Purchased a FORA.tv video on another website? Login here with the temporary account credentials included in your receipt.
Sign up today to receive our weekly newsletter and special announcements.
Good Evening. Yes you sit there please. Good Evening. I'm Will Hearst and I'm very glad to be here with you and in conversation with Tina Brown. Tina is somebody I've known over many years, mainly as a brilliant editor. I'm thinking Vanity Fair and the New Yorker among two of her projects. But tonight she is here with us as an author, of a really wonderful book that I have been immersed in for the last few days. So we should really just dive right in Tina, because one thing, I didn't know what to expect when I was told you were doing this book on Princess Diana, and there has been so much written about her. This is a marvelously detailed book. A real historical biography with footnotes and five hundred pages of enormous detail. So let me ask you how did you get interested in this subject, what drew you to this, because you obviously spent an amazing amount of research? Yes. First of all can everybody hear me okay? Good, good. Because sometimes it doesn't work. Its great to be here. I love coming here to San Francisco to do this gig with my old friend Will. What drew me to it, was the chance, in a sense, to put Diana in the context of her era, her class, and the media. It wasn't only the story about Diana that attracted me, although that did attract me. But having covered Diana, and really followed and felt involved with that story since 1981, when I was editor of Tatler magazine in England. And the princess, Lady Di, as she was then, rose first to prominence really at the same time that I was a young editor. So we sort of watched her evolve as a story. I thought how interesting it would be, ten years after her death, to sort of look at the whole picture. Instead of just seeing her in terms of this guy, or sound bytes, or infidelity, or Charles, it was wonderful just to see her in this whole tapestry... We're getting to all of that. Right. Good. So in a way you had kind of a parallel life, because you covered her. One of the things that is most interesting about this book - to me and I learned a lot. But I didn't know many of the things about her earliest life and you did I think some very original work in sort of finding you know, what her family life was sort of the Well, the Spencer's - the Diana before anyone really - knew who she was. It is almost like the secret years of Diana Spencer. I think it is almost as you know; Bush's missing years in the National Guard. But sort of you know, the social, the high society version. It was a little tiny window of time when Diana Spencer did have a life that wasn't famous. And that's really in a sense what most attracted me. And I really kind of got into that one. I went to Althorp to kind of obviously to get to know the house and I saw some of the early family newsreels of the family home movies of the Spencer's in the early days of the 60s when Diana was sort of six and seven. Then what really struck me was just how sort of emblematic they were, of a certain kind of upper class family living in a certain kind of way that had a kind of poignancy because you know, once upon a time she wasn't famous. And it's hard to even imagine that. The Spencer's were a family that was far troubled than advertised actually. In fact when you really learn the family history you sort of wonder how the Royal family could ever have made the mistake thinking that this girl could have turned out anything except big trouble because everybody in that family was troubled. It was a family that was in war with itself and everybody else. You know the mother and father have this acrimonious divorce. The mother went off when Diana was six. The it was a really awful divorce. It made the sort of Alec Baldwin-Kim Basinger divorce look like you know a walk in the park. The terrible relationship between Diana's mother and her mother because her Diana's grandmother testified against her own mother when she in the custody case for Diana and her brother because the grandmother Lady Fermoy wanted the kids to be brought up as Spencer's and then in the middle of all this like a puff in a puff of purple smoke or something from wicked comes Raine Spencer I just lost my ear piece who is the evil stepmother, who Diana really couldn't stand either can you hear me? I am sorry, this is -. Other way. Who Diana absolutely hated and the other children absolutely hated. So you know this was a family that was so driven with bitter feelings that it was a much more interesting group of people than I had ever realized, great material. Well, which brings us to Charles I suppose, so how I you know, it puzzled me the relationship between the two as I read your book because he I never realized how much jumping in and out of beds all the royals were doing -. I know. They are an unbelievably horny lot. There is no question about that. I mean apparently stocking after grouse and long dull dinners makes you quite horny but -. So did Diana did Charles really loved her at some point or was this an arranged marriage or was this an arranged marriage or what do you think? Well it's I think there was some tenderness there. I really do at the beginning. I think that Charles was beguiled by her kind of captivated by her, amused by her at the very beginning. The fact is the entire family were conspired to make him marry her. She was the last virgin left in the UK, I mean that was the -. There was this endless sort of search for the virgin bride which you know, in the 70s, in the era of the Sex Pistols, things were getting you know, desperate. And Diana was 19 and she was sort of didn't seem to have a past. She came to the most noble family that you could imagine. 500 years worth of Spencer's had been related or vow for the Royal family. And everybody wanted thought she would be perfect. And Charles you know, thought she would probably be perfect too. Another person who thought she would be perfect was Camilla because Camilla was already Charles's mistress and Camilla when she kind of had a look at Diana and sort of looked her over thought perfect. You know she is young, naÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¯ve, she will produce the heir and the spare, she will simply get on with it and I would be there for good. But of course little did Camilla know that Diana literally would turn into the mouse that brought - that she would literally transform before our very eyes into this incredible, gorgeous superstar. That wasn't in Camilla's script or in anyone's script for that matter. But Charles and Camilla then were already close and I mean that was something that that struck me was he had to sort of break it off with Camilla to go ahead with this marriage. But they never really were all that far apart. No Charles and Camilla were you know, still very much involved. And it was partly because of the Royal family's anxiety about the Camilla presence. Their biggest torment was that Prince Charles was going to turn into Edward the VIII with Wallis Simpson. That there was going to be a permanent married woman problem for Charles and they wanted to get him married because they because I mean they really felt that Camilla was an issue. And it's interesting to me how the arc of the Camilla story was always entwined therefore with the arc of Diana's because it was really because of the Camilla that Diana became so very important, to get him married you know, that he must get married. I think though that he was beguiled and enchanted by her and I don't think it's true to say that that some people do that he never loved her. I think particularly as a matter of fact, towards the end of their life of Diana's life their relationship was at its best, actually. And it was a very touching scene, I thought, when after the divorce, when in the July before she died, Charles came to see her at Kensington Palace and when the Diana opened the door, she said to him, so Charles have you come to get the furniture? And Charles said, no, no I have come to wish you happy birthday Diana. And they had tea together and sat and they laughed and they talked and the person watching said you know, it really I could see that this could have been something good. It could have actually been a good relationship and my feelings throughout was that it would never have been a great marriage, wouldn't have been a terrific marriage but it could have been a permanently negotiated truth you know, it could have been - Yeah. - a decent cordial marriage of the English kind. But for all this "sturm und drang" and smoke and mirrors of of what was happening off stage with Camilla. And so let's talk a little bit about what got in the way. Was it the Queen was I mean Camilla in this book - in your book, comes across as very clever and smart about Charles and sort of able to empathize with him when he is off, talking to plans - doing all these other things and she was quite canny and sort of - She was so shrewd and so tough. I mean she is amazing character. So was it Camilla and how did where did the Queen fit in? Well. We are all thinking of Helen Mirren of course. I wouldn't think of Helen Mirren. One of the people closest to the Queen said to me, the only thing wrong with the move was when the Queen saw the stag she would have shot it herself. Elizabeth the II is a very admirable woman. There is no question about it. But as a touchy feely mother in law she is not the person you would most think of. And unfortunately for Diana she was always looking for a mother substitute because of her mother had gone. So Diana was always very attracted to the older women as mentors and friends and pathetically almost comically, she always wanted Elizabeth the II to be one of those people for her, a mentor or someone who she could who could take you know, an interest in having so but you know the thing about the Queen is that she doesn't have those kinds of relationships with the people. She expresses her affection with somebody by shared interest. If she likes you her she would indicate by talking to you about dogs or horses or the day's racing results or something that of that nature. But she is not going to say, gosh how marvelous to see you darling, that's not what she is going to do, just not who she is. She would have all her life she has been raised not to do those things. I think it became a real issue in the Royal family quite early, just how upstaged they felt by Diana. Yes. That was really I think that two things killed that marriage. One of course was Camilla. But I think just as corrosive really was this question of the jealousy they all felt for the incredible super powers you know of Diana in terms of the media. You know they they could not get arrested as long as Diana was around. I mean the Queen would open Parliament, turn up in her jewel encrusted and her crown, sitting in her throne the whole thing. And what were the press writing? You know Di's new hair style you know. She got a hair cut that day. And there was on one occasion in that Princess Margaret said you know, how dare she turn up with the new hair cut? You know well. I mean they became absolutely paranoid about everything she did which I understand because they just they couldn't get any ink. Yeah. It's a terrible business. Diana did have a marvelous ability to sort of create her own character. And part of what comes out in the book is that this is a very contradictory character you know, you talked about how she wanted the Queen's approval. And yet she was undermining all of these old traditions, Balmoral in August and all this kind of thing. She was very subversive, Diana. She was wonderfully subversive, that's why I like her ofcourse. And you know Prince Philip used to call her a fifth columnist because you know, he felt that how did that happen? This girl from the noble Spencer family, whose father was the Equerry to the Queen, which is like the right hand of the Queen both whose grand parents were ladies in waiting to the Queen Mother and his two aunts were ladies in waiting. Somehow she came into the Royal family and then like guy folk she proceeds to sort of blow up the houses of the Parliament. I mean, they couldn't get it in terms if like, what happened? You know what had we let into our family? But she was subversive, Diana, she was I actually tend to feel that she had a very contradictory attitude towards the establishment from the word go because her grand mother Lady Fermoy testifying against her mother because of wanting her to be in the establishment and the part of court circle. I think it planted in Diana, a real sort of ambivalence towards this sort of establishment. Because she really felt it sent two messages to her, one, the establishment were cold-hearted and and to be defied and also though that you have to manipulate it to make it work. It was a sort of bad message for a young girl to receive all the way through her family background. So she always had an ambivalence towards it. But she also fought back it with all the weapons that she could and in the end they made her into a revolutionary. By the way, they they treated her you know they they wanted to write her out of the script, they wanted to erase her. And she wouldn't allow herself to be erased and the more the jealous of her they became and the more they tried to tamp her down and the more of course Charles wouldn't leave Camilla, she just decided she was going to use the weapons that she had, which was the media and her popularity and she used them to the hilt. Well, she had an amazing ability to sort of read what the British media and you should talk for a minute about the difference between let's say the US Media. We don't have quite the tabloid culture that London have and I found that an interesting part of the book as well Oh, it's so interesting. I mean, look the British media was going through a real kind of transition at the time that Diana rose you know, in the public consciousness because Rupert Murdoch had you know, come in some just a few years before and bought The Sun Newspaper and in doing so really changed kind of tabloid values, the gloves came off. And instead of the culture of difference towards the royal family, you which had always been there where by the Royals were always politely written about. Basically Rupert's kind of colonial sort of maverick street meant that he just thought they are like everybody else. We are going to take them down. And they used to refer to the photographers of The Sun used to refer to photographing the Royals as whacking the Germans, they used to call. And Kelvin McKenzie would come in, and The Editor and they would say you know, "We had a real complaint for the parities". He says, "Oh dear, it's difficult. How can we make then complain again tomorrow noon." So the glove and of course as the success The Sun took off everybody really follow suite. So that was a kind of procedure. So, what era was that? What era are we now, when Well, that was in the in really, in the 70's. And by the time Diana came along it was you know already the gloves were off. And they were also very bored with the Royal Family by that time because they felt that the Royal Family was now like a kind of old curdle you know, British Rails Cheese sandwich. You know they had all got old and boring and so and then along comes this gorgeous fresh faced girl. Yeah. She she's got a great smile you know, and she sells newspapers like there is no tomorrow. I mean Diana just was the ultimate commodity in terms of newspapers. I mean no one before or since has moved a product like Diana. You know a picture on the paper with Diana boom, the sales would go up. Well, Diana read the tabs. I mean she was in the audience as well as the subject of. But she was of that culture in some sense. Well, Diana yes, the thing about Diana was I you know, I called her a tabloid Princess in a tiara because she was a great imbiber of gossip and and newspapers. I mean, she didn't have any education, Diana, she left school. I called her the last uneducated British Girl because she left school at sixteen as aristocratic girls did with no qualifications at all unless you count Hamster husbandry which was one of the things that she was very good at. And, she became a Nanny and a cleaner, and she used to spend her time reading these you know, Barbara Cartland novels which were these romantic you know, day dreamy novels with titles like "Bride of the King", which is one of her favorite. And she loved the gossip columns and she loved the tabloid culture and she understood their narratives and their sort of rags to riches and their boom and their bust and the whole sort of glamorous sort of trashy world of tabloids. And she always she was addicted to the tabloids. She read them all every morning and knew exactly who all the people were. She even knew she knew their names, she knew the journalists names, she knew where they lived even and she knew the names of their wives. She had an extraordinary grasp of who the media was Right. - individually. One of the things that comes out of the book is that while she was at war with the Royals and fighting for her way she still put in would appears from every outward reading to be tremendous energy into her charities and into I think that some of the work that she did, some of the visits that she had to AIDS patients were one of the first times that some one who was very prominent went and touched, felt and hugged people and that was something that seemed to be another side of Diana. That was a completely genuine It's true. I could never its very interesting when I started writing this book, I thought I might end you know, fake Diana out in terms of some of her charity stuff. I thought well, I wonder whether I am going to find that actually you know it wasn't really as real as we think. I never did find that out which is why I really do like Diana because that side of Diana was absolutely authentic. Right from the time when she was a girl she always had an enormous empathy and compassion. It was like she had this huge emotional intelligence that transformed her enabled her to transform others. There was a nice story, when she was 14 and she went with her class on social service work to visit a mental hospital. And one of the things that the patients had to do was sort of the the visiting girls was supposed to do was dance with the patients in the wheel chairs, to music you know, wheel them around. And Diana figured out a way, she was very good at ballet, to dance backwards so she could pull the wheel chairs towards her the patients, you know, she could actually talk to them and laugh and interact with them in their wheel chairs so that they had a real dancing experience and it was a hard thing to do ,it required a certain amount of grace and talent to be able to dance like that but also great I thought, emotional imagination to be able to figure out a way to make that such a lovely experience for the patients. And it was remarkable to the matron, she noted it and said; it was extraordinary you know, the patients absolutely loved her. And that was always true with Diana. She had an extraordinary ability to connect and she also really understood very early on, what I think of as the power of gesture. You know she understood that she could do things which would be translated on the public stage which is where her media sense came into play in the absolute positive sense. She could do things really would change things for the better. And when she decided that she would go to an AIDS ward in 80s mid 80s, at that time you know as we know AIDS was AIDS patients were pariahs to such an extent that the patient that she did shake hands with without gloves, which was unbelievably the big story, was that was so kind of ashamed of having AIDS that he wouldn't have his face in the picture, only the back of himself. But of course by going to that ward and by showing that she would embrace and touch and feel without any protection, she sent this incredibly powerful shock wave around the world that was absolutely positive. And she did that a lot in her life, I mean she was incredible with lepers, she would go and she would grasp the bloody bandages of a leper patient without any covering and she would embrace people who are you know, had sores and she was like a she was a bit like a nurse in the sense that she had absolutely no squeamishness, Diana, for all her high born life and her royal privilege, she was had the amazing sort of brisk, fresh un squeamish spirit of a nurse, I think she could have been I think it was almost a bit like one of those World War I nurses and the you know, in the (Amien) in fact The English Patient was her favorite movie. But she was like that and I think she was amazing in the way she could do that and that was always absolutely real. It comes across as very genuine in the book, there was a story near the end where she has become interested in land mines and she visits this small child who is dying and who dies within you know, very short period of her visit and and I don't know if you feel like telling that story. Yes, she visited in Angola where she was enormously brave to go at the time and she was passionate to bring some some of her media spotlight to the cause of victims of antipersonnel mines. She visited a hospital ward well, it was hardly a hospital, it was a sort of a shack where these kids were and this child that had its whole stomach ripped out and she was so incredible with this child. The child was lying there dying and the child was exposed and the first thing that Diana did, I was told by someone who was there, was that she instinctively covered the child up with a sheet like a mother would. You know her first instinct was the child's decency which was extremely wonderful sort of you know, instinctive maternal gesture. And then she talked to the child in this extraordinarily tender way and the child was just radiant with this visit. It was she had a genuine ability, Diana, to lift people up, to transform them. I mean it was to say it's a healing gift is too perhaps mystical but she certainly had an ability to sort of irradiate people that she visited. And as she moved on to the next bed the child turned to one of the people there and said, who was that, was it an angel? And it was very touching because you can imagine for this child, this beautiful golden girl who would come with her great kindness and warmth and bring her lightness was something that made Diana really very special I think. It's hard to it's hard to untangle all that because there is just example after example of her genuine gift in this area. But then she would sometimes pick a certain day to do something because that I mean that there is this -. That's what I like about her, I mean if Diana was all goody, goody she wouldn't be fun to write about. I mean Diana could be real wicked piece of work, I mean there is no question about that. I mean when she plotted the whole Andrew Morton Yes. - revelations, I mean she was absolutely fiendish. I mean Diana decided she was going to tell her story to Andrew Morton about her about Charles and Camilla and her eating disorder and the miserable scene of Buckingham Palace because she feared that they were going to try to erase her and that she just felt that things were going to get And had the marriage started to break down at that point? Yes it had broken down but wasn't really publicly quite on the rocks. But she had some lovers of her own even - She did. - before all these was - Well that was another reason why she wanted to tell the story because she knew, Diana, that she had been recorded talking on telephone to her lover James Gilbey. And she knew that a newspaper had this tape, it became famously known as the "Squidgygate tape" because Gilbey called her Squidgy all the way through the phone call. Fabulous tape actually, you have to go online and look at it, it's so interesting. And she knew that this tape existed and she knew would come out and it came it was like burn a hole in her head. She knew that as night follows day this tape would finally make it into the public arena. And she knew that when it did come out it would brand her as someone who was not blameless. Right. So she wanted to get her story out quickly before that tape became public. And that was her actual motivation for doing the Morton book. The way she went about it was absolutely devilish. People think that that Morton talked to Diana but actually he didn't. She talked to a doctor called Dr. Colthurst who was her best friend from the old days of being you know the debutante days. And Colthurst used to come in on his bicycle to Kensington Palace with his tape recorder. She would talk to him for hours on the tape recorder. He would then bicycle out and give the tapes to Andrew Morton who would transcribe them all. And then put few a third person things into kind of substantiate it and make it look like a kind of third person book. The (galleys) would then go back to Diana she would all her mark up it was her book. And all the way through she absolutely denied having anything to do with the Andrew Morton she I mean would be asked - Never met the man. - never met the man. Andrew who? I don't know who who is Andrew Morton? The Queen and Prince Philip knew that she had they just knew she had done it. And they called her to Windsor Castle and they said, "Did you do it?" She absolutely stared them down and said "Nothing to do with me have absolutely no idea." Then the Sunday Times extracted this thing for four Sundays running. Diana was sitting there at Highgrove having breakfast with Prince Charles and she let's him know for the first time what is in that book, in The Sunday Times. He is sitting there reading the newspaper with his cereal and his coffee. Yes, you have to build that scene and sort of everyday coming down and - Everyday I mean he comes down to breakfast at Highgrove everyday and has a bowl of you know of his kind of bird cereal, whatever has he had he is all organic you know freshly brewed tea which is full of red currants from the garden or whatever and he comes down and lay down on his breakfast seat is The Sunday Times with this headline you know, Diana tried to kill herself, Charles is heartless fool and Diana is just sitting there eating her boiled egg as if butter wouldn't melt in her mouth. I think that's just amazing thing. What are you reading dear? It's unbelievable stuff. I mean she just talked it out. And at the time that the Queen and Prince Philip asked her if she had anything to do with Morton was the same day she had been the negotiating the serial rights with The Sunday Times. And she said she had nothing to so this is stuff you read with just mounting I mean I was amazed by all of that. I have no idea that Diana was such a brilliant Machiavelli. Yeah in addition to jumping in and out of beds there was a marvelous note of indiscretion. I mean Charles has this over heard cell phone conversation with Camilla that's really one of the most astonishing I don't know whether we can talk about it in public. It's pretty incredible, I know, I mean - But that was before Morton as I recall. Well, actually interesting enough the the taped phone call with Charles and Camilla, the "Camillagate Tape" was taped within days of the "Squidgygate tape". I personally think it's not a coincidence that the Diana tape followed the "Squidgygate" - that "Squidgygate" followed "Camillagate." Well, you suggest in the book that may be there was a government interest in - Yes. I it's quite clear. I mean in all the reporting I did was clear to me that the Camillagate tape was definitely taken off a cell phone. Charles, who would have been in medieval times known as "Charles the unlucky", I think I mean of all the things that happened to you, to have that phone call you know, caught on somebody's cell phone - some guy is sitting there in Cheshire with a pint of beer, he was just doing radio ham stuff and suddenly here is a voice that sounds very, very familiar you know Prince Charles. I think I recognize that voice and its Prince Charles reading over his speech to Camilla at the beginning and when he realize who it is he starts to record. Well, then of course him reading over the speech moves into this unbelievable dirty stuff. And he can't believe, he says, hes in heaven. He thinks this is incredible. And it's within days that the Camilla is taped with James Gilbey at Sandringham but the difference is that tape Diana. - Diana I beg your pardon Diana is taped at Sandringham with talking to her lover Gilbey. That tape it became clear from my reporting that that tape was made on a land line which means then rebroadcast as a as a supposed cell phone to be picked up because all the engineers that I spoke to and I spoke to several ones, getting them to analyze that tape, they said it absolutely could not have taken place on a cell phone for all sort of technical reasons, definitely took place on a land line which means she was being spied on, very likely because somebody knew in existence of the other tape I suspect and I think it was a great hostage for to have that on Diana so that public could really know that But it's really quite a thick intrigue by that point, where you have MI5, taping conversations. It is amazing brew of conspiracy, there is no question. I mean you know, Diana, they like to say they have always said Diana was paranoid, that she thought - well, she had a reason to be paranoid. Right. She was being spied on; there in is no question about that. But you know in a way of course she is being spied on because they knew how dangerous she was, I mean they genuinely feared her. They thought that they had no idea where she was going to strike next. And they wanted to keep an eye on her to see where it was coming from, so that they would always be caught with their pants down, which they always usually were. Well, she she had premonitions about her own death and she had thoughts that she might be subject to a plot and she was in fact you know, the government had the British Government had their had their eye on her. Talk a little bit about what what did you conclude about her actual death? I mean there is still an enquiry going on and Dodi's father is still interested in Yeah. - pursuing this. I mean where did you - Well, it's so interesting - - I mean, I really did investigate it very closely. And although it is an extraordinary thing that Diana did leave this note saying you know, "I expect that I am going to be killed in a car crash." and definitely was obsessed with being bumped off, she really feared it. There is just no way that I could conclude that she was murdered that night. I mean she the last hours of Diana were absolutely chaotic you know she was running hither and dither in Paris with Dodi Al-Fayed - - who changed his mind every ten minutes. I mean this was the man who had his butler once sit in Yeah. his house in France, in in Paris for three months because while he decided whether he was going to live in Pairs, Gstaad or London; you know, he was he was so kind of flaky that he he could never make an arrangement that he didn't cancel. And they cancelled the plans and changed them four or five times that night. It could not have been planned as a murder the driver was drunk, he wasn't even supposed to be driving that car, he was not even a qualified Chauffeur. And she wasn't wearing her seat belt. You know - All right. - which was certainly her own decision. Even though there were security people in the car that would have you think seen to her safety and - Yeah. - sent you know - - yeah, he would have dumped but you know, he wasn't that bodyguard was not one of the security Royal Security detail who would certainly not have allowed that to happen. One of Diana's biggest mistakes was that, when after the divorce she was still entitled to a Royal Security detail, and she could have had one. But she very stubbornly felt and again I understand it, but it was a very bad decision. She thought they were spying on her and she didn't want them in her life; you know, spying on her. And so in a way the tragic thing about Diana was it she really went with the Fayeds that summer for security. She thought that the great thing about the Mohammad Al-Fayed with his imitation was he had body guards, he had helicopters, he had planes. Fayed is one of those paranoid rich guys who never travels without you know, a kind of backup motorcade of you know, all sorts of security people and people on cell phones announcing he is about to arrive and all of that nonsense. And she thought that would work for her, you know. And of course the irony was that it was chaos that night and never would have been you know, with the Royal Security detail. Right. If she alerted, for instance, the British Embassy in Paris that the fact that she was going to be in Paris they would have also supplied you know, some kind of a backup security person but she didn't tell anybody the British Embassy until she died that night had no idea she was even in Paris. So it was very it was very wrong headed of her to do that, alas! But you could also understand her motives. It was strange; I would like to ask you what you think. But it it seemed to me in the story of her last night that she passed up several opportunities to sort of stay home and avoid all the paparazzi, but went out several times to the Ritz and then to his apartment, and then back out again so. You know if you are chased by paparazzi and you are going back out again and second and the third time, you going to be chased again, it would seem to me. Absolutely right. I mean, I think the million dollar question of Diana's last night was why didn't she order out you know. I mean, as you say if you are a movie star or you are a celebrity you don't have to go from the apartment to the Ritz, to a restaurant and I mean that was just crazy. Dodi's uncle who was staying in the Ritz, I talked to him, and he was going to meet them that night for a drink. But it was late and of course later they died. And he said to me, "If I had been Dodi and I had had Diana with me, I would never have taken her to the Ritz, I would have taken her to the jungle," he said. And he said they have the publicity bug and you know, it was a simple statement but you have to say well, Diana also part of her always wanted to be playing that dance - - you know, she herself was tipping off the media when she was on the boat with Dodi. And the famous picture of her kissing Dodi it was called the Kiss, on the boat that, the journal called, that went around the world. That was the picture that she tipped off the photographer to take and in fact when it came out, he got a call from her not to protest, but to say why was it so grainy? She knew what she was doing, she was sending messages all the time and yet at the same time like every body, like all these stars, it's they want the publicity, but then they then they hate being chased and that was what was going on with Diana in that sense. She wasn't any different from an Angelina Jolie. What did you conclude what - were the Paparazzi the proximate cause of her death because of chasing her or there is some has anyone really reconstructed what happened at that tunnel? Yes they have a Paget report which is the commissioned by the former Chief of Scotland Yard John Lord Stevens. That report has - they did they did a detailed reconstruction with laser and and and you know, all kinds of computer imagery to see what really happened that night. What happened that night was that Henry Paul drove into that tunnel, the most dangerous tunnel in Paris at 75 miles an hour and and and you know hit hit one of the you know, swerved and crashed straight into into the And the missing car was eventually - There was a white Fiat which was the famous missing white Fiat that was seen that night. In fact that was finally tracked down by Paget, there was white Fiat, which left its flake of paint on the car which they looked for at that time. But it wasn't a mystery it turned out, it was simply owned by a Vietnamese immigrant who was terrified of getting into trouble with law because he thought he would have great problems for his visa and so he never came forward until they found him just recently. So there wasn't really a mystery that night it was a series of strange things, strange coincidences and in some ways a kind of woeful karma that was in the air that, I think, happened from the very beginning. I don't think you can blame the Paparazzi. It took 90 minutes to get her to the hospital why did that what was going on there? Again I mean the French medical services are being blamed and it's fashionable to say you know, sometimes oh, you know, another medical system could have saved her. She died, if this has had happened in France, it happened in England or it happened in America but in fact its not so. The French medical system is that they, they have a different medical system. Their medical system is that every thing takes place in the ambulance. That ambulance is set up like a sort of mobile unit. It has got everything in it. And Diana was so delicately, you know, poised in that car that it took them a long time to get her out. And once they got her in the car, their biggest fear was that her heart would stop and if they had gone fast in that ambulance it would have stopped even faster than it did. As it was they applied all the things that they would have done in a medical emergency unit. But they did it in the ambulance and they had to crawl so that her heart wouldn't stop. And then even so just before they got to Les (Invalides) Hospital it did stop and they had to stop and resuscitate here there in the ambulance. In fact they only really resuscitated her there just to the point that she had another you know, short time to live when she got to hospital and she eventually - the whole team tried to resuscitate her for nearly an hour and - But it's a long time to go from a traumatic accident to a operating room you know, - Well it is, but they were doing all those things. It's their system. It's their system. That's the way they do it and it is not a bad system. I mean, what was happening in the ambulance was every bit as important as what could have been happening, you know, in the operating theater. So I think its its not fair really, it's a bad accusation that the French have had. They did everything they could and they did it with expert care. So what happens next in this saga? Diana is dead and now the Royal Family back to normal or what do you see? Well it's interesting. You got these two young men now and Camilla is sort of gradually coming out of the basement. Indeed, she is going to be the next Queen in my sound judgment. Well I think that there has been a lasting Diana effect on the Royal Family. They really did, they didn't want to admit it in her lifetime but now they do not publicly but certainly inside Buckingham Palace, the courtiers closest to the Queen will tell you that they rethought the way they do everything after Diana died because they realized only when the people made such a demonstration at the funeral that they have to pay attention. It's one of the great savvies of the Diana story that the Palace could only be got to listen to her when she died. Her death was was that you know, unfortunate desire to be listened to that Diana had all her life which was that they have to show a more compassionate face, be more accessible, modernize, show the people a more gesture or way of being inclusive and they have the tried to do this. And is that happening, is that slowly? They try - they have - they try a lot more. I mean, you saw with the 7/7 bombings, the Queen responded in a way she would have never responded before the Diana effect. I mean, she in the past, the Queens calendar was in aspic. I mean, you saw it with the movie you know she knew what she was doing in January 2009 now. And she would never change it, I mean like this is what happened in the movie, she wouldn't get the flag down because she didn't do things that way. All right. Well now with the 7/7 bombings she did disrupt her calendar immediately, she flew to the hospital by helicopter, she did visit the patients immediately in hospital. She did make a speech in the canteen of the hospital which was a speech of condolence. She did she came down from Buckingham palace and stood in the courtyard for the moment of silence with her entire staff you know, from footmen and maid to you know, private secretary, she had never did any of those things before. And they were all one of her aids said to me, this is that he was very proud of it. He said you know, this you can see you know we have really learned how to do these things. And Prince Charles also, he he admits that he learned from Diana. He said something kind of rather touching one of his aids said a couple of years ago to him, you know, sir, after some visit, you did very well at that children hospital, you did you really showed, - you know, you did the visit well, it was very appealing. And Charles said, well you know, Diana taught me how to do that, she taught me how to bend down and and get on to the level of kids as opposed to you know, look at them from a big height and sort of patronize them. And it shows that they did really absorb what Diana told them and of course the sadness is that it was too late for her. Right, of course and what about her her two sons? How what do you see? Are they going to take after Diana in terms of being interested in causes beyond fox hunting and grouse shooting or -? They are going to be both, what's interesting is that they are thoroughly Diana's boys and they are also thoroughly Charles's boys. Diana Should have had a sense that the Windsors were going to They did, yes. Yes and Windsorize, Diana used to quote, they have been thoroughly Windsorized but I must say, - scoop them back in and you know, Diana was a terrific mother and they were raised with great warmth to be boys first and princes second. So as you saw on TV recently they were accessible, attractive modern boys they are they, they are not pretentious of stiff or or fogeyish in anyway. They are good kids. William is actually very close to the Queen and Prince Philip, particularly Prince Philip who he really adores, actually. And Prince Philip has been terrific grandfather, I mean he has a bad rep really, Prince Philip, I am rather a fan of Prince Philip. When when William was at Eton he often used to go for walks in Windsor Great Park with Philip and Philip used to tell him stories of his military history which William adores. And that he is really close to them. And I think that that they do care passionately like their mother, I mean they interestingly William is already patron of one of Diana's charity Centrepoint Homeless Charity that they they often used to go with Diana to homeless shelters and to hospices and they really did imbibe I think a lot of what she taught them and I think you see already that they are very committed boys to what they are doing. So I think she had a great success there. You get a sense on the book that Charles was never close to his father and was sort of they were just going in two different directions. The relationship between Philip and Charles was absolutely toxic, I mean they just you know, it just didn't work. I mean they Philip just thought Charles was a wimp. He though that Charles was a total pathetic mess. Charles thought that he was a great big bullying; insensitive boar and it sort of went from bad to worse. I think that Philip in a sense I think William is in a sense the son Philip didn't have. Yeah. And I think he has learned to be more humane himself. He was fantastic with the boys at Balmoral after the death; it was rally Philip who consoled the boys actually. You said his nick name in the book was the enforcer? Yes, yes Philip is the enforcer. People don't realize how powerful that Philip is actually, there I mean he is he is the Queen's total sounding board. She doesn't do a damn thing without talking to Philip. Philip really runs the show, he runs the firm, he is the guide and he has played his role very cleverly really. I mean he is you know, people like to mock his incredible, insensitive ways and they are amazingly insensitive, one of my favorite Philip stories is when one of the photographers said on Christmas day to Philip on a Church, "and a merry Christmas to you, sir". And Philip turned about and said, "And bullocks to you". But that said I love him for I have to say so I mean he is like that. But he is also a quite sound and quite smart fit and I think he is he is an interesting man. It's a one of the things that makes this book so interesting is that one feels you know these cast of characters, you have been you have been following the series on some kind of television program and they are all real people and so and this book is really a kind of deeper look at how this all how this all works. I was struck by the fact that even though Charles, I can duplicate this story that you have where he is interviewed about Camilla I mean he is goes on about one's friends are so important, one must have friends and yes we have been friends. I suppose you could call her a friend it's it just is one mess after another and he lacks her tact and grace. But in some ways you know his interest in organic farming and green architecture have been you know he was the ahead of the curve in some of those things. I know, I mean the tragedy for Charles is that you know, he look like a total old fogey but actually he was really pretty cutting edge. And you know, his passions as you say, I mean he is now now having a sort of Al Gore moment you know, Charles. I mean you know, he really you know he cared about you know, organic farming, everybody laughed at him and said he was an idiot. But you know, it turns out that you know, of course is everyone is doing it now. He even had his little Paul Newman success kind of you know, with the lemonade when he did all these Duchy of Cornwall cookies and Duchy of Cornwall organic food, it is a huge howling business Duchy of Cornwall does very, very well. You know his his thing about interfaith initiatives, he is interested in Muslims you know, Charles was absolutely right about all these things actually. But he just it's way it was all packaged with him we could forgive him you know, that they all because he have this absurd you know, kind of Edwardian background, I mean nobody has spoken like that since you know, I wonder if anybody has heard the recording of Alfred Lord Tennyson reading the charge of the light brigade but it's the same voice, its amazing. Do you think we should open this up? Well we should go to question but I can't let you off the hook without talking a little bit about Vanity Fair and the New Yorker, do you miss doing that, I mean -? Right, I sometimes miss it a lot. - you know, I love editing. There is no question about that. But I have actually got a lot of satisfaction on reporting and writing. So you know it's I was a writer and a reporter before I was an editor. So in some ways I had always you know how one always want to be doing something one isn't. Whenever I was editing I used to envious indeed of sending writers off to all over the world while I was stuck there dealing with the advertisers or something. So I used to be very jealous actually at the writers and think that how nice it would be to go off and do some reporting. So now of course I have been doing the reporting and writing, I just lust to be editing but it's just the way life is you know. You think you might do another magazine or ? I don't know, I think I suspects that magazines not in a good place, I think may be one should think about doing something different. And I noticed that you talked little bit in this New York magazine interview that I saw a reporter followed you around that your you have been thinking about you know, may be the current fascination with sort of internet journalism is is missing something. You made a joke about "truthiness" - Oh, yeah. Yes, I think its too much voice on the internet. It's one of those things were everybody goes on about voice and it's great to have voice when there is some facts there. But when there are no facts there is just a lot of naval fluff, you know. And I do miss rigor. Rigor is something that's not in fashion and I like rigor. I like rigor reporting and I like rigorous thinking. And I do think that your first thought isn't necessarily your best thought. And the only thing I have got against some online stuff is just you know, I would rather have a thought that was a little bit more thought, if you know what I mean. But I also think that the internet is a fantastic asset in every way, I mean, you know, its just fantastic, what you can do with it and how wonderful the plurality of opinions are and how it does flush out all kinds of fabulous talent to. I think that it's in a way I would just like to see a way to bring rigor into it. Yeah, it's a very quickly changing business model because the cost of sending people all over the world like The New York Times does and and a big staff of very professional writers like The New Yorker has, I mean these are becoming very small economic businesses. Well that's my I know, that's my biggest anxiety because everybody is so thrilled with how cheaply they can do everything on the internet. But you cannot get really good information cheaply. And it's all very well to have so called citizen journalists which are really a terrifying concept in some ways because its people who know nothing but with a you know, with a lot of attitude very often. I wonder where the money is going to come to get the really hard you know, difficult professionally found information and you know, if the big if the big news outlets kind of keep on finding ways to do without that then where where we are going to get our truth, you know, its going to become a very difficult thing to find. Well, we should go to questions. This is a marvelously reported book, I say it is a formal news paper person this is a real it's a book about a very popular tabloid subject but it's a very detailed, correct, researched book and I think if you haven't read it , you will enjoy reading it.