Crown Jewels

Does anyone truly care about these photos of Prince Harry? I know I don't, and I'm starting this blog entry talking about them.

It's not exactly news; a Prince who's known for being a bit drunk and silly at times has spent an evening before going back into active service being a bit drunk and silly. I'm fuly aware that we're meant to expect a little more decorum from our princes - but we always have, and we've always been let down. After all, what else is Brighton's Royal Pavillion but the Prince Regent's dirty weekend getaway hut?

If anything, the people who should feel unable to look at themselves in the mirror this morning are those at The Sun who managed to come up with a reason to publish the photographs - being the first British newspaper to do so. Their main argument is that these photographs are freely available on the internet, and so it was 'perverse' to not publish them. I'm not sure I can follow this through as a sensible argument. Did The Sun's mother never ask the question regarding the age old problem: if everyone else was jumping off a cliff, would you do it too? Apparently, yes - The Sun would be racing to that clifftop, elbowing small children and asylum seekers aside as it did so. There are lots of things that are freely available on the internet, but The Sun doesn't feel compelled to publish those (I'm thinking specifically of those pictures of cats doing amusing things. I have no idea where your mind just went).

The Sun claims that it's an issue of freedom of the press, that it should not be stifled or gagged. This in itself is a noble idea, and one that should be defended and celebrated, but freedom of speech does not mean that you are contractually required to say everything that comes into your head. Just because you can say something, doesn't mean that you have to. Freedom of speech gives you the marvellous chance to, on occasion, just shut the hell up.

The Sun's defence of its actions is reasonably shaky - I'm sure that on legal grounds, it's perfectly sound, but equally I'm convinced that we all know it's to justify the publication of some photographs of a rich boy with no clothes on. If the newspaper felt that some service was being provided by these photographs, maybe it could go to further extremes: each time there was a horrific car acident, perhaps the newspaper could splash some lurid pictures of the maimed victims, as a sombre and caring reminder to drive carefully. Maybe next to some Keith Lemon Movie vouchers. You know, to make sure the entire family is involved.