How much is the right amount of coverage for the death of a royal consort?
On Saturday 10 April, the day after Prince Philip died, the Guardian newspaper’s front page carried a black-and-white portrait of the duke, followed by 12 more pages of news – including a four-page obituary – one comment piece and a leader article.
It was the only national paper (other than the Financial Times) not to offer a special supplement alongside the main coverage, but for some readers it was still too much. Between the readers’ editor’s office and the letters desk, we received about 100 complaints.
One reader wrote: “I find it difficult to comprehend how the Guardian can devote 13 pages of its Saturday edition to the death of Prince Philip. In proclaiming a self-avowed republican editorial policy, how can you rationalise such overkill that smacks of the sort of media coverage in an authoritarian country when the head of state dies.”
Another – who seemingly did not share the leader article’s view that in Covid times “other families can today see themselves, their own bereavements and their own losses and sadnesses reflected. That is one of the reasons why this death is indeed a national event for Britain” – told us: “I felt your coverage of the recent death of Prince Philip was totally disproportionate – especially in the context [of the] number of lives lost through the pandemic and the impact of that on specific communities. It smacked of one life being more…
