The Royals....again! Yawn!

[stevensfo]

So some journalists are trying to make us all excited and create their usual tabloid type outrage, outcry, massive uproar, fury, mounting anger, growing concern and resentment. All over whether or not King Charles and Kate Middleton may have said something 'racist'.

I am no fan of Piers Morgan, but I agree with him here:

“And then we can have a more open debate about this whole ferragosto because I don’t believe any racist comments were ever made by any of the royal family, and until there is actual evidence of those comments being made, I will never believe it.”

https://nypost.com/2023/11/29/entertain ... kin-color/

What troubling questions?

As with the UK government and the author of 'Spycatcher', the Royals have made it worse by hinting of libel charges, even though nothing really libellous has been said.

I was planning to get some popcorn, but will wait for the next episodes of The Windsors to be made.

Steve

[88V8]

So some journalists are trying to make us all excited and create their usual tabloid type outrage, outcry, massive uproar, fury, mounting anger, growing concern and resentment. All over whether or not King Charles and Kate Middleton may have said something 'racist'.

If one mated two cats of different breeds, of course one would speculate about the outcome, or if one mixed two paint colours, or cross-pollinated two roses.
Only a crackpot would perceive that as 'racist'.

V8

[dionaeamuscipula]

I am no fan of Piers Morgan, but I agree with him here:

“And then we can have a more open debate about this whole ferragosto because I don’t believe any racist comments were ever made by any of the royal family, and until there is actual evidence of those comments being made, I will never believe it.”

Morgan is a well known and vociferous Meghan hater, supposedly because they went on a date and she then "ghosted" him.

So anything he says has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

There is mystery about how the line got into the Dutch edition. The author has said no draft he did ever mentioned the names, so either he is lying or mistaken, or someone has inserted the names pre publication but post proofing. So, although he hasn't denied that the two named are correct, I would guess there remains some doubt about their veracity.

DM

[Laughton]

So some journalists are trying to make us all excited and create their usual tabloid type outrage, outcry, massive uproar, fury, mounting anger, growing concern and resentment. All over whether or not King Charles and Kate Middleton may have said something 'racist'.

If one mated two cats of different breeds, of course one would speculate about the outcome, or if one mixed two paint colours, or cross-pollinated two roses.
Only a crackpot would perceive that as 'racist'.

V8

But that seems to be the way the world is going.

[swill453]

So some journalists are trying to make us all excited and create their usual tabloid type outrage, outcry, massive uproar, fury, mounting anger, growing concern and resentment. All over whether or not King Charles and Kate Middleton may have said something 'racist'.

If one mated two cats of different breeds, of course one would speculate about the outcome, or if one mixed two paint colours, or cross-pollinated two roses.
Only a crackpot would perceive that as 'racist'.

The most Harry and Meghan have said is that the conversation was "awkward". It's the media that have blown it all up.

Scott.

[servodude]

If one mated two cats of different breeds, of course one would speculate about the outcome, or if one mixed two paint colours, or cross-pollinated two roses.
Only a crackpot would perceive that as 'racist'.

The most Harry and Meghan have said is that the conversation was "awkward". It's the media that have blown it all up.

Scott.

They do need to write about "something" apparently

I think it's good that the Royals are (finally) taking an interest in how genetics works; it's historically been a field they've not been that strong at

I'm sure there's an innocuous reason for this current debacle being over blown; perhaps a dyslexic aide taking notes on Charles worries about Harry being a ginger? (It is always a concern in our family )

[bungeejumper]

There is mystery about how the line got into the Dutch edition. The author has said no draft he did ever mentioned the names, so either he is lying or mistaken, or someone has inserted the names pre publication but post proofing. So, although he hasn't denied that the two named are correct, I would guess there remains some doubt about their veracity.

I've done a lot of proofing, mostly for high-end financial publications where the cost of an error can quickly become exponential.

A book shouldn't be put to print until it has been proofread at least ten or twelve times, by at least three different people, in at least three iterative stages. (You knock out the first errors, then you check the corrected proofs again, and then you rinse and repeat.) The final stage is that the printer's own proofreader reads the proofs, and anything after that is the publisher's responsibility. The author will absolutely, definitely have read the proofs at least three times.

So what we're saying is that this (ahem) "error" will have been inserted after the author has given the book his final clearance. I have seen errors happen after that, but only because the printer accidentally printed up the wrong set of proofs! In one instance it cost him two hundred grand for a reprint. Serve him right.

But "a" logical inference of that, in this case, would be that there was indeed an earlier draft which had named the royal(s), but which had been removed at the publisher's insistence and then accidentally reinstated. Hmmmm.

Incidentally, it took me about 30 seconds yesterday to find out which royal had been fingered by this "error". Photo shots of the Dutch language page were all over Reddit, and my Dutch is good enough to have left no real doubt. What seems to be in doubt is whether another royal was also named. I haven't seen that confirmed anywhere yet. Where's your source, Piers Morgan?

BJ

[dionaeamuscipula]

There is mystery about how the line got into the Dutch edition. The author has said no draft he did ever mentioned the names, so either he is lying or mistaken, or someone has inserted the names pre publication but post proofing. So, although he hasn't denied that the two named are correct, I would guess there remains some doubt about their veracity.

I've done a lot of proofing, mostly for high-end financial publications where the cost of an error can quickly become exponential.

A book shouldn't be put to print until it has been proofread at least ten or twelve times, by at least three different people, in at least three iterative stages. (You knock out the first errors, then you check the corrected proofs again, and then you rinse and repeat.) The final stage is that the printer's own proofreader reads the proofs, and anything after that is the publisher's responsibility. The author will absolutely, definitely have read the proofs at least three times.

So what we're saying is that this (ahem) "error" will have been inserted after the author has given the book his final clearance. I have seen errors happen after that, but only because the printer accidentally printed up the wrong set of proofs! In one instance it cost him two hundred grand for a reprint. Serve him right.

But "a" logical inference of that, in this case, would be that there was indeed an earlier draft which had named the royal(s), but which had been removed at the publisher's insistence and then accidentally reinstated. Hmmmm.

Incidentally, it took me about 30 seconds yesterday to find out which royal had been fingered by this "error". Photo shots of the Dutch language page were all over Reddit, and my Dutch is good enough to have left no real doubt. What seems to be in doubt is whether another royal was also named. I haven't seen that confirmed anywhere yet. Where's your source, Piers Morgan?

BJ

Apparently the Dutch edition doesn't directly name the second royal but it is clear who it is. Given the author's statement that he doesn't speak Dutch, it would not surprise me if his proofing of a foreign language edition was a little skimpy. Or he is lying about never having named them. Of course as a former journalist on the celebrity journal of record that is "Heat" magazine, that is unthinkable. Presumably though, the final proof lay with the translator.

DM

[stevensfo]

There is mystery about how the line got into the Dutch edition. The author has said no draft he did ever mentioned the names, so either he is lying or mistaken, or someone has inserted the names pre publication but post proofing. So, although he hasn't denied that the two named are correct, I would guess there remains some doubt about their veracity.

I've done a lot of proofing, mostly for high-end financial publications where the cost of an error can quickly become exponential.

A book shouldn't be put to print until it has been proofread at least ten or twelve times, by at least three different people, in at least three iterative stages. (You knock out the first errors, then you check the corrected proofs again, and then you rinse and repeat.) The final stage is that the printer's own proofreader reads the proofs, and anything after that is the publisher's responsibility. The author will absolutely, definitely have read the proofs at least three times.

So what we're saying is that this (ahem) "error" will have been inserted after the author has given the book his final clearance. I have seen errors happen after that, but only because the printer accidentally printed up the wrong set of proofs! In one instance it cost him two hundred grand for a reprint. Serve him right.

But "a" logical inference of that, in this case, would be that there was indeed an earlier draft which had named the royal(s), but which had been removed at the publisher's insistence and then accidentally reinstated. Hmmmm.

Incidentally, it took me about 30 seconds yesterday to find out which royal had been fingered by this "error". Photo shots of the Dutch language page were all over Reddit, and my Dutch is good enough to have left no real doubt. What seems to be in doubt is whether another royal was also named. I haven't seen that confirmed anywhere yet. Where's your source, Piers Morgan?

BJ

I simply saw it in the NY Post: https://nypost.com/2023/11/29/entertain ... kin-color/

I do tend to skim a lot of foreign news sites. However, it doesn't mean that the NY Post is telling the truth, any more than Piers Morgan. Personally, I can't stand the guy and think he would sell his own grandmother for free publicity.

If I were the Royals, I would keep completely quiet and let the hyperactive press bore everyone with their never-ending speculations, all based on pretty much nothing. The media loves a reaction, as it keeps the story going.

Steve

[bungeejumper]

Given the author's statement that he doesn't speak Dutch, it would not surprise me if his proofing of a foreign language edition was a little skimpy. Or he is lying about never having named them.

Fair point, thanks. If he didn't/couldn't proof a Dutch language translation, then responsibility would have to fall back on the publisher, who carries the ultimate can for what hits the bookshops. And who will have employed both the Dutch editor and the translator. Normally, publishers are infuriatingly nit-picky about anything edgy that they're legally unsure of. In this case, apparently not nit-picky enough!

I've had editors who've altered my copy by enhancing my text with their own little nuggets of wisdom, which might be wrong or deliberately biased. It does cause arguments. And on one occasion a print run was deliberately sabotaged by a print worker who was about to be sacked, and who subtly "adjusted" hundreds of telephone numbers in order to get his revenge on his employer. (Yours truly spotted the anomalies in the nick of time. Phew.)

Either way, it's the publisher's problem as long as Scobie can categorically prove (a) that he didn't write the disputed text, and (b) that he had been taken right out of the proofing loop. If the "error" gave rise to a libel or defamation case, he "shouldn't" be financially hit - but I wouldn't guarantee that all courts in all countries would observe that principle.

As for his reputation, well, there's no such thing as bad publicity.....

BJ

[stevensfo]

Given the author's statement that he doesn't speak Dutch, it would not surprise me if his proofing of a foreign language edition was a little skimpy. Or he is lying about never having named them.

Fair point, thanks. If he didn't/couldn't proof a Dutch language translation, then responsibility would have to fall back on the publisher, who carries the ultimate can for what hits the bookshops. And who will have employed both the Dutch editor and the translator. Normally, publishers are infuriatingly nit-picky about anything edgy that they're legally unsure of. In this case, apparently not nit-picky enough!

I've had editors who've altered my copy by enhancing my text with their own little nuggets of wisdom, which might be wrong or deliberately biased. It does cause arguments. And on one occasion a print run was deliberately sabotaged by a print worker who was about to be sacked, and who subtly "adjusted" hundreds of telephone numbers in order to get his revenge on his employer. (Yours truly spotted the anomalies in the nick of time. Phew.)

Either way, it's the publisher's problem as long as Scobie can categorically prove (a) that he didn't write the disputed text, and (b) that he had been taken right out of the proofing loop. If the "error" gave rise to a libel or defamation case, he "shouldn't" be financially hit - but I wouldn't guarantee that all courts in all countries would observe that principle.

As for his reputation, well, there's no such thing as bad publicity.....

BJ

Did anyone notice.. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/dutch-transla ... 27871.html

Reading between the lines, I reckon that this Scobie fella has pulled off an amazing bit of publicity that will make the book sell in its millions. I happen to know about translators, have done a lot myself, and they would never add any extraneous names into a text. For their talent, most translators are paid peanuts and will never jeopardise their career. The poor woman who translated the text was doing her job. Any names were most definitely in the text that she had to translate.


Steve

[bungeejumper]

I happen to know about translators, have done a lot myself, and they would never add any extraneous names into a text. For their talent, most translators are paid peanuts and will never jeopardise their career. The poor woman who translated the text was doing her job. Any names were most definitely in the text that she had to translate.

Definitely agree, translators are generally honest, competent and poorly paid. But the publishers will also have employed an editor (and very likely a Dutch legal team) who will have processed the text before she started work on it. And who will also need to be quizzed now.

You don't even start a translation until you've got both digital and physical copies of the text that will back you up in case of any future bother. I do hope she's got all that?

BJ

[Clitheroekid]

The whole song and dance seems totally absurd to me. I can't believe that any members of a family, where there was a baby en route from a mixed race couple in the family would not wonder and speculate about what colour the baby was likely to be. This is simply because, undesirable as it may be, black people are still seen as and treated differently from white people, so that a potential black baby in a family that had always been exclusively white would always be a subject of discussion and speculation.

It would therefore have been not only normal but expected that the King and Kate would have talked about this, as I'm sure every other member of the family did, not least Harry and Meghan themselves.

But simply discussing it by no means indicates that if the baby had been born black it would have been treated any worse by the family - I'm sure it would have been loved and cared for just as much - so it's entirely disingenuous, and a deliberate attempt to provoke reaction from the usual suspects, to conflate the discussion itself with actual racist behaviour.

It seems to me to be far more racist just to pretend that nobody was remotely interested, or would have ever noticed the difference.

[robbelg]

Did anybody ask if the baby was likely to be a ginger?

Rob

[SimonS]

The whole song and dance seems totally absurd to me. I can't believe that any members of a family, where there was a baby en route from a mixed race couple in the family would not wonder and speculate about what colour the baby was likely to be. This is simply because, undesirable as it may be, black people are still seen as and treated differently from white people, so that a potential black baby in a family that had always been exclusively white would always be a subject of discussion and speculation.

It would therefore have been not only normal but expected that the King and Kate would have talked about this, as I'm sure every other member of the family did, not least Harry and Meghan themselves.

But simply discussing it by no means indicates that if the baby had been born black it would have been treated any worse by the family - I'm sure it would have been loved and cared for just as much - so it's entirely disingenuous, and a deliberate attempt to provoke reaction from the usual suspects, to conflate the discussion itself with actual racist behaviour.

It seems to me to be far more racist just to pretend that nobody was remotely interested, or would have ever noticed the difference.

As I heard, it made about $150 million worth of difference to Oprah and a large sum to the Sussexes. And , of course, it plays into the hands of the wokists and similar navel gazers.
If one wants to see how a Royal romance really takes place try "When Sparks Fly https://www.hallmarkdrama.com/when-sparks-fly/videos/preview-when-sparks-fly_1,

[didds]

I am reminsed of a poem I wrote in 2017....

Tittle Tattle

little minded people with so little in their lives
promulgating rubbish with their cretinous wives
ooo-ing over news of celebs leaving dives
ahhing over gossip from journos with knives
(C) The Didds 2017.

Nothing has changed in almost 7 years.

[stevensfo]

The whole song and dance seems totally absurd to me. I can't believe that any members of a family, where there was a baby en route from a mixed race couple in the family would not wonder and speculate about what colour the baby was likely to be. This is simply because, undesirable as it may be, black people are still seen as and treated differently from white people, so that a potential black baby in a family that had always been exclusively white would always be a subject of discussion and speculation.

It would therefore have been not only normal but expected that the King and Kate would have talked about this, as I'm sure every other member of the family did, not least Harry and Meghan themselves.

But simply discussing it by no means indicates that if the baby had been born black it would have been treated any worse by the family - I'm sure it would have been loved and cared for just as much - so it's entirely disingenuous, and a deliberate attempt to provoke reaction from the usual suspects, to conflate the discussion itself with actual racist behaviour.

It seems to me to be far more racist just to pretend that nobody was remotely interested, or would have ever noticed the difference.

As I heard, it made about $150 million worth of difference to Oprah and a large sum to the Sussexes. And , of course, it plays into the hands of the wokists and similar navel gazers.
If one wants to see how a Royal romance really takes place try "When Sparks Fly https://www.hallmarkdrama.com/when-sparks-fly/videos/preview-when-sparks-fly_1,

Fortunately, these people are getting help:

https://www.pocho.com/tracy-ullman-on-b ... ort-group/


Steve

[Hallucigenia]

Reading between the lines, I reckon that this Scobie fella has pulled off an amazing bit of publicity that will make the book sell in its millions.

Supposedly in its first week it sold 8,923 copies in the US, and 6,448 copies in the UK.

He's claimed "Unbeknownst to me at the time, early and uncleared text was provided to the Dutch publisher in order for them to start work on the translation, with the understanding that their translation would be updated to reflect the final version of the book I officially submitted" but the Dutch have denied that :"Omid Scobie's explanation in his column in iNews about the Dutch editorial process of the Dutch edition of Endgame is factually incorrect and we do not recognize ourselves in his representation of the events."

Did anybody ask if the baby was likely to be a ginger?

Tim Minchin is your man :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVN_0qvuhhw