Jump to content

Coronation


Recommended Posts

Just now, m williamson said:

They don't , but as the difference was over 33 million it won't make up the difference will it? There were thousands attended the international match as well.

 

The contrast in the number of  flags and bunting put up for the England team and the number on display for the coronation was noticeable.

That just suggests to me that it's possible to be a football fan and be both a royalist or non royalist.

 

TV figures and how much bunting you see in your local area isn't an indication of the countries support or non support 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, harvey19 said:

You can't compare these occurrences as a true reflection of support throughout not only the UK but the support world wide.

Most supporters do so quietly it is the non supporters who are the most vociferous.

 

There is more interest than support as far as the rest of the world is concerned and much of that interest is similar to interest in the Kardashians. TV programs featuring real life people are well supported because a lot of people apparently like to nosey into others affairs.

 

Most supporters do so quietly? Could have fooled me looking at the Mall yesterday. Protestors were prevented from protesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Delayed said:

That just suggests to me that it's possible to be a football fan and be both a royalist or non royalist.

 

TV figures and how much bunting you see in your local area isn't an indication of the countries support or non support 

Isn't it? How convenient for those claiming that the majority support the monarchy. How do you explain that more people watched the coronation on TV in 1953 when only 21% of households had TV than in 2023 when 95% of households have TV?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, m williamson said:

Isn't it? How convenient for those claiming that the majority support the monarchy. How do you explain that more people watched the coronation on TV in 1953 when only 21% of households had TV than in 2023 when 95% of households have TV?

I'm not wanting to explain as I don't care enough but I'd put more stock in opinion polls about the support for the royal family today rather than questionable TV stats from the 50s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, janie48 said:

I  really enjoyed watching the Coronation on TV, and at times felt quite emotional.

 

 

Especially when the wonderful music Zadok the Priest  was performed by the excellent choir at the service in Westminster Abbey. 

 

 

 

You felt quite emotional, its a wonder you didn't fall quite asleep.😴

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, m williamson said:

Isn't it? How convenient for those claiming that the majority support the monarchy. How do you explain that more people watched the coronation on TV in 1953 when only 21% of households had TV than in 2023 when 95% of households have TV?

Probably because there was only 1 TV station then but with several stations covering the ceremony now I would ask if all stations viewing figures have been collated or are you just quoting the figures watching the BBC on both occasions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Delayed said:

I'm not wanting to explain as I don't care enough but I'd put more stock in opinion polls about the support for the royal family today rather than questionable TV stats from the 50s

Yes, I've found that people tend to put more stock in things that support their point of view.  Polls are not of course completely reliable, answers can be influenced by the way the question is framed and also by where and when the poll is conducted.

The Brexit poll got it wrong and that wasn't an isolated instance of incorrect predictions by pollsters. https://www.itv.com/news/2017-04-18/times-the-election-polls-got-it-wrong

 

If you want a positive response for the monarchy carry out the survey in a Waitrose carpark, if you want a negative one do it at Anfield before or after a match.

Support for the monarchy has declined, especially among the younger generation. I doubt anything will change too much and there is no way a vote will be allowed, so monarchists can relax. 

4 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

Probably because there was only 1 TV station then but with several stations covering the ceremony now I would ask if all stations viewing figures have been collated or are you just quoting the figures watching the BBC on both occasions.

The jingoistic Express with bunting around its title confirms it.

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1767255/coronation-viewing-figures-compared-spt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, m williamson said:

Yes, I've found that people tend to put more stock in things that support their point of view.  Polls are not of course completely reliable, answers can be influenced by the way the question is framed and also by where and when the poll is conducted.

The Brexit poll got it wrong and that wasn't an isolated instance of incorrect predictions by pollsters. https://www.itv.com/news/2017-04-18/times-the-election-polls-got-it-wrong

 

If you want a positive response for the monarchy carry out the survey in a Waitrose carpark, if you want a negative one do it at Anfield before or after a match.

Support for the monarchy has declined, especially among the younger generation. I doubt anything will change too much and there is no way a vote will be allowed, so monarchists can relax. 

I agree that support has declined .

There used to be a saying that years ago in a poor household there would be framed pictures of the monarch or a crucifix.

Different things to have faith in.

Edited by harvey19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

I agree that support has declined .

There used to be a saying that years ago in a poor household there would be framed pictures of the monarch or a crucifix.

Different things to have faith in.

Royalists have been spoilt by the queen. She carried out her anachronistic duty in an exemplary fashion. She was old school and understood how to play the game.

Nobody among hoi polloi knew what her politics were, even though she had weekly meetings with the current PM and got to influence things despite being unelected.

Charles has a reputation for sticking his oar in. Once he does that there will be people who disagree and want to know why an unelected person can influence policy in what is supposed to be a democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.