|Subject: Peer Review: A87748852 - Familiarity breeds contempt|
Posted Mar 19, 2012 by delbois
Entry: Familiarity breeds contempt - A87748852
Author: delbois - U14667493
I have no doubt I shall be shouted down for what I am about to say but I'm going to say it anyway. I do wish that announcers on radio and television, indeed journalists generally would show more respect for the Royal Family. The Princes are constantly referred to by their Christian names and the Duchess of Cambridge as either Kate Middleton or just Kate. From the tone used by all these commentators anyone would think they are bosom pals with the Royals. To my mind referring to the Royal Family in any way other than one that shows respect, demeans them and puts them in the same bracket as two bob pop stars. If we, the British don't show respect for our Royal Family how can we expect those overseas to do so? Familiarity does breed contempt, so please use their proper titles when reporting their activities.
Did you intend to post this here or on the BBC's Points of View message board?
This forum is for factual entries intended for the Edited Guide and not opinion pieces such as this.
We're no longer part of or connected in anyway to the BBC now.
If you click on the x it'll remove this entry back to your personal space.
Have you read the writing guidelines for submitting articles into peer review? You maight want to rethink your placement of this peiece into one of the other review sections
|Subject: A87748852 - Familiarity breeds contempt|
Posted Mar 19, 2012 by Bluebottle
This is a reply to this Posting.
Hello Delbois - it looks like you've not posted anything to h2g2 for a while (possibly not since January 2011!) so it really is great to see you active here again.
This is an excellent idea for an entry, and I feel that there is certainly a grain of truth in what you have written, but as the article reads at the moment it's in the wrong place. Peer Review is for writing factual articles aimed at the Edited Guide - and the Guidelines do not allow opinion pieces.
If you wish it to become an article suitable for the Edited Guide (and an article about the relationship between the Royal Family and the British Press certainly has potential to become part of the Edited Guide) then at present it is a bit short. Do you think you'd be able to make it longer, with a more neutral tone? If you do, then you will find that there are plenty of people willing to help you with writing for the Edited Guide, especially at the Writing Workshop, and a look at the writing-guidelines would also be beneficial.
If you wish to create a conversation and debate rather than a full-length article, then why not post your comment to Ask h2g2 here: A148907?
I hope you do decide to take this further and that I'll see you around on h2g2 more often in the future.
Hi, yes I have to agree with all of the above comments - Peer Review is the wrong place for this small Entry.
Please can you remove it from here? I suggest that ASK is the place to start a debate - and in which case you may find you have some material for an Entry - perhaps for the Post or the AWW if it is an opinion piece.
In reviewing this in the same spirit in which this was posted, I'd just like to remind the author that respect is *earned*, not accorded as a matter of entitlement, and certainly not because at some point somebody's ancestor was more ruthless and land-grubbing than somebody else's.
In some people's eyes. the very *idea* of monarchy is inherently contemptible. They are under no obligation to tug their forelocks just because you feel uneasy about them not doing so.
Please note that Not Panicking Ltd is not responsible for the content of any external sites listed. The content on h2g2 is created by h2g2's Researchers, who are members of the public. Unlike Edited Guide Entries, the content on this page has not necessarily been checked by a h2g2 editor. In the event that you consider anything on this page to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please