I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist. I tend to view such things through the lens of what my father often referred to as a "finely tuned bullshit detector." But, if I were going to believe in things like faked moon landings and second shooters, I might look for ways people in power were able to disguise those events. How could they possibly keep us from knowing about mind control drugs released in the contrails of airplanes or aliens at Area 51? If I had a hunch, it would be via celebrity gossip.
Why else would an entire world sit rapt by the daily lives of the British royal family?
On Monday, it was revealed that the former Kate Middleton and her husband, the would-be King of England, were going to have a second child. Thrilling news, I'm sure for them and their family. Yet, every news outlet on the planet reported it and tweets of congratulations hit the twitterverse from Dr. Oz to the Kardsashian kids -- you think I'm joking.
The stories even spent time discussing Kate's morning sickness, spurred on by her husband letting slip that it had been a tricky pregnancy so far. Brit tabloids must be in a sheer panic about now trying to get every scoop possible on the latest royal baby. Granted, this poor kid won't get the attention his/her older brother -- heir to the Iron Throne or whatever they call it -- got (ask Prince Harry if that is an issue), but it will come.
Meanwhile here in the colonies, we're dealing with a football player whose career may be over because of video footage showing him beating his wife unconscious in an elevator. In Gaza, new footage is emerging of the devastation from Israeli drone strikes there before the cease fire. ISIS continues to execute journalists and anyone not interested in supporting their extremist views. In other words, the world continues to spin on its axis and we humans act as insane as ever.
But stop the freaking presses because the royal family is having another baby!
This begs the question: How relevant is the royal family anyway? I don't know a ton about British politics, but it seems to me that the monarchy is rather antiquated in both concept and practical use. British Parliament and the Prime Minister appear to do all the heavy lifting and with good reason. Yet, we all love the damn royals.
We Believe Local Journalism is Critical to the Life of a City
Engaging with our readers is essential to the mission of the Houston Press. Make a financial contribution or sign up for a newsletter, and help us keep telling Houston’s stories with no paywalls.
Support Our Journalism
In a storage closet in my office, I have a box labeled "VHS TAPES." Inside are a bunch of old video tapes I have kept from back when the DVR didn't exist. Some of them are old music videos I recorded off overnight TV shows in the '80s. Some are movies or comedy specials. But one is unique. There, sandwiched between recordings of the 1983 U.S. Festival and Live Aid, in my mom's handwriting it says: "Royal Wedding."
This is not the William and Kate affair. No, this is Charles and Diana. My mother was adamant that we fire up our VCR -- which, by the way, was the size and weight of a boat anchor -- to record the much celebrated nuptials.
The only difference between then and now is the density of coverage. They had newspapers, even gossip rags back then. But, they didn't have the barrage of 24/7 coverage of every story from every angle -- well, at least the ones that draw the most clicks and viewers. And the royal baby, at least from that standpoint, computes.
We all get to look forward to speculation over what gender the child might be, what clothes he or she might wear, how Kate will get back to her size 6 after childbirth and what everyone on the planet thinks about the issue, whether we want to know or not. That nine months can't be up soon enough.