November 20, 2003

Daily Mirror Helps al Qaeda

Perceiving it to somehow be in the public interest, the Daily Mirror sent a reporter undercover into Buckingham Palace. The reporter applied for a job as a footman and gave a false reference but still got the job. This was to prove how easy it was for a terrorist to get a job working for the Royals.

Then, just after serving in the receiving party for President Bush, he broke cover and published his story. But he and Mirror editor Piers Morgan weren't satisfied with just showing how easy it was for someone to get a job at Buck House. They published all the details of the security systems, when and where the security personnel could be found or not, and even private details of the Windsors.

While it may pander to the unending curiosity of the British public that the Queen breaks fast on cornflakes and porridge oats served from Tupperware boxes for breakfast, accompanied by plain yoghurt, fruit and toast with a light helping of marmalade and the Duke of Edinburgh prefers a fry up, this is just simple invasion of privacy and violation of a signed confidentiality agreement. To compromise the safety of the Royal Family from nutters, psychos, and Islamic terrorists (pardon any redundant language) is a whole other matter.

Though it was a bit like closing the gate after the horse had bolted, Her Majesty's lawyers successfully applied to the High Court for an injunction preventing the publishing of further details. The information was indeed scandalous. The security around the Royals does appear to be terribly lax. Did I need to know exactly how lax? No. Did it sell newspapers? Yes. If the reporter and the paper were, as they claimed, motivated by a desire to show the need to improve security, then why didn't they privately bring these details to the attention of Her Majesty's household, or since the reporter spend a significant amount of time in the Royal presence, to the attention of Her Majesty personally?

Posted by david at November 20, 2003 11:09 PM | TrackBack

What??? Are you implying that everything the media does ISN'T absolutely and unequivocally altruistic???

Oh the humanity!!! ;^/

Posted by: aaron at November 25, 2003 12:12 AM