25 years after Diana’s death: why the British monarchy remains fragile in the face of scandal

Share This Post

- Advertisement -

Diana’s death on August 31, 1997 in a car accident in Paris caused immense emotion, with which the monarchy seemed completely out of step. She has since tried to revise her copy.

Criticized for its apparent coldness in the face of Lady Di’s death, the British royal family has tried to modernize and recover its image. But recent scandals have shown an institution that is still fragile and struggling to keep up with society.

- Advertisement -

Diana’s death on August 31, 1997 in a car accident in Paris caused immense emotion, with which the monarchy seemed completely out of step. The queen and her eldest son Charles, whose divorce had been finalized the previous year, had been walled in silence from their castle in Balmoral, Scotland, far from the capital, before returning to London to share in national mourning.

The most famous British family has become aware of its missteps, and revised its copy, also trying to turn the page on a painful decade, between divorces, family feuds and various scandals. Before these efforts, which helped restore his popularity, were recently challenged by a series of crises: sexual assault charges against Prince Andrew in the United States, resulting in a multi-million dollar settlement, or Prince Andrew’s departure Harry and his wife. Megan.

“Diana’s death was a whirlwind that forced the monarchy to reorient its public image, to adopt a more modern and expressive profile to attract the public,” royal historian Ed Owens told AFP. “This story lives through her children,” he warns. “Tough times are ahead.”

- Advertisement -

switch communication

A quarter of a century after the tragedy, the family manages its communication much more effectively. It has hired PR experts, is more responsive and has a stronger presence on social media as it manages the organization of major unifying events like Elizabeth II’s platinum jubilee celebrations that marked the ultra-popular monarch’s 70-year reign in June. past.

Robert Hardman, author of Queen of our times: the life of Elizabeth II, evokes a measured “evolution” in the face of the acceleration of continuous information and the emergence of social networks. The monarchy, the biographer believes, “changes slowly, imperceptibly, but firmly and not without reason.”

After Diana’s death, the aim has been in particular to show a more “human” image of the queen, sometimes seen as more concerned with her dogs and horses than with her subjects. The image of Carlos has also been worked on, criticized for his rigidity and arrogance. His children, Princes Harry and William, with their long and very close relationship and then their glamorous marriages, seduced the British.

“Big mistake”

Instead of “hunting over and waiting for it to happen” as before, the monarchy is now more responsive to controversy, according to Robert Hardman.

Faced with accusations of racism in the royal family launched by Harry and his wife Meghan, the queen reacted quickly in a press release, assuring that she took the matter seriously while stating that “memories may vary”. But Harry and Meghan’s exile in the United States in 2020 has done damage. “He deprived the monarchy of one of its saviors,” Harry told Ed Owens.

“Meghan a également incarné certaines des vertus que Diana avait également cherché à projeter”, note-t-il, soulignant sa façon d’exprimer ses émotions et de se montrer “sensitive aux préoccupations des gens ordinaires, aux vies des gens dans le monde Developing.”

For him, the “big mistake” of the 96-year-old queen in the last two decades has been mainly the management of the crisis of Prince Andrew, often presented as her favorite son. Accused of sexual assault in connection with the Epstein case in the United States, Prince Andrew ended up paying several million dollars. A month later, Elizabeth II allowed him to accompany her to a church service in memory of her late husband, Prince Philip.

“The Queen may not have learned the lesson of the late 1990s as well as she could have,” says Mr Owens. The historian believes that similar “traps” stand in the way of Charles, criticized for donations of controversial origins to his association or positions considered unsuitable for a future king. Unlike his mother, Charles lacks “subtlety” according to Ed Owens. “That’s going to cause problems.”

Author: Jerome Lachasse with AFP
Source: BFM TV

- Advertisement -

Related Posts