Why Prince Harry’s court loss is a 'bitter' and 'significant setback' in his media fight

Prince ravage has been relentless in his fight against media intrusion and the intrusion of secrecy he says he's long been guinea pig to from the tabloids.

And the younger son of King Charles had some success as two court judgments went his way.

But in a High Court ruling released Tuesday in London, Harry and six other high-profile figures lost a privacy lawsuit that alleged widespread unlawful behaviour by the publisher of the Daily Mail, Asssociated Newspapers Ltd.

In the wake of that ruling, there is now an open question of just what the Duke of Sussex will do if he wishes to carry on his crusade, even as the journalistic landscape has evolved and, in ways, moved on from the world he was so focused on fighting.

The loss "will be a bitter personal blow because it's been very plain that he has been absolutely convinced of the moral rightness of his case," Judith Rowbotham, a social and cultural scholar and visiting research professor at the University of Plymouth in southwestern England, said in an email. 

Harry, she said, "clearly felt strengthened" by the prescence of the other claimants — Elton John and David Furnish among them.

"So the dismissal of the entirety of the claims absolutely removes the ground from under his feet."

Prince Harry, others lose privacy lawsuit against Daily Mail publisher

It's "embarassing for all of the claimants," she said.

It's also likely to have come as a "particular shock" to Harry given his success in the two previous cases, she said.

The ruling came down as Harry was in London at an event in connection with the Invictus Games, the sporting endeavour he founded to support injured and ill service members that will hold its next competition in Birmingham, England, a year from now.

Prince Harry won't stay at Buckingham Palace during U.K. Visit

Prince Harry, Elton John and others lose case against Daily Mail publisher

In response, Harry released a statement to British media outlets, calling it a "a complete and obvious whitewash, but sadly not altogether unexpected."

"However, the lengths to which the court has gone to exonerate the Mail is as shocking as it is totally unwarranted," he said.

Prince Harry not staying at Buckingham Palace during U.K. Trip

Tuesday's ruling also leaves open how the public will perceive what Harry has been saying about the toll the media has taken on him and his family, says Craig Prescott, a constitutional expert and lecturer in law at Royal Holloway, University of London, said in an email.  

"People may wonder whether his broader arguments about press intrusion really stack up," Prescott said via email.  

Harry, he said, "may have a point" especially in relation to his wife, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. Whose life, he told court in January, the Daily Mail made an "absolute misery."

But, Prescott said, in relation to the news articles that were part of the case decided Tuesday, Harry was not able to make an argument that stood up in court. 

"You would imagine that the articles that formed part of the case would have been the strongest examples of what Prince Harry was alleging."

In an earlier case, Harry won 140,600 pounds (about $240,430 Cdn) after the High Court ruled he was a victim of "modest" phone-hacking and other unlawful information gathering by journalists at the Mirror Group Newspapers.

And in another case, News Group gave Harry a "full and unequivocal apology" for "phone hacking, surveillance and misuse of private information" by its journalists and their private investigators.

On Harry's narrow point about the media in the U.K. And their treatment of him as a member of the Royal Family, the case decided Tuesday was the final element, Prescott said.

"This was the last of the big cases against the different newspapers relating to the phone hacking and obtaining information. More recently, [Harry] has pivoted to discussing misinformation and social media, and so you can imagine that he will carry on with that."

There's little doubt Harry's crusade against the media — particularly portions of the tabloid media — has been a high priority for him. It is a theme he returned to repeatedly, inside and outside court, in his memoir Spare and various interviews.

"Over the past few years, Harry has made clear that taking on the press for what he sees as unjustified intrusion has been one of his big missions since leaving the U.K., and in some ways for him, even being part of this case is in a sense a victory for him," Prescott said.

Prince Harry slams royal relationship with press in new Netflix docuseries episodes

But now there is a possibility that, in ways, time has moved on from the heart of Harry's fight.

There's "a sense of this being yesterday's battle," Prescott said.

"The newspapers aren't as important as they used to be; their sales are down significantly from the 1990s, and the shift is ongoing to new types of media, of YouTube and other forms of social media, which raises very different issues."

Prince Harry, King Charles meet for first time in nearly 2 years — and they have tea

Prince Harry told his story in his own words. But what happens now?

Rowbotham expects Harry will want to continue his campaign against media intrusion via Archwell Philanthropies, his and Meghan's charitable entity.

But Tuesday's decision, she said, is "likely to kill it as a campaign that will be taken seriously in [the] future."

"Libel laws … remain, but it's a reminder of a reality that any legal historian would point out — that if you are wealthy and/or prominent, then even if you are powerful, gossip occurs even from those you believe are terminally discreet."

‘Absolute misery’: Emotional Prince Harry slams Daily Mail's treatment of Meghan

How Tuesday's decision will affect Harry's relationship with the Royal Family is also unclear. 

He said in a documentary that his crusade against the tabloids had been "part of a rift" with family members. 

In a sense, Prescott said, nothing much changes with the ruling.

"However … now that this is out of the way, it's the removal of one obstacle to improving relations with the rest of the Royal Family, who have not supported him on this, although there are many others."

Rowbotham thinks there will be relief from Harry's relatives that "the case has been so comprehensively dismissed." 

"But with damages still to be settled, I suspect that the King and Prince William will continue to avoid contact to ensure that they are not drawn into the case."

Senior Writer

---

---