Prince Harry, the thumb story, and my recently discovered role - John McLellan

Harry’s goal is not so much a campaign for better standards but an attack on Press freedom itself

The 'thumb' story is only one of 50 Prince Harry claims the Mirror obtained unlawfully

I know most attention these past couple of days has been focussed on a certain police investigation, but I’ve inadvertently been caught up in a little legal drama of my own, one that has also been making headlines.

No, I haven’t been arrested by the police, and as I was preparing for the Scottish Press Awards last Wednesday night, I had no idea actions for which I was ultimately responsible had been part of the biggest story about newspaper ethics since the Leveson Inquiry in 2011. It is, of course Prince Harry’s action in the London High Court against Mirror Group Newspapers for what he alleges was the repeated publication of stories about him containing information which had been obtained illegally, mainly by phone hacking. The company, now known as Reach plc since Mirror Group acquired the Daily Express and Daily Star, argues its material was legitimately obtained or had been published elsewhere.

Clearly there are limits to how much I can big up “Prince Harry: My Part in his Mental Downfall”, and I only found out about it on Friday when reading an account of the proceedings in the Spectator magazine, but there it was, the Edinburgh Evening News had apparently published a story in November 2000 about how he had broken his thumb playing football at school. I was editor at the time, so it looks like I owe him an apology because according to his witness statement, he “certainly didn’t want any information about injuries I had sustained being reported so publicly. They weren’t life threatening, they were routine childhood injuries, the odd broken bone. I was often teased at school, largely as a result of this kind of article.”

So if you’re reading this, Your Royal Highness, I’m so sorry, I didn’t have anyone hack your phone, it wasn’t my intention for anyone to tease you at school and I hope we didn’t add to your many woes. But perhaps I’m in the clear, and at risk of playing the “Big Boy did it and ran away,” card, the truth is the story must have come from the Press Association, the national news agency in which most UK news publishers are shareholders, and which is the main conduit for official news and pictures about the Royal Family. As I told the Leveson Inquiry, Scotsman Publications had neither the inclination nor the resources to go phone hacking or indulging in illegal practices to obtain information about the Royals or anyone else for that matter. At least Prince Harry accepts that, telling the Mirror’s lawyer, Andrew Green KC, that “unlawful information gathering” was “not systemic within the Edinburgh Evening News, I believe…” even though he apparently later confessed he didn’t know there was such a paper as the Edinburgh Evening News, just as I had no idea I’d published the story.

His problem is he cited the thumb story as an example of intrusive material which could only be obtained by illegally intercepting private communications, unaware that when the story appeared in the Daily Mirror on November 11, 2000, PA had already put it out and we’d already run it as had, in all probability, most other regional titles subscribing to PA. In other words, the Mirror story was just a follow-up to information already available as part of arrangements to give news publications regular updates about the Princes as part of a deal to ensure they could enjoy their school days in privacy, an informal agreement which then allowed William to enjoy his university days at St Andrews unharrassed, and for Harry to go on active duty in Afghanistan. The irony is his first tour in 2007-08 ended suddenly because his cover was blown by an American publication while British titles, including the Mirror, kept their word.

The thumb story was only one of 50 Prince Harry claims the Mirror had obtained unlawfully, but Mr Green was able to show how there were alternative explanations for many of the others, and while I’ve not been following proceedings closely enough to gauge accurately what the judge might conclude, it can hardly be helpful. At least Harry has given a stamp of approval to some of the British Press even if his mission is to destroy the bits he doesn’t like, but that in itself displays a fundamental misunderstanding of how a free Press operates. It is not possible for it to only represent the bits a Prince or Prime Minster likes, so Harry’s goal is not so much a campaign for better standards but an attack on Press freedom itself.

And that brings me closer to home and last Wednesday’s Scottish Press Awards at which the Newspaper of the Year accolade was won by the Scottish Daily Mail and the lifetime achievement award went to Richard Walker, the former Sunday Herald editor who founded The National. The event is organised by the Scottish Newspaper Society of which I’m director and we invited First Minster Humza Yousaf to present Richard’s award. Readers of this column will know I’m no fan of independence or indeed the SNP, and neither is the Mail, but I was delighted Mr Yousaf was able to join us (and fellow party leaders Anas Sarwar, Douglas Ross and Alex Cole-Hamilton) and give a magnanimous speech recognising the value of a free and independent Press. Coming into what many SNP supporters will claim is the biased lion’s den of the mainstream media showed a mature attitude towards his critics, and a further signal that the SNP recognises the work it needs to do to engage positively with the wider business community. It is the same attitude his leadership rival Kate Forbes showed in approving increased advertising investment in news publishing during the Pandemic.

The weekend’s events were hardly positive for the SNP or the independence movement and yesterday’s headlines will have made hard reading, but unlike Prince Harry, Mr Yousaf seems to understand a truly free Press is not a pick ’n’ mix.