MCN Blogs
Kim Voynar

By Kim Voynar

How to Have a Royal Wedding in the Age of Social Media

This picture of Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice arriving for the Royal Wedding is my favorite pic from the official photostream of the wedding. Check out those hats. You have to have been born a royal to pull off outfits like those with your dignity intact.

If ever there was a sign that we are firmly entrenched in the age of technology, with no way out except perhaps the robot apocalypse, it’s surely the way the British Royals took advantage of the Internet and social media in the handling of Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding.

The Official Royal Wedding website was flush with information for royal watchers — everything from the Official Royal Wedding Photographs to the live feed of the wedding itself, to information for those coming to London for the big day.

There’s a link to the Royal Wedding Charitable Gift Fund that was set up so well-wishers could donate to charitable causes rather than send the Duke and Duchess tons of stuff they don’t need, and so many Official Videos you could kill an awful lot of “work” time watching them.

Point being: It was smart of the royal family to recognize that William and Kate are of a younger generation, and to use that to their advantage in satisfying the hunger of millions of royal watchers to feel “in the know” by putting tons of information out there — while also carefully controlling what was put out there. Can you even imagine the meeting where someone sat down with Queen Elizabeth to explain to her why there should be an official Royal Wedding website, and what Twitter, Facebook and Flickr are?

Or maybe I’m not giving her enough credit. Maybe Her Royal Majesty is already savvy to the ways of the Internet age, and she’s hanging out on Facebook playing Farmville all day and tweeting under some anonymous name.

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Responses to “How to Have a Royal Wedding in the Age of Social Media”

  1. This is a joke, right? Those hats are a joke?

  2. Jan Gray says:

    What a jike, a pretzel is a good look for a wedding hat????

  3. John Smith says:

    Eugenie looks well hot!

  4. your momma says:

    your momma is hotter than that

  5. bejeweledcat says:

    They look like the wicked stepsisters from Cinderalla!

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon