I didn't say that was the only reason they hate the press. After being the victims of illegal phone-tapping by the press, not to mention their parents' treatment at the hands of the press, they have more than enough reason to see the press for what they are.
The Harry issue came after a period of relative good relations with the press. Only The Sun felt that those pictures should be printed. The other newspapers chose not to do so, taking everything else into consideration. Public perception of that incident changed totally when it was revealed that Harry had gone to Afghan, which the papers knew about well before Vegas. I think we can cut a young man heading into a hellhole within days, putting his life on the line for our safety and security, a little bit of slack, prince or not.
William gave pre-arranged photo shoots at St. Andrews. Charles and the boys
did the same at Balmoral. It happened for several years while they were on their ski holidays. The tactic just didn't work. The paps were still trying to get their exclusives. What's the point of arranging and taking part in a photo shoot supposedly in return for privacy when the press don't bother keeping their side of the deal?
It's funny that you think other RFs don't have scandals like the BRF. Most of those royals live in countries where the press just is not so hardcore as ours is. From the King of Sweden and his strip clubs, underworld friends and popsinger mistresses, to the Dutch and acceptance of bribes from Lockheed and their love children, to the Belgian king and his own lovechild, they're no cleaner than the British royals. They've just been lucky to live in countries where the press hasn't gone after them in the way the British press does. That's changing now though as events in Spain demonstrate.
Scandals in the BRF make headlines everywhere; scandals in other RFs do not.