Prince Harry's MGN court case: celebrity and press reactions

Taking the stand
The reason
Prince Harry’s scathing statement
Worrying for the Duke of Sussex
So what do people say?
Spiked Online
An ‘entitled little princeling’
It 'didn't go particularly well'
Washington Post
Was Harry naive to take on the press?
Back and forth
The BBC
The Duke of Sussex didn’t get riled by questioning
'From the royal court to the law court'
CNN
Bigger than Harry
What about the British newspapers?
The Mirror (the accused)
Page Six
Harry's uncle - Charles Spencer
Piers Morgan
'War' against the press
Support for the Prince
A very wide target
Firing at the press
'Put fire out with petrol'
Will the case have any effect on the tabloids?
Taking the stand

Prince Harry has made history, becoming the first senior member of the British Royal Family to testify in court for 130 years. We take a clear look as to why he was there and what celebrities and the press have said about the case.

The reason

Prince Harry is suing MGN (Mirror Group Newspapers) for hacking his phone on many occasions. He also says the publishers gathered information about him during his life that was obtained in a coercive or unlawful way.

Prince Harry’s scathing statement

Prince Harry’s 55 page statement includes being followed by photographers and ruining any serious relationships he was in. The Duke of Sussex said that the articles about him would be ‘wrong but interspersed with snippets of truth’ creating an ‘alternative and distorted’ version of himself.

Worrying for the Duke of Sussex

His statement continued saying “any one of the thousands of people that I met or was introduced to on any given day, could easily have gone: ‘You know what, you’re an idiot. I’ve read all the stories about you and now I’m going to stab you.’”

So what do people say?

There have been mixed comments about the Duke of Sussex’s case and how he was perceived on the stand, giving evidence and being cross examined by MGN’s lawyers.

Spiked Online

Spiked Online editor Tom Slater spoke to Sky News and said that Prince Harry’s court case made him look “entitled” and showed he “doesn’t play” by the same rules.

An ‘entitled little princeling’

“If Prince Harry’s intention with this court case was to make him look like an entitled little princeling who doesn’t play by the same rules, then mission accomplished,” Tom Slater explained.

It 'didn't go particularly well'

Finally, the Spiked Online editor said, “He struggled to produce any essential evidence for the phone hacking claims… If Harry wanted to make this look like this wasn’t a vendetta against the press it didn’t go particularly well.”

Washington Post

The Washington Post reported that Harry looked happy leaving the courtroom and was all smiles. But that this ‘didn’t mean that he is winning. Or that this case will help in his declared mission to rein in the British tabloids.

Was Harry naive to take on the press?

Dickie Arbiter, a former spokesman for Queen Elizabeth II, spoke to the Washington Post, saying that Harry’s claims were “forensically dissected” and that he is “obviously very naive about how the press works,” Arbiter said. “They feed off each other.”

Back and forth

The Washington Post quotes media lawyer, Mark Stephens, as saying “I think Harry has given as good as he’s got,” and yet “he’s been resilient on cross-examination” with Harry’s side “winning some and losing some”.

The BBC

The BBC gave Harry some credit, saying “He'd finished his high-wire act without falling off.”

The Duke of Sussex didn’t get riled by questioning

“He hadn't crumbled or got wound up or tetchy, he hadn't been dragged into too many awkward questions, he'd stuck to his own lines. You couldn't exactly say he'd been an eloquent witness, but he'd not walked into any traps,” the BBC continued.

'From the royal court to the law court'

The British corporation speculated that there would be more to come, writing that “given the number of other legal claims involving Prince Harry, this could be the first of a number of courtroom appearances. From the royal court to the law court.”

CNN

CNN also commended the Duke of Sussex on his demeanour in the court room. “Many observers pored over Prince Harry’s courtroom behavior but he kept his cool throughout and failed to reveal any bombshells that might further embarrass his wider family,” their report wrote.

Bigger than Harry

“For Harry, it isn’t just about highlighting the intrusive press coverage he has faced but speaks to his wider years-long mission to reform the media,” CNN summarised.

What about the British newspapers?

The Mail had a few scathing things to say about the Duke of Sussex’s appearance in a court of law. Specifically, a reference to Harry’s own revelations in interviews. They said, “He must have longed for the schmaltzy embrace of Oprah.”

The Mirror (the accused)

The Mirror themselves reported on the case with a headline that didn’t acknowledge it was them being sued. They opted for a simple ‘Harry vs the press’.

Page Six

Page Six have tried to touch on what the royal family themselves think about Harry’s attack on the press. Of course, there has been no official comment, but the publication states a ‘highly placed palace source’ says they can’t imagine anyone is pleased” and adds that the royals are “privately bracing themselves.”

Harry's uncle - Charles Spencer

Harry’s uncle, Earl Spencer, seemed to show support for Harry after rewtweeing Alistair Campbell’s tweets about the case, which said: “Prince Harry makes a very good point re the damage done to trust in your own circle when stories appear and you have no idea where they come from.”

Piers Morgan

Piers Morgan blasted Harry on his Twitter account for his appearance in court: "BREAKING: Prince Harry, who’s spent the past few years ruthlessly invading the privacy of his family, friends and acquaintances, for huge financial gain, has turned up at court in London to complain about newspapers invading his privacy."

'War' against the press

The Guardian commented on the broader message of this court case, explaining that it will always be hard going ‘to war’ against the press. They likened the event to a football game, calling the media ‘both referee and commentator’.

Support for the Prince

Backing the prince, The Guardian continued to say that Harry is right to feel injustice due to the nature of his role in the royal family where life events are in the spotlight for all to see. The publication even recognised racist ‘dog whistling’ in the media upon marriage to his wife.

A very wide target

But what the most difficult thing for Harry is the long game and what this case stands for. It is more than the 148 articles he is suing MGN for - it is a culture.

Firing at the press

The Guardian made an excellent metaphor: “firing-squad rules apply: it is exceedingly difficult to pinpoint the individual gun, let alone find it still smoking. All he’s really been able to show are the exit wounds.“

'Put fire out with petrol'

“I think it doubtful that the tabloids will ever, whether in concert or one at a time, stop trashing his reputation,” The Guardian’s opinion article concluded. “He tried to put this fire out with petrol.”

Will the case have any effect on the tabloids?

The Washington Post also summarised with a personal opinion: “As for whether this trial will change the behavior of the tabloid press — Harry’s broader goal — media analysts say not likely.”