Prince Harry recently found himself in a situation that can only be described as the ultimate facepalm moment.
On the surface, it appeared that he secured a significant victory against Rupert Murdoch's UK newspaper group, News Group Newspapers (NGN). After years of legal back-and-forth, the publisher settled Harry's lawsuit over allegations of unlawful information-gathering practices. But here’s the twist: while NGN admitted to unlawful actions at The Sun newspaper, they only did so after handing over a sizable amount in damages. The win, however, feels far from triumphant.
Confused? You’re not alone. The notion of "winning" a case like this while still coming away with a sense of loss is baffling. Adding to the drama, there were online whispers suggesting that King Charles might intervene on his son's behalf. Spoiler alert: not a single royal finger was lifted. No clandestine meetings, no behind-the-scenes maneuvers, and certainly no paternal gestures of support. The royal family stayed firmly on the sidelines, leaving Prince Harry to fend for himself.
So, why did Harry dive headfirst into this legal quagmire? Enter David Sherborne, a prominent lawyer known for tackling high-profile tabloid cases. Sherborne, who has built a career around lawsuits involving media scandals, encouraged Harry to sue. However, by the mid-2010s, the pool of potential claimants for these cases had significantly diminished, largely due to the UK's statute of limitations, which caps the time for filing a lawsuit at six years. As the clock ticked, Sherborne identified Prince Harry as one of the few remaining individuals who could still press charges.
Fast forward to 2019, and Harry, alongside his wife Meghan Markle, filed lawsuits against several tabloids. While many publications chose to quietly settle these claims without admitting wrongdoing, Harry's battle against The Sun was a different beast. By 2023, Harry's legal team was scrambling to pull together a compelling case, presenting approximately 30 pieces of evidence they claimed pointed to illegal activities. Yet, the police refused to reopen investigations into the matter, leaving the case hanging by a thread.
When the court date arrived, The Sun’s lawyers played their cards masterfully, arguing that Harry’s claims were "time-barred" under the statute of limitations. Meanwhile, Sherborne, under immense pressure, struggled to keep the case afloat. Despite these hurdles, negotiations began. The Sun knew they held the upper hand, while Harry and his team, desperate for a semblance of victory, accepted a settlement. There were no apologies from the journalists or executives involved—just a monetary payout to make the case disappear.
Harry’s aspirations to drag Piers Morgan, a prominent critic of his and Meghan, into the fray also fell flat. Morgan remained untouched by the legal fallout, and Harry walked away with little more than a hollow victory. Worse yet, the settlement effectively ensured that The Sun could continue its critical coverage of Harry and Meghan with impunity.
In hindsight, the settlement seems like a pyrrhic victory for the Duke of Sussex. NGN, a media giant with billions at its disposal, paid what amounts to a fraction of their wealth to resolve the case. For Harry, the public’s fascination with his ongoing legal battles appears to have waned, and his credibility as a crusader against media intrusion has taken a hit. The tabloids, emboldened by their perceived victory, are unlikely to relent in their coverage of Harry and Meghan.
And so, Harry finds himself in a paradoxical position: celebrated for his persistence in challenging unethical media practices but criticized for the way his battle concluded. The settlement may have brought an end to this chapter of his feud with the press, but the lasting impact on his public image and his ability to influence media behavior remains questionable.
