decision.
My opinion: this defeats the whole purpose of *having* a royal family. The majority of people only really pay attention to royals for the fashion and for the pomp of weddings and big national events. Having a “blood princess” marry in relative privacy might make people wonder what they’re paying for, you know? That being said, I feel like all of this is suspiciously worded, like the BBC and ITV are being blamed for not offering full coverage, when really it’s the royal family saying that there won’t be a live television feed. Or maybe the media and royals are in agreement that no one should waste the effort on Beatrice. Which, again, is sad.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Avalon Red.
Maybe the royal family will live stream the event?
Poor Bea…. she literally keeps getting the short end of the stack and sadly it’s always down to her parents. Sadder still soon the honour of letting her down will go to Edo.
I feel like she’s being punished for her shitty father
Woman takes the hit again
I am think a low key wedding is for the best.
Oh, it totally defeats the pupose. Good. We don’t need these spoiled brats anymore. All they do is waste money, commit foul crimes, and stop on brown and poor people.
I certainly hope the BRF is behind this. I love seeing these idiots shoot themselves in the foot.
If Bea really wants press she can have some photographing the arrivals but that’s it.
Yorks get some publicity and people get to talk about the fashions. Win win
There was no real reason for ITV to broadcast Eugenie’s wedding. Most people don’t know the difference between her and her sister and only because Andy and Sarah placed some pressure did any of this happen this way. Eugenie’s wedding should have been on the same level as Zara, another non working royal who is a granddaughter of the Queen. Now with the public knowing without question that Andy is simply a horrible person, things are awkward for Beatrice, but her marriage isn’t that important to most people. This was always about Andy’s ego and his power has been cut off, at least in the real world.
I agree with you and with @Elizabeth at Comment 7 below. A private wedding a la Zara with some arrival pics would be completely appropriate and not at all a punishment. It only feels like a punishment because of what Andrew and Fergie insisted on for Eugenie.
A private wedding like Zara’s makes sense. Somewhere easy to secure, like the church at Sandringham. Have a small, quick wedding over this holiday to ensure her grandparents can attend. Follow it up with a splashy wedding party weekend outside the UK in a few months.
I’m afraid that this is one of those situations where no matter what they do, they’re going to look bad to someone. I feel for Beatrice, but if Andrew hadn’t forced a big public wedding for Eugenie, a private wedding wouldn’t feel like such punishment in this case.
You’re right, what exactly are people paying for? They pay for the Royals lifestyle, they’ll still have to pay extra for the wedding and security and yet probably won’t get to see much of it… not that anyone is probably all that interested anyway. They all want the money and they all want to live privately whilst doing as little work as possible. The Royals are an epic waste of tax payers funds.
Wouldn’t it be terrible if when faced with a choice, we keep the Royals and lose the NHS?
I only watched Eugenie’s wedding to see Harry and Meghan and didn’t enjoy it at all. Music choices weren’t great and I never cared much for the York’s anyway. I certainly wouldn’t watch Bea’s wedding because I can’t stomach her parents anymore.
I just don’t see a big ratings draw for this, there isn’t an interesting narrative. With William you had the first big royal wedding in forever and he’s the future king. With Harry, he was marrying an American with a lot of celebrity friends. There just isn’t much of a story here other than her father being a pedophile. If I remember correctly the big story lines, which weren’t really that big, at her sister’s wedding were that she wore the tiara that Meghan supposedly wanted and her dress designed to show her surgery scar. It probably doesn’t make sense for stations to broadcast if there is no story.
Would not be surprised if LifeTime Channel in the USA broadcast the wedding as this is right up their viewers alley in terms of content choice. LifeTime Channel broadcast Eugenie’s wedding in the USA and I do not think any other network did.
Tiny violin.
So, so tiny.
A violin so small it would fit in Lizzo’s tiny purse!
The BBC refused to air Eugenie’s wedding simply because they didn’t think people would watch. ITV probably feels that way about Bea’s wedding because Eugenie’s didn’t do as well as they hoped. It’s not the crown’s decision. If that was true, Eugenie’s wedding would have been on the BBC. Bea and Eugenie are on the same level as Zara and Peter. The wedding won’t be tax payer funded other than security. That’s why Peter did a deal with Hello for his wedding and Zara’s was so low-key. Andrew’s self importance is the only reason these girls are being treated differently. Only working Royals should get fancy public weddings.
I’m of two minds – it is sort of the job to show off and what not, but there is no way that Pedo isnt going to walk her down the aisle so I can see why the networks wouldn’t want to broadcast and if the RF had any sense they would’nt want it broadcast either. Do they really want Savannah Guthrie and the rest of the morning talk show hosts of the world talking about the scandal as the Queen arrives? Beatrice gets the short end of the stick but at least she isn’t getting dragged through the mud on international television – she’s also marrying a normal or what passes for for normal in their set.
No one is bothered quite honestly. Most people I know have had about enough of all of them. I haven’t seen a royal wedding since Andrew married Fergie and that was only because my mother wanted to rant about what what an awful woman she is. I used to want the lot of them to s*d off after TQ dies but after the way she has dealt with Andrew I’d rather she had the rug pulled from under her too.
Everyone says most people in Britain don’t care about the royals. I’m sure out of the people that do care only 0.001% give a shit about Bea. I wouldn’t consider this a loss for the British public. They’ll sale the pics to the highest bidder and we’ll all still get to pic apart the fashion.
A release of official photos to news outlets after the event, with possible video and photo updates to the royal family instagram account would suffice. These people bore me.
Could anyone clarify for me the difference between Zara and the York girls? Basically what is the difference between being without title and being a non-working royal with a title of princess. Does it mean Zara has to curtesy to Eugenie? Does it mean better living quarters for Beatrice? Basically I would like to understand why Andy would have insisted his daughters hold the title but Anne decided not to have titles.
Essentially no difference. None of them get taxpayer-paid security or housing. Curtseys are based on line of succession to the throne, and Zara is lower-down than Beatrice and Eugenie. The Queen throws in the occasional twist whenever she re-writes the Order of Precedence, but mostly based on place in the line of succession vs. married-ins who have no status unless they are with their royal spouse.
Anne cannot pass titles because they don’t pass through a female line. Her husband declined a title, so their kids have no titles. When Eugenie and Beatrice were born, the assumption was they would be working royals. That was the working plan until they were in their mid-teens and things changed. By the time Edward and Sophie had their kids, they knew their kids wouldn’t be working royals plus Edward chose to receive a lower title at marriage.
I was going to say, when @Nota gets her she’ll have more information and detail, lol.
and Vice versa Becks1!
@ NOTA & BECKS 1–truly love the both of you 💕💋💕
So, the York girls were entitled to the titles of Princess as they are grandchildren of the male line of the monarch. Its not so much that Andrew insisted as much as it was part of their “birthright.” Even if Anne’s first husband had accepted a title, her kids would have only been lord/lady (I think – like Princess Margaret’s children were lord/lady.)
In terms of the practical difference – there shouldn’t be any. I think the big difference is that Zara and Peter knew their whole lives they weren’t going to be working royals, and B&E thought they would be. Also, I think Anne is a lot more low-key than Andrew in some ways so she didn’t insist her kids have these huge weddings that were televised etc. I think Peter’s wedding was pretty big and it was in Hello! but not televised and not a public event etc.
B&E do outrank Peter and Zara but I don’t think any of the younger royals curtesy to each other. Technically Kate, without William, has to curtsey to the York princesses, but I wonder if she has ever actually done so, lol.
They’re just saying it won’t be broadcast live pre-empting regular programming. It still may be filmed and shown as its own special.
Filming the wedding and showing it after-the-fact as a two hour special sounds exactly like something LifeTime Channel would do.
What is it about celebs, aristos and other monied people who walk out of events with thousands of dollars worth of luxury things for free. No wonder they never have to spend money.
That teal dress from Harry and Meghan’s wedding was one of her best formal looks. My only quibble, I’d prefer soft bell sleeves not pulled in at the wrist.
While I don’t think covering Bea’s wedding is a good idea simply because it would be splashing the pedophile all over the media, I’m not sure I agree with the ideology that we are entitled to some coverage because “what else are ‘we’ paying for?!” That’s a slippery slope and I think meghan and Harry have gotten the worst of that thought process. I do agree though that weddings are part of the royal draw – from the guest list to the fascinators! It’s a tricky situation to be in for sure.
Maybe she should make a deal with a streaming service or foreign network, sell the rights and make it a behind the scenes documentary style. People will be curious even with the Andrew scandal.
Not sure why the general public would really care if Beatrice doesn’t have a gigantic expensive wedding. Or feel like they didn’t get their money’s worth. There was a general lack of viewers for Eugenie’s televised wedding as compared to Harry’s. The Yorks should, at minimum, lie low right now out of decency and respect for the insane scandal their fate her has caused. Not everything is about a couple of spoiled princesses. At maximum obviously Andrew would be in jail.
Poor Bea. I remember someone writing some gushy article at her birth about how fortuitous and auspicious the date was, like she was going to have this fabulously blessed life.
Well, she’s not exactly enjoying that sort of life is she? Just one complication after another.
Nah, she’s enjoying a fabulous life.
Yeah, her life is actually pretty much a doddle honestly. I can’t shed tears for the heartbreak of possibly not having live network TV coverage of her wedding.
She should just be grateful she found someone that wanted to marry her.
Oh snap!
If even true, I’m sure the royal family would find a way to broadcast the wedding, if the couple didnt mind. But It was obvious from the get go the ceremonial wedding was going to be a bit different , and couple may have wanted more privacy. They didn’t do a interview or send out enegagements cards to the public, and not much info is known. Perhaps a ‘smaller’ scale wedding,( hard to imagine what a small scale wedding that would be considering her network of friends/family and connections she has.)I’m sure the couple would want things more private due to obvious reasons and of course Wolfe, Edo seems very protective of him. (his son) as well. I can totally imagine them having a glamourous party in another country though.
Ooh! Doesnt the Mozz’s family have some amazing Italian properties? A wedding somewhere amazing in Italy, with delicious Italian food! I’d be so down for that! I’m just a peasant though, (shrugs)
No surprise there! I wonder if the bookies are taking bets about if this will go ahead?!! Edo has alot to lose than gain in this partnership so I wouldn’t be suprised if they postpone it with the excuse of the Queen or Philip being ill🙄
I don’t think people want to see this part of the RF though. Not for a while at least. I think seeing Andrew at Beatrice’s wedding will, rightfully, be seen as him trying to snake his way back into the public opinion, and no one wants to risk that. I think it’s better for all of them to just go away, sight unseen. Beatrice isn’t a working member of the RF, and neither is Andrew, for the moment. So why should they be able to have a public wedding? A huge component of the publicity is the expectation that the public will fete them in return for the spectacle. No one seems to be keen on doing that for anyone here. Eugenie didn’t need a public wedding either. Just my two cents.