The narrative of our Royal Family is one of the most precious commodities in British journalism. We need only remember the media stories surrounding Diana before we begin to formulate a quasi-biblical narrative of great proportions, one that realigns her from the messianic spheres of impregnability to the realms of Flaubertian anti-heroine. She lived her life under perpetual scrutiny. This early case study on the long-term effects of frontline tabloid journalism has taught us this, that we are dealing with humans on a human level, and pariah or not, Diana should be remembered primarily as a woman.

Following her death, subsequent changes in the editor’s code of practice served to curb aggressive pursuit-based journalism, but the appearance of the Leveson inquiry has reminded us that this type of journalism will only seek more underhand ways to compromise the privacy of its subjects. In the years since 1997, coverage of the royals has been more subdued. Perhaps in realising the latent possibility of William’s ascendancy, Clarence House has reformulated its strategy to keep up public appearances. But this has not stopped us from receiving a plethora of stories promulgated to sustain the cultural narrative of an eccentric royal family, including classics such as Harry’s trip to rehab and back prompted by his penchant for cannabis and alcohol, his tasteless choice of fancy (Nazi) dress, Phillip’s casual racism and Fergie’s very own ‘Toegate’. For those of you who missed that, I’m referring to a rather naughty picture of the Duchess of York having her toes sucked in the French Riviera. In the months preceding the royal wedding coverage was strangely respectful, minus the one or two remarks about Kate’s ‘anorexia’ it seemed that at last, the royal family were being granted some respite from the neurotic voyeurism of the popular media. Or were they?

The appearance of Kate Middleton’s breasts in the French Closer and the subsequent media frenzy have been predictably divisive in their response, with one commentator even pronouncing the royal unveiling as ‘oddly old fashioned’. It seems that the pictures have once again stimulated the dialectic between sexualisation and commodity culture, with tabloid journalists everywhere eagerly dusting off their editions of Roget’s thesaurus in the search to ascribe a sensational epithet that will help market Kate’s newly commodified body. But locating the real issues amidst the maelstrom of outpourings by journos and bloggers alike isn’t so straightforward.

The Royal Family is symbolic of an irresolvable conflict. How do we locate matriarchal authority within a patriarchal society? By objectifying Kate and Pippa Middleton we end up not only counterbalancing the reality of female authority, we also contribute to the mass consumption of sexualised imagery, which in turn limits the efficacy of feminine power. Clearly feminists have a right to be riled.

Perhaps I have fallen into the obvious trap by commencing my piece with a reflexive analysis of the media’s treatment of Diana, but this leads me to the crux of my argument, namely, the long-term effects of journalistic malpractice on a fundamentally human level. Towards the end of Diana’s life she rejected her Royal security attendants in favour of the private Al-Fayed entourage. The excessive attention of the world media first caused strain on her marriage, then her resources, and it finally culminated in the frenzied car chase that would signal her tragic death. Parallels can be drawn with the treatment of Kate in the wake of the topless pictures. Since the Closer incident, more pictures have been published around the continent in Denmark and Italy. What’s even more troubling is the emergence of stories that claim the Duchess has been frantically ‘pleading’ William’s forgiveness for embarrassing the Royal house. Whether these stories are fictitious or not is beside the point. They supply the cultural narrative perpetuated by the media. Kate’s marriage has just become ‘interesting’ and sellable. If these stories are true on the other hand, it reveals that the media don’t just control the narrative, they control their subjects too.

In summary the recent invasion of Kate’s privacy has made the ongoing ‘Royal show’ problematic once again. It’s time to draw the curtains and turn on the house lights.