When it comes to public apologies, especially from a company like the Sun’s publisher, dropping the word “sorry” can be quite costly. Rupert Murdoch’s News Group Newspapers recently offered a “full and unequivocal apology” to Prince Harry, acknowledging “serious intrusions” into his private life, including illegal activities. Notably, this marks the first time they’ve admitted that individuals working for the Sun—specifically private investigators, not journalists—were involved. They also apologized for phone hacking and surveillance linked to News of the World, which was previously shut down due to the scandal.
Prince Harry will receive substantial damages, contributing to the Murdoch empire’s significant payout for settling approximately 1,300 cases, which altogether has surpassed the £1 billion mark. This isn’t the first time Prince Harry has won damages; he also secured a settlement from Mirror Group newspapers.
For victims of phone hacking, financial compensation is not the main issue. While Prince Harry is pleased with the admission of wrongdoing, described as vindication through a lawyer’s statement, this settlement does spare high-ranking executives in the industry from facing a judge’s scrutiny.
Many previous complainants would have preferred to take their cases to trial, but the risk of exorbitant legal costs deterred them. Actor Hugh Grant, who advocates for press regulation, highlighted this dilemma when he settled his own case last year. If a claimant turns down a settlement and is awarded damages lower than the offer, they could end up paying the opponent’s legal expenses, which could be financially devastating. Grant noted he might have been hit with a £10 million bill. Prince Harry has positioned himself as a potential champion for the average person against the media. However, some might feel that by avoiding a trial, the media executives emerged victorious.
The victims of illegal press tactics weren’t just celebrities or royals. Anyone with ties to a celebrity—be it friends, family, or former partners—could find themselves targeted. These were not consequences suffered without harm; individuals felt anxious and paranoid, and relationships suffered greatly.
While high-profile cases often involve famous figures, it’s important to remember the Guardian’s story that elevated hacking into a national scandal. This involved Murdoch’s News of the World intercepting voicemails from Millie Dowler, a schoolgirl tragically murdered in 2002. The uproar led to police investigations, numerous arrests, several convictions, and the Leveson public inquiry. Although the subsequent press regulations didn’t fully align with the report’s recommendations, they did highlight the pervasiveness of unethical practices within some Fleet Street newsrooms, tainting the industry’s reputation to this day.
Although the agreement reached on Wednesday concludes a lengthy legal dispute, Prince Harry and co-claimant Tom Watson, who also received an apology, urge further investigation from police and parliament. Lord Watson, former deputy chair of the Labour Party, has reportedly sent relevant documents to the Metropolitan Police. Despite profound changes in the media landscape since this saga began, the ethical core of this scandal—the irresponsibility pervasive in massive media and technology organizations, and their perceived invulnerability due to wealth and power—remains strikingly pertinent.
If you have thoughts on the issues discussed in this article and would like to share your opinion in a letter of up to 300 words for potential publication, please feel free to click here to submit your response via email.
