The Cambridges are reluctant ‘to pay top-dollar for experienced staff’

FFN_BARM_Groom_RoyalWedding_042911jpg_7235027

Today is the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s fifth wedding anniversary, so let’s celebrate with some of their wedding photos, since you guys still love talking about her wedding gown. There are already many glowing puff-pieces about Will and Kate’s “five years of cuteness” and “five years of being adorable,” most of which just involve rehashing old photos. But considering how the worm has turned on Will and Kate just in the past few months, I’m expecting some highly critical think-pieces about “the Cambridge Effect” on the monarchy this weekend. Tom Sykes at the Daily Beast has already gotten started, and it’s pretty great. While Sykes takes pains to say that William and Kate would benefit from better communications people – something we’ve heard before, Poor Jason – Sykes also makes it clear that Will and Kate are at the center of their self-created PR nightmare.

The complaints about Kate: The complaints are, dangerously for Kate (and, by extension, William) becoming all-too familiar; Kate is lazy (because she doesn’t do as many personal appearances as former generations of royals have done), Kate is dull (she never does anything that appears to be instinctive or unscripted), Kate is a dowdy, excessively middle-class dresser (the British fashion press are very much over praising Kate’s thrifty recycling, and it can only be a matter of time before one of them wonders aloud how anyone can make a daring label like Alexander McQueen look so much like Hardy Amies).

The Cambridges are trying to cut out the press: The ultimate aim of William and Kate’s youthful team of press handlers appears to be to cut out the papers altogether and communicate directly to the public through social media. All too often, reporters are being briefed about events after they have happened, or after they have been announced on social media by the palace. This pisses reporters off because it makes them look stupid to their editors.

The British papers are going HAM: The Sun and the Express both recently ran extraordinary hatchet jobs on the royal couple following their tour of India. They criticized Kate remorselessly for failing to bring ‘pizazz’ to the tour, criticized Will and Kate for demanding ‘alone time’ (implying that the trip to India was basically a tax-payer funded holiday), and drew unflattering comparisons between Kate’s professionalism and banal interactions with members of the public, especially sick people, and Princess Diana’s emotional impulsiveness…It was the Sun’s royal reporter Emily Andrews who really went for the jugular—revealing that “halfway up that steep hike to the Tiger’s Nest monastery, Kate brought her stylist Natasha Archer, 29, with her to touch up her hair and make-up before facing the cameras. Those “natural pictures” of her looking fresh-faced, despite strenuous exercise, were anything but.” She stuck the knife in by reporting that when Kate was speaking to charity workers helping India’s street kids, “who are mutilated to make money begging, she managed to utter: ‘Gosh, so interesting.’”

William & Kate are not spending money on quality staffers: An unprofessionally handled situation is being made worse by the reluctance of the palace to pay top-dollar for experienced staff. Jason Knauf, the current head of press at Kensington Palace is being paid way, way less than someone should be being paid to do that job. I have been told his salary is in the £60,000 range. And he’s the highest paid of the lot. The other staff are paid as little as £30,000 a year. Tube drivers in London make about the same kind of money as Mr Knauf is making after five years of service.

[From The Daily Beast]

Sykes ends his piece by saying that William is keeping in the royal tradition of “the promise of dishing out a knighthood to attract employees rather than paying key staff properly” and that William and Kate are in desperate need of “some expensive experts.” But I don’t even think that’s the biggest problem. God knows I feel sorry for Poor Jason Knauf (pictured below, while on tour with Prince Harry), but Poor Jason isn’t THE problem. The problem is William. I’m not even going to put this on Kate! William thinks he’s a communications genius. He thinks he can sideline a professional and powerful press machine in Britain. He thinks he can do whatever he wants and no one will dare question him. As for Poor Jason’s salary… that’s more than most people make. The KP press office should be consulting me (and all of us) and paying us as royal PR consultants. First order of business: MOAR WIGLETS.

jason knauf

FFN_BARM_Groom_RoyalWedding_042911jpg_7235266

FFN_BARM_Groom_RoyalWedding_042911jpg_7235031

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet, PCN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

128 Responses to “The Cambridges are reluctant ‘to pay top-dollar for experienced staff’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Palar says:

    Not too many government funded organisations are willing to cough up decent coin to hire the best. Will and Kate are no different.

    • puffinlunde says:

      The Royals never pay top wages for anything. The Queen’s domestic staff at Windsor Castle threatened a strike last year as they earned only just over £14,000 per year.

      • Citresse says:

        14 thousand pounds salary, do they at least have a decent pension?

      • Meadow says:

        The royals always play the old dog eared card of…..’ you can put that have worked for the Queen/Royal Family on your CV, so you will be able to get a high paying job anywhere’.

    • Melly says:

      You would think that they would spend a little extra to get some top PR people. They don’t want to work but they want to be praised, a top level PR person could help them do that. Will and Kate are so cheap in certain areas that matter and spend ridiculously on things that don’t matter (clothes and vacations). With the situation now, where the press is really going after W&K, you’d think their first order of business would be to bring in some experts to help control the situation before it gets any worse.

      • kcarp says:

        What is it called? Penny Wise, Pound Foolish…I had a boss who bought his kids new BMW’s in high school but would freeze left over donuts.

    • Megan says:

      Since they are so keen to break with tradition, I’d say it’s time to be “normal” and bring in the heavy hitters. Having Tom Skye’s editorialize on staff salaries is just plain embarrassing. Maybe Poor Jason has gone rouge and is planting all of these stories

  2. Bettyrose says:

    She brought a stylist on a hike. The article could have stopped there.

    • Sarah(too) says:

      Yep. Seriously. She couldn’t be bothered to make sure her biscuit was covered during a visit to a war memorial, but on a hike, let’s make sure the hair and makeup look perfect! Idiot.

      • SnarkAttack says:

        BettyRose and Sarah – you are both so right. Does that mean that the stylist is responsible for the hideous eyeliner? MOAR WIGLETS, Please and #PoorJason

    • Wren says:

      Thing is, it’s probably not all that odd for someone in her position to do. Especially on a tour where the photographs will be seen worldwide. It’s not like the hike was for exercise, or some kind of private thing where such vanity would indeed be strange. Of course it would be ridiculous for you or me to do that, but we’re not public figures doing a public event where we will be photographed extensively. And what if she hadn’t? The headline would simply be “Sweaty Duchess Red Faced After Hiking” or some such nonsense. She can’t win.

      I think the big change is that we are now (gleefully) told this information. It’s not like her behavior is really out of the ordinary for that kind of eveent, it’s just that there’s so little else to write about. This is how the press will get their revenge.

      • Rachel says:

        But then why agree to go on the much-hyped six hour hike at all? Why not go on a shorter, less strenuous walk with some kind of event at the mid-way or end point, especially if Kate is so self-conscious about her appearance that she’ll drag her hairdresser and stylist up a mountain?

        This said, I don’t believe they hiked for six hours to get to that monastery. Their fussiness with the press and insistence on privacy, not to mention the get-up Kate was in, suggests that they snuck on some donkeys at some point to speed things along and give their legs a rest. That makes hauling the stylist and hairdresser along even worse, in my opinion.

      • HappyMom says:

        I totally agree with you.

      • MrsK says:

        It wasn’t hidden. I think I even mentioned it in comments here at the time. The day of the hike, they published photos of her three assistants – the hair lady, the stylist, and the bag shlepper – as they were setting out. It was pretty obvious they were going to be hiding behind the trees along with whatever other support staff were there while the photographers focused on W&K.

        The Duchess was pictured with and without some kind of scarf or vest, IIRC, but clearly neither she nor the Duke were carrying any tote or backpack. Where did you think those pieces came from or disappeared to in middle of a solitary hike up a mountain? The shlepper hanging out just out of camera range.

      • Amber says:

        But @Rachel & @MrsK , the first round of headlines were about how “sporty Kate” looked perfect and hadn’t even broken a sweat during the hike, remember? They absolutely tried to sell that angle. That’s what made me roll my eyes. I wouldn’t blink if she had been sweaty and tired looking. It would’ve been much better than that ridiculous costume she had on and the super phony pictures.

      • Bettyrose says:

        Wren,
        I get the no win situation, but that’s the problem with having a hyper-controlled image. The lack of authenticity makes it hard to identify with a public figure. I personally love taking pictures after a hike, there’s a healthy glow, a natural setting, and genuine smile from the endorphin release. They’re young and healthy, now is the time to take uncoiffed photos. People will love them for it.

      • LAK says:

        Mrs K: the first round of reporting didn’t mention the glam/support team. The story was OTT praise for Kate looking glamourous, perfect hair, not sweating becauee she was superfit. William was said to be less camera ready, even mentioned he was sweating alittle.

        It was much, MUCH later in the day or possibly day after, by which time many were bored or couldn’t be bothered to re-visit the story, that the glam/ support team/ horses were mentioned and photos/ articles about them were posted..

      • lily says:

        <The point is that since she was going to a hike she wasn' t expected to have perfect hair and make up, she shouldn' t be bothered about her hairstyle. But instead she was. She' s a vapid bimbo

      • SnarkAttack says:

        Why not just pull your hair up? Carry a face towel and hope for the best like we all do – albeit with a selfiestick!

    • Megan says:

      I had to roll my eyes at that. I guess the purpose of king’s horses was to carry all of the beauty gear.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      Concise but correct.

    • Cricket says:

      So the story about Kate needing style sherpas to look camera ready was true? I thought that was a joke. OMG. The jokes really do write themselves with these two. Perhaps if she dressed more appropriately for a six hour trek and didn’t have stage ready make up on, she wouldn’t need a fix up.

      Makes me wonder if the Pipster also has a team when she participates in her athletic endeavors.. or could there be shade in sister land? Pippa competing in all these enduring events and I’ve noticed from the DM photos of her doing them, she seems to be wearing less make up – her eyeliner game has significantly changed.

      • Bridget says:

        No one wears much makeup at endurance events, Pippa included. It gets in your eyes when you sweat

      • Cricket says:

        Bridget.. exactly my point.. if Chutney was going to participate in a 6 hour hike – which we know she has the endurance to do – why on earth wouldn’t she showcase this part of her and pull her hair back, scale back on the make up and be keen to show off her skills? It could have been a great photo op as someone above mentioned how glowing you are after such a great work out. But nope, Waity has to keep to her Bucket character.

  3. jamie says:

    Same shit, different day.

  4. mm says:

    That’s $85,000 in USD so, yes, that’s a very low salary for such a high-profile job in London but Jason probably lives in a Crown Estate grace-and-favor apartment in an enviable London borough (if not KP itself) as well as hanging on to that promise of a future honor and getting his rocks off on being so close and so valuable to “powerful” people.

    • Montréalaise says:

      The salary isn’t bad at all if he does get an apartment to go with it, but if he doesn’t … Housing in London is horrendously expensive.

    • LAK says:

      Only the Monarch’s staff are offered grace and favour accomodation.

      The Royals are famously cheap in terms of the salaries paid to staff. Royal Household is even worse, even with the grace and favour accomodation.

      However, the expense accounts might be similar to BBC / Parliamentary expense accounts.

      • mm says:

        LAK, Charles’s staff etc is also offered grace and favor apartments. Diana thought Sir Michael Peat’s residence at Kensington Palace was grander than her own apartment. The Crown Estate leases them at peppercorn rates deducted from the staff salaries.

      • LAK says:

        MM: Michael Peat was the Queen’s Keeper of the Privy Purse / Treasurer/ Receiver of The Duchy of Lancaster from about 1995 (?) hence the grace and favour flat. He moved to Charles’s office in 2002, so the arrangement was continued.

      • Bettyrose says:

        But you’re not building equity living in a work-sponsored apartment.

    • Sixer says:

      (All the fun posts are happening while I’m on impossible deadlines. Gah).

      Average rent for a (not particularly nice) 1 bedroom flat in (not very) central London is more than £2,000 a month. This is a VERY poor salary for a big job.

    • Liberty says:

      Considering poor Jason’s petite hippity hop background prior to this role, is it a small salary?

      And the “I worked for” factor will probably be worth a lot more to him when he manages to land a next job and write his book or screenplay.

  5. Talie says:

    Daaaaamn….Jason is really underpaid! That is crazy… but on the flipside, I recently saw a job posting for a social media manager at Buckingham Palace and they get 30 vacation days per year. I mean, c’mon! That’s a major perk.

    • Ponytail says:

      Um, no. 25 is the legal minimum I believe (certainly I’ve never, in 30 years, received less) and I get more than 30 in my current role, PLUS Bank Holidays. That 33 is the 25, I think plus the 8 BHs. Not so impressive.

      • cr says:

        For an Americans it’s a major perk.

      • Tina says:

        As Ponytail says, it’s standard in the UK. We are European in some respects.

        Also, it’s not exactly a perk to be promised a knighthood if you’re American. Honorary knighthoods don’t get you tables in restaurants.

      • Starkiller says:

        Tina: do you know him personally? If not, how do you know he wouldn’t consider it an honor? Maybe he doesn’t care about getting tables in restaurants–as hard as it must be for you to believe, some Americans care about things beyond eating!

      • Tina says:

        I didn’t say it wasn’t an honour, I said it wasn’t a perk. I think there may be some transatlantic misunderstanding – it’s a bit of a joke over here that a gong (common slang for knighthood) is only good for getting a table in a restaurant. If you can’t call yourself “Sir” (and with an honorary knighthood, you can’t) it’s not even good for that. Bad joke on my part, I suppose.

      • LAK says:

        Starlight: it’s a joke. Tina wasn’t insulting or even talking about food specifically. We (British people) tend to joke about how pointless a knighthood is.

        In the good old days, it really did get you ahead of a queue especially in restaurants, and now it can’t get you that basic a perk. And if you aren’t a UK citizen, it’s honorary, so even more useless because you can’t go around calling yourself Sir American citizen (as an example).

      • Tina says:

        Thanks LAK, your explanation was much clearer than mine.

    • Sixer says:

      Legal minimum for paid holidays here is 5.6 weeks. They do it like this so it counts for both part and full time workers. Public holidays are included in this, so in effect, the legal minimum is 4 full weeks plus the 8 public holidays (1.6 weeks): New Years Day, Good Friday, Easter Monday, May Day, Whit Monday, Christmas Day, Boxing Day.

      Some people get more. Mr Sixer, for instance, gets 4 weeks to take when he likes, the 8 public holidays, and a further 3 days to be taken between Christmas and New Year, so that the company can shut down from Christmas Eve until the first working day of the New Year. The extended Christmas thing is quite common here.

      • Ponytail says:

        That makes much more sense, the way you explained it ! My job has 25 days’ leave + 8 BHs + 6 ‘closure’ days, when we’re closed at Easter and Christmas. I haven’t had closure days in a job before so I get confused trying to figure what the statutory minimum is.

      • Dara says:

        Sixer, you know it makes grumpy when Europeans talk about (read that as brag) your time off. In the savage land that is the US I get 10 days paid vacation, 2 other days they term “floating holidays” to use when I wish (not sure why they are considered different, probably to do with payroll taxes) and 6 days that are National Holidays (that includes Christmas Day and New Year’s Day). If I want time off around the Christmas holiday, I have to hoard some of my vacation days to use at the end of the year.

        As measly as that amount seems, it’s actually probably the average amount by American standards. Some companies offer little to no paid vacation time – if you want a week off for a summer holiday, it will be unpaid.

      • Solanacaea (Nighty) says:

        In Portugal you get 22 days (excluding weekends), which would be 30 days total, plus the holidays, which are a total of 8 to 10 days…

      • Egla says:

        I work for the government so i have 45 days of paid vacation (if i take Monday to Wednesday of the next week the weekend is counted) plus the official holidays so we have a loot.To add to that IF you get along with your chief you can stay at home with just a phone call.
        The private sector it’s a different matter. It depends on the firm. The only days they can’t force are the official ones and we have a loot. Let me just tell you that we have FOUR official religions and their respective holy days.

      • Cricket says:

        Just to add to Dara’s time off allotment. I’ve worked for companies when you have less than 5 yrs in, that 10 days vacation plus national holidays and 3 sick days. So if you get really sick with something and are out more than 3 days per year, you have to use vacation time or you don’t get paid or you get written up. These aren’t bagging groceries at the local food store jobs, they are ‘white collar’ cubicle jungle jobs. To get more than 10 days vacation, unless you barter for it when you are initially hired, you have to work past 5 yrs and then usually pick up another 5 days.. but again, if you get sick.. you’re screwed.

    • Talie says:

      All I have to say…you all are lucky to have so much time off! It IS impressive! Haha

    • Montréalaise says:

      But what’s the point of getting lots of vacation time if you don’t make enough money to afford vacations? Spending those 30 days just sitting in your apartment because you can’t afford to go anywhere does not sound appealing.

      • Sarah says:

        Travel in Europe is CHEAP! I got return flights from Paris to Stockholm for 30 euros!!!

        I’m living in Vancouver right now and I cant find anywhere to go for less than 300 bux return. Insanity.

      • Emily C. says:

        Sounds appealing to me. Plenty of Americans with ZERO vacation time would love to be able to just sit in their apartments playing video games or whatever for a month.

        Jason’s underpaid, Americans are overworked (and usually underpaid.)

      • Sixer says:

        Because most people aren’t renting in London, Montrealaise. Working Britons can generally afford holidays, you know.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Let me say that I enjoy my time off from work even if I don’t go away on vacation. I enjoy stay-cations and don’t take my time off all at once; not having to go to work is a vacation in itself.

  6. Jade says:

    Royal families and state politicians from first world countries would not have lowly-qualified PR and management staff, even if not the best. I would not blame their staff. The BRF is such an established institution, do you seriously believe staff do not prepare and research vigorously for the royals’ state visits or charity events? No decent hairstylist, make-up artiste or stylist to help you appear professional? You can’t make the helicopter hair chutney horses drink if they don’t want to! Or should it be…you can’t create expectations for the dolittles to attend everything every year! Aiyaiyai.

  7. cr says:

    Cutting out the press is stupid. Learn to use them, like Diana did.

    • Melly says:

      Their life is easier if the press is on their side. I don’t know how they don’t see that! Their was so much good will towards these fools, all they had to do was “work” a couple days a week and give a couple interviews a year to the British press. This isn’t rocket science! =)

      • SnarkAttack says:

        They need to take a page from the Dutch Royal Family (who are BTW way more interesting in all ways – patronages, style and most importantly jewelry. Can anyone picture Kate trying to pull off a Maxima outfit… LMAO…

      • Liberty says:

        Melly — no, it’s not, but it would involve work, and trying to be pleasant with the press people as they provide the interviews. Can that be done by these two? I am not joking — can it be done? Have they the capacity?

    • Montréalaise says:

      Diana learned how useful the press could be even before she got engaged, when she charmed the reporters following her, who all raved in print about how lovely she was and how she was the perfect choice to be the bride of the Prince of Wales (I was around then and I remember it distinctly).

    • msthang says:

      cr, and boy did she!!!!!

  8. Lainey says:

    Harry shares a lot of staff with the Cambridges and there’s nothing wrong with his pr. (Although I wish they’d promote his stuff more) the problem is what will and Kate do or the lack of it in their cases.
    Did anyone see the video Michelle Obama released on Instagram? Can’t wait to see her and Harry together on a couple weeks!

    • Hudson Girl says:

      I just posted about Obama video on Harry thread because his posts need more love (clicks pay the bills 👍)
      I LOVED the video, especially ending. I especially love that the Obamas made no mention of “the Princes” etc. Michelle only addressed it to Harry.

  9. Betti says:

    Typical of public funded bodies – they can’t and won’t pay the going rate for talented and experienced people. You get what you pay for! That’s all i have to say.

    However saying that, there are many media organizations that pull that as well. The big publishers are just as bad.

  10. HH says:

    RE: Kate and Alexander McQueen >>> I was under the impression that Sarah Burton has severely toned down the label. That + Kate comes across dull, but I don’t know if it’s necessarily just Kate.

    RE: Kate/Will not like Diana >>> Can you make someone… interesting? I recall a commenter on here stating they had known someone who met Kate while she and Will were still dating and called her “remarkably unremarkable.” And Will is no Harry (or, hell, not even Charles). I think that they are two incredibly average people who have been given extraordinary positions. They feel like those people you meet and describe as “nice” but you don’t have anything great/bad to say. Those people that just exist in a way which has a net zero effect on life.

    • LAK says:

      Sarah burton stated that she was going to tone it down when she got the job and my goodness has she ever.

      The first couple of years under her tenure, she was still working from his ideas book, and my goodness so many recycled designs from past collections.

      Now it’s all meh.

      Except for the one dress – a strapless gown rendered in silk chiffon, that is re-issued in a different colour every season since 2011, there is nothing interesting about her collections.

      • HH says:

        I see her designs and my god, I mean, I would NEVER have guessed to even be remotely associated with McQueen. His fashion was ART.

      • Amber says:

        McQueen is not what it used to be by a long, long, long shot. I consider the wedding dress itself to be the first shot fired into the sails of Lee’s legacy. Even so, Kate has a special gift to find the most dull and nondescript outfit in a collection, (and then further butchering it with awful tailoring, zero styling, and a lack of presence and posture). I don’t know how she consistently finds a McQueen that looks like a Packham, that looks like Wickstead, that looks like Temperley, and around we go.

      • ArtHistorian says:

        Genius can’t be replicated – there’s no way that the McQueen label could sustain the level of art that Lee McQueen brought to his collections, unless they hire another genius.

      • hmmm says:

        @Amber,

        Speaking of genius, that is genius insight. *All* of her pieces are interchangeable, regardless the designer. I believe a lot of us cannot fathom a personality devoid of any spark, making choices that are consistently uninteresting, listless. I did not know such people existed except in stories.

    • Magnoliarose says:

      Don’t get me started. Her designs are a farce. More like a crime to be honest.

    • SnarkAttack says:

      HH (and LAK?) would you go so far as to call them #LuckySperm. Prime example of lucky sperm can be found if you google Jonathan Kraft (son of Patriots owner)— by virtue of the little swimmers, he’s got the life…

  11. Natalie says:

    So #poorJason for real? Because that is chicken feed.

  12. Montréalaise says:

    Even if they did have the best (and most highly-paid) PR people in the world, I’m not sure it would make a difference. Will and Kate seem to be pig-headed about doing things their way and not listening to advice. Example – if they followed advice, would Kate still be having Marilyn moments?

    • Jade says:

      Exactly. This article only adds on to the pile of excuses for their workload….being new to the role and still learning, being newlyweds, being new parents, being parents to two small children, having HG, too much pressure, lack of privacy, having lost a mother, being the heir, whatever royal work means, needing to rest on off flying days, cyberbullying…now it’s the lack of top staff. Oh wait, add THE WIND. Meanwhile, the rest of the BRF continue to chalk up the numbers.

    • Janis says:

      I agree. This is just another deflection from the Doolittles – throwing their staff under the bus
      to cover for their faults. None of the Royals pay well and they still get on with their work. SMH

      • Melly says:

        When you don’t pay your staff that much money, you really need to be careful about throwing them under the bus! All of a sudden there will be more insider leaks which will only further hurt their image.

    • lily says:

      I agree with you! :) they wat to do their own way that is doing the minimumor even less. What a disgrace these two are

  13. Olenna says:

    Always figured they were cheapskates. And, that dress? The cones say it all for me.

    • Wow, my 14 year old little brother made me laugh, when we were watching the wedding on TV, when he suddenly said, does she have ice cream cones in her chest, mom gave him disgusted look. My, she was in Westminster abbey, and she managed her exhibitionism very well.

  14. LizLemonGotMarried says:

    Poor Jason indeed. Bless his heart is all I have to say…

  15. perplexed says:

    I’m beginning to think they don’t care if they get bad press. Maybe the Queen does if they do, and maybe even Charles does, but I don’t think Kate and Wills do.

    • hmmm says:

      I don’t think they care at all. Like the sugars, they can find an excuse. The biggest one has to be that their fragrant presence anoints the plebs. When you’re a god you are immune to criticism.

  16. LAK says:

    They really don’t understand how to use social media and it’s a shame because if they are going to cut out the UK press, who would be promoting them at no extra cost or effort on their part, their social media game needs to be on point, not just a conduit to make announcements every 3months. Social media is like a bottomless hungry beast that has to be fed daily. You can’t post every 3 months and expect to get any traction. The UK press can be updated every 3 months and theybwill ran stories based on that one briefing for weeks on end.

    • Melly says:

      So very true. If they had a really strong social media game, that would definitely help. I really don’t understand their strategy with the British press. They just had to do a couple interviews a year to keep the press happy and on their side.

    • Green Girl says:

      I’ve seen the Twitter account for Clarence House, and it is a barrage, for a lack of a better word, of pictures, quotes, etc. I doubt very much that Prince Charles is telling his social media person what to post, but I do think he is smart enough to hire someone who knows what they’re doing.

  17. zappy says:

    ugh.. I still remember my local tv station aired this wedding. live!!! and no. my country isnt commonwealth or have any special relation with britain. but the hype .. the royal wedding .. wow.
    one thing I remembered until now. thats the first time I saw those ‘unique’ hats. I didnt know before those kind of hats exist.. no offence :)

  18. The Original Mia says:

    They are trying to use his cheapness as a reason for his poor PR. The old adage “you get what you pay for”. But that’s a load because Jason can only do what William tells him to do. The amateurish PR is a result of the small-minded, shortsighted prince who thinks he’s smarter than everyone else.

  19. Looty says:

    To me, the key is that the press is angry with them. It’s all punishment for that, not sincere criticism. If Will and Kate sucked up to the press they’d be getting glowing reviews even if all other actions were the same. The press, including celebitchy, are nothing but hypocritical vampires sucking these people dry for money. Kate is a young mother and that is a hard job. She has a staff but she has obligations others do not.

    • mandy says:

      How hard a job is it to make 1 or 2 appearances a month when you are a mother- what about all the mothers who work 12 hour shifts like nurses and doctors and do not have a full time nanny and chauffeur and personal trainers and chefs and personal assistants and personal stylists and a secretary when you run nothing- not government policy or charities or even the local PTO – hard job indeed!

      • CarolinaBelle says:

        According to William, working parents are bad parents who neglect their kids…

      • MrsK says:

        Let me just add – even 1-2 appearances a *week* is a part-time job. I appreciate that for someone who takes this seriously, an appearance also involves research in advance and follow-up afterward, so I’d say 1-2 appearances weekly is okay as long as her children aren’t in school.

        It confounds and frustrates me that someone with every opportunity in the world to do good should be avoiding it as she does. If I were a princess, I’d take my favorite causes and make the PR machine work for me so I could make a real difference.

        I’d like to think that if I were a princess, I’d be able to figure out in what areas I could truly help, but even if I just spin the wheel – helping survivors of domestic violence, helping homeless animals, recreating antique varieties of flowers or grains … as long as the concern and the cause are genuine, she would get the willing help of all the resources in the world. Instead she and her equally small-minded husband spend their lives whining.

      • LAK says:

        Further to MrsK: The level of assistance she can access is so much greater and easier to find than a regular person. She could decide to start , as an example, an initiative providing basket weaving to her local mum and babies group and by lunchtime, teachers would have been found and a schedule put together that worked for everyone would be in place!! Not kidding.

        She’s not a regular mum. Something people often overlook in the rudh to find excuses for her behaviour because they can’t accept the reality her actions demonstrate.

    • pleaseicu says:

      Please. There are literally hundreds of millions of young mothers in the world who get on with raising their children, volunteering in their communities, working full time jobs and do so without complaint, without a staff, without flashing their bum and biscuit while working, and without being infantalized and excused from acting like an adult by the press. And they also manage all this without millions of pounds of money from their in laws and vacations to tropical locales whenever they want and without 2 mansions and a helicopter a their disposal. Yes, poor, poor Duchess. She has it so so rough.

      • Janis says:

        I agree and just love it when sarcasm just drips off the screen. Bravo! What you said is so true and wish someone would make her aware of the optics of her very privileged situation, not that she cares. The Doolittles attitude and lack of work insults every taxplayer paying their bills. For shame…..

    • Melly says:

      They don’t need to “suck up” to the press. They just need to work for their publicly funded lifestyle. If Kate wanted to be a stay at home mom, that would be fine as long as William worked full time. That’s how normal people do it and the Cambridges are normal, just like you and me! *Intended sarcasm* Either they both do a couple of engagements a week or one of them works full time while the other stays at home. It would be smart if they gave the British press a couple interviews a year, it would keep the press happy & on their side. Also, the British press report to the British people (the Cambridges subjects) and it’s generally a smart idea to be accountable to people who pay for everything you have!

      • @ looty, sincere question; what obligation????
        “She is a young mother and that is a hard job” honestly? Mums all over the world work and kick some arse while at it. Both my parents are in medical profession, I admire their work ethic especially my mum.
        FYI during American suffragette movement, it was one of the excuses anti feminist gave; women who work would be terrible wives and mothers.
        Women have fought extremely bravely to stand up for their rights. They can be best in their chosen fields while being awesome mums!!

      • k says:

        Exactly! If you need proof, look at Princess Anne. You can tell she still absolutely hates the press, but she plays along when necessary with interviews and access to the Gatcombe Park grounds when there’s eventing going on. When she really dug into the full-time royal thing with 400-700 engagements a year, her image began to change and the public and the press do really seem to respect her, even if she refuses to do stunts for them, as explained here: http://everythingroyalty.tumblr.com/post/60676402012/princess-anne-the-princess-royal-on-her-rather

        Sure, I’ll agree that they’re much higher profile than Anne is now and will be used as the family’s glamour couple until their looks fade (they already are) or until Harry marries, but all female royals have been young mothers at some point. Why is Kate given so much room when Anne, Sophie, Diana (if you want a comparison with an even higher-profile spouse) still averaged triple-digit engagements while raising children? Peter and Zara are well-adjusted and it looks like Louise and James will be too. The only difference between Kate and the other women in the family is the amount of attention as the spouse of the heir to the heir. She won’t face the pressures of being Queen for 20-30 years, given the Windsor genes. She had 10 years to figure out if she wanted the attention of the world on her and is 5 years in to adjusting to her “new” role. How the hell can it still be new to her?

    • Jib says:

      So Looty, I should have told my boss that I can’t work more than a few hours a month because I’m a mother? And it’s Hhhaaarrrrrdddddd!!!!! So hard!!!!!! Please.
      Nannies, and housekeepers and cooks and a mother who’s always around – they are just lazy. Rich, entitled and lazy. Period. No excuses.

    • hmmm says:

      Will the newby LOoty be responding or is this a hit and run? I wonder. U would love to read their responses.

    • SnarkAttack says:

      I totally agree with Mandy,
      The Cambridge are very, very work shy. If she took just two days per week (yes 9-5 or 10-5) consistently to work
      -Research Prep
      -Calls
      -Events/Visits
      She could get a lot done, maybe not her hair and wiglets but much meaningful work – they have an incredible ability to get things done and lights shone where they typically don’t -

    • notasugarhere says:

      KM has two nannies, housekeeper, cleaners. They have close to three dozen staff, personal and office staff combined. She spends plenty of time away from the kids working out, shopping, going to the hairdresser. She has plenty of help and still cannot work a few hours a week for charity? She’s not an overworked full-time SAHM, she’s merely lazy and selfish.

      Sophie Wessex did more engagements the year surrounding her near death having Louise than Middleton has managed to do in any year. Sophie had her PR firm at the time and still managed to work more than either W&K do.

  20. CarolinaBelle says:

    What I get out of all this is that Jason is quite possibly better at his job than he gets credit for, and that WK are far worse clients than any of us can imagine.

    Jason will be fine. This position looks prestigious on paper. He will likely move on shortly to a higher paying job using his KP credentials.

    • Christin says:

      That’s the way I see it. The guy is supposedly a crisis PR person, whom they chose! He’ll move on to something better and likely less stressful than this ‘crisis’ couple.

  21. cerys says:

    The royals are notorious for paying low wages. Apparently the prestige of working for them should be enough for their staff. Its amazing that their employees stick with them for as long as they do.

  22. Anett says:

    I wonder what headlines they gonna produce on their 10th anniversary. I would be surprised if they gonna be any different. Hope never dies.

    Today, KP again published a video of Harry in tow with the Queen on social media. Needless to say, the Press is not happy. Richard Palmer tweeted about his concern too. I expect Charlotte’s bday pics will also arrive through that channel.

    • Betti says:

      The Harry video is part of the PR game for Invictus. FLOTUS started it ;) They are using the power of SM to promote the games – not themselves and thats the difference between the Dolittles.

      The press are all over the video primarily as TQ’s in it.

      • Christin says:

        I’m surprised William wasn’t hiding under the sofa, planning to pop up at the last minute and try to steal the limelight on that one.

    • msthang says:

      Anett, I think the marriage will be completely Kaput by then!!

  23. Tessd says:

    This is normal for royals – their stuff has historically been paid very little. They cultivate the idea of working for them being prestigious enough in itself that one should be happy to get paid at all.

  24. Zardi123 says:

    Agh…….. Lets face the truth … Waity Cambridge has no empathy…. she is only good at being selfish showing her knickers on public Royal Engagements … She has had all these years and has learnt nothing as she is not intelligent and cant speak properly …The age she is 34 years but acts like a child a very spoilt and snobbish child …at that..
    Petulant Bill and her spend enormous amounts but cannot pay their slaves that run around after them… They put the Monarchy to shame.. The other Royals work tirelessly what do the Cambridges do exactly … answer not much… The Indian Tour they did was disgraceful they just had a luxury holidayat taxpayers expense…
    her comments were banal on the tour to certain people

    • hmmm says:

      Indeed, Duchess Dolittle and her groom seem to lack empathy.

      • wolfpup says:

        They witnessed children who were maimed in order to beg in India. Another child’s pain (the slave child) was hid with fancy dress amongst aristocracy and horses, in the painting that is hanging in the Cambridge’s reception area. They offend me!

  25. Magnoliarose says:

    Everyone’s fault but theirs. I see. Poor beleaguered Workshy and Dolittle. Can you imagine the horror they endure everyday because of their subpar staff. If only the staff did more then they would pay more and then they’d be new people. That’s it right there.

  26. OhDear says:

    *Still* throwing their PR staff under the bus? First it was “they won’t stand up to William,” now it’s “they’re terrible because William won’t pay for better staff.” Wow.

  27. Emily C. says:

    I don’t care what she wears, so long as it stops flying up. And it bothers me that the article talks about Kate’s bad pr rubbing off on Will. It is — or should be — the other way around. Will is the worst of the two, and he’s the one who didn’t have to do anything whatsoever for this position. He didn’t have to bear children, and he didn’t even have to hustle/wait for someone else to marry him. He picked Kate. And I think he did it partly because no one else would have him, and partly because he thought he would look better in comparison to a woman who is very unfit for the role.

    I don’t care much about Kate though. I feel kind of bad for her, actually, because she is obviously in way over her head and her husband is determined to be of no help to her or to anyone else. She grew up marinating in wealth and privilege too though. But her looks don’t matter, and most of the comments about her clothing are ridiculous.

    What matters to me is that these two, especially Will, are showing the monarchy for the useless, parasitical institution it is. I look at pictures and see the fear in Kate’s eyes — I think she knows it. Will doesn’t.

    • msthang says:

      Emily, when HM dies, their days are numbered!! So she should be afraid, be very afraid, she might actually have to get up and go to a job!!

  28. Anare says:

    “Gosh…so interesting.”😠 What the hell? Most 15 year olds could have engaged in more thought provoking comments than that!

  29. Cleo says:

    The low staff wages are shameful. These are barely living wages in London. With their staggering privilege the BRF should set the example by paying working citizens fair wages not treating staff as serfs.

  30. Meadow says:

    Silly pair, if they actually paid top dollar for a wiz bang PR person, they might find someone who could spin their story so well they could probably get away with working just one day a week and get praised from one end of the UK to the other, but do we really expect them to have a clue.