Media, Monarchy and Money

Media, Monarchy and Money

Episode 140

Introduction

This podcast will take a closer look (well as much as one can in a podcast without the gates of media hellscape opening wide and letting the clowns run free for a while) at the symbiotic relationships at play here, between media, the Monarchy and the Establishment.  The following bullet points generally cover the discussion in this podcast.  The list is as follows:-

Deep dive into certain areas:-

• • Explore how the media has historically shaped public perceptions of monarchy, from royal scandals to carefully crafted public images.
  • Highlight key moments where media coverage either bolstered or undermined the monarchy.
  • Analyse the quid-pro-quo relationship: exclusive access to royal stories in exchange for positive portrayals.
  • Investigate how tabloids sensationalize monarchy-related content to boost sales.
  • Discuss how media conglomerates balance profit motives with potential pushback from royal PR teams.
  • Outline the monarchy’s financial sources (e.g., Sovereign Grant, private estates, and tax exemptions).
  • Investigate allegations of misuse of funds or unethical financial dealings.
  • Discuss the limits of royal influence over global media outlets.
  • Examine how financial incentives and advertising revenue influence media portrayal of the monarchy.
  • Discuss the economic ties between the monarchy, establishment, and key media figures.
  • Explore how financial and political elites protect the monarchy as a stabilizing symbol of tradition.
  • Highlight any evidence of collaboration between the establishment and media to shape public narratives.
  • Analyze the ethical implications of the monarchy’s wealth juxtaposed against issues like poverty and inequality.

Framework for Discussion “Media, Monarchy, and Money”

1. Media’s Role: Influence, Dependency, and Agenda-Setting

• Historical Context:
  • We should all really explore how the media has historically shaped public perceptions of monarchy, from royal scandals to carefully crafted public images.
    • There is plenty of evidence out there.  One of the easiest ways to find evidence is to look at who or what has been in the news frequently over any given period? Ie days or weeks.  That generally means that the media is asking the public to look in a particular direction or event or person by using emotive headlines designed to increase anger and which will generate engagement for days.  The result is that the public forget or don’t even look at something else that may have been reported and instead look at the metaphorical fire that was started a few days ago and is still burning ferociously. You can look back anywhere in the UK Monarchy 1000+ history, and find out about who or what was the distraction story of the that period in history.  Once you see it, you will recognise it throughout history.  The Whipping Boy phenomenon became the framework for distraction away from what the ‘important’ folk in the Monarchy were involved in, and who had to be protected at all costs.  Many of the people over those centuries were women.  Here we are now in 2024, turning back the clock and creating mayhem whilst planning equally terrible things that the general population are ignoring and will realise the full impact when it becomes inscribed into the legal framework.
  • Highlight key moments where media coverage either bolstered or undermined the monarchy.
    • You don’t have to look far, and to give a modern day distraction target, just think of Harry or Meghan or both as a couple – used for distraction stories, and targets who make more money for the media anyway, than the person or people in the BRF who they do not want the public to criticise.
    • Another target is slowly coming into the glare of the media at the moment, but that is more to protect others, whilst at the same time, trying to appear as if they are protecting someone else.  In reality it is only a matter of time, before that person will be considered officially collateral damage.  Once the next heir is in post, just watch how the targets will contain new people. The news outlet who has been blamed for stating that one senior Royal did in fact receive treatment for cancer, and not “pre canerous cells” as was reported recent weeks, is now saying that they made a mistake, and that the individual did indeed have cancer. The decreasing numbers of Royalists who still support this entity is reducing in numbers anyway, and within that small group, there are some of the once loyal followers openly stating on social media platforms that they no longer believe that story.  This crabs in a bucket behaviour should not be coming from any national organisation, and definitely not from publicly funded individuals.  The constantly changing storyline has done it no favours, and the public relations team/s behind it all, appear to be like everyone involved in this game.  All the players behave and utter words that keep them in employment or keep them looking good, when the reality is far from the official line, and most people in the country don’t believe it.  The reason is carries on as long as it does is because people have day to day issues that they have to navigate, and for now, they can afford to put the badly behaved rich people on a back for burner – for now.  That stance will change.
• Symbiosis with Monarchy:
  • Analyze the quid-pro-quo relationship: exclusive access to royal stories in exchange for positive portrayals.
  • Investigate how tabloids sensationalize monarchy-related content to boost sales.
    • It is all about follow the money – that is what media, monarchy and the establishment are focussed on.
• Conflict and Criticism:
  • Examine instances where the media has acted against the monarchy (e.g., critical documentaries, exposés).
    • The Channel 4 documentary is a case in point, and most of know that this is just the tip of the iceberg.  As a starter, there is no doubt in my mind that UK media have known this for decades, not least because the practice of owning land, has been going on for centuries by those who decided to take it, and the original owners of such land were left with nothing, but to be in the control of the monarchy and the establishment.
    • There will be other news outlets who will take the risk of doing similar media projects like this in the future, and as the temperature grows in terms of having a Republic, more of these type of media publications will emerge.  Those who have kept quiet over the decades, do so, because they could not put food on their table without voluntary locking the ball and chain attached to their ankles around the British Royal Family members.  Every now and then, they try and pretend that that they will unlock the ball and chain and reveal something that the BRF would rather not be aired in public.  Done as a warning sign.  The special relationship is fragile and one day it will break completely, and most of those involved will not be in the public eye beyond that time.  The odd media person may find employment, but none will be revered or feared from that point on, and most wont secure employment, as they have proved over decades that they possess no ethics and they do not report ethically, and they too follow the money.  The relationship between the BRF and the Royal Rota I suspect is one where they neither likes the other, but they protect each other enough to ensure that their bubble remains. The Establishment also feels the same, and stays protecting and defending both, because it maintains stability of an institution and a way of life that they have enjoyed on the back of a figurehead family who are regarded like the Partridge family but who in reality are nearer to the community of people who befriended the Kray twins.
  • Discuss how media conglomerates balance profit motives with potential pushback from royal PR teams.
    • They don’t worry about pushback.  All are drinking from the same trough for survival.

2. The Monarchy: Wealth, Power, and Public Perception

• Money Trails:
  • Outline the monarchy’s financial sources (e.g., Sovereign Grant, private estates, and tax exemptions).
    • No matter what name they give the financial account, the fact remains that every two years the Monarchy expenditure is assessed, and it either remains the same or it is increased.  The fact that there are less working Royals on the payroll of the Sovereign grant, but don’t be confused about that, as there are plenty of other funds used, and to this day, the number of people living on public funds has not reduced, and none of them are interested in funding a life outside of the Royal protective bubble.  Officially the Senior Royals have reduced in number, but yet the family have been given a £45m increase in funds, and since the last Queen died, none of those senior Royals has been able to tick as many boxes, officially known as Royal working engagements, (nothing more than a photo opp anyway) has even tried to pretend that do even a quarter of those totals in the last two years since the Queen passed.  The reality is that the UK public pay for a smaller total of Senior Royals, who are not even pretending to do the same few engagements previously, and the family have received a £45m increase in funds.  Make it make sense.
    • Receiving income from the estates that they inherited from historical Royals who stole land from vulnerable people, have continued the practice of entitlement with no care or concern about the mental or financial health of the people who have the misfortune to rent property from them.
    • No other person in the UK has the novelty of choice as to whether or not they pay tax.  The BRF voluntarily pay tax when they feel like, and the amount they pay is never publicised.  I use the analogy of crumbs being wiped off a dining table to the floor, and the hungry people in the vicinity are allowed to go and grapple for scraps once the Royals have finished eating and drinking and walk away from the table. We the population of the UK are meant to feel grateful.
  • Investigate allegations of misuse of funds or unethical financial dealings.
    • There is zero point in me talking about this as this is something that has gone for centuries, and to date, even when it has been done in full site, and photos exist where there is zero doubt about the transactions and the mode of delivery, because the Monarch is exempt from the law.  In fact none of the Royal family have ever been punished for any crime; my feeling on that is that they all know too much about the others, and therefore minor or serious crime will go unpunished, and as all the legal entities are part of the Establishment, none of us expect to see any change.
• Cultural Symbolism vs. Modern Realities:
  • Debate whether the monarchy’s cultural significance justifies its cost.
    • My personal opinion is that no modern society needs to have a monarchy.  Its culture is right wing, despite them officially stating they are not political.  It is not even hidden now, and the most recent example is the 8 year campaign of the treatment of the only POC to enter that UK Royal family, and the abuse that has reigned down on her since, and the fact that 8 years later it is still continuing, tells most rational people all we need to know.  To this day the BRF do not realise the amount of self inflicted damage that they have done for the Monarchy because of its treatment of a non white person into their family and the fact that they have continued to try and destroy their family member because she dared to be more competent and qualified and experienced than all the BRF combined.  The world has seen and continues to watch as the UK continues to destroy itself since 2016, and they the Monarchy will never come back from that treatment.  It will ultimately end up in the legal process, and there is no doubt in my mind, that the people who will carry the can for the this collapse  of the House of Cards will be those in the media – televised and printed.  They will finally realise that the in the chain of things, media personnel are cannon fodder.
  • Explore public opinion on the monarchy’s relevance in the 21st century.
    • Approx a quarter of the population are Royalists.  Most of them mirror the age of the senior Royals.  Nature on its own will level the playing field, but before then, the other 75% will have had enough and things will change.  The majority of Monarchies that were formed are no longer with us.  The few that remain will all disappear from view eventually.  The UK Monarchy will not be one of the last ones standing.
• Control of Narrative:
  • Analyze how the monarchy uses media to maintain its mystique and suppress dissenting narratives.
    • That old playbook is wearing thin now.
  • Discuss the limits of royal influence over global media outlets.
    • That influence is reducing slowly, not least because they have witnessed the treatment of people of colour, including the Commonwealth, and those nations now, have a changing view of the UK as a whole, and it is not going to improve.

3. Money: The Driving Force Behind Influence and Control

• Funding Media Influence:
  • Examine how financial incentives and advertising revenue influence media portrayal of the monarchy.
    • Always follow the money.
  • Discuss the economic ties between the monarchy, establishment, and key media figures.
    • The timespan is reducing.  When the Establishment includes wider social groups, from every societal tier, the Monarchy and media will fall.  If you look at the history of France and its Monarchy, the Establishment was initially made up aristocracy and legal and police etc.  Once people from all the societal group, eg working class, middle class etc including the Clergy, things changed very fast.  The clock is ticking on the UK and its protection pals in the top tier of society.
• The Role of the Establishment:
  • Explore how financial and political elites protect the monarchy as a stabilizing symbol of tradition.
    • That is already on a weak foundation.  See my comments on France history in this podcast and in one podcast where I devoted it to comparison between France and the UK and the similarities.
  • Highlight any evidence of collaboration between the establishment and media to shape public narratives.
    • Every single article in every single UK newspaper, particular the tabloids, provide an abundance of evidence.
• Impact on Broader Society:
  • Discuss how public money is spent on the monarchy and the resulting societal tensions.
    • It is obscene and offensive.
  • Analyze the ethical implications of the monarchy’s wealth juxtaposed against issues like poverty and inequality.
    • Beyond offensive.

Key Themes for Exploration

1. Mutual Dependency:
   How media profits from the monarchy while the monarchy relies on favorable press to sustain its image.
2. Power Imbalance:
   The monarchy and establishment have disproportionate control over the media, limiting freedom of expression.
3. Tensions Beneath the Surface:
   Delve into why the monarchy, media, and establishment may not genuinely trust or like one another, despite public-facing cooperation.

Conclusion

1. Historical Impact of Media on Public Perceptions of Monarchy:

– Media has played a pivotal role in shaping the public image of the monarchy, often oscillating between reverence and skepticism. Royal scandals, such as those involving King Edward VIII’s abdication or Princess Diana’s relationship with the royal family, have been sensationalized, altering public perception. Conversely, meticulously crafted public images, like those of Queen Elizabeth II, are often aimed at projecting stability and dignity.

2. Key Moments of Media Influence:

– Moments such as Princess Diana’s interview with the BBC’s Panorama in 1995, which highlighted issues like infidelity and mental health, significantly undermined the monarchy’s image. On the other hand, events like royal weddings and jubilees are usually media spectacles that bolster the monarchy’s standing by emphasizing tradition and continuity.

3. Quid-Pro-Quo Relationship:

– The relationship between the media and the monarchy can be symbiotic, where media outlets gain exclusive access to royal content in exchange for positive portrayals. This mutually beneficial setup helps the monarchy maintain a favorable public image while media outlets gain lucrative content.

4. Tabloid Sensationalism:

– Tabloids often sensationalize stories about the monarchy to increase sales. This can involve exaggerating trivial issues or focusing on personal aspects of royal lives, often leading to a distorted public image but heightened public interest and circulation numbers.

5. Balancing Profit and Royal Relationships:

– Media conglomerates may face dilemmas when balancing profit motives with potential royal pushback. Positive or neutral coverage can protect ongoing access to royal stories, while overt criticism may jeopardize these journalistic advantages.

6. Monarchy’s Financial Sources:

– The monarchy’s finances come from various sources: the Sovereign Grant (a government-allocated fund), income from private estates like the Duchy of Lancaster, and certain tax exemptions. These various streams contribute to the monarchy’s wealth, supporting its public endeavors and private expenditures.

7. Financial Allegations:

– Allegations regarding misuse of funds or unethical financial dealings occasionally surface, often scrutinized by both the media and the public. Investigations officially focus on transparency and accountability in how royal funds are utilized.

8. Limits of Royal Influence on Global Media:

– The monarchy’s influence over global media is limited, with various international perspectives often free from domestic diplomatic considerations. However, royal visits and international duties can shape foreign media portrayals and in recent times those visits just put additional nails into the coffin.  Crowds are openly making their feeling very loudly known – both in the UK and abroad.  The Royals look distinctly uncomfortable, as they are only used to deference from the public.  It is a different era now and it is only going to get worse.

9. Media Influence through Financial Incentives:

– Financial motivations, such as advertising revenue linked to royal coverage, can sway media portrayal. Positive depictions may attract more advertisers seeking to capitalize on royal popularity.

10. Economic Ties with Media and the Establishment:

– There are long-standing economic connections between the monarchy, establishment figures, and media conglomerates. These relationships may foster a more protective media sphere around the monarchy, emphasizing stability and tradition.

11. Protection by Elites:

– Financial and political elites may support the monarchy to maintain socio-political stability and uphold traditional values seen as crucial to national identity, thereby influencing media narratives.

12. Collaboration to Shape Narratives:

– Though specific evidence of collusion is often hard to substantiate, there can

be informal or formal collaboration between the establishment and media to sway public opinion in favor of the monarchy, particularly during times of crisis or when promoting a patriotic image.

13. Ethical Implications of Monarchy’s Wealth:

– The vast wealth of the monarchy, when juxtaposed against societal issues like poverty and inequality, raises ethical questions. Discussions often focus on the role of the monarchy in modern society and whether the privileges and financial perks they enjoy are justified in the context of broader socio-economic challenges.

These points outline how deeply integrated the media has been in shaping not only the public perception of the monarchy but also its overall role and sustainability in the modern age. Each of these aspects demonstrates the complex interplay between media, the monarchy, and public sentiment.

Ivy Barrow

171124

Reference Sources

A few books for you to explore these issues further if you ever feel the need to look a bit deeper into certain topics.