H&M vs Backgrid

[PicturesOfDogs]

H&M have apparently ’demanded’ pap footage from Backgrid, according to TMZ.

Their lawyer has replied with the following:

In America, as I'm sure you know, property belongs to the owner of it: Third parties cannot just demand it be given to them, as perhaps Kings can do. Perhaps you should sit down with your client and advise them that his English rules of royal prerogative to demand that the citizenry hand over their property to the Crown were rejected by this country long ago. We stand by our founding fathers

Court case #6 incoming?

https://amp.tmz.com/2023/05/18/prince-harry-meghan-markle-demand-photo-agency-give-them-footage-of-chase/

They sell it don't they? Isn't that what they do, sell pictures to the media? I don't imagine they will give it away as it might make them lots of money.

Sorry if that's been said, I haven't read the whole thread, 2 posts actually but I will read the rest.

Doesn't Harry complain about a bit of give and take between the royals and the press?

I think it's likely that H&M were put in an uncomfortable and upsetting situation and I feel sorry for them for that.

For me, I think what this incident demonstrates is that their PR and current approach to the press just really isn't working for them. The RF have been dealing with public/press interest for centuries and, perhaps not unsurprisingly, seem to have got an approach in place with the press that works well (most of the time).

The press aren't going anywhere and the RF know this. They seem to have cultivated a sort of understanding with the press in the U.K. that both sides seem able to live with. I'd imagine that's been pretty hard won.

H was clearly uncomfortable with that understanding (and the compromises that I'm sure come with it) and thought there was a better way. He tried to get changes made from the inside but wasn't successful and is now trying a different approach from the outside but I don't think it's working.

I'm not saying he was wrong to be uncomfortable with the understanding the RF has cultivated with the press but I can also understand the other members of the RF not wanting to drive a coach and horses through an arrangement which, on the whole, is manageable and sustainable.

Perhaps H&M will find their own position they can live with as time goes on (I hope they do) but trying to control their press exposure completely is almost certainly not achievable, particularly if they continue to want a certain level of exposure to generate income.

Just my opinion!

I can also understand the other members of the RF not wanting to drive a coach and horses through an arrangement which, on the whole, is manageable and sustainable.

When I think about ut, I have next to no idea what the Waleses do in their private time. Or indeed any of them rely. I don't know who their friends are, where they go, meet up, eat out... It's just the odd snippet here and there. And all their public appearances are controlled and well-managed. I'd think that was, on the whole, an ideal way for them to live.

I agree, and I'm sure to an extent they "buy" that freedom with providing some regular exposure (of themselves and their children) in a controlled way at public engagements and on special occasions.

I can imagine the risk to the RF of trying to "take on" the press in some sort of David v Goliath battle for moral supremacy was just too great and I don't really blame them for that.

what this incident demonstrates is that their PR and current approach to the press just really isn't working for them

Hmm, I think this ‘incident’ has got Meghan’s photo, looking fab in her lovely gold dress, onto the front pages of newspapers and websites in the UK and US, and the story discussed on news channels. The award ceremony got her into a few UK tabloids but this story has had much further reach.

If that was the aim of their PR company, it’s worked really well.

It must be exhausting being them. Constant drama and conflicts.

I suppose if you take the "any publicity is good publicity" approach and that might be their PR's approach, who knows! If it is it seems pretty short-sighted.

I'd have thought the idea was to build a brand that people felt positively about and I just don't think they're achieving that or even working towards it at the moment.

I agree. They've probably got a wall they're filling with all the ridiculing memes. They can put them in a book and sell it. Kerching. Proper job.

I just don't see how it can work if one person is full of trauma about media and photographers while their partner has spent her whole life pursuing fame and attention.

Never a truer word said.
An actress (past) who wanted to achieve great recognition. Coupled with a royal who wants to escape recognition. Two different sides of the coin.

You can see how M revels in the limelight (that’s fine if that’s what she wants) but H wants to shun it, or so he tells us constantly.

It is a really strange juxtaposition, if that is what is going on.

Just because you actively pursue fame, doesn't mean you want to be chased by the paps, stalked or hav lies made up about you do you think this if all celebrities or just MM?

I think it’s the fuel of their relationship. If it all stopped I suspect they would just sit there, bored and lacking direction. It’s all they have to bond them apart from their children.

When they left the venue, there was an absolute blizzard of flashes from photographers. If you look at those pictures, Harry seems just as happy with that as Meghan does, to be fair.

But it does mean that you're going to be in a lot of situations where photos are going to be taken of you, both at official events as well as just out in public. And if the sound of a camera click gives your partner significant trauma, that could become a source of contention within the relationship.
(I'm talking hypothetically and not about the Sussexes. Harry doesn't seem that traumatised to me and I don't believe that Meghan would subject him to media exposure if she thought it was traumatising him.)

You're right, @Haywirecity but as I said above, Harry seems to have got over his fear or trigger of photographers' clicks and flashes and is fine with them, if you look at Tuesday's footage. (Not the pap stuff)

Sorry, I've just seen that you added "Harry doesn't seem that traumatized to me". I agree, @Haywirecity .

Yeah, @MamoruHisaishithe US tabloids are having a field day

It seems like only 5 minutes ago when we were being told - repeatedly - that US had no tabloids and the paparazzi were a problem in UK only. And that's why they had to leave

Yes, it's very strange.

According to several posters on here, that sort of paparazzi 'swarm' is quite common in NYC and a number of celebrities have complained about it being intrusive.

It's almost as if that reason for moving to the US doesn't make sense.

Isn't it also true that there are fewer regulations for paps in the USA than there are in the UK?

But don't you make plans that consider likely scenarios?

Car drivers do not have the right to mow down people crossing the road, but I wouldn't step out into the road without checking it is safe. If it is a busy road I would look for a pedestrian crossing.

H&M attended an event where paparazzi would be in attendance, and there was a good (bad) chance the photographers would - as they have done to many celebrities - try to follow them home. So wouldn't you plan for that eventuality? Go from the event to a hotel used to ensuring privacy for high profile guests, either for the night, or until the paparazzi get bored/ assume you are staying the night/ you can leave by another exit. Or whatever other plans are viable.

In so many situations H&M seem to focus on - and complain about - the factors that they can't control, instead of altering the aspects of the situation that are within their control to get a better outcome for themselves.

I think so, though I am not an expert, and I believe fewer regulations about privacy, libel etc because freedom of speech is highly valued and constitutionally protected.

Happy to be corrected if I am wrong though, it's not something I've particularly looked into, it not having much relevance in my life 😂if I was in the public eye and choosing where to live I would probably do rather more research

Maireas is correct - in the US, photographs that are taken in a public space for editorial use generally enjoy Constitutional protection under the First Amendment right of free speech. Beyond that, and while the law varies from state to state, generally paparazzi are legally prohibited from trespassing on private property or using telephoto lenses to survey private property.

So the best way of getting away from paparazzi would be to get to private property asap.

If I am ever in that situation I will bear it in mind!