Earl Spencer reiterates claim about King Charles's alleged remark after Diana's death
Unbiased summary
Earl Spencer, brother of Diana, Princess of Wales, has publicly insisted that King Charles told him "rest assured, we'll forget her soon enough" during a phone call days after Diana's death in 1997. Buckingham Palace issued a rare statement suggesting grief may cloud memory but did not directly deny the claim. Spencer's memoir, Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, is being serialized in the Daily Mail. Additional excerpts include alleged reactions of Queen Elizabeth II to the car crash and claims about lack of care for Prince Harry. Spencer said he is telling the truth and has not heard the King deny the words.
Generated with deepseek-ai/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 (NIM)
Coverage by outlet
The Guardian
left
Angle
Frames the dispute as a clash between a truth-telling memoir and an evasive, defensive monarchy, with satirical commentary on royal public relations.
Bias
The Guardian emphasizes Spencer's credibility and the palace's 'smudged' response, using strong language like 'bombshell' and 'monstrous'. The accompanying opinion piece and cartoon mock the royal family, treating the episode as tabloid entertainment. It omits any questioning of Spencer's motives and downplays the lack of corroborating evidence.
The Mirror
centre-left
Angle
Sensationalizes the royal rift, adding new claims about the late Queen and highlighting the 'war of words'.
Bias
The Mirror focuses on additional inflammatory details (Queen's 'tetchy' question) and uses phrases like 'furious war of words' and 'astonishing claims'. It gives prominence to royal sources calling the claims 'utter nonsense' but overall frames the story as royal drama. It includes Prince Harry's non-response, suggesting wider family impact, but does not critically assess Spencer's reliability.
BBC News
centre-left
Angle
Presents a balanced but slightly sympathetic view of Spencer's interview while noting the palace's response, with deeper historical context.
Bias
BBC provides factual reporting of Spencer's exact words and the palace statement, but includes an analysis piece that emphasizes the royal family's vulnerability and public mood in 1997. It gives voice to both sides but subtly frames the palace's rebuttal as 'unusually angry' and notes the wounds are raw. It omits any skepticism about Spencer's lack of evidence beyond his own recollection.
The Independent
centre-left
Angle
Aggregates the latest claims and frames them as 'bombshell' revelations that could 'tear the Royal Family apart'.
Bias
The Independent leads with the late Queen's 'tetchy' reaction and lists 'top five bombshell claims' in a clickbait style. It includes palace response but focuses on the drama and potential fallout. It omits any analysis of the credibility of Spencer's claims or the palace's strategy, instead presenting endless excerpts without substantial critical distance.
i Paper
centre
Angle
Tries to be measured but centers on the palace's internal frustration and questions the earl's motives.
Bias
The i Paper gives balanced coverage but adds a behind-the-scenes angle: palace officials questioning 'is it just about money?' and saying the King is furious. It emphasizes the reputational risk to Charles and notes Harry's awareness. This framing leans toward the palace's perspective more than other centre-left outlets, while still reporting Spencer's defense without comment.
Daily Mail
right
Angle
Uses its exclusive serialization to amplify the controversy, with a mix of support for the King and fascination with the scandal.
Bias
The Daily Mail publishes the extracts and headlines that maximize conflict ('bitter war of words', 'searing memoir'). But it also includes pieces defending the King, such as Kemi Badenoch's backing and criticism of the palace's response as a 'mistake'. It highlights Spencer's claims but frames them as 'incendiary' and 'bombshell', while also giving space to royal aides questioning Spencer's motives. Overall, it seeks to profit from the story while maintaining some establishment sympathy.
GB News
right
Angle
Focuses on the late Queen's alleged 'tetchy' reaction, framing Spencer's claims as an 'explosive swipe' against a beloved figure.
Bias
GB News leads with the less serious but more provocative claim about the Queen, using language like 'explosive swipe' and 'dismissive'. It emphasizes the palace's breaking with convention, but frames the monarch as a victim of attacks. It omits the broader context of Spencer's grief and the substantive dispute over the King's alleged comment, instead focusing on the Queen's reaction as an emotional hook.