Canadian Paparazzi

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I think it was set up for a photo shoot, she has very little control of the dogs, holding the lead with her fingers not in a grip, , one strap of the baby carrier has slipped onto her arm, this moves the baby away from her face.

Avalon that was my first reaction to the photo - if the dogs suddenly bolted she would be flat on her face on top of Archie.
God forbid.
A baby that size should be in a push-chair/buggy.

If it was a long shot lens then maybe Meghan wasn't aware a photo was being taken but it sure looks like she knew. I noticed the baby sling and thought Archie looked very uncomfortable in it - it seemed to me she was holding him in the sling at a strange angle so she was on best view for a photo shoot. I also noticed the two dogs and wondered how she had proper control of them as their leads didn't look to be proper control ones. Had they seen a squirrel or something they could have jerked off and pulled her over with Archie. Again I am thinking if this was not posed why did the dogs not notice they were being followed, apart from what were the security guys doing strolling nonchalantly behind.
They can't eschew publicity if Meghan wants to resume her actress career. As for Harry, how naïve can you get if he thinks the press is no longer going to be interested. He was born royal and it's not something you can stop.

I deduce that WR is Waitrose (?)

How can they say they want to be left alone and then deliberately pose for the cameras?

LOL . My question too Anniebach.

What’s a WR trolley ?

The difference is that M is now threatening to sue for a photo which looked like she was happy to be snapped in a public place with two bodyguards but then threatens to sue. Kate smiled in the same way in a similar situation and .... went about her life, presumably in the knowledge that there would be people who were interested (for reasons known only to themselves) in photos of them in the early days of their marriage doing normal things like shopping or walking the dogs. No legal action required.

Same scenario - being papped in a public place. The evil witch set it up, St Catherine was the innocent victim. Hummm......

Yes she was suzie - and she didn’t threaten to sue.

Well that’s strange annie because I saw A photo of KM with a WR trolley and as she was smiling it was of course obvious that she knew she was being photographed.

I've had a reply today from my cousin who lives about 10 mins from them. He says there are some media folks around, but the locals "take it in their stride".
Canada is a big country.

Not all the royals , just those who crave the front pages.

When William and Kate lived on Anglesey, Kate shopped in
the local supermarket, they both went to the local pub, never
in the press.

So much of what the royals and other celebs do isn’t newsworthy imo - but there’s obviously sufficient numbers of people who enjoy seeing these things for there to be enough of a market for the pictures.

A mother takes her baby son out for a walk – and that is a newsworthy story! How utterly pathetic.

If it bothers you so much then look away.

The gutter press at that ???

So a ‘fuck’ is not a acceptable but it’s ok to assassinate the character of people you’ve never met and only know through the eye of the media is it?

Very strange values some have.

No, my iPad can’t talk, thankfully, when gutter language is used .

Not all. There are some still, calm voices of reason.

Do you lot never actually listen to how you all sound.

What a fucking nasty post

Terrie great post

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one suzie.