Her womanly & motherly ways should be an example to us all. Diana was a bright light in a dark world, but is now an everlasting star, which will be there for those that look for it. May God bless her sons with the never-ending memories of the affections and love that she bestowed upon them. May God bless us all as we remember Princess Diana as she was, and as she is, in His presence.
I had mixed feelings about the your program
on the late Princess Diana. On one hand ,
I enjoyed the coverage of the Monarchy
but this was overshadowed by the objection
to what seemed like a "get the press off the
hook" contend. In sum, I thought you had a
bad thesis, one resembling a Greek tragedy.
Too much was said of her and too little
of responsible journalism .
I was terribly disappointed in your latest documentary featuring the now deceased Princess of Wales and her "relationship" with the British media.
I have always counted on "Frontline" to provide in-depth documentaries regarding pertinent issues facing our nation and the world.
It did not surprise me in the least to witness the behavior of the
mainstream media (CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS) during the period following
Princess Diana's death. I, however, was shocked to find "Frontline"
joining that motley crew in feeding off of her deceased body.
What was the value in yet again parading British "royal
watchers"/"journalists" across the screen expounding on their knowledge of gossip about her private life. Let alone showing embarrassing tabloid photographs as well as playing embarrassing audio tapes of the Princess and her husband. Finally, joining the mainstream media's line that the Princess actually enjoyed all of the attention she received from this multi-billion dollar industry.
I expect more from "Frontline", or at least did in the past. Now I
ask the more pertinent question....where can I go to find news coverage which is NOT laden with gossip and innuendo? Sadly, "Frontline", I thought you were one of the few the answers left in this nation.
Sincerely and sadly,
Noel Ann Porter
Did we really need another show about Princess Di? Has Frontline decided it is necessary to cater to the lowest common denominator? In the guise of a serious discussion of the Press you have really just added to the media and public obsession with celebrity and celebrity gossip. You are the only show left that even occasionally provides a forum for serious documentaries. It is a shame that this valuable forum is being wasted and trivialized with celebrity pandering that is in excess all over the television dial.
Thank you so much for the presentation of the Princess and the Press. I have been a tried and true fan of Diana since the age of 17. I am now 35. It was very informative and very un-bias. I hope that future shows are dedicated to Diana also. She was a true giver from the heart and a gift that god gave us for such a short time. Thanks again.
I guess your show was one of the few I've missed on the never-ending saga of this wonderful icon of modern culture. I think the world has been obsessed with this fairy tale story over the years. I'm sad that the world won't be able to see the dynamic woman Diana was slowly becoming, and be able to watch her age with grace and dignity. With all the controversial stories about 'who done it' we hear daily in the news, I will forever, in my own heart, put most of the blame on the Fayed family for putting Diana in the position of being at 'their' mercy.....their bodyguards, their drivers, their escorts, their yachts, palaces, hotels, etc. They forced Diana to be 'protected' at their standards, not the ones she was used to, like her own valet, her own drivers, her own protection. Never would they have allowed excessive speeds to dodge the press. Why would she? She had been living with them for 16 years. I truly feel Dodi was so anxious to allude them for his own purposes and made a spectacle of them. I'm just so very sorry she didn't have her seat belt on, as she was always adamant about with herself and her children. Diana's 'protectors' would have never allowed this scenario to even exist. That's the tragedy.
Why can't our news cover the human interest stories in the loving fashion that they exist...like yesterday's tremendous news about 7 babies born healthy, and the goodness of the world in their contributions to their well-being, or stories of human interest like Charles Kuralt brought to our TVs weekly. Today's news broadcasters would never devote their career to human interest like he did. Those are the stories I am 'obsessed' with from the press. Let Diana rest in peace, and let her children enjoy being the normal kids she tried so hard to allow them to be. Let them enjoy a hamburger in their blue jeans without 60-90 cameras filming every bite. Let them walk in her footsteps into the world without us being able to witness every step.
I've never turned away from a FRONTLINE program before. I began to watch your Diana story only because of my faith in the amazing standard of quality your documentary series has maintained in the past. After one hour I turned it off, perhaps missing revelations reserved for the end. It seemed strange to have FRONTLINE (particularly the wonderfully emotive narrator) devoted to such a thin and redundant topic.
Despite all the attention she drew, it was always clear she was unexceptional. She was mixed-up and sad. In the BBC interview, she often talked of her "work," and I doubted she could know what the word meant. She couldn't know what she couldn't know.
The day of your broadcast coincided with the further media amazement that she was, at the time of her death, headed toward a role opposite Kevin Costner in a "Bodyguard" movie sequel. It's become difficult to even take her memory seriously.
I really enjoyed your program the other evening about Princess
Diana and the Press. I have been a royal watcher for many years because I am
originally for England and it's a natural past time to be interest in the Royal
Family. It is still unbelievable that she is gone. I always had dreamt of
seeing her in person, but that will never happen, she will be greatly
When I was channel surfing tonight I happened to run into Frontline and "The
Princess and the Press". I was really amazed at how fast the program was
produced, along with how truly unbiased it was. I enjoyed hearing all the good
things/bad things that both Diana and did publicly Charles during their
As an American citizen, I appreciated learning more about the strict traditions
of the British Monarchy. All I can say now is I think that has era gone sour.
After the loss of Diana to such an obnoxious way of life, shouldn't it be
stopped, or at least reformed? Doesn't anybody care about the real people in
this world? (As in the thousands of unfortunate people Diana wanted so dearly
to comfort and help?) Time to move on folks... monarchy and celeb stalking is a
waste of you precious time.
Lauren A. Bass
I thought the program very well done. Diana's death was a tragic event brought
on by her driver's speed and alcohol consumption and secondarily the attention
of the press in all her movements, which she, at times invited.
Thank you for presenting such many and varied topics for our viewing. I may
not always agree with your slant of the subject matter, but you always give me
reason to think and analyze.
Upper Darby, PA
I just happened upon your site. I find that
a lot of attention going toward the Princess Diana
can be very offensive . Cant we just let it go.
we all know she is in a far better place. The media
just want a lot of money so the go along with what
ever makes the most money. We need to let it go for
the sake of the children that she loved so much.
They have enough to deal with .... like the Queen.
It's really striking how "fair" you tried to be on the program. For what?
Since, when is life fair and so balanced as that program? I don't think I have
ever seen such a "balance" on any Frontline program. It was too balanced.
I'm not a Diana or a Charles fan. The program did not express any opinions on
the subject, except of those interviewed from either the Diana or Charles camp.
Just the dry facts?
What about the social implications of all of this? The British monarchy uses
the English people. They are sovereign rich people. Why shouldn't they use
anything for their own purposes, even the press? They wanted to dump the
princess that was obvious. I guess the next statement doesn't have to be said.
Diana's death was very tragic and sad. My final thought is that the program
was a complete waste and not even timely.
San Diego, CA
I enjoyed the show! I do think that Andrew Morton told things best. I think
it was probably true that Diana felt so much love and attention from the media
and the public and didn't feel special with the Royal Family.
I also agree with the tempestuous notion of the Spencers mentioned by Morton.
At the time of her death, I was particularly disturbed by the statement by her
brother that all of the media "should have blood on its hands". He said this
before any investigation had been done. It certainly does seem that Diana
loved the media attention but, as anyone would, would like to be bale to turn
it off at times. Too bad it doesn't work that way. I do feel, though, that
she would have exuded media attention whether she ever used it or not, so I
don't think that should be an issue. It was never right that she be so hounded
by the press. I've thought about it and just can't imagine how awful it would
be to never be able to leave your home without the press in your face. This
harassment should definitely be illegal.
As far as the accident goes and
assigning responsibility between the driver and the press, it is not yet
definitive. However, no matter
if the press was in pursuit, it doesn't make sense that Dodi and Diana hired a
drunk driver. From the news reports I've heard, the driver had been drinking
for some time that day and had a history of heavy drinking and had a very high
alcohol level at the time of the accident. Had he known he was on call to
driver perhaps he may have acted differently. I do wish he could have felt
comfortably about saying "I'm sorry, I can't drive, I've been drinking".
Nonetheless, as drunk as he was, why were Dodi and Diana comfortable with his
The only answer I can think of is that they both had a bit to drink themselves.
There have been no reports of their alcohol levels, but I can't imagine that
anyone who was halfway sober would hire a drunk driver. I also wonder that
since the knew about all the media waiting outside why not just stay at the
Ritz? Ultimately, everyone is responsible for their actions, and having two
children to think of, Diana should have never agreed to get into a car with a
I have also heard that the Ritz has confirmed that Dodi called the driver but
the driver had been drinking in the lounge at the Ritz. I don't think it's
fair that the Ritz bear no responsibility in the actions of their employee.
Obviously, Al Fayed wouldn't know about each employee and what they were doing
al the time, but the safeguards, etc. should have been set up with his company
so that a drunk driver would not have been at the wheel that night or any
night. I think Al Fayed should take responsibility rather than blame it on his
Judith E. Houghton
I think that it is time to let her go. If people would just stop and think of
the impact these programs and articles and interviews is having on her
children. They need time to heal and this is not the way to do it. Think of
what they must be going through right now. Do they really need to keep hearing
how she was not loved, how she was hounded by certain departments of the media
and how poorly their family treated her? If people really admired Diana, our
thoughts should be on what can we do to help her children, how her works with
the Red Cross and homeless shelters and hospitals can
Schiller Park, IL
As a lifelong reader of British history with
a keen interest in the human drama of the
English monarchy, I looked forward to your
Frontline feature "The Princess and the
Press". But the program saddened, almost
angered me. I admired Diana Princess of Wales
with a discreet and respectful awe. I was
never interested in the 'tabloid' escapades,
but saw her as a complicated woman in a
privileged but onerous role of historical
importance. I had once hoped to see her
crowned queen. Her death was a shock, at first
but now seems to me a horrible and ironic
inevitability. Your program vilified her
with insidious subtlety.
She gave so much to
her family, her empire, and the world - why
was she not allowed the basic human right of
personal privacy? The press used her, sold
her as a dehumanized commodity, and now you
are defiling her even in death. Must compassion
be continually sacrificed for greed? Diana
is not an icon or a product, she was flesh and
blood and soul, a mother, sister, daughter,
wife and spirit who was crushed by the money
machine. Please re-examine your editorial
view and re-broadcast a piece on Diana worthy
of her tender heart and humanitarian legacy.
Deborah F. Eastman
Is this really necessary? I thought that this media frenzy was all over and
done with. shame on you for reporting such stuff - quoting from such tabloid
sources should make you suspect. Have we seen enough of this already? I think
so, but obviously you would prefer to dredge up such sad and sensational
views. How disgusting. I thought you knew better, but obviously I was
I was a Di watcher, especially in these latter years. Her appeal,
unfortunately, was her problems, for she proved to be quite human. I
identified with her since I, too, battled anorexia and bulimia as well as
married a wandering eye. I felt like a soul sister to her, though we never
met. As she stood up to the royal family, I cheered. Not with hatred toward
the royals for they mean little to me, but in celebration that a fellow
survivor did what was psychologically healthy. It is such a shame that she
died before she truly lived.
Thank you for a well-documented glimpse into her life via the news people who
played such a big part of her popularity and, sadly, her death.
Your program held my interest for several reasons the millions of other
programs have not:
1. Your broad coverage on the life of Princess Diana in the media, dating back
to her first arriving on the scene in 1980. I remember being fascinated with
her while at the age of 10 years old myself then.
2. The way you presented the beautiful evolution of this incredible
woman's life from "commoner" to royalty. The transformation she had to go
through was amazing and she did it with taste and glamour. I'm pretty tired of
seeing the same old news coverage of her death and the details that are none of
my business, so your presentation on her LIFE was refreshing.
3. The fact that I had to look at myself as one who fed on the Diana
frenzy and possibly contributed to her torment by the paparazzi. If it
weren't for me and other people who have to have all the latest and juiciest
details about her, she may not have been so hounded by the press. Thank you
for making me look at myself and really evaluate how my actions and dollars
affect the lives of those in the media.
Grand Blanc, MI
I was not able to watch your program on the princess and the press last night
so I taped it and watched it this morning. What I found so disturbing is that
a show of your usual high caliber has stooped to programming which places you
squarely in the company of those you wish to examine.
I have noticed with increasing alarm as public television has become more and
more aligned with the general state of shoddy features and reporting as we find
in today's media. My feeling is that this story was not meant to enlighten but
to enhance ratings. For years I have counted on PBS and the programs it offers
such as yours, to present topics which enlighten and inform the public and
which have important impact upon their lives. Instead I find that with this
particular program Frontline has thrown this principle out the
You would have served yourself better as well as your viewers if the thrust of
this particular program had been tailored not upon the princess and the press
but presented a hard-driving piece of television journalism about the appalling
quality and tactics found in all forms of media today.
Yes, I find it tragic what happened to Princess Diana, but maybe she is only
the poster girl, the symptom of the underlying cause. Come on Frontline go out
and get the real story. It is time that someone has the courage to chastise
the media, its journalists, as well as its viewers to raise the standards of
Susan M. Cashin
The real tragedy of your program tonight is not the love/hate
relationship of the press and the Royal family, and Diana's subsequent horrific
death, but the loss of integrity in the news institution itself.
These are the days of rushing to print or air with unsubstantiated
reports, rumors, innuendo and speculation. The days of previously
unthinkable "anonymous sources" being given the credibility of solid
As a former CBS News employee, I was privileged to have Walter Cronkite as my
boss. I learned valuable lessons about integrity and
news-gathering from him. His like will never be seen again. We are,
instead, seeing a complete dissolution of lines between tabloid and
"respectable" news media in search of ever higher ratings and more
profit. Gone are the days when news was considered a public service.
And we are the poorer for it.
Nora Siri Bock
New York, New York
Shame on you for airing such dreck. You have tarnished your image by wasting
valuable time and funding for something people believe is nothing more than
tabloid news. If I want to watch such nonsense, I'll tune into MSNBC. Please
concentrate your attention on newsworthy stories. Your program was
Lost City, WV
I find your propagation of the position that because Diana sometimes invited
the media's presence she forfeited any rights to privacy as very self-serving
to your profession. That such a view could be seriously put forth suggests a
serious absence of ethics.
Alan Vande Kop
I budgeted an hour and a half of my personal time to watch your show "The
Princess and the Press", expecting to learn what really happened in that tunnel
in Paris. Instead, all I got was every reason
(plausible and implausible) that Diana was also to blame, with
absolutely nothing detailing the press involvement in Diana's death.
Way to go! You'd make Rupert Murdoch proud.
I enjoyed The Princess and The Press but hated the continuous
justification and rationalization by media members. One more "...she
sometimes WANTED press coverage..." would have prompted me to change
I think even celebrities in the public eye deserve a certain amount
of privacy. Must they turn over their most intimate moments to the public?
When they are out in public places perhaps they are fair game but they should
be permitted to leave that behind and should not be continuously pursued.
As always, I enjoyed your show tonight.
They are always informative and I look forward
to them. You always present a 'fair' straight
forward outlook at any subject you tackle. It
it for that reason I catch all your programs.
As for this one on Princess Diana, it was extremely
well done! First one on PBS since her death. It
brought back all the drama of that time to me and
I shall value my recording of it.
Thank you for the excellent program and keep up the
Casa Grande, Az.
Your special report about Princess Di, was absolutely amazing. I think
it is one of the last opportunities I had to remember such an amazing and
incredible woman, in modern history. I personally appreciated the
documentary which let us know the happiest and hardest moment of such an
admired personality of all times.
Thank you for letting the public have this last and great opportunity to
Princess Diana's life and person was that of someone that should be
highly regarded and loved and respected worldwide. She was the essence of
love, compassion, benevolence and genuineness to hug the human spirit and yes
a beauty no doubt! SHE WAS A TRUE PRINCESS, THE ONE MANY DREAM OF, THE KIND
THAT MAKES FAIRY TALES COME ALIVE.
Her humanitarian heart had no other interest than to love and be loved back.
Her instincts, as a torn and tormented woman made miserable by Prince Charles,
were not those of a lunatic or schizophrenic patient and to make her look like
so is one of the worst and most backstabbing actions taken against her. After
all, she did feed you all Paparazzi, didn't she?
Princess Diana's pure mind and soul were savagely attacked and left
brutally in the hands of murdering people. killing and breaking her
life intrusively and terribly by low riff raff who have no concept of
morals nor of the human heart and its essence to preserve love in a
world full of hate and crime.
Diana, a passionate young human being, with desires to be loved back from her
very husband could only do what any other young human being would have done to
get it all back. Her public image struggle and a royal fight was much more
poisonous bite than anybody else in the world can ever dig into and come out
alive. Her strength (and no weakness) showed through the years, while pulling
herself to peek out from such a masquerade and web of lies and to come forward
triumphantly holding the flag of humanitarian facts.
Is it not enough to have her death chucked in our throats? Is it not
enough that she was a victim of a cruel and very abusive husband? Is it not
enough to have the immense public threat shoved down her fragile spine? Is it
not enough that she was de-crowned and humiliated by the Royals already? Has
she not paid enough with her own personal sufferings made so public and her
very essence conspired upon and doubted? Is she not dead because of the
To this day, my heart has not ceased to cry for someone so brutally
murdered, so viciously beaten up over and over but not just "someone" instead
PRINCESS DIANA OUR QUEEN OF HEARTS LAYS DEAD AND NO PRESS OR MEDIA WILL EVER
BRING HER BACK! ONLY HER SPIRIT AND BEAUTIFUL SOUL REMAINS WITH US TODAY. So
why cannot the world respect her soul and leave her alone , you know she wont
come back to get you.
P.S. DIANA YOUR HEART AND SOUL STAYS WITH ALL OF US, PEOPLE WHO CARED FOR YOU
PEOPLE WHO WILL MAKE IT A POINT TO CONTINUE YOUR WORK AND WORD.
Mina Diaz de Rivera
I really liked Prince Diana so it was good to remember her again. I have
everything about her and Prince Charles so that very few facts presented on
program were new. I would have rather heard the good news of the love
Fergi and her husband to make up for all this sadness. I think that Oprah is
have Fergie on TV tomorrow to tell us about it. Fergie did have much
given to her on Oprah and all stood up and clapped last time she was on. No
what she has done, there is something genuine and adorable about her.
Phoenix, AZ USA
The thrust of the "Princess and the Press" is
that the public, through it's intermediary,
the Press, has become increasingly uncivilized
as our civilization gets older.
While we realize that the discreet celebrity
coverage of the past was not necessarily apropos,
we have now journeyed to the other extreme
where salacious gossip is considered newsworthy.
Today's "journalists" seem to think anything,
especially if it is titillating, is news.
It is not. The result is an intolerable intrusion
into celebrities lives which is unwarranted and
venal. Yes we, the public, are guilty of buying
the newspapers which carry salacious headlines.
But the journalists and paparazzi must shoulder
the blame also for they have not just fed the
demand, they have created it.
And at the end of the day what has been accomplished.
Publishers are richer but the world is poorer
for it has lost, not only a life (the Princess)
but it's code of ethics which should have been
the signposts pointing the way towards future
progress for this round of civilization.
When we think of Diana, we think of the many wonderful attributes she
possessed. When we look to ourselves, we see a need for change in terms of our
hunger for gossip; not only has it cost Diana's life, but in true essence, it
represents our true inner selves in terms of us looking to others to seek the
desirable traits Diana possessed. If we individually possessed her radiance, we
would not have been so
enthralled by her mere presence in out world. With her death, let Diana go.
Lets focus on what she wanted us to see all along: the pain and anguish within
I do not understand the fascination with Diana. Perhaps it is an indication of
the shallowness of today's People magazine society that so many people can be
so intrigued by a woman as shallow as they are. Diana would never have been in
front of a camera, or in most of the parts of the world she frequented, or even
of any interest at all had she not married the man who will one day be the
monarch. While she was certainly canny about using the press and giving
unthinking people the feeling that they "knew her," she really was, in her own
words, "thick as a plank. "The Princess Royal does much more for humanity that
Diana ever did but does it without the arranged fanfare.
Lake Placid, FL
There are a couple of issues that your otherwise thorough documentary seemed to
dodge. The initial issue is rather obvious: the "why" of Diana's popularity,
and therefore her pursuant press. What archetype did she evoke in the western
imagination? The virgin princess; the wronged queen; the lady of the lake?
Whatever it was, it was primeval and heady stuff--not wholly created by either
her or Murdoch's minions, but rather derivative and ultimately deadly: icons
don't wither, they press as to their breasts, they take a fast and lethal rides
in the dead of night. Which brings me to the second issue. She was married at
age 19. Think about this. We shudder at the idea of our own daughters
marrying this young. Her life was scripted and she, of course, helped write
the script. But she was child when she wed the prince, and she had to put away
her childish things before all the world. I have nothing but pity for this
woman and for her sons--who have also been thrust into
Why didn't you entitle your program that way? Was this an attempt to
objectively document the events that led to Diana's death, was this a study of
a social phenomenon, or was this an editorial.
I believe the latter: you manipulated all the shots and video clips that are
available to you in order to state your belief that Diana was hypocritical in
her relations towards the press and that she deserved what she got...is there a
vested interest here? How can you honestly believe that you can objectively
report (if anything the like is ever possible) on the press if you are the
press? You can edit anything to make us believe that she was a manipulator,
just as you did when you made us believe that she was a saint when she was
killed in that accident...oh, and how gallant of you to make sure that we all
get that you chose not to show the crumpled car and the debris, etc. (
we all know that you could have) !!!!!
I commend you...Goebbles couldn't have done a better job.