Reinventing the Royals<\/em> shows how the Windsors overcame Fleet Street, but the public are the real losers. <\/p>\n Perhaps the most telling detail of this two-part documentary on the contest between press and monarchy is not to be found in its contents, but rather its broadcasting dates.<\/p>\n The airing last month followed a brief delay from a planned release on January 4th, with Windsor lawyers holding the show up over fears it would penetrate too deeply through what Tom Nairn termed The Enchanted Glass<\/a>. <\/em>As the documentary goes on to demonstrate, this is not the first time the royals have quashed inspection of their role in British affairs, which makes its director Steve Hewlett’s contention that Harry and William have had to endure \u201ctruly extraordinary scrutiny\u201d of their family all the more baffling.<\/p>\n It is certainly true that Britons take an voyeuristic interest in the Windsors, with the readers of the tabloid and broadsheet alike happy to drool over the drunken misbehaviour of Harry and cutesy mugshots of George. This is coupled with devotion to the royals so fawning, mawkish and drab it could serve as a convincing polemic against universal suffrage, such is the vast acreage of British stupidity uncovered when people are asked their opinion of Diana Spencer.<\/p>\n Yet that so many are enticed by the prospect of greater privacy for the monarchy shows the success of the two spin doctors whose work Hewlett tracks. Starting with Mark \u201cBlackadder\u201d* Bolland’s recasting of Charles and ending with Paddy Harverson’s work on the prince’s two sons, the series is an entertaining if uncritical recap of the Windsor’s press relations throughout the last two decades.<\/p>\n
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n