Kate Middleton’s right to be angry. But only King Canute would think privacy laws can hold back this tide

RSS Feed

Kate Middleton’s right to be angry. But only King Canute would think privacy laws can hold back this tide

September 17th, 2012

FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda

By
Melanie Phillips

PUBLISHED:

16:58 EST, 16 September 2012

|

UPDATED:

02:15 EST, 17 September 2012

The topless pictures that have been published of the Duchess of Cambridge are not just a repugnant invasion of her privacy.

They also represent a wake-up call — not just to the Royal Family but to everyone — that we inhabit an utterly changed information landscape. It’s now a media Wild West out there.

The pictures were taken of the Duke and Duchess, apparently from a road, by paparazzi with telephoto lenses as the royal couple sunbathed on holiday at Viscount Linley’s chateau in Provence.

Their decision to take legal action against the French magazine Closer which first published the pictures is entirely understandable.

Brave faces: Kate and William embark on the next leg of their Diamond Jubilee tour on the Solomon Islands, but have admitted their horror and anger at the intrusive pictures

For those photos represent an intolerable intrusion that simply cannot be justified. The attempt by Closer’s editor to justify publishing them, on the basis that they were charming scenes of a couple who were in love and that, anyway, topless sunbathing was no big deal, was specious and self-serving.

More urgently, the dread is that the Duchess will be stalked by the press and paparazzi as was Princess Diana, and will come to feel beleaguered and spied upon.

Voyeurism

Given the royals’ hyper-sensitivity to media intrusion as a result of the experiences of the late Princess of Wales, it is a matter of regret that the Cambridges, of all people, weren’t more cautious about assuming they could ever be safe from a prying camera lens.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that the Duchess has fallen victim to an intrusion for which there is no possible excuse. She was enjoying a private holiday in a private house.

Unlike the pictures of a naked Prince Harry, whose confidence was betrayed by strangers whom he had chosen to invite into his hotel suite, the pictures of the Duchess were taken by photographers spying on her in a private moment in order to make money out of public voyeurism.

Disgusting: French magazine Closer was the first to publish the naked pictures of the duchess and will now be taken to court by the Palace

If the Duchess is bound to feel violated by such behaviour, the distress of Prince William must surely be far more acute.

For the echoes of the fate that befell his mother, Diana, who was actually fleeing from the paparazzi when she died in a Paris car crash in 1997, are all too painful.

In fact, the intrusion upon the Duchess is especially objectionable. It has to be said that Princess Diana courted and manipulated the media. By contrast, the Duchess has played an absolutely straight bat and, clearly valuing her privacy, has never sought any more publicity than her duties require.

William’s overwhelming concern that his wife should not be hounded as he believes his mother to have been is entirely understandable. And so it is right for the couple to try to prevent history repeating itself by drawing the firmest possible line in the sand.

Having said that, however, one wonders whether this is merely a gesture which will be washed away with the tide.

For the royals are seeking to curb the excesses of an anarchic, global media. And, frankly, they have as much chance of doing that as did Canute in attempting to hold back the waves.

These pictures have already been published not just in France but throughout Europe. At the weekend, the Irish Daily Star published 13 of them along with an image of the topless one published by Closer. Greece’s Eleftheros Typos news-paper published two photographs of the Duchess, one topless, on its front page.Some 200 pictures taken of the couple have been reportedly offered to publications around Europe.

And Chi magazine, an Italian rag which in 2006 sickeningly published a picture of the dying Princess Diana — and whose owner Mondadori also publishes Closer — has said it plans to publish today no fewer than 26 pages of these pictures.

Indeed, the issue here is not with the British press at all. Offered these pictures, every British paper has refused to touch them. This is because self-regulation here has worked.

Outlawed

Publication of such pictures — where those involved had a reasonable expectation of privacy and there was no public interest — is outlawed by the PCC code of practice. And the British press, which has significantly cleaned up its act since the death of Diana, knows the public would revolt against it.

By contrast France, where these pictures have been published, has a constitutional right to privacy.

Yet in practice, this statutory law of privacy protects the powerful — but throws everyone else to the media wolves.

In good spirits: The royal couple laugh as warriors perform a traditional dance at Honiara International Airport but William must be feeling especially protective of his wife at this trying time

History Repeating: William’s mother Princess Diana was hounded by the press and many directly blame the paparazzi for her death, after her car crashed while trying to flee from photographers in Paris

Thus, French privacy law allowed former President Francois Mitterrand to conceal the existence of his secret mistress and their illegitimate daughter up to his death. And the French learned about the sexual proclivities of the disgraced former banker Dominique Strauss-Kahn only when he was accused of rape in New York.

Yet despite the fact that publication of these pictures is undoubtedly illegal in France, the editor of

Closer, like many others, will have have made the cynical calculation that the likely penalties would amount to far less than the financial rewards. Moreover, even if the royals succeed in stopping this or that paper from publishing any more pictures, or in sending any journalists to jail, the fact remains that — as with the pictures of Prince Harry at his strip billiards game — the internet has already sent many of these images of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge around the world.

All this demonstrates the utter futility of attempting to impose further controls on the British press when it is impossible to regulate a media that is now global and instantaneous.

Social media has now bust the very idea of a privacy law wide open. At his inquiry into press ethics, Lord Justice Leveson suggested that the issue of regulating Twitter and Facebook should be separated from regulating the press.

Control

He said he thought there was a difference between the online version of newspapers or magazines, and social media which merely hosted conversations between individuals. But many personalities have found to their dismay that activities they had hoped would remain private have been transmitted to the world through Facebook and Twitter.

Further regulation of the press would do nothing to protect individual privacy in the Twitter and Facebook age — but would merely hand yet another weapon to those who wish to control public debate.

Thus it is not surprising — even if it is deeply alarming — that Labour Party sources have revealed that a Labour government would implement statutory regulation of the press if Lord Justice Leveson recommends it.

Legal battleground: Lawyers for Kate and William will appear at this court in Paris tomorrow to try to prevent further publication of topless photographs of the Duchess

Since Leveson himself has repeatedly said he is very alive to the danger of fettering a free press, it is to be hoped that he will not go down this road.

Whatever he concludes about regulating the press, however, the fundamental change produced by the internet is now a fact of life.

This means individuals have to change their behaviour accordingly. The royals need to assume that, whatever they may choose to do in a hotel room or on a private terrace, they cannot assume their behaviour will remain unremarked.

When asked last week by a child in Kuala Lumpur what his secret power would be if he were a superhero, Prince William replied that he would like to be invisible.

Given the scars he so obviously still bears from the traumatic events of his childhood, it was a poignant reply. But he cannot be invisible. He and his Duchess are a future King and Queen.

Rather than blow her top after the event, the best advice to the Duchess is keep it on in the first place. As with the British media, so it is with the royals: the best protection against violation of privacy is self-regulation.

[email protected]

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

Newest
Oldest
Best rated
Worst rated

No sympathy at all,if they and their security are daft enough to believe they are above that sort of thing ,wake up and smell the coffee,just like little brother had to a few weeks earlier

–

M.J.S.
,

Caerphilly,
17/9/2012 15:16

If Will is so worried about the press he should have told his wife to keep her top on . They are going to have a tough time . This state of undress in public is nothing new for them . She was in public . Also , Diana had 2 sons . This constant talk of William and his anguish over his mother ‘death and press treatment is so annoying . William has been protected from day one . He is in a bit of shock that anyone would not toe the line .All his mistakes have been ignored by the media . Harry has made mistakes but was never given the full palace protection . The media is still writing about his teen mistakes . Will has no right to complain since he has been treated as the golden one. The royal reporters know that Will and Kate are treated on the same level as the Queen . Harry should live his life The press only has room for one Good Prince Too bad since Harry is the one who has the charm . He is the son they hound very much like they hounded his( Diana ) mother . Kate loves it

–

Rose
,

USA, United States,
17/9/2012 15:11

The “wild-west” strapline is rich coming from this bunch of journalists…

–

Jules
,

Wellingborough,
17/9/2012 14:39

If you think the British Press have ‘self regulated’ here then your mistaken. What they’ve done is realised the uproar, they saw what happened with Harry and his billiard balls. So the British Press self censored for fear of the backlash.

If they had thought for one second they could have gotten away with it, the Sport, the Star and the Sun would have published these photos.

–

alphaone
,

Terminus,
17/9/2012 13:40

I simply cannot understand why Kate would strip off knowing that she could be seen by all those around her and that there are cameras lurking everywhere. So, knowing all that It obviously didnt bother her to throw caution to the wind. I dont remember Diana going topless or naked anywhere near where photos could have been taken of her because she knew better. Kate and Wills knew what the dangers were better than anyone so I’m afraid it just doesnt make any sense for them to create such a fuss about it all.

–

Mm
,

Lincoln,
17/9/2012 12:59

It is despicable particularly as the photographer was around a mile away spying on them with a telephoto lens. It is just creepy. Will they put cameras in her shower next and why on earth do they want to publish pictures of her boobs anyway? Why do people want to look at photos of her boobs? Shame on all of them. They are just perverts and peeping Toms.

– sophie , belfast, 17/9/2012 10:44

says Sophie from Belfast who reads the DM which is the newspaper equivalent of Heat magazine-wall to wall papped ‘celebs’. If it’s ok to snap Kate Moss topless on holiday then it’s ok to snap Kate Windsor. You can’t have it both ways just because one is a royal.

–

Steve
,

Oxford,
17/9/2012 12:57

She knew her privileged lifestyle came at a price. She has no one else but herself to blame. Unfortunately, mass false hysteria has perpetuated the story where in Europe it has passed. Nobody got over excited about Carla Bruni’s topless pics published in the British press at the time of her visit to Britain. Total hypocrisy at it’s worst.

–

Sara
,

London, United Kingdom,
17/9/2012 12:52

Self-regulation has worked! Don’t make me laugh. If it was not for Leveson the British press would have published and now legal action is being taken in France that will make the British press even less likely to print. It was the FEAR of prosection NOT self regulation that kept the photos out of the British press.

–

ian
,

maidstone,
17/9/2012 12:48

Serves her right for being so daft as to sunbathe topless. Did they really think they were totally private? Wake up Royals, this is the 21st century.

–

Devon Dumpling
,

Devon,
17/9/2012 12:47

One thing we should do over this sad episode, that is to black ball/cold shoulder the owners and purveyors of these scandal mags, that have caused this insult to proliferate. They will get the message we are not doormats to be soiled with (use your imagination)

–

Lionel 70
,

Macclesfield, United Kingdom,
17/9/2012 12:39

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.