The Prince and the Paparazzi

If you’ve been following Twitter today, you’re aware of the fact that some royal drama has been going down regarding Prince George and his privacy. The following statement was released from Kensington Palace this morning: “An incident last week has prompted Their Royal Highnesses to seek reasonable assurances from the individual about his behaviour. The individual was spotted at a central London Park in the vicinity of Prince George, who was removed from the Park immediately. There is reason to suspect that the individual may have been placing Prince George under surveillance and monitoring his daily routines for a period of time. The Duke and Duchess understand the particular public role that Prince George will one day inherit but while he is young, he must be permitted to lead as ordinary a life as possible. No parent would tolerate the suspicion of someone pursuing and harassing their child and carer whilst their child is playing in a public park or going about their daily activities.” This isn’t the first time the Cambridges have challenged the paparazzi, and it almost certainly won’t be the last. William’s firm stance is unsurprising, especially when put in the context of Princess Diana’s death and the topless photos of the Duchess published in 2012. However, this battle won’t be an easy one. The main target in these allegations is Niraj Tanna, a name familiar with many long time royal watchers, and he’s made it clear he won’t be going down without a fight. Tanna’s lawyers released a seven page letter today claiming the allegations to be “wholly without foundation” and arguing that photographers are “fully entitled” to take images in public places like parks. The letter goes on to say that Tanna will “continue to undertake his work with the concerns of the Prince's parents very much in mind." Proponents of Kensington Palace’s stance argue that George is just a toddler and deserves privacy like any human being. Although he will one day likely be king, he deserves as normal of a childhood as possible, and out of respect to his parents wishes, should be left alone. Dissenters argue that so long as the little Prince is on public property, he’s fair game, and getting papped is the payoff for living a royal life of privilege. The argument has been made that perhaps Kensington Palace should release more official pictures of George so the public can watch him grow up on the Cambridge’s terms, but whether this strategy would effectively keep photographers at bay is open to debate. Either way, there will certainly be less opportunities for paparazzi to photograph George once the Cambridges move to Anmer Hall in Norfolk - a move likely spurred on by the young family’s increasing want of privacy as much as by William’s new job. What are your thoughts? Have the Duke and Duchess overreacted about Prince George’s right to privacy, or does Kensington Palace have a point?