The excessive coverage of Prince Philip is not simply about one man

By Richard Sudan

(Richard Sudan is a journalist, writer and TV reporter working for Press TV.)

The coverage of the death of Prince Philip has been thoroughly exhausted, for many nauseating, while seemingly never-ending. At the time of writing, eleven days after Philip’s death, media platforms remain full of ‘news pieces’, comment articles, and news coverage discussing the life and death of the 99 year-old, who died on April 9th.

There are two sides to every coin, of course. On the one hand, Prince Philip was a husband, father, grandfather, and great-grandfather.

And to be clear, I do not mean to speak ill of the dead. My view of Prince Philip is not personal. I care about him and the Royal family about as much as they’ve ever cared about me.  But that’s the point.

All of the so-called news coverage painting them as an everyday family, delving into so-called family feuds, combing through the Prince’s life while uncritically glamorising his so-called achievements, distract and divert from one inescapable truth, which is continually overlooked and side-lined. And for good reason.

Because the fact is, the very existence of the Royal Family is offensive to countless people around the world, outside of Britain. The empire and wealth they sit upon and symbolise was accumulated at the expense of nations, for whom the British flag represents the plunder and pillage of wealth and resources alongside an immeasurable loss of life. There’s nothing flamboyant or particularly edgy about saying this. It’s the plain truth.

And that’s why puff pieces like this one in the Daily Mail are necessary in Britain, to try to keep up the mirage with ordinary people and detract from the truth of history. As is the case with the story highlighted, for example, the much publicised symbolism of Black people in a former British colony worshipping Prince Philip, as a literal God, in news articles, is no accident. It’s by design.

Blatant propaganda like this creates the perception that somehow, areas around the world which have suffered immensely at the hands of Britain, through colonialism and modern-day neo-colonialism, view the empire and the British monarchy as a force for good in the world. 

There are many in Britain, who are certainly taught and believe this. But it’s a complete fabrication, and a whitewashing of history.

And of course, the nature of all of this coverage isn’t really about Prince Philip, who was described as an ‘extraordinary man from an extraordinary generation’.

It’s really about self-flattery, an exercise of indulgence in British nationalism, and an opportunity to try to rejuvenate a battered image of the Royal Family in the wake of the Prince Andrew scandal which refuses to go away, and also the bombshell interview from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. 

These two episodes, proved to be a complete disaster for the Royal Family from which perhaps irreparable damage was done.

But to be fair, not everybody in Britain was pleased with the back to back rolling coverage of events following Prince Philip’s passing. 

While millions in Britain remain perpetually enthralled to the Royal Family, the BBC, funded by the taxpayer, received hundreds of thousands of complaints concerning the wall-to-wall coverage of Philip’s death.

The Sunday Times newspaper also received complaints about the trivialisation of racist comments made by Prince Philip in the past. And to be clear, racist and bigoted comments made by him were not an anomaly. They were numerous.

The fact Prince Philip was born in Greece, outside of Britain while the Royal Family has German ancestry, made for an interesting observation for some.  

At a time when many die-hard British nationalists maintain a decisively anti-immigrant stance and perspective, the fact that the Queen, who many of those same people profess loyalty to, chose an immigrant as her spouse, is an irony apparently lost on them.

What did make the news coverage too, in the wake of the death of Prince Philip, were photos of him flanking Nazis in the 1930s, attending a Nazi funeral, mourning the death of his sister.  

While proximity might be one thing, interestingly, Philip also reportedly once described Adolf Hitler’s attempts to restore Germany to a superpower as ‘attractive’.

These facts of course, have not been the focus of mainstream coverage.  Those pages have been devoted to highlighting that Prince Philip was a devoted husband and subject of the Queen while portraying him as an almost heroic public servant.

What there is no question about, is that the mainstream media, loyal to the British state, has milked the last few days for all of the political capital possible.

While there are very real problems in Britain affecting millions, such as homelessness, joblessness and a crippled NHS in the midst of a pandemic, more and more people have been discussing the relevance, and ultimately the expense, of the Royal Family in the 21st century, while the conduct of the individuals within it, has been ever more the subject of focus.

At the time of writing, coverage of Prince Philip in the aftermath of his death and funeral, has continued and will likely continue in the coming days. 

But the whole exercise has not simply taken place to mark the passing of one man.  It has been used in a continual cycle of news to revamp the image and public perception of the Royal Family which has been severely impacted of late, on the ropes, and for very good reason too.

^{The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV.}

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk