British Queen Asks Paparazzi to Back Off

(AP)  Britain's Queen Elizabeth II has warned newspapers not to run unauthorized paparazzi photos of the royal family, Buckingham Palace said Sunday.

The palace said a lawyer for the British monarch wrote to newspaper editors about six weeks ago telling them not to publish intrusive photos of the family at home.

The palace said the letter was sent "in response to many years of the royal family being hounded by photographers on the queen's private property."

The tough new royal stance has been in the works for months and was not triggered by any individual event. It comes just before the Christmas holidays, when photographers traditionally try to snap the royals relaxing at their Sandringham estate in eastern England.

The royal family has long had an uncomfortable relationship with photographers. Some people feel media hounding contributed to the death of Princess Diana in a car crash in 1997.

More recently, Prince William and Prince Harry have been snapped emerging from nightclubs and William's girlfriend Kate Middleton was pursued outside her home.

In 2007 William's spokesman complained about the "threatening" behavior of photographers.

Prince Charles' spokesman, Paddy Harverson, told the Sunday Telegraph that members of the royal family "feel they have a right to privacy when they are going about everyday, private activities."

"They recognize there is a public interest in them and what they do, but they do not think this extends to photographing the private activities of them and their friends," he was quoted as saying.

[bm4260]

The queen is treated no differently than any other person in the media gaze in the UK. The media in the UK is the only way the British people can see how the royal family is spending the money we give them to perform their function. Why should they be protected if they are not up to the job or are doing things that compromise their position. We are bankrolling them if they are not happy - if they don't want what comes with the job they can abdicate and become a private citizen and allow the British people to elect their head of state. She really is out of line here as what she is saying is she does not want to be accountable to the people who fund here lavish lifestyle through their taxes!

[CAnother]

Deploy snipers to thin the herd. The survivors will be more polite.

[barbaram99]

The Royals needs their apace..The Queen has to step up to the plate on this issue. When they are not doing their duties then their time is theirs..Surely HM has persons that take her photo and that of her family. Don't buy the reading matter that has photos in ? and they will go away as the money stops. I don't buy the mags as the photos are snapped by the group that hunts for them and could careless of the safety of others..HRH Diana comes to mind..I am an American..

[mgpm-2009]

This should have been done many years ago. And I agree with the poster that said we need to stop buying the magazines that print the pictures. That they would hound Diana to the point of contributing to her death (I know Henri Paul was drinking, but those paparazzi were chasing them, weaving in and out on motorcycles near the car,thereby contributing to her death)was reprehensible and this decree should have been made long ago. I stopped buying People and US, etc. because of that very event. Those photographers are vultures, even taking pictures of Diana as she lay dying in the street. Disgusting.

[ToolMangler1]

All Her Majesty need do is get a law passed that gives a person or group of persons legal rights to 3/4 of all monies collected from the use of their likeness on/in any "Unauthorized publication or ventures" and a semblance of privacy will return to the world.

[ToolMangler1]

The moment you are cited by the authorities for an 'imagined' event or offense.
No! Actually that is wrong. the moment the Media notices you "For any reason", you are public property, If the paparazzi can sneak a telephoto of you sitting on the 'toilet', they are free to sell it to whom they wish. The Media is close to having legislation being brought up against them that gives citizens the right to privacy in certain areas... Because they won't police themselves, they leave no choice but for laws to be made that stop their predations on the unknowing citizenry.

[Phxfire]

The Queen is the owner of several estates and many that belong to the crown. Its been this way for centuries, nothing new. As Queen she is the titular owner of Buckingham Palace, but she couldn't sell it, she could sell Balmoral, though, because it was purchased by Queen Victoria. Back in the day, the ruler could have sold any property, including Buckingham. They were all purchased or built by the crown and, in essence, belong to the 'family'. Today, those built by raising taxes, ie Buckingham, are Crown poperties and now privately owned anymore. BTW, They DO have a right to some private time, like any 'leader'.

[Overruled1]

Does this make them private citizens?

[edgy44]

The real solution is for the public to quit buying the silly magazines and newspapers that publish these silly and obtrusive pictures. With the advent of digital photography, these idiots just snap away with billions of photo's that get deleted when no one buys them. At least in the past they had to develop them first, and that slowed them down, or required that they actually think before they shot. It's just upskirt mentality now.

[Overruled1]

"The Queens'" private property?
I thought everything the monarchy has is state property?

[edgy44]

No. They are quite wealthy and have their own assets.

[Overruled1]

Looks to me like they have it all then.
My view of english royalty is changing.
Does this mean they are private citizens?