The tabloids' voracious appetite for royal stories feeds our insatiable hunger for regal revelations. The Royals decry the intrusion, but over the last 60 years the press has repeatedly dug up tales of Royal misbehavior. Are they justified to print? Since the very beginning of the Queen's reign, and the promise that her family are really just like everyone else, the British public's appetite to read about every detail of the lives of the Windsors, has fueled huge tabloid sales. That hunger has led to some amazing headlines of just how badly they can misbehave, and some equally shocking press tactics in getting those stories. In this program we look at the events that have brought us from the first photos of 'Party Princess' Margaret in a swimsuit to Harry and Meghan's press ban. From lifting the lid on secret affairs and family arguments that the royals would rather keep private, the tabloid press has kept us informed about almost every juicy titbit. Britain's most famous family may well be funded by our taxes but shouldn't they be afforded a little privacy? Equally can tabloid tales be given some credit for how well Will and Kate have knuckled down to their job as King and Queen in waiting? Tabloid revelations have had a big hand in how we view our royals. Tabloid tales of royals behaving badly always shift newspapers. From secret affairs, to just who was rude to whom- the royals might hate it but it seems the British public just can't get enough. But are such embarrassing headlines always justified?
