Princess Diana: The Final Year - Jan. 1997 to April 1997
A look at the British Media Coverage of Princess Diana
Besides Bill Clinton exploiting the power imbalance between himself and a female intern (weird way to learn what a bj is), my first real memory of a breaking news event was Princess Diana’s tragic death on August 31st 1997. I recall walking through the cramped kitchen at my grandparent’s townhome in New Jersey, catching the tail end of a conversation between my grandmother and one of my aunts about Princess Diana dying in a car crash in Paris. I remember the music most of all. I spent months trying to record the perfect cut of “Candle in the Wind (Goodbye English Rose)” on my boombox, ripped from 106.7 Lite FM. (Was this the OG Napster?) It was unbearably sad in a way my undeveloped 9 1/2 year-old brain could not fully comprehend. I didn’t know the enormity of Diana, except for the fact that my mom’s ‘80s wedding look was clearly inspired by Diana, sans a 25 foot train.
Since I wasn’t flipping through the UK papers at the breakfast table at the tender age of 9, Slim Fast in my hand, resplendent in shoulder pads and feathered hair, my only frame of reference for Princess Diana is how exalted she has become in the media since her death. I had no idea how the cruel coverage had been painted over by years and years of tributes and adoration, so much so that you can barely see the original color.
There was a time where Diana was not an asset to the British Royal Family: she was a liability. A time where every move she made, every hair out of place, every pound gained or lost at risk of incessant scrutiny by an insatiable press.
With the anniversary of Diana’s death quickly approaching, I want to take a look back at the coverage from the final year, January 1997 - August 31st 1997. Then, I’ll look at the immediate post-Diana coverage and how the media scrambled to “protect” their industry and save face with a very angry public. This post will focus on January 1997 to April 1997.
Note: These articles are just a sampling of the relentless coverage Princess Diana received that I unearthed from the British Newspaper Archives. If what I’m showing you is a few snowflakes, know that the actual coverage was an avalanche.
Princess Diana’s Media Coverage January 1997 - April 1997
January 1997
The British Media may applaud Diana’s sons for following in her footsteps with charity work now, but they ridiculed her efforts when she was alive.
Princess Diana’s trip to Angola in January 1997 for an anti-landmine campaign is met with skepticism. She is ridiculed for her attempt to get, what some saw as, “political.” She is chided for her love of the finer things in life and when she engages in a serious endeavor. She cannot win.
This article quotes The Times, which spoke to a minister who referred to Diana as a “loose cannon” that the British Government did not need getting in their way of serious work. It goes on to say that she is “ill-advised” and unhelpful.
This article goes as far as to cynically caption a picture of Princess Diana, engaged with a child who lost a limb as a result of the landmines as, “the perfect photo opportunity.” Again, no one takes the Princess of Wales seriously.
Another story claimed that the Armed Forces Minister, Nicholas Soames, had been linked with a smear campaign to sabotage Diana’s work in Angola with the Red Cross. Soames just happened to be a close friend of then-Prince Charles.
The other big piece of “news” in January 1997 are staffing changes. Naturally Princess Diana is to blame. (Sound familiar?) An aide quits and suddenly articles pop up like this:
If she were known as her other title, Duchess of Cornwall, one can imagine the phrase “Duchess Difficult” wielded in the broadsheets.
February 1997
February brings more landmine talk and a theme we’ll see come up again and again: Diana’s love/hate relationship with the paparazzi and the paparazzi’s attempt to defend their invasion into her life.
There’s a lot of discussion — really assertion — from the media and the paparazzi in particular that Diana doesn’t hate the attention, she craves it. And while I’m not going to completely dismiss the fact that Diana courted media at times, occasionally playing the game, she was never allowed to quit. Sit a round out. Let someone else take a turn. A lot of the claims from the media feel like justification for unending coverage of Diana. The equivalent of stating when a girl says, “No” she really means, “Yes.”
In this piece paps are quoted as saying that, Diana “wants to be a private person” but deep down there’s this “little monster” who wants to be a Princess. They felt she was desperate to be in the papers and in some ways felt they are doing her a service. She used them, why not use her? Just as creepy as the justifications themselves is the over familiarity these men, who pretty much stalk her, seem to feel toward Diana. It has shades of the parasocial relationships we see regular people have with celebrities on social media.
Despite protests that the British Royal Family never sues over stories, Princess Diana serves a libel writ to Express Newspapers in February 1997 over allegations that she would receive the proceeds from the charity auction of her dresses. There are a number of auctions of Diana’s clothing in 1997, which feels rather ominous in hindsight. Like she was preparing for a next chapter without knowing a tragic conclusion was already in the works. A book — a life — cut too short.
March 1997
March of 1997 brings Diana some good news. The Princess of Wales accepts an out of court settlement for her libel writ case against Express Newspapers. She meets one of her heroes, Nelson Mandela. Also, breaking news, if you think it’s hard to be Princess Diana, imagine being her impersonator!
Christina Hance packed in her up to £5,000 a day job as a Diana impersonator stating: “The lack of privacy has been difficult to deal with.” Riveting. This has yet to impact that Taylor Swift impersonator that doesn’t really look like her and parades around with bodyguards as a joke. I wonder if Diana ever wished she could shed her skin and blend in like Hance.
April 1997
In April there was an altercation involving Diana and a pap attempting to take her picture as she left a gym in Earl’s Court, London. Diana flagged down a bystander to wrestle the camera from the pap and retrieve the film.
Diana is referred to as “dim wit” for having the audacity to leave her home to exercise. “No, instead she has to traipse all across London in damp straggly hair, long black coat and slippers […].” The woman left her house.
The Mirror proclaims (and doesn’t stick to) their promise to stop buying paparazzi photos of Diana because of violence against…paparazzi. They do admit that Diana, “endures the most intensive media attention of any single person in the world.” That’s about as close to self-reflection as we’re going to get.
April also brings some Camilla vs. Diana commentary along with Dr. Khan — Diana’s love interest.
Decades later, the coverage of Meghan Markle is eerily similar to that of her late mother-in-law, Princess Diana’s (post for another time). One example is when she gets in hot water over not visiting Wales — she was then-Princess of Wales after all — but she didn’t go because she didn’t want to overshadow the Prince of Wales — future King Charles — which would undoubtedly have led to trouble with the palace. If she went she would be accused of stealing the spotlight. If she didn’t go, it’s a dereliction of duty.
Finally, it’s predicted that if Diana’s palace security doesn’t improve she will get hurt.
Well, they were right about one part, but not the source of the real danger.
Stay tuned for part 2.
-Meredith
Interesting and well done! It’s so fascinating (and sad) to see how little the press coverage has changed when a royal steps from the “norm”. Also found out I’m 10 years older than you (!!!😖🫣😂 I’m in complete denial of my age) but I say that cuz here in the states Princess Di was loved even with all the bad uk press, so the love that came from the press after her death didn’t seem odd..... until you look back and see they’re full of crap and just in it for the money
Meredith this is good. I saw a documentary on Diana and one segment of the documentary was about the landmines in Angola. She was so upset that one of her assistants received information that Diana was doing this to get attention and it was a publicity stunt. It is a shame how this woman was treated by the media, monarchy and British people.