No one is saying they were necessarily following her every move. But orders of magnitude more people knew of her, knew about herthean knew of/about JFK Jr. I also will point out that in 1989 you were, what, 11? |
The question is not: do you remember Diana's visit to Chicago in (checks wiki) 1996? The question is: did Diana and JFK Jr have similar levels of fame/celebrity when they were alive? As the PP noted, wherever she went in the US and throughout the world, Diana drew very large crowds. Her advocacy work was widely noted and admired. She met with heads of state worldwide. She was on the nightly news and in national and local newspapers, as well as in People mag. I'm not a BRF fan. But I am 5-6 years younger than Diana and JFK Jr would be if they were still alive, so close to their contemporaries, so I remember them and the attention they got. It's honestly laughable to compare them--her fame far outshown him. She was one of the most recognized people in the world and in the US. He was not one of most recognized people in the US, nevermind the world. Most Americans did not know much about him other than that he was JFK's magazine. He was occasional tabloid fodder only. |
| Lol JFK's *son* |
https://www.northwestern.edu/magazine/summer2016/campuslife/then-the-peoples-princess-diana-chicago-visit-1996.html |
|
I would say they were pretty equal in how they were both viewed by the public.
I always thought when they were alive, that if they ever became a real-life couple how nuts pop culture would have went back then. |
| Yes, living outside the US, the only time I heard of jfk junior was in the news on the crash. Diana was everywhere though. |
| Diana was world wide popular. JFKJ mostly a US thing. |
He was perfect for the show because he was a thoroughly NYC obsession. And NYC was pretty much the extent of his reach. |
This. Diana was global but JFK Jr was not. |
|
I'm the same age as Diana and JFK Jr. so I lived through their fame as an adult. I agree with everyone who says that Diana was much more internationally-known. I also agree with the PP who said Diana's fame and world-wide admiration was more akin to Jackie's.
I was from a working-class, immigrant family who knew NOTHING about the BRF, but all my friends and I got up at 4:00 a.m. to watch Charles and Diana's wedding. And discussed whether or not it was worth marrying that old, ugly guy to become a princess! |
| PP here again. I'll add that Diana's funeral was on the day I got married. I was getting ready with the TV on and all of us glued to the coverage. Then my mom came into my room and turned it off - saying why on earth was I watching a funeral on my wedding day! |
The thing about Diana was that you could know nothing about the British royals and you'd still know Diana. Also she was known by people of every age. I think JFK Jr. had a narrower demographic reach, consisting of Boomers nostalgic for his parents (which was not all Boomers and would skew towards Democrats, Catholics who idolized the Kennedys, and women) and women in their 20s in the 90s who would have considered him a lust object. But children, middle aged men, most Republicans -- these people didn't care about JFK Jr. But a lot of those people still cared about Diana. |
Ah, sorry. Clearly I still don't know much about him. |
You probably mixed that incident up with Kobe Bryant. Its understandable. |
| I think Diana was more famous. That said I remember watching the coverage of both of their deaths as a child. My mom was particularly devastated by jfk jr’s death but I think Diana’s was more global, consuming and long term covered. |