Sunday, 20 July 2008

Person gets married at a wedding attended by Kate Middleton

Yes. That's right. A person has gotten married at a wedding that was attended by Kate Middleton. Well not just any old person. The bride was Lady Rose Windsor, the 28-year-old daughter of the Queen’s cousin, the Duke of Gloucester. So the royal connections cast aside like yesterdays dinner, the UK media whips themselves into a frenzy about the appearance of always the invitee and never the bride, Kate Middleton.

The Times headline reads: Lady Rose Windsor, and Kate Middleton, in bloom. To their credit, the esteemed British newspaper doesn't mention Kate until the 2nd paragraph. But when they do they all but decree she's next to marry into the family. The Times article, written by "no one" says: "Almost as many eyes were on Kate Middleton who confirmed her growing position in the royal fold by turning up without Prince William, her boyfriend. She wore a pale blue jacket with a duck egg blue dress and a black feather fascinator." Almost, but surely not "all" eyes were on Kate?

Meanwhile both the Mail On Sunday and Daily Telegraph throw away any semblance of journalistic integrity by omitting the bride totally from the headline and going straight for Kate Middleton, royal wedding attendee. The Daily Telegraph's article, written by a person appropriately called Roya Nikkah (it could be a reference to Kate Middleton's appearance at "that" St Andrew's fashion show in "that" set of knickers as well as her penchant for flashing us a look up her dress every time she steps out of a cab or sits on a floor at a costume party) - has a headline entitled: Kate Middleton attends another royal wedding. Yes, she was there and the Telegraph took 6 paragraphs of Kate Middleton-drivel before actually giving us any details of the main focus of the day. The bride.

Of Kate Ms/Mr Roya Nikkah said: "Miss Middleton wore a knee-length floral-print satin dress and a cropped blue jacket, accessorised with a black fascinator – the hair accessory favoured recently by both the Queen and the Duchess of Cornwall." What? No quotes from the obligatory "royal sources" to ram home just how near Kate is to having her own royal wedding? Boring!

Never Kate-failing Mail On Sunday brings up the rear once again by totally bypassing any mention of the bride and groom and focussing bizarrely on Kate's "Marilyn Monroe" moment. Lack of volumous breasts and hourglass figure aside, the Mail On Sunday tells us that whilst Kate was like Miss Monroe she wasn't Monroe. Their article written by Mr James Tapper (I'm sorry. Even I can't/won't touch that one with a ten foot pole) had the headline of: Kate Middleton legs it at second Royal wedding without her Prince. A given considering Wills is thousands of kilometres away supposedly exercising with the navy. Or is that "on" exercise with the navy I can never figure out which one?

Anyway, with the flood of Kate-loving we've all come to expect (and loathe) the Mail On Sunday article manages to slot Lady Rose and Mr Gilman's names somewhere in the article with the copious Kate drivel. They finally get around to mentioning who Rose was and why the guests were all dressed up like a bunch of chooks at a village fete (the ladies...I suppose that fits the male guests as well) in the 7th paragraph with just the smallest of mentions regarding Lady Rose in the 2nd paragraph. Even these were just secondary notes to the real story..Kate and her flying dress that defied gravity. The MOS said: "Miss Middleton's floaty knee-length dress caught the wind and defied gravity yesterday as she arrived for the wedding of Lady Rose Windsor. "

So there you have it. A quick view of the Kateness occurring at weddings far and wide. Not only is Kate more unique and perfect than we ever imagined, she can also defy gravity. I'm now waiting for her to part the English Channel and feed the masses. Now that would be unique.

To read more about the Kateness around us, click here.

1 comment:

Wendy M said...

Great Article!!!

Free Blog CounterSoftware Dis...