Moreover, Prince William had already taken legal action over phone hacking incidents involving him and Catherine, reaching a settlement years ago. Once you settle, you typically can’t pursue further legal action on the same issue. Harry’s notion of a unified legal front is flawed because he chose a different path from the rest of the family. While the royal family preferred a settlement to avoid a lengthy trial, Harry opted for the latter. So, how is this the royal family’s fault?
Harry often avoids accepting responsibility for his choices. His omission of these crucial details in the interview feels manipulative, even if he may not fully realize it. He seems baffled by the backlash he receives for these interviews, blaming it all on the press rather than reflecting on his own actions.
In a somewhat over-the-top analogy, Harry describes his legal battle as “slaying dragons,” which comes off as a bit juvenile. He claims this is a monumental endeavor, but in reality, his financial settlement was significantly smaller compared to Prince William's. Harry’s payout was £140,000, while William’s settlement was likely in the millions. Harry’s situation, involving only nine instances of phone hacking compared to Catherine’s 140, doesn’t seem as impactful.
Harry’s attempt to link his legal battles to his family rift is not only overreaching but also absurd. The real cause of the rift seems to be the constant public criticisms and accusations made by Harry and Meghan, many of which have been proven false or exaggerated. This ongoing saga suggests that Harry is once again contradicting himself.
For instance, Harry claims Queen Elizabeth would have supported his legal action, which seems unlikely given her preference for settlements to maintain privacy. He also contradicts himself when discussing King Charles and Princess Catherine’s health, implying his legal battles are entirely separate from his family’s well-being, yet he suggests they are central to the family rift.
Harry’s discussion of paranoia is also flawed. He argues that being vindicated from past hacking claims proves he wasn’t paranoid, which muddles the distinction between genuine concern and irrational fear. His ongoing fixation on these issues, despite the minimal hacking incidents compared to others, points to an exaggeration of his own situation.
The Sussexes seem to be struggling with their public image, partly because their legal battles and criticisms of the press are based on old issues. Meghan was not the subject of the same level of intrusive press coverage as Diana or Catherine, which should have been a positive change. Yet, Harry and Meghan appear to be dissatisfied with the lack of media frenzy, reacting aggressively to any negative coverage.
Harry’s narrative that his lawsuits have led to more negative press is also misleading. The critical stories about him and Meghan stem from their own actions and behavior, not from any retaliation by the media. His attempts to shift the blame to the press for the negative coverage they receive are not convincing.
Moreover, Harry's claim of working for the greater good falls short. Unlike Prince William, who is actively addressing homelessness and making a tangible impact, Harry’s legal actions primarily benefit himself and Meghan. His attempts to portray this as a public service mission are out of touch with reality.
