海角大神

When pictures of Prince Harry, playing strip billiards in a Las Vegas hotel suite, appeared on websites and in newspapers around the world last week, it seemed like dream front page material for Britain's tabloid newspapers.聽 After all, his family has long been fodder for Fleet Street: Prince William is believed to have had his phone hacked by journalists in 2005, and their late mother Princess Diana was famously plagued by tabloid paparazzi after she married Prince Charles.

But Britain鈥檚 scandal-loving press held back. Only one paper, The Sun, published the pictures, in what media critics hope 鈥� and journalists fear 鈥� may become an inhibited new norm for the British media.

The ostensible reason for their restraint was a letter written by Harbottle & Lewis, Prince Charles' lawyers, to the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), warning editors that the pictures should not be published as they were taken on "an entirely private occasion" where Harry had a "reasonable expectation of privacy."

But journalists have been quick to argue that newspapers would have published the pictures with alacrity had it not been for the ongoing Leveson inquiry into media standards, which is likely to recommend tougher regulation of the British press when it publishes its report this autumn.

Neil Wallis, former executive editor of the News of the World, told the BBC last week that the Leveson inquiry had 鈥渘eutered鈥� the press and that editors were 鈥渇rightened of the consequences鈥� of publishing such pictures.

A veteran Fleet Street reporter who has worked for Britain鈥檚 biggest tabloids agrees. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a view that short-term limitation and caution are far, far better than not being able to do anything at all in the longer term,鈥� says the journalist, who did not want to be named.

鈥淲hat the public doesn鈥檛 know is the number of stories that have simply not been reported,鈥� he adds. 鈥淎t least every fortnight there鈥檚 been a scandal that we haven鈥檛 been able to write about. That classic tabloid terrain 鈥� they鈥檝e just shut it down.鈥�

Indeed, two days after The Sun broke ranks with Britain鈥檚 newspapers and published the photographs days after they first appeared on TMZ, a Los-Angeles-based celebrity gossip website, Rupert Murdoch, chief executive of The Sun's parent News Corporation, seemed to allude to this new climate of caution, arguing the paper had published the photographs to highlight the absence of 鈥渇ree press鈥� in Britain.

鈥淣eed to demonstrate the no such thing as free press in the UK,鈥� Murdoch on Sunday. 鈥淚nternet makes mockery of these issues. 1st amendment please.鈥�

The Leveson effect

In some ways it was a surprise that it was The Sun, Britain鈥檚 biggest-selling newspaper, that should have broken rank with Britain鈥檚 tabloid press over the Harry images. It was a phone hacking scandal at its sister publication, the now defunct News of the World newspaper, also owned by Murdoch鈥檚 News Corporation, which prompted the government to set up the Leveson inquiry.

A number of Sun journalists have been arrested as part of a parallel investigation into bribery, launched last year as the phone hacking scandal deepened.

Among the most shocking scandals that have been investigated over the past year is the alleged hacking by journalists of the mobile of a murdered schoolgirl, Milly Dowler, in 2002, which caused widespread fury.

Brian Cathcart, professor of journalism at Kingston University and a former deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday, believes that newspapers鈥� caution over the Harry pictures was prompted more by a growing sensitivity to public sentiment than explicit fears about the Leveson inquiry.

鈥淟eveson is the manifestation of public horror and disgust at what had gone on before, especially with the Milly Dowler story,鈥� he says. 鈥淟eveson was a response to that.鈥�

The case of the Harry pictures, he added, would be unlikely to make much difference to Leveson鈥檚 final recommendations.

鈥淚t might be a reminder to Leveson, a case he might point to. But the man has spent a year digging around all this material 鈥� this is a long way from being the worst case of media intrusion.鈥�

Breaking the rules

The Sun鈥檚 publication of the pictures was nonetheless a 鈥渇lagrant and very illuminating example of ignoring the PCC,鈥� says Mr. Cathcart. Few could disagree. 聽

By heeding a warning made by Prince Charles鈥檚 lawyers via the PCC, tabloid newspapers were, after all, abiding by their own rules.聽聽

Clause 3 of the PCC鈥檚 Editors鈥� Code of Practice states that is 鈥渦nacceptable to photograph individuals in private places without their consent.鈥� Private places are defined as 鈥減ublic or private property where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.鈥�

The British public seems to agree that this is right. The PCC received more than 850 complaints on Friday about an alleged invasion of privacy in the case of the pictures. And more than two-thirds of Britons believed that The Sun was wrong to publish the pictures, according to a poll by Usury.

All of which suggests that the public would support tougher regulation of the British press.

As a from the International Forum for Responsible Media and reposted on the website of Hacked Off, which campaigns for a more responsible media put it: 鈥淭o keep the tabloids in line we need Lord Justice Leveson in permanent session. If this option is not available then statutory regulation seems the next best thing.鈥�

The Fleet Street reporter, however, warned that tougher restrictions carried risks, too.

鈥淪o fine, the public isn鈥檛 finding out about sex scandals鈥�, he says. 鈥淎nd who really cares about that? But there are also more significant scandals that are going unreported.鈥� We can, for example, no longer talk to police and find out what they are doing. That is not a triumph.鈥�