How a fan with an iPhone beat the UK’s top photogs to capture the Royals on Christmas Day

“It’s the picture that has gone around the world,” Olivia Rudgard reports for The Telegraph. “But the first image of the ‘Fab Four’ – the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, with Prince Harry and his fiancee Meghan Markle – was taken not by a professional photographer, but a single mother with an iPhone, who hopes the fees will help fund her daughter through university.”

“The image was taken by Karen Murdoch, 39, who was waiting outside St Mary Magdalene Church near the Sandringham estate as the Royals walked to the Christmas Day service,” Rudgard reports. “She was inundated with media requests after posting the photo on Twitter, and it appeared on the front pages of several national newspapers on Boxing Day, as well as in international media organisations in Australia and the USA.

Rudgard reports, “The image captures the two couples looking relaxed and happy, with the Duchess and Prince Harry both looking directly at the camera.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Congratulations, Karen! Apple’s trusty iPhone comes through yet again!


    1. Karen Murdoch was able to take that photograph because of some favourable circumstances.

      At events of this nature, the press are herded into a press pen and at this site, it isn’t sited particularly favourably. Karen was fortunate to find herself in a position where the two princes and their other halves were all grouped together and all smiling. By the time the royals had walked on to be within range of the press photographers, they had split up into smaller groups, so there wasn’t an opportunity to get the ‘money shot’ that Karen took.

      Great photography is often about capturing a special moment. That’s exactly what Karen did with her iPhone.

    1. Your post gives a lot of food for thought (once we eliminate the offensive parts).

      That gene pool was, after all, one of the very reasons for at least some of the colonies breaking away from the empire (if none else, at least the USA).

      On the other hand, those who do hit that gene pool roulette jackpot tend to go through rigorous programme of training in order to live up to the expectations that the pool automatically confers upon them. The second-in-line to the throne, William, was an active duty pilot for the RAF, as well as the Royal Navy (flying C-17 Globemaster, as well as the Sea King helicopters). He left the military service with the rank of Major. His brother Harry was with the Royal Army at first, and saw combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He eventually also trained to fly helicopters. After multiple tours of duty in combat zones, he left the military service with the rank of Captain. So, while these guys may have simply won the gene pool roulette, they seem to have done quite a few more things of valor (to earn their royal privilege) than the last four US presidents, none of whom ever saw any combat (or meaningful active military service).

    2. … in the U.S. they worship actors, singers, reality show personalities, YouTubers, TV evangelists, and anyone with a shitload of money.
      Speaking of gene pools, by the way this country is going it looks like a case of massive inbreeding.
      Stop casting stones botvinnik.

      1. Be careful about including everyone with the word “they”

        In some cases, at least “admiration” (worship is a British thing) is due to what they have done, not for genetics.

        If you list any one person in the above categories, chances are the average person on the street has never heard of them. So called fame is so dispersed now days that few people get wide attention.

    3. Happens here, too. Look at the racism and misogyny of many of your pals and idols, for example. It is all just gene pool roulette, dude. And you and your ilk are the biggest offenders.

      1. No, honest, botvinnik, your party’s attitudes to race, gender, and national origin are essentially based on what you refer to as “gene pool roulette”. You do not see your own hypocrisy.

    4. It’s funny how your hero Trump is so utterly desperate to meet the British Royal family. It’s even more funny that the Obamas are personal friends of Prince Harry and would normally be expected to receive invitations to his forthcoming wedding, but it appears that such an invitation would upset Trump so much that they might have to not invite the Obamas in order to avoid a diplomatic incident.

      However, that wedding is a private event, not a state wedding like with Prince William had, so different rules apply. Furthermore, Prince William doesn’t always follow strict royal protocols, so might decide to invite whoever he feels like inviting. Friendship might take precedence over diplomacy, but if the Queen instructs Harry that he must not invite the Obamas then he would have to reluctantly obey.

      It’s also worth noting that the ‘young royals’ who Trump especially wants to be seen with are not at all keen to meet with Trump. If Trump ever manages to make an official State Visit to Britain, rather than the ‘working’ visit in the spring, it will be amusing to see which of the young royals find ways to be elsewhere during that visit.

        1. The report was in The Times ( AKA The London Times by some ). The Times is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who has very close connections with both Trump and with the UK government. Other Murdoch owned newspapers in the UK are offering additional detail on that story. When Murdoch newspapers say something about Trump, you can’t easily dismiss it as fake news, even if you find the story inconvenient.

            1. I’m not a fan of our Royals, so you can insult them as much as you wish and it won’t concern me, but if rumours are to believed, Prince Harry might not be as inbred as some of his relatives, which would make your ‘inbred’ slur somewhat wide of the mark.

    5. Botvinnik – we don’t, even though papers like the Mail and the Express will tell you that we do. It is a stain on democracy that the UK is called ‘democratic’ when its Head of State is unelected. (BTW, if you are a Catholic you are removed from the line of Succession to the Throne). The Upper House (of Lords) is also unelected – although if you ‘donate’ enough to the main political parties you should get at least a knighthood.

    1. yeah, well, I understand this: if the British don’t find themselves another Winston Churchill and find him fast, there’s not going to be a United Kingdom much longer.

      1. There won’t be a United Kingdom much longer. Britain is turning inwards, has become a divided nation and is losing influence around the world. America is doing a similar thing but on an even bigger scale.

        Russia believes its playing a smart game, but it’s China that will soon become the predominant global superpower.

        A combination of western stupidity and Chinese strategic planning is going to change the world very rapidly.

  1. Just stop covering the so-called royals. It’s absurd and outrageous that in the 21st century anyone cares about rich people with titles, especially Americans, whose history began with a complete rejection of monarchy and titles. What the British “royals” do should be as irrelevant and unimportant as what the Kardashians do.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.