Thread by @SussexHenryVIII

Baby is asleep (for now) I have time to read Prince Harry's written statement

nytimes.com/interactive/20…

"...I was no more than 5% funded by the taxpayer while I was a working Royal in the UK, yet ift felt as though the tabloid press thought they owned me absolutely."

I have noticed this sense of ownership being much stronger with the BRF then any of the other European Monarchies

"There also seems to be a real blurring of the lines in terms of what is in the public interest and what is of interest to the public"

"...(being born into this 'contractual relationship' without any choice)..."

It doesn't HAVE to be a contractual relationship... in fact it shouldn't be. The press are supposed to have a semi-adversarial relationship with people in power.

As Harry describes the "relevant people" I just want to plug again that I don't think any of this would have happened if Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton had still been in charge of the Wales brothers 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️

Harry points out that the institution provided his mobile phones and managed the bills.

Reinforces two things and echoes what Meghan has said about her treatment while in the firm. They are in control, they have control over your personal devices and personal documents.

"[The phone hacking] created a huge amount of paranoia in my relationships."

Anyone who claims to not understand the profound isolation this would have caused for an already isolated adolescent is either a moron or is being obtuse on purpose.

"...I am shocked and appalled at the sheer volume of payments made by MGN titles to private investigators..." (including when Harry was a minor)

Reminds me of my question to as how the tabloid press found Harry and Meghan exactly six weeks after they moved to Canada then the US

As Harry describes feeling sick over how the press intruded upon Diana's privacy, likely tapping her phone... it's impossible not to contrast his statements with his brother's... and I don't think the comparison is kind to William

It's kind of incredible that a young Prince Harry was exposed to tabloid headlines about his parent's messy divorce because copies of the "newspapers" were placed in royal residences...

As Harry gets into specific articles I can't help but think there is an elephant in the room

Yes, these "journalists" could have and probably in many instances did use illegal methods to obtain information. But it's also possible that someone at a palace leaked the information

Harry goes on to describe that the repeat articles on his minor sports injuries gave bullies at school all the material they would ever need.

Again anyone insisting they don't understand the negative effects this would have on a kid is lying.

It does strike me as ridiculously unsafe to tell hundreds of thousands of tabloid readers that they could get tens of thousands of pounds if they were able to get a sample of Harry's DNA

Harry confirming he probably did call Paul Burrell a two-faced shit 😂

Again, not a great look for William and it strikes me that even 20 years ago the brother's way to manage the tabloid intrusions were different

Someone walking up to you in the street and "confronting" you about your teenage relationship would be very scary. I feel for Chelsy here.

There were eight payments to private investigators in the days leading up to the article outing Harry & Chelsy's relationship.

Through all these articles and Harry's comments it becomes clear that the press were tracking him somehow. I don't know how anyone doesn't come away with that assessment. He's 20 years old at this point. Ridiculous.

It strikes me that the tabloid press put an adolescent/young adult Harry into a cage where he couldn't trust even his closest friends and then publically laughed at him when he didn't cope very well

"[The press] claim to hold public figures to account, but refuse to hold themselves accountable."

Especially over the past six years the UK press have actively hidden what should have been huge scandals involving taxpayer $ to instead report salacious gossip about H&M

"Democracy fails when your press fails to scrutinise and hold the government accountable, and instead choose to get into bed with them so they can ensure the status quo."

I go on and on about institutions protecting each other.

And let's face it, neither the tory party nor the royal family would continue to exist much longer if faced with an actually adversarial press corp

F@#k Piers Morgan.

I do like how Harry specifies he's not only angry about his own treatment, but angry about how Morgan treated his mother.

People generally forget how responsible that man is for many of the tabloid smears against Diana in the years leading up to her death

"I fully expect the journalists in question to come along and explain how they wrote these stories"

Unnamed sourcing needs to become less acceptable in the journalistic sphere.

"...on one hand, MGN admit that phone hacking and other unlawful information gathering went on but, on the other, they deny liability for every claim that's been brought against them..."

That's why he is Good King Harry. He has the $ and influence to fight, so he does.