Prince William and Kate engagement was officially announced two years ago - on Nov 16, 2010.
Going back in time, we went through some major, and more interesting, reports about the event.
1. The Washington Post, in "Prince William's engagement a rebirth for Britain", declared,
To the relief of the British public and taffeta-craving masses elsewhere, Prince William announced Tuesday that he was officially engaged.The same report also made the following embarrassing interpretation of the tie,
...the young lovers represent a royal redemption, a rehabilitation, a reboot from the fraught triangle of Charles and Diana and Camilla.
By 'rebirth of Britain' we should read 'perpetuation of the monarch for,
"There is a movement afoot to really run the monarchy out" after the death of Queen Elizabeth. A royal wedding of this magnitude, Kelley said, makes the whole family look good.
2. With plenty of apostrophes - "Diana's ring seals Prince William's marriage plans", the New York Times does not hold a quantum of malice,
The announcement ends the long and winding “Will he or won’t he?” saga that has provided years of diversion for royal enthusiasts and helped keep the royal-focused gossip industry afloat.
adding that,
After an autumn of dismaying news about budget cuts and Austerity Britain, the engagement provided an all-purpose happy diversion.3. British Daily Mail, on the very day of the engament announcement, published a flashback exploring the split three years before,
The first thing William did after their separation was to rush off with friends to the Mahiki nightclub in London’s West End, leap on a table and cry: ‘I’m free.’
But like so many young men who never know quite what they want until they no longer have it, he rapidly began to realise just how much he missed Kate.
No one had envisioned that about one year after the wedding all eyes would turn from the ring to the bare breasts. But neither of them are now an issue. And the monarch is surely grasping its chance of ever stronger fidelity.
