{"id":78922,"date":"2025-05-06T10:43:10","date_gmt":"2025-05-06T10:43:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/78922\/"},"modified":"2025-05-06T10:43:10","modified_gmt":"2025-05-06T10:43:10","slug":"prince-harry-bbc-interview-lapse-in-usual-high-editorial-standards","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/78922\/","title":{"rendered":"Prince Harry BBC Interview ‘Lapse in Usual High Editorial Standards’"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n\tThe BBC<\/a> has issued a clarification over Radio 4\u2019s \u201cToday\u201d show concerning its coverage of the broadcaster\u2019s recent Prince Harry<\/a> interview.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn the bombshell conversation<\/a>, which aired on Friday after the prince lost his appeal for higher security protections in the U.K., he called the outcome of his case a \u201cgood old-fashioned establishment stitch-up\u201d and revealed that his father, King Charles III, \u201cwon\u2019t speak to him\u201d because of it. However, he said he \u201cwould love reconciliation\u201d with the royal family.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn a statement issued on Tuesday, the BBC said that Radio 4\u2019s \u201cToday\u201d show should have challenged Harry\u2019s claim of an \u201cestablishment stitch-up\u201d in its coverage of the interview. \u201cClaims were repeated that the process had been \u2018an establishment stitch-up\u2019 and we failed to properly challenge this and other allegations,\u201d the clarification reads. \u201cThis case is ultimately the responsibility of the Home Office and we should have reflected their statement.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe BBC then published the Home Office\u2019s statement as follows: \u201cWe are pleased that the Court has found in favor of the Government\u2019s position in this case. The U.K. Government\u2019s protective security system is rigorous and proportionate. It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals\u2019 security.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe clarification also refers to Buckingham Palace\u2019s statement on the interview, which was included in BBC News\u2019 reporting on the matter: \u201cAll of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn conclusion, the BBC called it \u201ca lapse in our usual high editorial standards.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tRepresentatives for Prince Harry did not immediately respond to Variety\u2018s request for comment on the clarification.<\/p>\n

\n\tElsewhere in the interview, the prince said he is \u201cdevastated\u201d about losing the appeal, which concerned a judge\u2019s decision last year to uphold the downgrading of his U.K. security arrangements after he and wife, Meghan Markle, stepped back from royal duties. In the case, which has been ongoing for four years, Harry\u2019s lawyer argued that the prince was \u201csingled out\u201d for \u201cunjustified and inferior treatment\u201d\u00a0and that higher protection is necessary since he and his family still receive security threats. However, the ruling made on Friday stated that the prince\u2019s \u201csense of grievance\u201d did not \u201ctranslate into a legal argument.\u201d Because of the loss, Harry told the BBC that it\u2019s unlikely he\u2019ll ever permanently return to the U.K.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cI don\u2019t see a world in which I would be bringing my wife and children back to the U.K. at this point,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd the things that they\u2019re going to miss is, well, everything. I love my country. I always have, despite what some people in that country have done \u2026 And I think it\u2019s quite sad that I won\u2019t be able to show my children my homeland.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The BBC has issued a clarification over Radio 4\u2019s \u201cToday\u201d show concerning its coverage of the broadcaster\u2019s recent…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":78923,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7708],"tags":[192,7709,7721,7719,7718,7720,1281,447,7710,519,7711],"class_list":{"0":"post-78922","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-royals","8":"tag-bbc","9":"tag-british-royal-family","10":"tag-duchess-of-sussex","11":"tag-duke-of-sussex","12":"tag-harry","13":"tag-meghan","14":"tag-meghan-markle","15":"tag-prince-harry","16":"tag-royal-families","17":"tag-royal-family","18":"tag-uk-royal-family"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114460478901485899","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78922","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=78922"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78922\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/78923"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78922"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78922"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78922"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}