I'm no fan of the press and I don't buy newspapers any more. I have no axe to grind with the young royal, although I think he may have caused some problems with enforcing standards down the line. And I think who bubbled the photos is a scum bag....
But...
I am a little confused over the heat the media is getting over this one.
Why? It's all sensationalism. Unconfirmed sources. People making up stories for newspaper that pay money and offer 'ladies' their moment of fame.
errm...The article I just clicked on was pretty much non-judgemental and one hundred per cent in line with the photographs...or are these photos fake?
The debate on privacy is a busted flush...two hundred and forty million Americans were discussing this on national TV whilst we were still asleep.
And anything that has passed my eyeballs on the subject since, seems to be pretty much in line with with a straightfoward rendition of the events of the evening, as evidenced in the photos and implied by the army.
So, in this instance, what has the "media" got wrong? Buggered if I can see it (no pun intended).