Is public opinion against Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge?

[Orchid]

In your opinion, of course, wannabe. 

Totally agree with you, BC.

  Teenager 'Mean Girls' comments 

Oh dear.

[cinrit]

The rules and expectations governing academic debate and discussion do not apply to public opinion. Reasons and evidence are not a requirement for stating pubic opinion, yet public opinion is extremely powerful and can make or break the careers of the most powerful people.   

^^ I didn't say they're not valid.  I said they'd be easier to take seriously.  If someone posted that they saw Kate out in her back yard sunbathing all day every day for the past two weeks, talking on her cell phone and telling a friend that she'll be darned if she'll do any more than one engagement a month, I'd be a lot more likely to take it seriously than something like "a bit too self-interested".  What does that mean, "a bit too self-interested"?  How does the poster know this?  She doesn't.  Kate may be self-assured (and if she is, good for her!), but not necessarily self-interested simply because she got her hair done or bought a new dress.  Those truly are high-schoolish thoughts ... the "let's-freeze-Jane-out" kinds of comments.  They have nothing to do with performance, which is what really matters.

Cindy

[Blue Clover]

Orchid,

Great response to all of that!   

[Orchid]

Thanks, BC. I'm not bothering to engage with certain things anymore.

[Lothwen]

Considering that we are talking about whether or not Public opinion has turned against Kate it is a valid point to bring up the reader comments on tabloid sites.  Not only that, but if we wanted to we could post quotes from blog sites as well.  Or I could even post quotes from our own members here. 

Now, I agree with cinrit that sometimes people are hard to take seriously.  I find it very hard to respond to the "Kate is ugly and her hair is gross!" and the "You're just jealous because you're not her" comments because neither one addresses her character. 

However, any comment that speaks of her work ethic (or lack of)  her past, her relationship with William, then I pay attention to that.  A person shouldn't have to write in a specific way just to be taken seriously


And that's all I have to say about that, so if anybody would like to get in the last word, it's all yours

[anitalalala]

I dont think so...not yet!
No seriouslly i think a great percentage of public will be influenced by what media creates of her...and latelly it has been positve...shes living the fairy tale post marriage with a prince...
But yeah there will be many phases where media will take opportunitys and even invent some to try to kill her in the eyes of the public...and by such phases i think she should...and will..probablly have done more than she has latelly...
Coz its not like she havent done a thing...but she havent done anyhting substantial..or that at least gives any signs of what she wants to be seen as....besides being pretty and well manered...ready to be a royal barbie...wich anyone in her position and with the education she had acess to...would do wihtout blinking theyre eyes...so yeah were still waiting...
And if the waiting turns intyo something very looong...i believe publçic will start to turn on her negativelly...
But that will take some time...and definatelly will have many phases...during her public life...thats for sure...and totally natural!

[Lothwen]

I don't know about that antilala.  If you read this article it's very positive and flattering, but the comments are pretty negative. 

[anitalalala]

Thats what im saying...the media being on theyre honeymoon phase with her "yet"...only talks apositive things about her...coz obviouslly they need to treat her well...coz the country wins...they win...everybody wins...and they manage to keep a good relationship with her...for a while...
BUt the over exposition she receives "for nothing" aparentlly...besides being pretty and had married a prince...is bothering many people...copz they talk about her like shes a godess...and obviously fans agree...but the majority of people who arte not fans or haters...see and see what they see...dont see a godess...but a women who has everyhting and does bascially nothing...and yet is worshiped for doing nothing and super duper overportected when negative coments comes...

People feels like they dont have the right to give opinions...or that theyre opinions are being ignored...wich causes a lot negativism on her...And thats media doing it...on purpose...as far as i can see...

Theyre no fools..theyve been oplaying this game for years...and they will play it always...kate and the royals knows it as well..and maybe thats one of the reasons theyre overprotecting her and letting her do what she wants...but if what she wants ids being a houseiwife forever she will have a lot of problems with her image me thinks...since thats not what people and media expects of her...and she will be pressured sooner or later for actions...So when the honeymoon period passes...she will go thorugh her first "negative" phase with media...the first of thousands....and them theyre will be negativity all over the place...it will be the public who will feel pitty of her depending on media haraseemnet and pressures on her...and will start to defend her...on no...and then media will be obliged to be positive about her...and then be bad..and on and on and on...

Its ver predictable in my view...the public decides in the end...and judged them...but the media has a huge impact on it as well..me thinks...peope tend to enjoy people who are in bad situations...in kates case shes vbeing praised and worshiped constantlly for doing nothing...thats why so many are starting to hate her...coz of media attempt to make her look like something shes not..but that in my view is predicted and on pupose...and it will soon be over....
When they start to criticized her wreally bad...people will start to feel pitty for her..and defend her  more...
its a never ending game...and honestlly makes no sense to me somtimes...

But in general MY view is that she makes nothing to be worshiped like she does...its all some crazy and desperate try to sell her as something shes not ...and yeah im one of those who thinks is quite annoying...
But she always been praised for nothing even when she was a gf...and defended coz she was a private citizen...so she wouldnt have to do a thing for the royals...i assume im hapy that at least now shes a royal and have a role to keep...so i can criticize her for doing nothing...
But yet for some there will alwaus be excuses...excuses...excuses.. ..always 
before she wasnt suppose to do abc coz she wasnt a royal..nopw shes not suppose to do abc coz shes still new...and shes a human being..and blablablab...athere will always be something to build an excuse for her...or any memebr of her familly..or wills...seriouslly...and theyre will alwaus be people who are convinced by such excuses and thos ewho dont...there will always be those who will love and wroship her no matter what and there will alwaus be those who will hate her no matter what 
Im far from loving or hating her...but i definatelly expect a lot more than what ive been seeing...
And i totally agree with some..the public opinion of her right now is pretty negative...and in my view is due to the overreacted worshiping of somoene whos nothing that special aparentlly...but it will soon be pver...and things will change obviouslly..so does the opinions...and that will happen a lot...until she have an stabilished image...
Thats why me thinks is important that she starts to worjk on her image...as soon as she starts and the less chance she will give to media or public to build up a negative view of her...

[Blue Clover]

Anitalala,
Very good post! You made a few excellent comments! 

[Wilkat]

I'd rather see her out and about visiting hospices, hospitals and shelfters than arriving at "glitzy" events. While these "glitzy" events do happen it would be good to see the other side of royal work: really pitching in to a charity and giving back.

Clarence House has disclosed that Kate makes private charity visits and likes to work behind the scenes because she isn't one to try to grab attention for her charity efforts. She keeps up with patients privately. I like that. I don't think public opinion is at all against Kate but she gets knocks just like the rest of the Windsors. I won't trust Robert Palmer's tongue wag against Kate when it comes to her subtle approach to cameramen because afterall he is a big Camilla-Fergie fan which leads me to believe he has little judgement in these affairs. I just remembered that a few years back I was browsing a couple of *We hate Kate* websites and they clubbed together to go to the Daily Mail and I think it was The Sun or Mirror to make endless  *We can't stand Kate* posts. Then they came back to the website and bragged about the stuff they said against her and patted each other on the back for making her look as unpopular as they could on any given day. They did the same in the Hello magazine polls, voted against Kate in all catergories. Now that's organization and I have seen evidence that it continues with these same malice loaded groups who found new allies after the wedding.

[Georgiana]

Even though the press are still writing very positive articles about Kate I find that the number of negative comments in response to the articles have begun to increase. IMO once Kate gets pregnant and is mother to the heir(s) to the throne they will be very positive again, just like after the engagement.

[Harryforlife25]

^ A pregnancy will not change the fact she is wived as a girl with no work ethic to speak of  sure in the beginning people will be happy and will go gaga about the baby but Kate has created an image of herself an is not going to disappear .

[Georgiana]

^ maybe becoming a mother will bring out a different side to Kate? Even if she remained the same work wise the press would be all over a pregnancy announcement and the public would be more favourable towards her IMO. Just like the way the term waity Katy disappeaered from the mainstream press vocabulary post-engagement.

[Blue Clover]

Wilkat,
You like Kate and it is obvious. Constructive criticism of Kate is not a conspiracy by "haters" as you put it. It also doesn't take away from your positive emotions about Kate either, you can still like Kate as much as you do. However, it is absolutely unrealistic to think that everyone is going to like the public figures you are so drawn to as much as you do, and it is really unfair to make poisonous statements about their intentions, such as they are all ganging together to leave negative comments at the DM. I am willing to bet that many of those who commented on this most recent article about Kate at the National Gallery have never even heard of the royal forums, any of them. The fact that some people chose to offer constructive criticism, or not so constructive criticism, about Kate does not take away from your feelings about Kate.

Not everyone feels the same way about the public figures we admire, it will always be this way, it is not wrong or bad to dislike, or like for that matter, someone who lives his or her life on the public stage. 

[sophiechloe]

^ Perfect post. 

I'm going to give you a quick  () - goes against all my principals, but you deserve that one 

[Blue Clover]

Sophiechloe,
Thanks so much!      I really appreciate the fact that you made an exception for me, so amazing! 

[Sunny234]

The comments section of the Daily Mail is not exactly an accurate guage of public opinion. A commenter can post under multiplt names without limit, you can red and green arrow your own posts and other posts multiple times. I wouldn't give much credit nor deem one's popularity on the articles or comments on the Daily Mail website.

[Tami]

Cinrit agreed, I couldn't help myself -- various smiley facial expressions, I mean old time royal watcher, so yes I've read old threads of Kate and the Paparazzi.

Yes, I use to read them too. 

[sophiechloe]

Blue Clover,
You disrespect Kate and it is obvious.

What is there to respect - that she married a Prince?

As for the "groups" you mention in your post - please - you are free to join any such groups, just please do not post any links on here 

[Wilkat]

The comments section of the Daily Mail is not exactly an accurate guage of public opinion. A commenter can post under multiplt names without limit, you can red and green arrow your own posts and other posts multiple times. I wouldn't give much credit nor deem one's popularity on the articles or comments on the Daily Mail website.

  I think we have all seen those repetitious misspelt posts echoing the same old unfounded taunts, even when they haven't asked us to help them do it.
  Sophiechole, not to worry, I have no desire to join an anti Kate website and so why would I post one of their links? 
Sorry but there are lots of women who married royalty that I do not respect. I'm not a forelock tugger.  I respect Kate's integrity, education and ability to rise above all the nonsense she has been subjected to simply because she is from a wealthy family and looks rather nice all dressed up. 

[Wilkat, Your previous post was removed because we do not allow members to attack one another here at the forum. You basically said that anyone who does not support your views of Kate simply "disrespects" Kate, you crossed a line.  We do not allow attacks on posters, please show respect to everyone who posts here.]

[Orchid]

Blue Clover,
You disrespect Kate and it is obvious.

Far from. Blue Clover is not disrespectful towards anybody. Like may of us BC shares a balanced array of views about Kate from the critical to the sympathetic and approving.  It's quite insulting to accuse her of being disrespectful towards Kate as that implies she's predisposed to being unfair and unpleasant which is far from the truth. 

The point Blue Clover seemed to be making was that not every post which is viewed as unfavourable towards Kate is the result of groupies.  Granted they may exist, but they don't account for the entirety of negative comments.  There are many impartial people out there who are not involved in royal forums or "Kate-hate" websites that arrive at sceptical conclusions about Kate and their views can't be dismissed as blind hatred. Rather people employ many different thoughts and beliefs to arrive at their perceptions.  Their views may not be accurate but then its not necessarily the case that those who support and admire Kate are correct in their favourable assumptions of her either.

[cinrit]

Wilkat,
You like Kate and it is obvious. Constructive criticism of Kate is not a conspiracy by "haters" as you put it. It also doesn't take away from your positive emotions about Kate either, you can still like Kate as much as you do. However, it is absolutely unrealistic to think that everyone is going to like the public figures you are so drawn to as much as you do, and it is really unfair to make poisonous statements about their intentions, such as they are all ganging together to leave negative comments at the DM. 

Wilkat didn't say that everyone should like a public figure (e.g., Kate).  She related an experience that she had, and to call her statements "poisonous" is unfair.  You may not have had the same experience, but these groups do exist.  I had nearly the same experience on a Yahoo discussion list dedicated to Diana.  The hatred felt by the members of that list towards Charles and Camilla was disturbing.  They talked about looking for Camilla and tossing tomatoes at her.  They talked about disrupting her wedding to Charles and swarming her if they could get close enough.  When William and Harry gave the interview to Matt Lauer and Harry said that they love Camilla "to pieces", the discussion went ballistic.  The women were almost hysterical and called William and Harry every name in the book for having the audacity to like their stepmother.  I unsubbed from the group then.  I saw no reason to stay in that kind of atmosphere.  You may not have experienced these kinds of groups, but they do exist, and they do plan attacks, even if they're "just" tomatoes or, as Wilkat experienced, online attacks on message boards. 

Cindy

[Bensgal]

The anonymity of the internet allows posters, whether on a forum or replying to an online newspaper article, to express themselves in a manner they most likely wouldn't do if in a face-to-face meeting. Personally, I'm not always "for it" as I believe common sense and good manners are tossed aside.

[Orchid]

Indeed, that can be very true, Bensgal. 

[Lothwen]

True Bensgal