How the Royal family gets away with it

Lewis Goodall (0:02)

This is a Global Production. The House of Windsor has taken yet another battering this week. All over the world, allegations from Princess Diana's own brother that the King himself was giddy at her death. That he told Earl Spencer in the hours after her tragic car crash in Paris in 1997, that her sons would forget her soon enough. On paper, pulped or otherwise, you might think that that could be enough at least to wound a monarch whose own ascension was almost halted by the toxin which flowed from the Diana marriage and her demise. And yet, it hasn't really. The battering has felt a light toasting at best. Why? The passage of time? The peers I mentioned, isn't there always one? Or is it something else? The power of the media to still relentlessly mediate royal stories. An alliance between palace and press, which affects royal coverage in ways most of us don't ever even see.

Andrew Lownie has seen that process at the sharp end. He's one of the few writers and journalists about royal affairs who can't be placed neatly into the category of courtier. His book, Entitled, a biography of the former duke and duchess of York, became a bestseller because it spared no royal blushes and applied scrutiny which we rarely see. Exposing Andrew and Fergie as well, the Entitled figures that they then were. So we thought what better week to invite Andrew into the News Agents studio, that's Andrew Lownie, to assess how damaging has this book been? What is the state of the House of Windsor now? And how does the palace work with press to curate our monarchs and princes? Welcome to The News Agents.

Andrew Lownie (1:49)

The News Agents.

Lewis Goodall (1:50)

Well, Andrew Lownie, welcome back to The News Agents.

Let's just actually start. Very, very clear. Do you believe Earl Spencer?

Andrew Lownie (1:58)

Yes, I do. I think broadly speaking, I've only read half the book, but broadly speaking, I think he's telling the truth. It was a good opportunity to challenge the narrative that we've been fed for the last 30 years, and I think that's what he wanted to do. I think the problem is he's been let down by some sloppy editing and poor legal work. And so he has to take responsibility clearly for the mistakes he's made, but those should have been picked up.

And so I think the sad thing is that the message that he had is kind of been diluted, and indeed in some ways has been destroyed by the fact that he has made some very silly mistakes in the book.

Lewis Goodall (2:33)

I suppose the natural thing to us would be, what's the point of it? I mean, it's so long ago. I mean, of course, he's got the right to write a book about his sister if he wishes, but what's the point of it all?

Andrew Lownie (2:44)

Well, his argument is there's going to be a lot coming out next year for the anniversary. I mean, I know dozens of books lined up, television programmes. And, you know, everyone wants to kind of shape the historical record. He wants to get his version of events out before, I think, as he honestly said, before the TV programmes and the books in which he has no control, bring out a slightly different version.

That seems to me a perfectly genuine reason. I mean, after all, that's why politicians and generals write their memoirs.

Lewis Goodall (3:12)

The thing I have to say, Andrew, I mean, we've talked before about Prince Andrew, or formerly known as Prince Andrew, Andrew Moutbatten-Windsor. And, you know, as scandals go in the royal family, how does this compare?

Andrew Lownie (3:29)

How does it compare? Well, what, the Charles Spencer with the, the Andruan?

Lewis Goodall (3:32)

Let me rephrase it. I mean, how, obviously the royal family have been going through plenty of turbulence in recent years, it always feels as they are in one way or another. Even in the King's short reign, there have been lots of scandals, lots of problems. How does this compare to all of those, would you say? Or will it just disappear?

Andrew Lownie (3:50)

No, I think this is just another nick in the whole institution and it's going to begin to snowball depending on how they respond. You know, I think the Andrew thing is very serious because it was about endemic corruption within the institution itself, not just two rogue apples there.

But I think people sense a vulnerability with the monarchy. I think people are more emboldened. I think people are much less deferential. We've had many more programs questioning their finances, for example. And I think even members of the royal family sense an opportunity here. I don't think it's a coincidence that Harry has popped back and we've got now Sarah Ferguson back in town. So it's, and I think the problem is that the monarchy always reacts too little too late and just misjudges the mood. And instead of addressing all these issues, they kind of try and cover them up. And I think once people realize the cover up that's gone on over Andrew over the last 40 years, I think they really will be in trouble.