Nude Harry Snaps: 'Papers Neutered By Leveson'

My friends, this was taken from Sky News:

http://news.sky.com/story/975950/nude-harry-snaps-papers-neutered-by-leveson

The decision by the British press not to publish the naked pictures of Prince Harry is a sign that the Leveson Inquiry has resulted in "neutered newspapers", a former News Of The World executive editor has said.

Neil Wallis said he would have published the photos, apparently taken on a camera phone as the third-in-line to the throne partied in Las Vegas over the weekend, if the incident had taken place before the inquiry into media ethics began.

And that is a perfect example of why Leveson was needed and the NOTW folded.

Looking round various news sites taking comments, it's glaringly obvious that the great British public couldn't care less - typical comments on Sky:

Wormcake
11:21 AM on 23/8/2012
Who would be interested in nude pictures of him anyway. I've just come back from Thailand where we bumped into quite a few off duty military personnel living it up and enjoying a break from service life so why shouldn't Harrry.

Nervous Pensioner
11:21 AM on 23/8/2012
Who cares?
As long as newspaper editors are barred from illegal acts such as possibly being involved in phone-hacking, does it really matter?
Are we supposed to be influenced by a former NOTW Editor?
Would this be the same man recently arrested by the Police in connection with allegations, yet to be proven, about issues being looked at by the Met and Levenson?
Credibility? - I don't think so.
Like I say, who cares?
Report Abuse

Steve-N-
11:16 AM on 23/8/2012
Oh, shock and horror! Who cares? Leave the guy alone and let him have some fun and privacy on his hard earned holiday. This is not even news and is a complete waste of paper in my opinion.
Report Abuse

womble
11:14 AM on 23/8/2012
This is why Neil Wallis and his like should never be allowed back into mainstream journalism or anywhere near a newspaper ! His attitude to what has happened in the past is arrogant to say they least, and clearly displays he has not learned the lesson !!
Why is it in the "public interest " what Prince Harry does on a " Private holiday " in a " Private hotel " room ??
If pictures appeared of Neil Wallis and his wife or girlfriend enjoying a "Private holiday " would he like them display across what is loosely termed as newspapers, and then someone deciding " It's in the Public Interest "
Clearly this guy is so far removed from what is proper decent journalism, he lives on another planet.
Learn the lesson Mr Wallis !!!!!

Sally Wigwam
10:10 AM on 23/8/2012
Stop reporting on this rubbish and leave the guy alone. He's young, that's what young people do. Get out there to Afganistan or Syria and start reporting on stuff we need to know about.

I seriously don't care a flying **** what Harry does
======================

I don´t see why all the fuss about this? he have done nothing wrong.

he is a normal human being enjoying a moment of peace in the company of girls.

Well done Harry.

if someone dislike your normal behaviour, continue with your behaviour.

I can't imagine why they think anyone would be greatly interested in seeing Harry's backside, anyway, Pedro, it's no different from any other member of the human race.

It does show what contempt they have for the public, though, that they still think that Harry taking his clothes off in private is of any interest - it's not as if he was running down the road doing it.

The person who should be ashamed is the one who took the photo and sold it, IMO.

I agree with you bb1, unless if someone who took the photo is gay. shame on you. the press have not learned nothing with princess Diana´s death.

Anyway, it was Las Vegas - WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS, STAYS IN VEGAS.

I should think one or two of his royal ancestors would be cheering him on, considering how many of them have had an eye for the ladies.

Yes, I agree: "I should think one or two of his royal ancestors would be cheering him on, considering how many of them have had an eye for the ladies.".

So, the Sun has taken it upon itself to publish the photo hypocritically claiming it is a 'freedom of the press' issue.

No, it's the Sun thinking pics of Harry Wales' backside are going to sell more papers.

IMO, they have misjudged the national mood over this very badly - very few people care.

I am a little surprised that it didn't occur to Prince Harry that someone would do this, but it's hardly going to be the ruination of his life. And I am also surprised that it didn't occur to the rest of The World's Media that no one in Britain would be interested.
As for the person who did this, much good may it do them.

I am shocked that his minders allowed this to happen. They could have taken away guests' mobile phones?

He is getting ready to deploy again and if he wants to let off steam beforehand, he is just as entitled to do that as anyone else.

I think Prince Harry is a lovely human being. His private time should be exactly that. Private.

I don't think his minders are allowed to do things like that, Lily. Free Speach, innit.

But I did note one cretin in The Daily Mail Comments say that he's spoilt brat and needs to go and do something useful. Loads of Red Arrows but no one bothered to answer them.
It's like that cretin, Lillian Glass. They think they spout ignorant abuse when they know nothing about The Royal Family. I don't think one of The Royals has sat around doing nothing for many a decade.

Actually, Sabot, taking away mobiles at the 'door' in America is sometimes done where 'celebrities' are concerned. It depends what is happening.

The girls were invited into what constituted as his suite and so the minders could have done that. If they didn't want to temporarily surrender their phone then they would not have gained access.

I can see that point, Lily. But it doesn't reflect well on anyone involved. And I really don't know why any newspaper would want to cash in on such a stupid thing.

They are all greedy, Sabot. Anything to make a buck.

Agree, the minders should have taken the guests' phones - if they had been minding a superstar rapper, it would have been done without a second's thought.

Money talks in Vegas, not Free Speach. And I can't see his female guests being any too popular once the dust settles....

But at the end of the day, who actually cares? It isn't as if he's ever going to be Henry IX, unless HM's subjects decide they could do with a Party Monarch. Did anyone think the Royal Backside was somehow different from non-Royal backsides?

Young bloke takes his clothes off in hotel room.....there's worse on Big Brother every night of the week.

It's sleazy, nasty and hypocritical of the Sun, though. It's also a bit insulting to their readers, that the Sun thinks they want to see the Royal Backside at breakfast, instead of their usual topless page 3 'models'.

This piece in the Mail is interesting:

How did Harry get away with it? Naked 'playboy' prince receives huge swell of support for his nude antics in Las Vegas (but the media weren't so kind)

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2192461/Prince-Harry-receives-huge-swell-celebrity-support-Twitter-nude-antics-Las-Vegas.html#ixzz24STVl5zB

The po-faced and hypocritical columnists have got this one badly wrong; the public and assorted famous people couldn't give a flying one; indeed, the general consensus seems to be, Well done, Harry!

I think that he's terrific.

Well done Harry: you´re a single man, she´s a hot woman: enjoy.

If I were you Harry, I would do exactly the same.

I should think his namesake Henry VIII would have been DELIGHTED for his loyal subjects to see photos of the Royal Backside with young ladies - he had to make to with a giant codpiece to show off

Maybe the Sun thinks its readers are too stupid to go and look at the Royal Backside on the internet, so have to get it shoved under their noses?

Even some of The Sun readers weren't three impressed. But I don't understand why The Media in any shape or form are doing this in the light of Leveson. They are just proving that they have no discretion at all. Some of them are completely incapable of regulating themselves. And for such a silly thing.

I get the impression that the media thought it could drum up outrage about this, but generally, the public couldn't care less, being rather less stupid than the press thought.

Boris (who else):

Just a day after Harry was called the 'Royal Boris Johnson' the Mayor of London has come rushing to the defence of the beleaguered prince.
Naked pictures of the third in line to the throne have swept across the internet causing him huge embarrassment.
But some commentators have predicted that like Boris Johnson, errors of judgment and bungling incidents often end up being celebrated rather than damaging.
Earlier this month Mr Johnson somehow got stuck on a zip-wire, but in a precarious situation that would have finished most politicians, Boris somehow managed emerge from the farce unscathed, even glorified.
Speaking today on radio Mr Johnson, pictured above with David Cameron as the Paralympic celebrations began in Trafalgar Square today, said he viewed Harry's naked billiards episode with 'deafening indifference'.
'I think it would be disgraceful if a chap wasn't allowed to have a bit of fun in Las Vegas,' he said.
'The real scandal would be if you went all the way to Las Vegas and you didn't misbehave.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2192901/Prince-Harrys-friend-Arthur-Landon-Vegas-attacks-despicable-girl-sold-naked-photos.html#ixzz24TzrSNtU

Quite; his minders should have stayed sober and confiscated the cameras and phones.

There could have been a different outcome had his minders stayed sober.

I suspect that most ordinary people are wishing they had been there.

Which is, of course, the whole point of having minders....

It's actually quite cheering to discover that the UK is NOT the nation of puritans the prodnoses and hypocrites in the media thought it was and that most people just don't care. And the younger ones are cheering Harry on....

Really, the prodnoses would do well to read a little British history, and remember that Charles II didn't get called the Merry Monarch because of his sober and celibate behaviour....

I know, Sabot, I should think bookings for Vegas from under-30 Brits will soar after this

Royalty has always had it's embarrassments, but it's still there. And they are still making films about the roisterings. And who didn't do something silly when they had to much to drink.
Some people underestimate Britain's loyalty to The Crown. It's our Crown. Bugger off and mind your own business. Grandma will sort him out.