Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

‘It’s David versus Goliath’ Next month, Prince Harry, along with other high-profile figures will take on the Daily Mail newspaper amid claims it used unlawful methods to gather private information about them. @c4Dispatches examines what’s been happening behind the headlines.

Channel 4 Dispatches

100,068 subscribers

24,003 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Prince Harry is one of a number of high-profile figures claiming private information about them was gathered unlawfully by methods like phone hacking. But Channel 4 Dispatches reveals that there’s more to the story behind the headline.

Channel 4 Dispatches

193,127 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Prince Harry has returned to London for his High Court trial against the publisher of The Daily Mail. He and a group of other high-profile celebrities, including Elizabeth Hurley and Elton John, are suing the company for using unlawful tactics to gain information, such as bugging cars and phones. Harry, 41, described the "intrusion" as "terrifying" for loved ones, in his witness statement on Day 1 of the trial. #princeharry 📽️: Getty

HELLO! Canada

10,095 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Prince Harry and other high-profile celebrities have lost a legal battle against the publisher of The Daily Mail on Tuesday. All claims were thrown out by the court in what is widely expected to be the last of the prince's courtroom battles against British media outlets. CBS News' Chris Livesay has the full story.

CBS News

16,980 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Prince Harry is back in London – and back in court – along with Sir Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost and more high-profile British names who are suing one of the U.K.’s most sensationalist tabloid publishers for “unlawful information gathering.” The allege Associated Newspapers, the parent company of the Daily Mail, of bugging homes and cars, hacking phones, e-mails and voicemails, accessing medical and bank records, and paying off police officers for private information over nearly 20 years. The company calls the accusations “preposterous smears.” Harry is expected to take the stand this Thursday in a nine-week trial that could reshape how Britain’s aggressive tabloids operate. Ramy Inocencio is at the U.K.'s highest court, the Royal Courts of Justice. #princeharry #london #news

CBS News

26,327 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Prince Harry looked “confident and cheerful” Monday morning, at the outset of his third major legal battle against a third media group, a source inside the court told CBS Mornings. King Charles’ second son is among a group of high-profile claimants who are suing one of the UK’s biggest and most sensationalist tabloid publishers for “unlawful information gathering.” The suit alleges Associated Newspapers group illegally snooped on them by hiring private investigators to hack their phones, bugging their cars and access private records to generate scoops.

CBS Mornings

15,006 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Totally agree with Sayid 🃏 that the Daily Mail will not like the USA reporting on Prince Harry’s case which exposes their allegedly dodgy unethical ways of information gathering, AND this being with other big name figures like Elton John. But maybe they have no shame. And how dare the Daily Fail claim the allegations are smears against them after smearing and trying to destroy reputations is their whole business (except for the dirty spineless principle-less royals they have done a deal with for good press). Thanks to Sayid for the US news report. #PrinceHarryVDailyMail

Totally agree with Sayid 🃏 that the Daily Mail will not like the USA reporting on Prince Harry’s case which exposes their allegedly dodgy unethical ways of information gathering, AND this being with other big name figures like Elton John. But maybe they have no shame. And how dare the Daily Fail claim the allegations are smears against them after smearing and trying to destroy reputations is their whole business (except for the dirty spineless principle-less royals they have done a deal with for good press). Thanks to Sayid for the US news report. #PrinceHarryVDailyMail

Glow Lee

21,689 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

VANESSA ADMITS SHES OBSESSED WITH PRINCE HARRY AND MEGHAN ????? “It’s hard to stop being obsessed with them if they release an absolute slew of photographs that no-ones ever seen before…...” While Afua Hagan (née Adom) dismissed Vanessa query about if Harry and Meghan’s 8th wedding anniversary post was cringe rather than cute, I’m wondering is Vanessa needs rehab because there’s a whole lot of high profile people in this world that release cute romantic pictures of themselves and I’m not obsessed or tracking them. Derangers need to go cold turkey but they want it the other way round and for Harry and Meghan to ‘be private’ and go away.

Glow Lee

19,389 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

IS PRINCE HARRY NOT JUSTIFIED IN COURT ACTION SIMPLY FOR THE SAKE OF JUSTICE? Clip with Afua Hagan (née Adom) on the question of what is motivating Prince Harry to sue the Daily Mail and newspapers in general for their unlawful phone gathering. I never understand why people on Tv shows, presenters, royal reporters and callers -question what Harry’s ‘endgame’ is in taking the media to court because 1) it’s so long ago 2) they’re not phone hacking anymore 3) it won’t change the media and they’ll still attack him. How about the endgame just being justice and accountability? Why is that people understand that the common man might come upon evidence of guilt of a crime committed against them 20 years ago and all would agree they should get their justice finally. No one would ask ‘what’s your endgame?’ So a Prince is not allowed to get justice even when his family have previously taken out legal action on the newspapers before? Anyone would think Prince Harry is being singled out and dehumanised while expecting him to just take all kinds of wrongs against him by bad people, institutions and empires.

IS PRINCE HARRY NOT JUSTIFIED IN COURT ACTION SIMPLY FOR THE SAKE OF JUSTICE? Clip with Afua Hagan (née Adom) on the question of what is motivating Prince Harry to sue the Daily Mail and newspapers in general for their unlawful phone gathering. I never understand why people on Tv shows, presenters, royal reporters and callers -question what Harry’s ‘endgame’ is in taking the media to court because 1) it’s so long ago 2) they’re not phone hacking anymore 3) it won’t change the media and they’ll still attack him. How about the endgame just being justice and accountability? Why is that people understand that the common man might come upon evidence of guilt of a crime committed against them 20 years ago and all would agree they should get their justice finally. No one would ask ‘what’s your endgame?’ So a Prince is not allowed to get justice even when his family have previously taken out legal action on the newspapers before? Anyone would think Prince Harry is being singled out and dehumanised while expecting him to just take all kinds of wrongs against him by bad people, institutions and empires.

Glow Lee

19,670 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

In recent days, the Justice Department has sued eight states to compel them to share their voter registration lists with the federal government. Those lists include voters’ personal data like dates of birth and Social Security numbers. State officials oppose the move because of concerns about how the information will be used. It comes as President Trump continues to target election systems including mail-in ballots. Elizabeth Landers sat down with David Becker to learn more.

In recent days, the Justice Department has sued eight states to compel them to share their voter registration lists with the federal government. Those lists include voters’ personal data like dates of birth and Social Security numbers. State officials oppose the move because of concerns about how the information will be used. It comes as President Trump continues to target election systems including mail-in ballots. Elizabeth Landers sat down with David Becker to learn more.

PBS News

11,769 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

According to the Murdoch-owned page six: "When Prince Harry and Meghan Markle rolled through Park City for the premiere of their documentary “Cookie Queens” over the weekend, people close to them noted a change in their demeanor — a mood one source described as ‘somber.’ “They were very guarded. All Harry wanted to talk about was his Daily Mail trial,” said a source friendly with the Sussexes who ran into them the day of the premiere." So they were "guarded", but also, Harry wanted to talk about his ongoing court case against the Murdoch-owned publisher of the Daily Mail. 🤨How could both these things be true? You can't be verbal and mute at the same time. 🤔Also, UK court rules generally restrict witnesses/claimants from discussing active case details outside the courtroom with non-parties, and Harry has been notably strict about this in the past. For instance, during his 2024 New York Times Dealbook Summit appearance, he refused to elaborate on a case when pressed. 👇 Every month, these people write an article about how Harry and Meghan are finished in Hollywood; meanwhile, they write hundreds of articles about them every day. 🤣Just look at how much Page six has covered H&M at Sundance.

According to the Murdoch-owned page six: "When Prince Harry and Meghan Markle rolled through Park City for the premiere of their documentary “Cookie Queens” over the weekend, people close to them noted a change in their demeanor — a mood one source described as ‘somber.’ “They were very guarded. All Harry wanted to talk about was his Daily Mail trial,” said a source friendly with the Sussexes who ran into them the day of the premiere." So they were "guarded", but also, Harry wanted to talk about his ongoing court case against the Murdoch-owned publisher of the Daily Mail. 🤨How could both these things be true? You can't be verbal and mute at the same time. 🤔Also, UK court rules generally restrict witnesses/claimants from discussing active case details outside the courtroom with non-parties, and Harry has been notably strict about this in the past. For instance, during his 2024 New York Times Dealbook Summit appearance, he refused to elaborate on a case when pressed. 👇 Every month, these people write an article about how Harry and Meghan are finished in Hollywood; meanwhile, they write hundreds of articles about them every day. 🤣Just look at how much Page six has covered H&M at Sundance.

Benjamin Eley Cannell Parody (Fake/Parody)

54,858 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

🚨Tracey Martin issues a statement to Candace Owens regarding her Daily Mail claims🚨 “For the record: Candace Owens publicly identified me on X as the "source" and "family friend" behind a Daily Mail article. That statement is unequivocally false. After the article was published, revised, and republished by the Daily Mail, my name has been publicly included to a story I had no involvement in sourcing. I did not provide information to the Daily Mail, nor was I the confidential source referenced in the article. To resolve this matter, I have respectfully requested that the Daily Mail issue a public statement confirming that I was not their source. They can make that clarification without disclosing the identity of the actual source. When public figures make accusations, those words carry weight. Accuracy matters. Evidence matters. Integrity matters. Every person deserves to have their name protected from false allegations. I have no interest in fueling online outrage or participating in misleading people. I am interested in one thing: the truth. Truth doesn't need embellishment. It only needs to be told.”

🚨Tracey Martin issues a statement to Candace Owens regarding her Daily Mail claims🚨 “For the record: Candace Owens publicly identified me on X as the "source" and "family friend" behind a Daily Mail article. That statement is unequivocally false. After the article was published, revised, and republished by the Daily Mail, my name has been publicly included to a story I had no involvement in sourcing. I did not provide information to the Daily Mail, nor was I the confidential source referenced in the article. To resolve this matter, I have respectfully requested that the Daily Mail issue a public statement confirming that I was not their source. They can make that clarification without disclosing the identity of the actual source. When public figures make accusations, those words carry weight. Accuracy matters. Evidence matters. Integrity matters. Every person deserves to have their name protected from false allegations. I have no interest in fueling online outrage or participating in misleading people. I am interested in one thing: the truth. Truth doesn't need embellishment. It only needs to be told.”

Sarcastic Liberty 🇺🇸

162,135 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

THE LOOSE WOMEN ARE BLINDSIDED BY THE UNUSUAL DECISION BY THE JUDGE IN THE PRINCE HARRY & OTHERS VS DAILY MAIL CASE!!!! The Loose Women were unanimous in their surprise at the Judge throwing out all 97 claims (‼️) and think that it will go back before the Court of Appeal before another judge. I have to say that given that the test is a balance of probabilities rather than beyond all reasonable doubt, I am surprised too. The judge previous a defence for tabloids is concerning. Also remember it was not proven that the Daily Mail definitely did not invade the privacy of the celebrities- just that the evidence available so long after was not sufficient. I think it’s unlikely that The Sun and The Mirror who were found/admitted to have done this unlawful behaviour for gossip, did, but the Daily Mail did not. Why did they mass delete a bunch of emails? Why did a key witness change his evidence to support the mail. Shady business!

THE LOOSE WOMEN ARE BLINDSIDED BY THE UNUSUAL DECISION BY THE JUDGE IN THE PRINCE HARRY & OTHERS VS DAILY MAIL CASE!!!! The Loose Women were unanimous in their surprise at the Judge throwing out all 97 claims (‼️) and think that it will go back before the Court of Appeal before another judge. I have to say that given that the test is a balance of probabilities rather than beyond all reasonable doubt, I am surprised too. The judge previous a defence for tabloids is concerning. Also remember it was not proven that the Daily Mail definitely did not invade the privacy of the celebrities- just that the evidence available so long after was not sufficient. I think it’s unlikely that The Sun and The Mirror who were found/admitted to have done this unlawful behaviour for gossip, did, but the Daily Mail did not. Why did they mass delete a bunch of emails? Why did a key witness change his evidence to support the mail. Shady business!

Glow Lee

40,061 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

If you’re curious how people really feel about the Daily Mail’s endless doom-and-gloom attacks on Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales? Allow me... Take a quick detour to the Daily Mail Royals YouTube page and check out the comments on their little drama piece: “END OF THE MONARCHY AS WE KNOW IT?! | PALACE CONFIDENTIAL.” I won’t pollute this post with a link. Out of almost 5,000 comments, roughly 99% are people tearing strips off the Mail — calling the reporting “disgusting,” ridiculing the thumbnail, and declaring they’ve unsubscribed. If the editors or anyone really at Daily Mail bothered to scroll their own comments, they’d see what I’ve been saying all along: this propaganda circus isn’t sticking. It’s backfiring. They puffed up their chests, threw a tantrum like toddlers denied pudding, and in the process managed to alienate the very audience that kept them afloat. Subscribers are vanishing faster than their relevance. Royal coverage online has already shifted, and the tide is only going to get rougher. And if their masterplan is to woo Sussex supporters? Bless them.😆😂 That’s not a market; it’s a mirage. A sliver of "X" noise, not a loyal audience. In short, the Daily Mail has chosen its hill. And it’s the daftest one imaginable to die on. #BoycottTheDailyMail #IStandWithTheWales #WilliamAndCatherine

If you’re curious how people really feel about the Daily Mail’s endless doom-and-gloom attacks on Prince William and Catherine, Princess of Wales? Allow me... Take a quick detour to the Daily Mail Royals YouTube page and check out the comments on their little drama piece: “END OF THE MONARCHY AS WE KNOW IT?! | PALACE CONFIDENTIAL.” I won’t pollute this post with a link. Out of almost 5,000 comments, roughly 99% are people tearing strips off the Mail — calling the reporting “disgusting,” ridiculing the thumbnail, and declaring they’ve unsubscribed. If the editors or anyone really at Daily Mail bothered to scroll their own comments, they’d see what I’ve been saying all along: this propaganda circus isn’t sticking. It’s backfiring. They puffed up their chests, threw a tantrum like toddlers denied pudding, and in the process managed to alienate the very audience that kept them afloat. Subscribers are vanishing faster than their relevance. Royal coverage online has already shifted, and the tide is only going to get rougher. And if their masterplan is to woo Sussex supporters? Bless them.😆😂 That’s not a market; it’s a mirage. A sliver of "X" noise, not a loyal audience. In short, the Daily Mail has chosen its hill. And it’s the daftest one imaginable to die on. #BoycottTheDailyMail #IStandWithTheWales #WilliamAndCatherine

HRH Lady J 👑

13,774 просмотров • 1 год назад

Just to be transparent (and sorry for bringing this up again): this is about half of the bot accounts that have been following me in the past 48 hours, on average 10-15 per hour. This is in no way a coincidence or happening without people behind this app allowing it. I don’t have the time or energy to keep blocking them all and I refuse to go private to just protect this account. They will eventually suspend my account with some bullshit claim of inauthenticity and this is probably how they have also approached with many other “uncomfortable” accounts that they have suspended. Sharing this to let you know about the shenanigans happening here before it’s too late.

Just to be transparent (and sorry for bringing this up again): this is about half of the bot accounts that have been following me in the past 48 hours, on average 10-15 per hour. This is in no way a coincidence or happening without people behind this app allowing it. I don’t have the time or energy to keep blocking them all and I refuse to go private to just protect this account. They will eventually suspend my account with some bullshit claim of inauthenticity and this is probably how they have also approached with many other “uncomfortable” accounts that they have suspended. Sharing this to let you know about the shenanigans happening here before it’s too late.

Amir

52,936 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The “progressive summit” in Toronto last weekend, where Obama gave a keynote, and Prime Minister Mark Carney welcomed him. Alex Soros was there too, along with other left figures. It’s being called a think-tank event on economy, democracy, and global cooperation. Carney’s been talking about a “new world order” in speeches lately, saying the old rules are gone and middle powers like Canada should step up and lead coalitions. The “secret meeting to launch a New World Order with Canada in charge” is evidence of the plot, with Soros. It’s globalists trying desperately to gain power amid knowing they will lose in the Midterms.

The “progressive summit” in Toronto last weekend, where Obama gave a keynote, and Prime Minister Mark Carney welcomed him. Alex Soros was there too, along with other left figures. It’s being called a think-tank event on economy, democracy, and global cooperation. Carney’s been talking about a “new world order” in speeches lately, saying the old rules are gone and middle powers like Canada should step up and lead coalitions. The “secret meeting to launch a New World Order with Canada in charge” is evidence of the plot, with Soros. It’s globalists trying desperately to gain power amid knowing they will lose in the Midterms.

Patricia 🇺🇸

64,463 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

This woman is making videos casually bragging about how she used to steal bottle deposit slips and cash them at other stores for free money… then laughs that the statute of limitations “has to be up by now.” She even let a coworker take the fall for some of her crimes. No shame. No regret. Just pure “I got away with theft and I’m proud of it” energy. We’re really out here normalizing petty crime like it’s a fun childhood story? What’s next, admitting you used to shoplift and calling it “hustle”?

This woman is making videos casually bragging about how she used to steal bottle deposit slips and cash them at other stores for free money… then laughs that the statute of limitations “has to be up by now.” She even let a coworker take the fall for some of her crimes. No shame. No regret. Just pure “I got away with theft and I’m proud of it” energy. We’re really out here normalizing petty crime like it’s a fun childhood story? What’s next, admitting you used to shoplift and calling it “hustle”?

DocumentingLibs

36,762 просмотров • 10 дней назад

Prince Harry & Invictus: Before Meghan Markle vs. After Meghan Markle Watch the video clip and see the difference. Prince Harry was supposed to be in the UK for Invictus. For the veterans. For the cause. Instead, what have the headlines been? Prince Harry’s security. Meghan coming to the UK for the first time since the Queen’s funeral. The children supposedly visiting Diana’s grave. A possible meeting with King Charles. Family reconciliation. Then, a day later, it’s that Harry may have to rethink everything because he didn’t get the level of security he wanted. Then it’s that Harry is being targeted by terrorists, according to his own private security team. Now we’re back to Meghan and the children staying in California. Maybe tomorrow we’ll get another headline about how they won’t let threats deter them, how they’re bravely putting duty first, how deeply committed they are to the cause, and how, despite everything, they may come to the UK after all. The usual self-congratulatory PR praising their courage and sacrifice. Yet through all of this, where is Invictus? Where are the veterans Harry is supposed to be representing? The event has been overshadowed by an endless cycle of Sussex drama. It’s disappointing that Invictus continues to let Harry and Meghan’s endless PR narratives overshadow the very people the Games were created to support. The focus should always be on the competitors and the veterans - not on an endless cycle of Sussex drama. If I were a sponsor, I’d question whether my donation would have a greater impact with a charity that focuses on the people it’s meant to serve, rather than funding an organisation that’s repeatedly distracted by Sussex-related headlines.

Prince Harry & Invictus: Before Meghan Markle vs. After Meghan Markle Watch the video clip and see the difference. Prince Harry was supposed to be in the UK for Invictus. For the veterans. For the cause. Instead, what have the headlines been? Prince Harry’s security. Meghan coming to the UK for the first time since the Queen’s funeral. The children supposedly visiting Diana’s grave. A possible meeting with King Charles. Family reconciliation. Then, a day later, it’s that Harry may have to rethink everything because he didn’t get the level of security he wanted. Then it’s that Harry is being targeted by terrorists, according to his own private security team. Now we’re back to Meghan and the children staying in California. Maybe tomorrow we’ll get another headline about how they won’t let threats deter them, how they’re bravely putting duty first, how deeply committed they are to the cause, and how, despite everything, they may come to the UK after all. The usual self-congratulatory PR praising their courage and sacrifice. Yet through all of this, where is Invictus? Where are the veterans Harry is supposed to be representing? The event has been overshadowed by an endless cycle of Sussex drama. It’s disappointing that Invictus continues to let Harry and Meghan’s endless PR narratives overshadow the very people the Games were created to support. The focus should always be on the competitors and the veterans - not on an endless cycle of Sussex drama. If I were a sponsor, I’d question whether my donation would have a greater impact with a charity that focuses on the people it’s meant to serve, rather than funding an organisation that’s repeatedly distracted by Sussex-related headlines.

Queen Esther

69,866 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад