Extensive Phone Hacking by MGN

[Roussette]

So... Harry has won his case.

As lawyers are saying now... this is massive. 15 out of 33 accusations of hacking by Harry were upheld as a result of phone hacking and other illegal practices.
Hacking and blagging were even taking place during the Leveson enquiry.

He has won damages of £140,000 plus. And before this thread descends into Harry hate, please think of all the other claimants who have also had their claims upheld and damages awarded to them. They went through hell, medical records hacked and reported on, trackers on cars, phones hacked...

It's not about the money, it's about 'accountability of power'.

It is entirely possible to think that Harry was hacked and has been brave to bring a case whilst also thinking that him writing a book and taking part in a documentary about his family was distasteful. It is entirely possible to think that Harry was telling the truth about the effect of the hacking on him and at the same time that he had a less than perfect relationship with truth when talking about his family. It's entirely possible to think both William and Harry have called the press to account for the hacking in different ways that we don't get to judge because we don't have to deal with the emotional fallout.

I don't see Harry as a hero or a villain, he's a person who makes good and bad decisions. I'm sad to see this thread about the implications of his case for the media descending into Harry good/royals bad. That to me is falling for the media agenda which imo wants to deflect us from their ongoing problematic behaviour back into team whoever arguing.

The media may not hack anymore, they may not have done for decades, but they still make up stories and sources, create conflicts, exaggerate, misquote, misdirect and demonise people to sell stories. If they can successfully keep the public supporting their team and attacking the other team (and not just in royal stories) this whole issue will sink beneath the surface again. Keep the focus on how they use people for clickbait and maybe they will be called to account.

Piers Morgan is playing this exact game in his statement.

Reach, as I said, owns MGN:

*Reach is valued at around £250m. It has already paid out around £100m in damages and legal costs over phone hacking.
It must pay Prince Harry £140,600, and potentially more over other articles that have not yet been decided on.
And there are around 80 other people waiting in the wings, with their own claims they want to pursue.
During the trial, the Mirror barrister referred to the "catastrophic effects" of previous settlements.
As recently as last month, Reach announced 450 job cuts, blamed on the economic environment. *

I think the idea put forward by some that this is old news, not a big win etc is clearly wishful thinking.

@MrsLeonFarrell the thread hasn't descended into any such thing, its a few comments which show that people want to know the truth about what went on and how illegal practices are covered up, and appreciate a public trial like this, more than an out of court and secret settlement, or simply turning a blind eye and employing people from the papers that did this. It's a fair and reasonable thing to discuss in this context. Other threads very much do create heroes and villains, and they focus on how evil Harry is every day, relentlessly. Please do add your thoughts on those threads, they could do with it. Mild criticism of the RF here doesn't compare.

@EdithWeston

What were the Windsors mean to do ?

Well maybe not threaten Harry with the ‘dire consequences within 24 hours’ if he didn’t drop his campaign against parts of the media ?
Maybe not then strip him of all funding and security when he refused to back down.
Maybe not stand by silently as H and esp M were subject to abuse and hate by the media

Mild criticism is in the eye of the beholder.

I don't think saying that Charles is scared of the press, as you wrote upthread, is mild in the context of a thread about phone hacking. I think it's a pretty serious accusation.

I do try to offer balance wherever I see heroes and villains stereotypes. I see them on this thread, hence my post.

Oh yes William’s secret settlement - if that doesn’t tell you all you need to know about the Windsors , I don’t know what will

William kept his mouth shut and his head down as far as the public are concerned - public good ? What’s that ?

This was great from the BBC article, a reporter who was in court and comments on the media coverage, which was much discussed here:

*Covering the trial, I often felt as if I was in a parallel universe.

What I saw in court did not seem to equate with what I read about in the reporting by some papers about the trial.

Some of this was trivial. Something the prince clearly said as a joke was described in the Mail as a grumble. It really wasn't.

A polite ask to "repeat the question" was written up as a demand. He was described as a combustive mixture of "victimhood and arrogance".
That is not what I saw.

More damagingly perhaps, some headlines too appeared a little skewed. For example, that he had told the judge he "is not aware of any evidence he was hacked by the Mirror".
Clearly, he and his legal team believed there was evidence, or they would not have brought this case.
He has had the last laugh. This is the most comprehensive legal judgment about one media organisation's unlawful methods since the scandal of phone hacking first emerged.
And as he put it, his "mission" continues.*

I thought it deserved highlighting because the claim he said he wasn't;t aware of any evidence was jumped on by this board during trial.

the most comprehensive legal judgment about one media organisation's unlawful methods since the scandal of phone hacking first emerged.

Well done to all 4 claimants for bringing this.

I don't think its 'serious', thats funny, I could say much worse! I think its a pretty accurate and obvious observation. He's had a lifetime of intrusion. Why else would he tell his son not to pursue criminal activity against him? I am assuming he cares about his son.

What a sensible post and I completely agree. I too think the press has behaved appallingly - and not just to Harry. But Harry has now made reining in the press his life's crusade. Bearing in mind his own flexible relationship with "his" truth as opposed to "the truth", his supposed desire for privacy and his at times fragile mental health, I do not think this crusade is going to make him happy.
I also suspect it is an unwinnable fight, regardless of how many court judgements go in his favour. There may be minor changes to press behaviour and they may be more rigorous in keeping the right side of the legal line, but they will continue to investigate and source stories by whatever means they can. It has been thus for 100s of years and clamping down too hard will risk the freedom of the press and protect the guilty as well as the innocent.
I hold no brief for the press or Harry but wish him a happy life. He sees his court action as a fight for justice and I understand why, but raking over old wounds, whether with Oprah, in print or in court merely keeps that wound open and festering and motivates the press to continue to present him in a negative light.

Genuinely, if a single fairly mild observation offends you so much it means the thread is descending, you are overreacting. Go to the threads where untruths about Doria abandoning her child are and correct them. I have no time for the tone policing thanks.

Yes these posters scare. How can you be so fixated on someone you clearly hate?

They could have made.a statement about the racist attacks being unacceptable?

But Harry has now made reining in the press his life's crusade

Thank goodness. Large scale criminality should not go unpunished and sometimes we need people with power and wealth to do the right thing and start the kind of change needed. Hugh Grant has started more claims against the press than Harry and is a founder of Hacked Off, so I commend him too, and to others like Baroness Lawrence, who is suing ANL along with them, to Siena Miller also... plenty of people who have used what power and wealth they have, and others don't, to continue this fight and make people properly accountable, since the Tories decided not to.

Here's hoping!

I disagree with the general tone, I think the media is so important and needs to be held to the highest standards. However that doesn’t mean if they fail we reject the whole lot - the Judge was careful to point out the majority of stories were sourced lawfully through proper journalism and the hacking of PH was “modest”. We can’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Equally a story that is denied by the subject or uses anonymous sources doesn’t mean it’s made up.

I also disagree that because scrutiny is hard, it shouldn’t be done. It should have been easier for Meghan and Harry to leave but they are in the line of succession and so there should be a way they can not be in it anymore. But scrutiny is because of the position, and the extraordinary scrutiny is justified because of the even more extraordinary privilege that was not earned.

The tabloids also have the highest readership in the UK, predominantly amongst working class people. There’s something distasteful about the middle classes and royalty like PH using this scandal to sneer and scoff at them.

Overall I think PH was the wrong candidate. I’m sure they picked him because of his profile (Sky News wouldn’t have been live blogging someone from Corrie) but he does also attract a circus. Plus immediate and justifiable accusations of hypocrisy. I also think he’s not someone who respects press freedom - if you change every time he says British Press to Fake News Media you realise how Trumpish his views are. It tells MY version of truth or it’s fake.

I also think the effects of this case will eventually prove to be a fizzle rather than a bang. People turning away from journalism onto much more sketchy news sources is already a trend. Leveson 1 already happened. I don’t think this will help the “real” victims and if they thought it might they should have pursued their cases first.

There’s something distasteful about the middle classes and royalty like PH using this scandal to sneer and scoff at them.

Is this a joke? Do you even know about the other claimants? very ordinary people caught up in news stories or, victims of crimes, have also been hacked. seriously, that is the most desperate attempt to minimise this I have seen.

I don’t think this will help the “real” victims and if they thought it might they should have pursued their cases first.

Oh have a word with the judge and the lawyers then. These cases were test cases, selected form the 100 or so claimants who made the claims originally.

@whattheactualfrog
If you are concerned that people read proper journalism may I point you in the direction of the Guardian and Byline Times ?

Hence why I think someone else should have been picked

Why? Nobody is more or less deserving of privacy based on their personal wealth or role in society. Did you read the judgement? As it goes over selection. It doesn't explain, at all, how you come up with this being used to 'sneer and scoff at the working class'. There is no basis for saying that at all, unless you think working class people are less deserving of an honest press? Where is their sneering? MGN is owned by huge corporations, as I outlined, the issue is with MGN, not their readership.

The Guardian frequently publishes things that are antisemitic, Byline Times publishes things that are generally credible but don’t target everyone equally. But we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater for them either. Which proves we need a diverse media. As long as they operate within the confines of the law, they shouldn’t be restricted to only publishing things that you personally find truthful, important and tasteful.

I mean, do you think Reach Plc is owned by working class people or something?? very confused by these claims....

As long as they operate within the confines of the law,

Which is what these cases are about... boy oh boy....

@whattheactualfrog
Who, in your opinion, should Byline Times be targeting ?

Overall I think PH was the wrong candidate.

No he was and is not. He has every right to not want people to illegally invade his and his friends privacy as any one of us and of the other people who took on the Mirror. Think about the horrendous invasions of privacy that people like Chelsy Davy had. It was not right and should not be encouraged.

I’m sure they picked him because of his profile (Sky News wouldn’t have been live blogging someone from Corrie) but he does also attract a circus.

Who causes the circus? Harry or the media?

Plus immediate and justifiable accusations of hypocrisy.

What in the context of this case?

I also think he’s not someone who respects press freedom - if you change every time he says British Press to Fake News Media you realise how Trumpish his views are. It tells MY version of truth or it’s fake.

No. There has been a sustained assault in the press on Harry over several years - this takes the form of applying a negative lens to anything he, his wife or his associates do (for example - making a joke about how crazy the first amendment becomes an assertion that he doesn’t want a free press).There is nothing in what he has said which is at all related to him saying that all bad press was “fake news”.