The Prince and the Press: Continuing the Discussion on Prince Harry and the UK Media

[MrsMaxDeWinter]

A few weeks ago, there were three really great long running threads about Prince Harry and his battles against the UK "popular press."

I thought I would do one that looks at Harry's current court action.

For those interested in the kind of balanced view you won't get from the tabloids, all of whom face conflicts of interest, here is the Guardian take, which is the springboard for this discussion.

It is not possible to take any of the tabloids seriously when they report on Harry's legal cases. Former editor Alan Rusbridger, now of Prospect, has observed that all tabloids covering this story are acting unethically as they have not declared their conflicts of interest: Harry is suing all of their media houses.

The only papers with no conflict of interest are the Guardian, the Telegraph and the Financial Times.

So I will be following this from the Guardian live page.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/04/diana-meghan-and-the-tabloid-press-harry-finally-gets-his-day-in-court

@mixedrecycling

It’s just interesting that it’s not included in the court documents.

was it down to laziness, over confidence or they were unable to get supportive witness statements

Surely his barrister would have referred to it if it was available ?

<<tangent>>

I suppose the car trackers might even have been attached by his own security team ..

@Mumsnut

I thought the same.

@Mumsnut 😂😭

Is that something they could have really done? But surely not without his consent? How cringe would it be if that came out

And could he then sue the government/palace/whoever heads up security?

Of course they could. They are ordinary people subject to bribery, just like anyone else.

I just googled the Star (as you do) and Meghan was pregnant in February. Apparently so was Catherine at some point. And British tabloid print BS?? Well, they do, but blatant lies?

It doesn't quite add up to me, because I don't see a reason why they would do it. Chelsy did not receive official protection, so where her car was when she was not with Harry wouldn't interest them. They would have known when Harry was seeing her and where, because they would be planning and recce-ing and deciding on the level of protection needed for those locations

Harry's car would always be in a secure location. But hers wouldn't be. So if I were the baddie wanting to install a tracker, I'd get a random PI to do it - not try and subvert a highly vetted personal protection officer.

(Also, I don't think any suspicions have been raised against his protection officers)

His security team would have risked a lot. Which isn't to say they would all be impervious to bribery, but having made a career out of being personal security it would be career ending if it ever got found out.

Other staff, far less of a risk, because confidentiality and incorruptible-ness would be less of an issue. Security roles often need a full and checkable employment history, so it would be difficult to brush over an incident like that.

A gardener, for example, would still have work options even if they lost their job for that reason. A garden centre probably wouldn't care about that sort of breach, or a Council parks dept. Or pretty much any low paid service job where people move around quite a lot - easy to account for a gap in service where the breach occurred, and a high turnover of staff creating a constant need for people who may be less than perfect.

I don't think anyone is saying gross intrusions of privacy, bribery, phone hacking and tracking devices didn't happen. I'm sure they did to Harry and Chelsy, but the case is about proof and the case is against MGM, not tabloids as a whole.

As for negative press against Harry and Meghan, I don't for one minute think some clever spin doctor sat down and thought, now we've built the couple up we will tear them down. Once stories began to come out about the behaviour in Australia and allegations of bullying, they dived right in and upended the entire applecart, which until then had been positive. They do love to build people up and then tear them down, but to tear them down you need to have some tipping point for the free for all to begin. Basically, no smoke without fire.

If Harry was in the habit of sneaking off ( especially if there were drugs involved etc) then his security might put a tracker on in case he gave them the slip so they could follow discreetly or at least know where he was.

His security team would have risked a lot. Which isn't to say they would all be impervious to bribery, but having made a career out of being personal security it would be career ending if it ever got found out.

The PPOs are policemen, rather than people in "security" (although they may later retire and go into that field). I have met a number of them due to having close friends who worked for the family.

I'm not saying they did, I'm saying they are as susceptible to £££ as the rest of us so it's possible. I hope they wouldn't but it's possible one might take a risk if they really needed the money. I suspect they'd be more likely to leak stories, which would be difficult to prove.

That’s what I meant , HowSimplyWonderful. Not that they were bribed to do it.

Car-jacking is a thing in SA isn’t it?

That's a good point

He wouldn't be able to make off by car without them knowing.

On foot maybe.

But the car he was in for a night out (whether his or Chelsy's) will not be left unattended. He can't "give then the slip" when there's someone on the spot ensuring the car isn't interfered with. And who might also insist on taking over the driving if they thought H or C was in no fit state.

His car wasn't tracked - just Chelsy's, which suggests the device was placed well away from the protection officers.

AFAIK, Harry has never raised suspicions that his protection officers were sources of stories. But if they were in the pay of a tabloid, I agree with StarbucksSmarterSister that the sale of info is much more likely than the placing of a device on the girlfriend's car.

Not for poor people like me 😂 but in any case, I am from the UK and back in the UK, and never got into the crime mindset of Saffers.

Agreed. Thanks for th extra bit about Piers Morgan,

What if Harry put the tracker on the car himself 😱

‘Agreed. Thanks for th extra bit about Piers Morgan,’

That’s great you agree! so maybe now you’ll stop twisting my words, misrepresenting me, and strongly hinting I shouldn’t be posting on this thread x

😮😮😮

If Harry was in the habit of sneaking off ( especially if there were drugs involved etc) then his security might put a tracker on in case he gave them the slip so they could follow discreetly or at least know where he was.

That sounds a likely explanation. And infinitely sensible of a security team if they had someone in their care who just might push a boundary or two.

Surely Chelsey would have told to sweep underneath her car with a mirror every time to check for devices?

we were told to do this due to exHs job at the time. Thought it was pretty standard.

Actually, that does make sense..

So actually in all seriousness it may well have been their security for their own protection? Woudlnt they have told them about it when confronted with it?