[Closed] The Sun - It's in the Public Interest that we Sell Papers

What would Harry Do?

www.binnerstshirts.com

🙂

[i]I can't help but think this whole thing is a non-story[/i]

I thought that when I passed the newspaper stand in Dublin airport: "Oh Prince Harry naked, whatever" and walked on.
I guess I'm not like the vast majority of Sun readers though.

crankboy - Member

Never buy the Sun.

As is being pointed out ad nauseum, this is nothing to do with press freedom, it's about selling papers. Which means there's a market because people want to read this drivel and I find that really depressing.

I might be being a touch cynical but:

Most national newspapers suffered double digit percentage sales losses year on year in July.

Daily Mirror : 1,082,054 ; -8.74
Daily Record : 275,526 ; -9.73
Daily Star : 623,534 ; -11.78
[b]The Sun : 2,550,859 ; -9.60[/b]
Daily Express : 555,544 ; -11.25
Daily Mail : 1,921,239 ; -6.29
The Daily Telegraph : 581,249 ; -8.34
Financial Times : 290,765 ; -13.61
The Guardian : 209,354 ; -15.85
i : 280,122 ; 52.51
The Independent : 83,619 ; -54.28
The Scotsman : 34,127 ; -12.47
The Times : 404,099 ; -8.41
Racing Post : 46,836 ; -15.34

So what "public interest" story do the Independent and Guardian need to publish urgently?

[img] [/img]

[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/arts-entertainment/harry-photos-ruined-by-old-spanish-woman-2012082439034 ]TREASURED photographs of Prince Harry naked in Las Vegas have been ruined by an elderly Spanish woman.[/url]

The Sun, reaffirming its journalistic values - that being less than zero. As a news piece WGAF? What they should have said is that the article would be of interest to their readership, not the public!

More to the point who was the wretched, piteous creature that took/released the images ... for gain I assume? Very poor manners on their part.

the day The Sun took a principled stand on "Freedom of the Press"?

lol at cfhs link

For those crying "he's doing it with my money", I know that using actual facts is against the spirit of STW, but:

[i]The state duties and staff of other members of the Royal Family (but [b]not[/b] the Prince of Wales, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, [b]or Prince Harry[/b]) are funded from a parliamentary annuity, the amount of which is fully refunded by the Queen to the treasury.[/i]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_list

So, no, he's not.

Oh, and:

[i]The Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry receive income from their jobs in the Armed Forces, from the trust established on the death of their mother and from their father’s Duchy income.[/i]

http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/finances/income/

Surely no one is going to buy The Sun today just to see these photos? You either buy it regularly or not.

The PPC has already had 60 complaints, presumably from regular Sun readers who were taken aback by some unexpected mild nudity.

The PPC has already had 60 complaints, presumably from regular Sun readers who were taken aback by [s]some unexpected mild nudity[/s] the poor quality of todays Page 3.

Struggling to see why anyone would give a crap about the pictures.

However, private pictures should not be splashed all over the papers. END OF.

Capn, that might just about the the article of the week!

Cfh - that touch up job of the Jesus painting deserves a thread of its own! I'm still undecided as to whether it was a pi55 take or not - looked like Keith Harris's 'Cuddles' monkey puppet. V funny!

Harry is worth the £3 a year I pay for the royals on his own. Drop in Phil the duke and I think you get great value for money 😛

On a more serious note, if you seriously have an issue with him getting naked, whilst on a private holiday, with a group of mates, in Vegas then you need to man the frick up. Yes he is a public figure but I'd like to see you moaners live squeaky clean in the same situation. As for the holiday being paid for out of the public purse, how do you know that? I know for a fact that on a CPT's wage after a 6 month tour you could easily afford that hotel room ($4k a night split between 6 rich mates). Add in for good measure that he is single and mortgage free, as well as having an inheritance means that public expense would be very limited.

I've got a hangover that should have been given to breivick as a sentence instead of the paltry 21 years he got, so if i've offended anyone go have a word with yourself. 😳

Are we really that devoid of actual news that "member of royalty can afford a hotel room" is worth debating? Christ, I've been in Vegas hotel rooms when I was out of work.

Actually, I should probably rephrase that.

Christ, I've been in Vegas hotel rooms when I was out of work.

On my money? Shocking.

I hope all my tax money goes to Harry. I hope he continues to enjoy himself. I hope he keeps getting naked and sexing loads of good looking women.

I don't understand people that get indignant about this sort of thing when we've got politicians and bankers lying to our faces and stealing our money.

IHN - Member

For those crying "he's doing it with my money", I know that using actual facts is against the spirit of STW, but:

The state duties and staff of other members of the Royal Family (but not the Prince of Wales, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, or Prince Harry) are funded from a parliamentary annuity, the amount of which is fully refunded by the Queen to the treasury.

Quite fortunate that the queen was able to amass an enormous fortune by virtue of business acumen and a Royal [i]lottery win[/i], eh?

IHN - Member

Oh, and:

The Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry receive income from their jobs in the Armed Forces, from the trust established on the death of their mother and from their father’s Duchy income.

Let's have a republic.

[i]I hope all my tax money goes to Harry[/i]

Unfortunately for you, none of it does (apart from the bit he gets as Army salary). I'm sure he wouldn't mind if you sent him a postal order for a pint though.

IHN - Member

I hope all my tax money goes to Harry

Unfortunately for you, none of it does (apart from the bit he gets as Army salary). I'm sure he wouldn't mind if you sent him a postal order for a pint though.

Where did the Royal family's money come from?

They benefit from a long tradition of royalty that is a mix of violent conquest, nepotism, intrigue and the one-time (exploitation of the)belief in 'divine appointment'.

Lucky them.

Something I've often wished is that my dad had stumbled upon a Duchy. It would have made our lives so much different.

A Duchy that employs, at a guess, a thousand or so people, so it certainly makes a difference in their lives.

And the business activities of the Duchy attract corporation tax. And Prince Charlie pays 40% tax on his income from the Duchy.

Again though, I don't want facts to get in the way of dogma

Let's have a republic

What difference exactly would that make?

Where did [s]the Royal family's wealth money[/s][b]this nations wealth[/b] come from?

[s]They[/s][b]We[/b] benefit from a long tradition of [s]royalty[/s][b]colonialism[/b] that is a mix of violent conquest, nepotism, intrigue and the one-time (exploitation of the)belief in 'divine appointment'.

Lucky [s]them[/s][b]us[/b].

Poor lad musn't know whether hes coming or going, first he wears a uniform to a fancy dress do, gets in bother. Then he wears nothing, and gets in bother.

Make your mind up morality judges! 😉

A Duchy that employs, at a guess, a thousand or so people, so it certainly makes a difference in their lives.

And the business activities of the Duchy attract corporation tax. And Prince Charlie pays 40% tax on his income from the Duchy.

Again though, I don't want facts to get in the way of dogma

That sounds like a bit of a circular argument to me.
I suspect that if Prince Charles didn't 'own' the Duchy and all that sails in her, others would.

Remove the monarchy and the UK will continue to function as before. People might like the Royals, but they are just people like everybody else, albeit with life-long privilege.

If it had been done years ago, Harry and Wills could now be living out of the public eye, working for the armed forces. Harry would be doing similar to what he does now, but on a lower budget. William may or may not have been married to Kate Middleton. The wedding possibly wouldn't have been such a grand affair though.

The public would even get more access to the palaces that could have been given to the National Trust.

IHN, do I assume that you are a member of the Royal Household?

[i]IHN, do I assume that you are a member of the Royal household?[/i]

Am I balls, I'm not even particularly a royalist. I just get annoyed by the "this is all being done with my money" stuff that gets banded around when the vast majority isn't.

[i]That sounds like a bit of a circular argument to me.[/i]

To be fair, so does yours; have a republic so nothing changes? Even if we did have a republic we'd have some form of head of state who would be sent on international schmoozing trips and they'd [b]definately[/b] be tax-payer funded.

Even if we did have a republic we'd have some form of head of state who would be sent on international schmoozing trips and they'd definately be tax-payer funded.

And accountable.

Also, are you really trying to argue that Harry is independently wealthy?

[i]And accountable[/i]

Well, for a start it would probably be some sort of 'honorary' position, much like the French or Irish presidents, so they wouldn't actually have much to be accountable for.

And in the same vein, what exactly should the Royal family be accountable for?

[i]are you really trying to argue that Harry is independently wealthy?[/i]

Well, yeah, he is, in the same way that anyone born into a wealthy family is. And there are plenty of families wealthier than the Royals, should we abolish them too?

[i]Cfh - that touch up job of the Jesus painting deserves a thread of its own! [/i]

It had one, I'll go bump it.

Am I balls, I'm not even particularly a royalist.

I just get annoyed by the "this is all being done with my money" stuff that gets banded around when the vast majority isn't.

Let's become a Republic. Our honorary, ceremonial presidencies can have a fixed term.

...and Harry can go to Vegas in peace.

[i]That reminds me of those people who say,
"I'm not a racist, but..." [/i]

I'll have you know that some of my best friends are Republicans 🙂

[i]It's not the money that bothers me too much, it's the notion of we 'common folk' being 'subjects'. ie. We are inferior by virtue of our non-blue blood.[/i]

To be honest, I think that's more your problem than theirs. I have absolutely no feeling of being a subject or being inferior to the Royal family.

I was thinking this during all the Jubilee stuff. If you meet the Queen, the protocol is to bow if you're a fella and curtsey if you're a ladygirl. I don't think I would.

They're a famous and rich family who, like it or not, are important to the country from a cultural and historical aspect. I don't in any way see them as 'special' though.

it's the notion of we 'common folk' being 'subjects'. ie. We are inferior by virtue of our non-blue blood.

See.. that might've been the prevailing notion centuries ago, but now it's just an anachronism.

I don't think anyone truly believes the royals are superior because of their breeding. And it sure as hell would not stand up in court - it would not even be considered.

A lot rich toffs do have superiority complexes though, but that's normal for humans, and nowadays is about money not breeding.

[i]Let's become a Republic. Our honorary, ceremonial presidencies can have a fixed term.

...and Harry can go to Vegas in peace. [/i]

If we're just talking about figureheads, what does it matter if one is wearing a crown?

And all that would happen would be shots of Leo Blair naked in a Vegas casino would appear in the papers. It'd be the same game, just different players.

[i]A lot [s]rich toffs do[/s][b]people[/b] have superiority complexes [b]and an equal number have inferioty complexes[/b] though, but that's normal for humans, and nowadays is about money [b]and snobbery, noth normal and inverse[/b] not breeding.[/i]

FTFY

Our honorary, ceremonial presidencies can have a fixed term.

I don't understand people that get indignant about this sort of thing when we've got politicians and bankers lying to our faces and stealing our money.

And the 'But we'd have president Blair' argument against a republic is pretty facile too.

He should go after that person and sue them in the US courts.

A true republican sentiment wouldn't draw the distinction between the actions of one bloke in his 20s and any other, just because that bloke happened to be from the Windsors.

Just heard on TV over 800 people have complained to the PCC about The Sun publishing the pictures - it's pathetic - the more the Royals shit on some people the more they love it.

I just fail to see Whom would buy such a paper in the first place

the sun = gutter press , ive seen better at my regiments officers mess piss ups.top bloke is H

Never understand how you could buy such a paper
even before what as come out

I hear it's very popular in Liverpool, mostly as toilet paper.

Bizarrely I've never really understood how it sell so many copies, especially when so many people seem to dislike it! After the NOTW scandal and when the Sunday Sun was launched, I thought that would consign the Sun to the record books. Although strangely the 1st edition of the Sunday Sun sold is massive numbers.

interesting how everyone on here NEVER buys the sun! it's a prole rag full of lies, deceit and scaremongering. But I reckon loads of people on here buy the Daily Mail!