Meghan Markle has been accused of accepting $500,000 for photos of Lilibet, and Prince Harry is suing Backgrid for data breaches.
In an alarming development, Prince Harry's ongoing battle with the British media has spilled over to the United States.
Despite the royal couple's explicit request, a photo of their 2-year-old daughter, Lilibet, was recently released with her face unrecognizable for data protection reasons.
Newsweek magazine's Royal Report shed light on the issue, with Lilibet attending a parade in Montecito with her parents, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, and her brother, Prince Archie, on July 4. It was revealed that it was captured by
Shortly after the parade, the New York Post, Page Six and Mail Online quickly published photos of the little princess in Prince Harry's arms. However, interesting discrepancies arose between transatlantic reports.
British publications took care to blur the young prince's face, but the New York Post and Page Six published the image without editing. This disparity reflects the stark contrast between media culture and legal practices in the UK and the US.
Newsweek global correspondent Jack Royston shared his insights on the podcast "Royal Report", highlighting the lasting impact of Princess Diana's eventful experience as a relentless paparazzi stalker.
This unfortunate legacy casts a shadow over Harry's life, especially when it comes to intrusive photos of him and his children. It remains unclear whether the photos of Lilibet and her family were taken by paparazzi photographers or by ordinary people, but were eventually sold to tabloids through paparazzi photo agency Backgrid.
Prince Harry has been at odds with the media in recent months, including Backgrid and Rupert Murdoch. In February, Prince Harry and Meghan requested the release of the resulting images after what the team described as a near-disastrous car chase after a disastrous encounter in New York.
Many of these images were taken by a backgrid photographer. In response, the US-based photo agency issued a scathing public statement rejecting attempts to obtain images of Prince Harry, invoking the doctrine of personal property rights under US law. Additionally, Prince Harry has sued Murdoch's newsgroup newspaper for engaging in historic phone hacking and other illegal activities to gather information about his private life dating back to the 1990s.
The publisher refuted some of the prince's claims. Backgrid and Murdoch's media involvement in releasing uncensored photos of Lilibet will no doubt add to Prince Harry's frustration as he tries to hold the media accountable for their persistent intrusion into his family's privacy.
In particular, the circumstances of these photos suggest that they were taken without Lilibet's consent. Royston has stressed that he has urged news outlets to edit the images to protect the princess, including a request to blur her face, according to the New York Post. The paper did not respond to this. Differences in the legal framework between the United States and the United Kingdom contribute to the different approaches in drawing Lilibet's face.
إرسال تعليق