No End To Naivete

[Canary42]

This guy's so unworldly - did he really believe there would be less paparazzi attention across the pond.

https://uk.yahoo.com/style/prince-harry-isnt-happy-archie-104000516.html

[andy-hughes]

Stickybottle - // Leaves the uk to escape the intrusion into his privacy but is constantly courting the media whilst making himself look more foolish //

I have debated the notion of privacy many times on here, and there is an important distinction to be made about it.

If Harry and Meghan choose to go on TV every day of the week, that is not an invasion of their privacy, it's their choice.

If however, the paparazzi follow them every time they leave their house and shove cameras in their faces and publish aunauthorised and demeaning photos, or reporters shout at them for quotes, and only ever publish quotes when one of them gets annoyed, that is invasion of privacy.

The two are not the same, so saying that Harry going on TV goes against his compaints about invasion of privacy is actually incorrect.

It's about the choice of the inidividuals involved.

[douglas9401]

Or, let them have cake, and eat it.

[naomi24]

//It's about the choice of the inidividuals involved.//

Indeed. And he chooses to expose himself to criticism. He can't expect to blather on at will without inviting comment - whether it be good or bad. He makes his choices - the media listens and makes theirs.

[Spicerack]

And then moan about the marzipan.

[Peter Pedant]

I like my privacy but only when I say
endlessly and exhaustively discussed by arch discussant andie hughes - did he ever cover
the striptease? - uncover the stripteast I mean

here you can look ! - and oops here you naughty man you cant look!

way to make money to me

[Spicerack]

It's all a racket. I notice they've set up a charitable foundation.
This tells me they don't aspire to be in the millionaire class.
More the billionaire class.

[youngmafbog]

Well lets face it Harry isnt the sharpest knife in a drawer full of spanners is he?

As an anti Royalist I should be all for this tearing up the RF, but strangely I find myself sympathising with the Queen, Charles and William.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // //It's about the choice of the inidividuals involved.//

Indeed. And he chooses to expose himself to criticism. He can't expect to blather on at will without inviting comment - whether it be good or bad. He makes his choices - the media listens and makes theirs. //

That is not the point I am making.

Harry chooses to be a public figure, and chooses to make announcements through the media.

On that basis, comment is entirely justified.

But comment is not invasion of privacy, as I have outlined above.

I'll repeat the gist of my previous example -

George Smith is a professor of mathematics, and invents a new formula which he goes on television to discuss.

The press then comment on his appearence, and what he said about his formula, that is not invasion of privacy.

The a newspaper prints a story with pictures confirming that on the weekend, George dresses up in women's clothes and likes to be called Susan.

That is invasion of privacy.

An abusurd example, but the principle is what counts.

What you choose to reveal to the media is fair game for comment by the media.

What you choose to do privately and you do not choose to reveal, but which is revealed without your kowledge and consent - that is invassion of privacy.

[andy-hughes]

Peter - // I like my privacy but only when I say //

I beleive you are missing the point - please refer to my post at 18:38 which explains the fundamental difference between being a media figure, and having your privacy invaded.

[naomi24]

No need to repeat yourself, AH. Those who read your first post know what you said. Those who didn't bother are unlikely to read your second either.

[Peter Pedant]

from the gt vaunted post of 18 38
// What you choose to do privately and you do not choose to reveal, but which is revealed without your kowledge and consent - that is invassion of privacy.//

ha ha are you serious - let me give an example - A prime minister ( I am making this up mind) has abused his position by ( let us say - oo) lobbying his old chums in office. The old pm stands to gain a fabulous sum . I am making this up - say £65m

and according to your "principle" - he is allowed to say 'oh no no this is a private matter, I dont wish to discuss this at all'
and so he is not ( questioned) coz it is private see?

what does TTT say - pull da uvva one !

that by the way - by a counter example demolishes a declared 'priniple'
have fun boys and girls

[andy-hughes]

Well I'm sure you will have read my first post Naomi, and clearly you failed to understand it, hence my repeat of the gist of it.

Either way, you have read my second post, and hopefully you now grasp the fundamental difference between media comment and the invasion of privacy.

[Peter Pedant]

I am open to the suggestion that my refutation fails as the example is too extreme and can never occur in real life

[Peter Pedant]

yup read the great post of 18 38
and can say I am no wider
wiser

[andy-hughes]

Peter, I have taken the time to make some sense of your ramblings, and as I suspected, you have completely missed the point I am making.

[naomi24]

AH, I read it, I understood it, and I said what I wanted to say.

[andy-hughes]

Good for you, although you can't see or hear it, I am letting off a party popper in celebration!!!

[Peter Pedant]

// Peter, I have taken the time to make some sense of your ramblings, and as I suspected, you have completely missed the point I am making.//

so as I suspected - I dont ramble: I just dont say what you wanted me to say - so some progress has been made
and pass the silent party popper

meanwhile in the great debate -1.) young child dies and this proves the non existence of God. 2.) please refute whilst AH snipes. 3. The end

we are no further on
carry on debating boys and girls - this is after all AB !

[Stickybottle]

Andy Hughes
Total rubbish. Harry and family left the uk because of the supposed scrutiny he was constantly under.
Continuing to court controversy and heighten media speculation about Royal family rifts etc somewhat fly’s in the face of everything he was complaining about but I wouldn’t expect you to get the gist of that either

[calmck]

Just a point. H and M have some agreement with Procter and Gamble. This company sells skin lightening creams in Africa and Asia. Double standards or what