Should Newspapers Print Pictures Of The Queen Giving Nazis Salute?

[Gromit]

Some down market newspapers today have printed photographs of the Queen, aged 7 years old, practising the Nazi salute, in the gardens of Buckingham Palace.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/11748024/Buckingham-Palace-disappointed-at-1933-footage-released-by-The-Sun.html

Is there a public interest justification for printing the pictures?

Or is it disrespectful to her majesty?

[Gromit]

Svejk,

Strange that you nor AOG are able to condemn the publishing of these photos. Don't know why.

[Svejk]

Gromit Svejk,

/// Just because I have some sympathy with the plight of the Palestinian people, does not mean I support Hamas or Fatah.///

Cop out. Say you're against them. (So I can bookmark it for future reference)
Anyway, I was talking about left wing people in general. And I didn't say they were your friends, I asked were they.

[Gromit]

The Daily Mail has now changed the headline because therre has been a backlash. . It now has a go at the sun.

// 'The Sun has sunk to a new low': British public reacts with fury after tabloid publishes 80-year-old pictures of the seven-year-old Queen and the Queen Mother being taught a Nazi salute //

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3165923/Pictured-Queen-taught-NAZI-SALUTE-Edward-VIII-secret-1933-film-Balmoral.html#ixzz3gFfKTnAm

[Svejk]

Once again, I refer you to AOG's post@9:35.
He's got your number and so have I.

[Retrochic]

https://wirralleaks.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/hanbags.jpg

[Svejk]

It gets worse;
https://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/2285/453/original.jpg

[SirOracle]

As someone who among other things is a republican,I am thoroughly enjoying every moment of this expose.(sorry no can do acutes ).

[stuey]

I don't understand why Buckingham Palace even responded to this: it's part of history; it happened; it was 1933; she was a child of seven; they were playing childish games on the lawn; nobody knew what would come to pass. If the photo was in a history book would it have caused this much furor. Obviously, the newspaper is trying to make mileage and sales out of this; but, that's what they do. Why don't we find out where that lawn is and strew stuffed toys, flowers, and hand-written notes saying how appalled, devastated and disgusted we are after, how many years, after the heinous event?

[Hypognosis]

@stuey

I said most of that at the end of page three of this thread
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1432961-3.html


I am curious about the fact that, of all the archive material which the Royals has "unveiled" to the public, over the years - often when their popularity has sagged a bit, such as post-Diana investigation - this little piece of footage never came to light.

I mean: it's nothing, a "non-story", after all. A minor detail, easily explainable by reference to historical context. What possible harm could have come from releasing this, in the 70s?

Was it actively suppressed, is what I am getting at. That is more significant than what is actually going on in the film: the fact that we were *not told* and not even trusted to behave in adult ways when faced with it.

[waterboatman]

No. She was a child and it bears no relevance whatsoever. just a rotten underhand bit of 'sensationalism' in it's worst form.

[anotheoldgit]

stuey

/// I don't understand why Buckingham Palace even responded to this: ///

Would you have not respondered, if you suddenly saw a piece of your families private film footage suddenly plastered across the front page of a National Newspaper, without your permission?

[-Talbot-]

A proper... 3 wise monkeys thread.

[DTCwordfan]

The Telegraph has it that the Palace is considering legal action - I would also have the police investigating who stole the film in the first instance, never mind the Sun handling stolen goods.

[TWR]

Crp Paper, crp Journalism, looking to sell more crp papers just like they did with the Hillsborough Tragedy.

[SirOracle]

I would be interested in what would be the reactions of you defenders of royalty, had these pictures been published in the early 1940s,when thousands of British and Commonwealth lives were being lost.

Don't think that even you would be too happy.

[venator]

The Sun headline "THEIR ROYAL HEILNESSES" (their caps) is obviously meant to appeal to Sun readers.

Nobody with a reading age over 12 would fall for this sort of low innuendo.

[stuey]

AOG, that's an excellent point which, obviously, I overlooked. I guess I was concentrating, if I may use that word, upon my utter bewilderment concerning the furor over there about what a seven year old child did in 1933.

[Retrochic]

Thing is these days we, the 'general public' are 'outraged', 'devastated', 'panic-ridden' (choose your adjective) whether we want to be or not . Pathetic journalism which unfortunately panders to the lowest denominator. It like the "he pinched my bum and called me 'darling' 30 years ago and that's why I'm now a lonely old women who can't keep a relationship -I need compensation" brigade.

[retrocop]

DTCwordfan @ 0954

//I would also have the police investigating who stole the film in the first instance//

Oh the irony of that from you.
Given the nature of the salute depicted I would of thought you would want another of you favourite organisations to investigate.!!