Harry's Night in Vegas: August 2012

[Artemisia]

Well, apparantely The Sun decided not to follow the general consensus of not publishing the pictures the British media seemed to have.

The Sun explains decision to print naked Prince Harry pictures

THE Sun has made the decision to publish the naked pictures of Prince Harry that have swept the world. The pictures, that have already shocked millions of people, will run in Friday’s edition of the newspaper. In a video explaining the decision, the newspaper’s Managing Editor David Dinsmore said the issue has become one of “the freedom of the Press”.

To see the video in question, scroll to the end of the article.

 

[soapstar]

It will be interesting to see if other British media follow suit.

 

[EIIR]

It will be interesting to see if CH make a formal complaint to the Press Complaints Commission, and if they choose to sue News Limited for breaching Prince Harry's privacy.

The Sun will try and justify this on 'public interest' grounds; that the British public somehow have the right to see pictures of Prince Harry in the buff, in his private hotel room on a private holiday. Which is utterly absurd.

I think we can expect an increasingly fractious relationship between the Palace and the press once more.

 

[wbenson]

I think Clarence House is just going to have to accept that there are things that just can't be undone. Harry's privacy was already breached, and there's nothing anybody can do about it now; trying to stop one small corner of the world's media from showing the pictures is just going to prolong the pain and result in even more discussion of what would already have been fading into the past. (This is sometimes called the "Streisand effect." A photograph of Barbra Streisand's house was available online as part of a set of pictures of the California coast. She sued to have the picture taken down, but this merely resulted in more people flocking to the website to see it. The ethics of the situation are different, of course, as the exterior of one's home is available for anybody to see, but the results will be the same if Clarence House does anything. They have to decide if they want to be right or if they want to put this incident behind them.)

 

[cdngirl]

I think we can expect an increasingly fractious relationship between the Palace and the press once more.

Do you really think so? I'm not sure it will cause that big of a riff

 

[cdngirl]

I think Clarence House is just going to have to accept that there are things that just can't be undone. Harry's privacy was already breached, and there's nothing anybody can do about it now; trying to stop one small corner of the world's media from showing the pictures is just going to prolong the pain and result in even more discussion of what would already have been fading into the past.

I agree with this, they should just move on. What's done is done.

__________________

 

[Artemisia]

The Sun's Friday front page - Heir it is!

'Despicable girl’ sold naked photo of Prince Harry, says his party friend

The publication of naked photographs of Prince Harry “put a real dampener” on the group’s high jinks in Las Vegas, one of his closest friends said on Thursday. Arthur Landon, one of Britain’s richest young men, was with Prince Harry during their holiday and said the person who had sold the pictures was “despicable” and had abused the Prince’s hospitality. Mr Landon, who is worth more than £200 million, told The Daily Telegraph that he suspected the culprit was one the bikini-clad girls who attended the party. He insisted his friends were “really careful” not to betray the Prince and said none of them would have been involved in the sale of the images.

 

[An Ard Ri]

The Sun's Friday front page - Heir it is!

Same cover as today's Irish Sun!

 

[LadyoftheLake]

“I obviously think it is really despicable that someone would accept Prince Harry’s *hospitality* and then take these pictures,”

from the Sun article above.

 

[Nico]

The Sun's Friday front page - Heir it is!

"the Sun is not making any moral judgments"

higher level of hypocrisy i would say. Not surprising from one of Mr Murdoch's publication though.

 

[cdngirl]

“I obviously think it is really despicable that someone would accept Prince Harry’s *hospitality* and then take these pictures,”

I'm hoping that was a misquote. Unbelievable.

 

[Artemisia]

from the Sun article above.

The quote is from the Telegraph article. Sorry for the confusion - I posted The Sun cover and the article from The Telegraph together.
The Sun is probably going to dedicate most of its article tomorrow to explaining why they chose to publish those images.

 

[Artemisia]

I'm hoping that was a misquote. Unbelievable.

OK, I'm a bit confused here. What's unbelievable?

 

[NGalitzine]

It will be interesting to see if CH make a formal complaint to the Press Complaints Commission, and if they choose to sue News Limited for breaching Prince Harry's privacy.

The Sun will try and justify this on 'public interest' grounds; that the British public somehow have the right to see pictures of Prince Harry in the buff, in his private hotel room on a private holiday. Which is utterly absurd.

I think we can expect an increasingly fractious relationship between the Palace and the press once more.

Since Max Mosley won his suit against News Corp I would guess that Harry would also win a suit for violation of privacy. I doubt however that the BRF would want to drag this out through the courts which of course is what News Corp counts on. I do think a formal complaint will be made to the PCC though.

 

[Zonk]

I'm hoping that was a misquote. Unbelievable.

Why would you hope that is a misquote?

I think he is right. Prince Harry obviously trusted the wrong person and made the wrong decision to do this in a public place (although it was his private room).

Really I don't get why everyone is being so judgemental (and this isn't directed at you specifically). Yes Harry showed bad judgement in doing this but really if this is what he and his friends do (in the privacy of their homes) amongst their trusted circle what's the big deal? I hate to be the barrier of bad news...but there are people who do this (and a lot more) every day. They live and work with us and most likely are very nice people if you didn't know what they did in the privacy of their home (or hotel).

If they aren't doing durgs, if no women and/or men are being forced to participate against their will or while they are under the influence of drugs...who are we to judge? Don't get me wrong, this isn't the type of thing I would do when I think of having fun...but I don't begrudge those that do. I would just hope they would use caution in all matters.

My only issue with the whole thing is that Harry showed poor judgement. He should have never put himself in this sort of situation. He knows his position, he knows that he is a target, and he knows that someone can make money off this type of thing. He should have known better. Period.

 

[cdngirl]

OK, I'm a bit confused here. What's unbelievable?

Unbelievable, because I cannot believe the naivete of that statement. I'm beginning to wonder if these men are really in their late 20's

 

[EIIR]

I think Clarence House is just going to have to accept that there are things that just can't be undone. Harry's privacy was already breached, and there's nothing anybody can do about it now; trying to stop one small corner of the world's media from showing the pictures is just going to prolong the pain and result in even more discussion of what would already have been fading into the past. (This is sometimes called the "Streisand effect." A photograph of Barbra Streisand's house was available online as part of a set of pictures of the California coast. She sued to have the picture taken down, but this merely resulted in more people flocking to the website to see it. The ethics of the situation are different, of course, as the exterior of one's home is available for anybody to see, but the results will be the same if Clarence House does anything. They have to decide if they want to be right or if they want to put this incident behind them.)

But then where does this end? If they say nothing and allow the British press to breach Harry's privacy in this instance, how on earth could they expect them to respect it in the future?

Clarence House have to draw the line in the sand somewhere. They can't control what overseas publications can do and it's unrealistic to start taking lawsuits against publications all over the world. The UK is a different case. The British press have to have a working relationship with the RF, and the royals have to be given the privacy that they are entitled to.

What some here are proposing is basically giving the press carte blanche. Every picture will end up on the internet somewhere, so the concept of privacy for public individuals is dead.

 

[Artemisia]

Unbelievable, because I cannot believe the naivete of that statement. I'm beginning to wonder if these men are really in their late 20's

Ah, thanks for explaining. I thought the quote contained a turn of speech or phrase meaning of which I didn't grasp.

I guess it is pretty naive of Harry to expect complete strangers to honour his privacy. His close and tried group of friends - yes, but people he had never met before - hardly. Of course, we all want to believe the best in the others (at least, I do), but unfortunately, most of the times it's the worst that turns out to be true.

 

[Zonk]

Unbelievable, because I cannot believe the naivete of that statement. I'm beginning to wonder if these men are really in their late 20's

Okay that makes sense than.

I am not sure I would characterize them as being naive. I think when you have a small circle of friends that you have trusted for a period of time (and most royals seem to have that), you sometimes forget that you shoudln't automatically trust everyone and you let your guard down and forget that not everyone can be trusted. And let's real...whoever sold this picture made more than 10K I am thinking. That's a lot of money for some people. Heck, I might even sell Harry out for that amount. I Kid...I wouldn't but for some it can make life a little bit easier.

They probably thought these girls were cool people so thats why they brought them to their suite. The stripping might not have been planned (off the cuff please pardon the pun) so to speak. And yes, when you are impaired by alcohol we tend to do things we normally wouldn't do.

 

[soapstar]

Why would you hope that is a misquote? If they aren't doing durgs, if no women and/or men are being forced to participate against their will or while they are under the influence of drugs...who are we to judge? Don't get me wrong, this isn't the type of thing I would do when I think of having fun...but I don't begrudge those that do. I would just hope they would use caution in all matters.

Well this might be the next headline. In the Telegraph article that Artemisia linked to, there's a photo of Arthur Landon's suitcase and the conents are quite interesting.

 

[Zonk]

Well this might be the next headline. In the Telegraph article that Artemisia linked to, there's a photo of Arthur Landon's suitcase and the conents are quite interesting.

Very interesting indeed. While an item or two items are definitely questionable, it should be pointed out that its Arthur's bag and the other items show that dressing up is something that Arthur likes to do.

 

[Empress Merel]

Lmao, does he have a bong in there? Keeping it classy, I see. Is that even legal to take with you?

 

[Artemisia]

Very interesting indeed. While an item or two items are definitely questionable, it should be pointed out that its Arthur's bag and the other items show that dressing up is something that Arthur likes to do.

Not to mention, Arthur - by his own admission - was not actually in the hotel room at the time of the incident.
I don't get why the picture of the suitcase was needed in the first place though, and especially certain articles within.

 

[soapstar]

^The Telegraph probably got the photo from Arthur's facebook (and posted it to cause drama). Arthur's fb was public a few hours ago, so people could see that photo and the conversation he and Harry had about it. It was posted all over tumblr. With all that's going on, I don't know why Arthur didn't make his facebook private.

Lmao, does he have a bong in there? Keeping it classy, I see. Is that even legal to take with you?

Yep, he does.

Very interesting indeed. While an item or two items are definitely questionable, it should be pointed out that its Arthur's bag and the other items show that dressing up is something that Arthur likes to do.

Yeah it does appear he likes to dress up.

 

[Zonk]

Yep, he does.

The Telegraph probably got it from Arthur's facebook. It was public a few hours ago, so people could see that photo and the conversation he and Harry had about the it. It was posted all over tumblr. With all that is going on, I don't know why he didn't make his facebook private.



Yeah it does appear he likes to dress up.

On Facebook and tumblr?!

Goodness maybe these guys are naive! When will people realize that you don't need put your life out there for everyone to view! Too much information can work against you.

My sister had to tell my 17 year old niece today that she needed to cool down on the tweets. My sister works a small private university and my neice is a senior looking to apply to colleges this fall. Not a good thing if someone is looking for qualified applicants.

 

[cdngirl]

Goodness maybe these guys are naive! When will people realize that you don't need put your life out there for everyone to view! Too much information can work against you.

lol, see what i mean. It's mind boggling. Again SMDH.

 

[soapstar]

No, he didn't post it on tumblr. He posted it on his facebook which was public (anyone could see it). Then a bunch a people copied it and put it up on tumblr. They actually posted a few photos he took - one was of Harry passed out on the beach and the other one was this suitcase photo. They also posted the convo that he and Harry had about the bong. It's mind boggling to me that Arthur didn't think about making his FB private.

 

[zembla]

Rupert Murdoch chose the right moment to pull the trigger on this cover since all the attention had shifted to talk of how free the press is in Britain right now. The palace doesn't want to be tarred with censorship as much as they don't want these pictures out there. Basically, they screwed themselves.

 

[camelot23ca]

Unbelievable, because I cannot believe the naivete of that statement. I'm beginning to wonder if these men are really in their late 20's

It's the morally indignant tone of the quote that kills me. All they wanted to do was go to Vegas, get trashed, and then get naked in a hotel suite with a bunch of complete strangers! And now it turns out that one of the people who accepted the invitation to get trashed and naked with a bunch of strangers in a Vegas hotel suite also had no qualms about taking pictures of it and selling it to TMZ! I mean, really, who could have seen that coming?

 

[branchg]

I guess it is pretty naive of Harry to expect complete strangers to honour his privacy. His close and tried group of friends - yes, but people he had never met before - hardly.

Harry is well-aware he cannot trust anyone who is not part of his close circle of friends...something he learned very well from the time he was young from his mother's experience. This is where his poor lapse of judgment will become a problem in the eyes of The Queen and his father.

No doubt he will move beyond this incident, but hopefully he is ready to settle down and act more appropriately in the future.