The royal family account for a large portion of tax payers therefore they are on the public interest, right? Although both sides can be argued there’s no doubt that the media often step too far when it comes to the royal family, especially photographs.
In regards to the death of princess Dianna it could be argued that the press were primarily at fault, before her death she even set out a plea to attempt stop the British press from reporting on her and her sons business and life. During her holiday away with her controversial partner Dodi Fayed, the son of the wealthy Mohamed Fayed, the British press were eager to take snaps of the couple this eagerness is what some still believe today that is the cause of the crash which killed the Princess.
It can be argued that the press had a right to be there in the fact the people of Britain pay for the upkeep of the royal family however the exact opposite can be argued with more fruition, the press were involved in multiple harassment claims by Dianna up until her death in September 1997. However her death only sparked more media interest and even more controversy arose through pictures of the princesses’ dying body receiving gas and air arose in 2006.
These highly controversial pictures were even turned down by publishers and editors until in 2006 an Australian newspaper printed a front page article on the princesses death including the picture. The papers argued it was to invoke sympathy and sadness however it did the opposite creating anger and uproar. The editors of the Sun even giving their take on the publishing’s as sick and immoral.
2008: The media yet again caused controversy as foreign papers chose to disobey the agreement that prince Harry was serving in Afghanistan and it must be kept a secret to protect him. This shows the regulation of British media is difficult without blanket regulation.
Fast forward to early 2012 and the honeymoon of Will and Kate where an Italian magazine published pictures of a topless Kate. The pictures whilst already raunchy and controversial were made even worse as the couple had already agreed to release pictures of their honeymoon taken by a private photographer. The pictures were of Kate sunbathing topless from 2 miles away taken with a telephoto lens which make the situation even worse.
The fact that the pictures were acquired so crude and Will and Kate were not on official business leads no case to suggest the images were in the public interest along with this the pictures were taken on private property on a relations villa in rural France as well as the subjects being unaware of media presence shows a distinct case of press harassment the very thing that was argued that had been stopped after the death of princess Dianna.
Moving even more recently to the pictures released of Prince Harry playing pool naked in Las Vegas, these pictures were taken on a camera phone at a private party then later sold on to newspapers, this is less of an argument of invasion of privacy through the press and more who was at fault, it could be argued that Harry a successor to the throne and a current prince should be more traditional however on the flipside is it really in the ‘public interest’ what goes on behind closed doors.
In arguments for the release of the picture it shows the people of England and the tax payer that some of their hard earned income is being foddered away by improper royals with obscure pastimes. This could be argued to be in the public interest.
The other argument of course is the fact that not only is Harry in his youth but the activities he partakes in behind closed doors whilst being completely law abiding are defiantly not within public interest. Either way the publication of the story shows little evolution of the respect in regards to privacy the press have towards the royal family.
Jumping forward to present day and the media coverage of Prince Harry’s girlfriend and the knock on affects of the coverage are still in play from the previous reports whether they are just or not.