Palace Fights Release of Kate Middleton's Bikini Photos

Avatar for cmkristy
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2005
Palace Fights Release of Kate Middleton's Bikini Photos
19
Wed, 02-13-2013 - 12:03pm

The pregnant Duchess of Cambridge was photographed in a bikini last week while relaxing on a secluded Caribbean beach with Prince William. The blurry pics offer the much-in-demand glimpse of the royal baby bump. They were also taken on the sly, and will soon be published in Italian and American tabloids -- all without Middleton's permission.

"We are disappointed that photographs of the Duke and Duchess on a private holiday look likely to be published overseas," a palace spokesperson told the press. "This is a clear breach of the couple’s right to privacy."

No one would argue that it's not. But how much privacy is the royal family actually entitled to? In this day and age, photographs of celebrities on private vacations are published all the time. It may not be fair, but it comes with the territory. Why is it a huge royal scandal when it happens to Will and Kate, two of the most recognizable beautiful people in the world?

Royals, Lighten Up! The Palace Fights the Release of Kate Middleton's Bikini Photos- http://www.ivillage.com/royals-lighten-palace-fights-release-kate-middletons-bikini-photos/1-a-521812

Interesting!  What do you think? 

 photo snowsiggy.png

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003

Is it really illegal to take pictures on a secluded beach?

I would have to agree with this, "And while they're at it, how about releasing more official photos of the happy couple? People don't really care if they're looking at approved images or stolen ones. They just want to get a glimpse of the mom-to-be. Is that really so wrong?"

Although I do believe people have a right to privacy, they are public figures. They should be aware people will want to see pictures of them, whether that is of Kate's latest fashion or how she looks when she is pregnant. Shouldn't they expect this? Maybe, maybe not, but if they just released a few tasteful, professional pictures of her pregnant, looking happy, doing well, then maybe they could curb the need for these tasteless, intrusive photos.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009

Correction.. She may be married to the Prince William but her title derives from him. She is herself a commomer because she was not born into royality. If they would divorce, she may still be called Duchess of Cambridge but not the title "Her Royal Highness". Sarah and Diane, for example, both lost their Royal Highness status after their divorces and essentially went back to being commoners again. They would have lost their Duchess titles if  either had remarried.

Plus, just because she is the Duchess of Cambridge does not put her on the same "celebrity" level as someone like Paris Hilton or Nicole Kidman or  Katie Perry or some "starlet".  Those "celebrities" need the publicity for their careers.

That is not the case for Katherine, the Duchess of Cambridge. In due time, Prince William will become the Prince of Wales and his father, King Charles. It doesn't matter what we think about these people, how good looking or ugy they are. They do not own the role.  They occupy the role. It is a job. And with any job, people can take time off.

This young couple were off-duty, on a private secluded resort to spend some time with the Duchess's parents. I

It is disrespectful, distasteful and potentially very dangerous. Like every young woman going through her first pregnacy, she deserves the right to her privacy and not be treated like she is some animal in the zoo, to be stalked (and stalking is against the law) and photographed to sell magazines.

Plus, there has been death threats against the members of the royal family. And here we have a photographer getting close enough to take photographs while the couple were on private resort.

Sorry, Jam, I have to disagree.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009

Correction.. She may be married to the Prince William but her title derives from him. She is herself a commomer because she was not born into royality. If they would divorce, she may still be called Duchess of Cambridge but not the title "Her Royal Highness". Sarah and Diane, for example, both lost their Royal Highness status after their divorces and essentially went back to being commoners again. They would have lost their Duchess titles if  either had remarried.

Plus, just because she is the Duchess of Cambridge does not put her on the same "celebrity" level as someone like Paris Hilton or Nicole Kidman or  Katie Perry or some "starlet".  Those "celebrities" need the publicity for their careers.

That is not the case for Katherine, the Duchess of Cambridge. In due time, Prince William will become the Prince of Wales and his father, King Charles. It doesn't matter what we think about these people, how good looking or ugy they are. They do not own the role.  They occupy the role. It is a job. And with any job, people can take time off.

This young couple were off-duty, on a private secluded resort to spend some time with the Duchess's parents. I

It is disrespectful, distasteful and potentially very dangerous. Like every young woman going through her first pregnacy, she deserves the right to her privacy and not be treated like she is some animal in the zoo, to be stalked (and stalking is against the law) and photographed to sell magazines.

Plus, there has been death threats against the members of the royal family. And here we have a photographer getting close enough to take photographs while the couple were on private resort.

Sorry, Jam, I have to disagree.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012

Being famous doesn't mean you're owned by the public and denied basic rights of privacy.  Imaging having to live you life knowing that an army is stalking you, trying to take compromising photos.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001
She's not a commoner anymore, Yes, she is a public figure. Thanks for the correction about where the photo was shot.

 


 


iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2009
I agree that it was tacky to take their pictures and sell them, but poor taste is not illegal, as far as I know. Therefore, no grounds for a suit. I won't buy any mags that carry the pictures, but that is a pretty hollow threat since I don't buy gossip mags in the first place.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009

They were on the private island of Mustique and not on some public beach.They deserve to have their privacy respected.

Plus, they are not celebrities. It doesn't matter what she looks like pregant; she is not public property.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-23-2001

The nude pics were one thing but she's in a bikini and its a public place?  No, I don't think you can fight that!  And they need to stop pouting and put up with the celebrity they are, Lol. Unrelated but she is a tiny little thing, I have a friend that's due next Summer too, She looks more pg than that! 

 


 


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2009

Thanks, should have checked myself.. It is a member State of the Commonwealth plus it is a parliamentary democracy with Queen Elizabeth as its  Constitutional Head of State.

Security heads should roll over this one. If some photographer could get close enough to them to take pictures, without them knowing....

No wonder the Palace is angry. As a subject of the Queen, I am too.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-17-2012

Celebrities aren't official representatives of the country or citizens of Great Britian...and celebrities often call paparazzi to get their picture taken, which isn't the case with the royals.  I think there would be as much uproar from the administration if Michelle Obama was snapped topless and published in the Enquirer.

Pages