EagleTribune.com, North Andover, MA


July 26, 2013

Editorial: Many are unmoved by news of royal birth

Did you hear the news? There was a baby born in England on Monday.

It would be pretty hard to escape the headlines announcing that Prince William and Kate Middleton welcomed their baby boy into the world Monday. His name is common enough — George — but he does have an impressive title — His Royal Highness the Prince of Cambridge.

The hubbub over this royal birth brings up those age-old questions about the odd kinship between our nation and our former colonial masters: Isn’t our country founded on a strong disdain for the monarchy? And do most Americans really have a “love affair” with the royal family, or is it force fed to them by the media?

Certainly there was a lot of force feeding going on this week and last. The media was staked out outside the hospital for days. Updates in front of the hospital’s closed door were breathlessly broadcast across our nation. There was even some temporary panic when it was thought that the media was staked out in front of the wrong hospital.

But there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that the media coverage aside, we Americans are for the most part apathetic when it comes to the royals. Of note is a 2011 New York Times poll regarding the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton. It was heavily covered and even broadcast live, yet the survey found only 6 percent of Americans were following news about the wedding “very closely,” and 22 percent said they were following it “somewhat closely.” The other 72 percent were either not interested at all, or were not following it very closely.

The most interesting part of that survey was how the British people felt about the wedding — they were nearly as apathetic as we Yanks. Some 70 percent were not following it closely, or “not at all.”

Text Only | Photo Reprints

Helium debate
Political News