Harry & Meghan change their surname

[Gottseidank]

… from Mountbatten-Windsor to ‘Sussex’.
Apparently it’s to strengthen their brand.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-harry-meghan-sussex-archie-lilibet-children-name-royal-title-cnvf7d9jf

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/the-crown-new-season-sex-charles-camilla-b2453151.html

Some folks are happy to repeat bollocks if it sounds good to them

Absolutely agree. Many people cannot move past the salaciousness of what happened (because they don't like the people involved) to appreciate how egregious the hack and publication of a private personal telephone conversation was and also just how inaccurate the reporting of it is in popular culture. Truly awful.

The wheelchair basketball team here used to actively advertise for able bodied people when they first started up.

They didn’t have enough players to form a team and it was made clear to the ‘fakes’ (their words!) that disabled players would take priority when they joined.

Not all of the disabled players in the team have disabilities that require them to be in wheelchairs. My DD played with them, and plays in a different team at Uni, and has narcolepsy and learning difficulties and doesn’t use a wheelchair.

Seriously

Charles and Camilla were hacked and a personal conversation of theirs was released to the public for no reason. Yes - you will find editors saying that it was in the public interest but it honestly was and is not. And if you believe that the media should be held to account for similar activites for people you do like - it does not serve anyone to use material obatined in such a fashion for people you don't.

I think it depends. In wheelchair rugby it may be that there are disabled people who want to play but don’t have enough to form a team. So if they couldn’t find the extra players they would miss out on playing altogether. What I think is unacceptable is if able-bodied players were taking the place of actual disabled players or if mainly able-bodied players were playing against mainly-disabled players.

As for able-bodied people posing with accessibility aids, I don’t like it.

I couldn't agree more. We surely all agree that the hacking of a private conversation is not acceptable, yet time and time again this personal and private talk is brought out to be used against Charles. It really is low.

I am glad this thread has created some points of agreement between posters that are often seen as 'the other side'

Absolutely fantastic post @skullbabe , I applaud your fairness and integrity.

Skullbabe nails it a lot

It's used against him because at the time the conversation took place, both he, the future King, and Camilla, were both married to other people. He was committing adultery and this was unacceptable especially as he would one day be the head of the Church of England.

It was also used against him because it helped to show that he'd been having an affair with Camilla during most, if not all, of his marriage to Princess Diana who was incredibly popular and was considered to be one of the most celebrated and beautiful women in the world. It's hard to convey nowadays how shocked the general public were about the whole affair and how he had treated Diana, because the palace had fed us the whole Diana and Charles fairytale, and people really couldn't understand why he would prefer someone like Camilla.

No, @GetWhatYouWant - read the posts from @skullbabe et al.
Hacking into a private conversation and then publishing the details is wrong.
Either you think hacking is ok, or you don't, not "it's ok if it's Charles"

And how about if the whole contents of the sqidgy gate tapes was released and posters started quoting them completely twisted and wrong????
Would that be fine because Diana was a married woman???
Illegal gathering of personal conversations is either wrong for all or completely fine for all !
There is no in between, regardless of who the unfortunate victim is!!!!

And the majority of the time that it’s used against Charles he’s quoted as saying something he didn’t actually say.

Indeed ! @YetMoreNewBeginnings , let's be clear it was discovered that Harry cheated on chelsy from hacking their phones , is this now ok to bandy about because he's a cheater???
Personally I say no , it's not , no personal conversations gathered illegally should be fair game , one rule for all!
It you find yourself defending it because oh but this or this person did that , then frankly your a hypocrite.

Why is it relevant that Diana was ' incredibly popular and was considered to be one of the most celebrated and beautiful women in the world'?

He shouldn't have been hacked

The breakdown of his relationship with Diana was very sad for them both and their children. Her looks and popularity are irrelevant.

Actually I don't believe that phone hacking is wrong in every single circumstance if it reveals something that is in the public interest such as the adulterous behaviour of a future King. My personal opinion obviously.

I didnt know it was established that Harry cheated on Chelsey Davis? Where is that?

I found the radio ham (early days) hacking of Charles horrible.

So it's ok to hack, say, Harry or Meghan's private conversations because it may reveal something that others subjectively believe to be morally wrong? Would that be fine?

This

In what way is the private life of a 'future king' a matter of public interest?

I can see why someone would think that. I don’t agree, but can see why (I’m baffled why there was any shock or surprise - it would be more surprising imo if the arranged marriage of a Prince of Wales didn’t involve affairs on each side at some point)

However, if people are going to use quotes from the illegally obtained recording as a way of attacking the character of someone then they should at least do so accurately.

Rather than completely twisting something said simply because it sounds more salacious.

At the time Diana's looks and popularity were a huge part of the public's shock at the affair with Camilla, as in, it seemed incredible he would choose a woman who was so unattractive compared to his wife.

So? Is that a reason to hack his phone?
If Diana had been less attractive, would you support Charles' privacy more?

If only NGN had of known it’s okay to hack an heir they’d of saved some money settling with Prince William as hacking is fine on the off chance he’s having an affair.

Also when it becomes acceptable to hack specific conversations you have to ask how many conversations is it acceptable to hack to find out that said specific conversations exist?

Is it acceptable for all of the kings conversations to be recorded just in case? Just the ones between him and women?

Is it now acceptable, given they’re P&PoW, for all of William and Kate’s conversations to be hacked and recorded?

Who decides what’s in the public interest? There was a lot of public interest in Kate’s surgery so would it be acceptable to leak a chat between her and her mum about her surgery as the public would be interested? Or is it only acceptable with affairs?

what about conversations between the King and the prime minister for example?