The brothers had called for the removal of the images from the film Diana: The Witnesses in the Tunnel because plans to screen the pictures left them ‘deeply distressed’.Today the Shropshire Star’s Royal Correspondent Shirley Tart gives her verdict on the programme:
Did we see her final moments? Did we see her body? No, we did not. But we might just as well have done. The shots cutting out Diana’s face but showing a passing doctor leaning over her, shadows and images in the back of the wrecked Mercedes and most of all, the narration of Diana: The Witnesses in the Tunnel, were in part more explicit than any photograph might have been.
Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. And just because Channel 4 could make the admittedly clever and shocking documentary aired last night, does not mean that they should have done so.
And claims that they would not use some of the most controversial pictures in the world cut little ice when a sombre voice invited us throughout to imagine the gruesome details which were withheld.
What else can you make of lines like “she was a beautiful woman, her head was down, she was having difficulties breathing É” “she was jammed between the front and back seats É” “at the hospital she was lying on a stretcher, looking very serene, just bruisingÉ” “she had a trickle of blood on her forehead but no other visible injuries É”
Did I need a photograph to picture the distressing scene? I did not.
Former Oswestry man Trevor Rees was the only person in the car to survive and, as Diana was given oxygen, a student was trying to help the bodyguard. The aim of this latest focus on events of a decade ago which shook the world, placed paparazzi photographers in the frame, spawned conspiracy theories and even suggested the Duke of Edinburgh had a hand in it all. In the absence of an inquest, such high-temperature nonsense has been allowed to flourish.
Channel 4 says that pulling the programme would have created a dangerous precedent with a serious impact on news coverage of high-profile tragedies like 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings.
That’s nonsense. This is not a new topic. We are 10 years on, a fortune has been made by hundreds who have exploited the tragedy and last night’s film told us little new. But it underlined the distasteful obsession with a dead princess, it ignored the concerns and anxieties of Diana’s sons and then treated us like idiots by painting word pictures as bad, if not worse, than those from a camera.
10 Comments
Er, Shirley, you’ve told us that Channel 4 shouldn’t have made the programme, but you’ve not told us why they shouldn’t have made the programme …
The obsession with Diana just proves to me that the country needs to eventually become a democratic republic and abolish the monarchy.
SOONER RATHER THAN LATER !!!
We have seen programmes detailing in some detail the suffering of people in the Twin Towers, the people in the bombed trains and bus in London, documentaries about the atrocities on both sides in the Northern Ireland troubles - some have journalistic merit - others are tabloid sensationalism, but either way, why should the death of a Royal be treated any differently?
I saw the documentary, and thought that it had a serious purpose in that it painted a different perspective to the paparazzi ‘involvement’. It also further nailed the idea that there is some grand conspiracy, (Mr Al Fayed and the Daily Express - I hope you watched it too). The controversial pictures were grainy blakc and white photocopies, and could have been of almost anyone.
I saw nothing unusually sickening in the programme - sadly people die as a result of drunk drivers all the time. I thought the pre-programme hype was more disturbing, and Shirley Tart’s fawning over the Royal family would be far more likely to turn my stomach than anything shown on screen.
why oh why is the british public
relentlessly subject to the roughshod forced so called entertainment from these tv,for want of a better word, companies
it is because all ofer the world, quality has gone out of the window
bring backthe lone ranger and john wayne
After all the publicity people knew what the program would be showing, so it was there choice to watch or not.
So far, Channel 4 have received 2000 official complaints.
I assume the total number of viewers exceeded this derisory figure, therefore why all the fuss?
The simple reason behind the publics continuing interest in the whole sorry saga is simply because of all the unanswered questions.
So yes, the programme should have been shown.
Who knows, maybe more evidence will come to light…..
‘So far, Channel 4 have received 2000 official complaints.’
That’s true, but the prgramme attracted several million viewers, and tellingly, only a couple of hundred people complained after it was shown - the rest complained purely on the basis of hearsay.
oh please please live this poor soul alone please think of the 2 princes i know they are in the public domain but none of us would like all this attention on our own dead mothers would we ?
Why cant everyone just leave her alone, years have passed and people are still digging up the past. let her soul rest in peace. she was such a beautiful woman who is still now even in her grave not being able to rest. coz of ignorant people like urself. Leave her be for gods sake.
Princess Diana was involved in a car crash because she was hounded by the paparazzi. We live in society that is obsessed by celebrity and the situation is only getting worse. Diana should be allowed to rest in peace. It is of no importance to anyone what happened in Diana’s car after inpact. Its the people that watch this garbage and constantly buy the tripe so called celebrity magazines that continue to fuel the culture of celebrity!! Its high time “certain members of the public” stopped fueling this ridiculous obsession!