When Prince Harry got caught with his pants down last month in Vegas I didn't hear anyone from the press trying to protect HIS privacy. The Palace made a short statement that basically said nothing, moved forward, and shipped him off on another tour of duty.
And there's nothing wrong with that. If you are in a position like Harry's and you take off your clothes, the odds are someone is going to take your photo. He has nothing to worry about.
There's also nothing wrong with Princess Kate taking off her top to sunbathe. I doubt most people care one way or the other. It's done all the time in Europe.
But now the press refuses to publish her semi-nude photos and everyone seems to think that's fine:
Media experts in Britain said concerns that Kate's privacy had been invaded would likely mean the images wouldn't be published by the country's newspapers.
They won't get published in this country, and if I was still an editor I would not be publishing them," former News of the World executive editor Neil Wallis told BBC radio. "There's absolutely no chance whatsoever that they will be published in this country."
Maybe there are legal issues we're not hearing about, but as it stands I can't help thinking this rings of a double standard. And I'm not buying that security issue nonsense they claim was the reason for publishing the nude photos of Harry. They didn't have to publish those pictures. What I'm seeing is a bottom line: that it's perfectly fine to invade Prince Harry's privacy and publish nude photos of him, but don't touch sweet little Princess Kate and never publish photos of her topless.
I'm all for equal rights for women. And I say if you can publish the nude photos of the man, then you should be able to publish the nude photos of the woman as well. No more double standards for men or women.
You can read more about it here in this article: