All language subtitles for Episode02FrontPageNews

In October 2016,

news broke that Prince Harry
had a new love interest:

Meghan!

I'm such a big fan!

American actress Meghan Markle.

You, guys, thank you so much.

When it was revealed
she was dating Prince Harry,

she became the most
googled woman on the planet.

As naive as it sounds now,

I did not have any understanding

of just what it would be like.

I tried... I tried to warn you
as much as possible.

Meghan
became an immediate target

for the world's media,

who approached
friends and family

hunting for any information
on her past.

Meghan had been very upset

by some of the coverage.

She then came to London
in a friend's private jet.

And came to Kensington Palace
and was kind of in tears

about some
of the really mean comments.

I was told that Meghan felt
from an early stage

that the press,
the British press...

She felt it was out to get her.

Harry's told me
he has read stuff on newspapers

and he has found it really difficult
to try and ignore it.

But when your girlfriend
is in tears crying,

what are you going to do?
The knight in shining armour

rides to her rescue and says,
"Right, enough is enough".

Harry's response

was an unprecedented
official statement,

condemning
media treatment of Meghan.

It said a line had been crossed

and that Meghan had experienced

a "wave
of abuse and harassment",

with "outright sexism and racism

from social media trolls".

Very strong language from Harry

You could hear his voice.
Angry, very angry.

It took everyone by surprise.
They didn't tell anyone else.

They just did it.

I know
from other very senior aides,

I mean eyebrows were
really raised about it.

In the past,
the attitude of the Palace

was never complain,
never explain.

All of that has changed,
I think, with the young Royals.

William and Harry grew up

watching what happened
to their parents' marriage,

watching the part
that the media played in that.

They saw their mother harassed to the
point of tears, time and again.

They grew up utterly determined

that they would protect
themselves

and particularly
their loved ones.

Palace aids have told me this,
ad infinitum,

and it... It's not...
It won't be a surprise

that William and Harry
think the press,

particularly photographers,
killed their mother.

When Harry feels
his girlfriend's under attack,

when William felt
his girlfriend's under attack,

when William feels
his kid's totally off limits,

you have to understand

that that's where those feelings
come from.

How are you coping
with the press attention?

You can tell.

Are you bearing up with it
well though?

It must be
quite a strain with all of us.

Well it is, naturally.

From the moment
she burst upon the royal scene,

the media was obsessed
with Princess Diana.

Diana was so popular,

putting a photograph of Diana
on a front page

could double your circulation.

Ken Lennox
photographed the royal family

for over half a century.

In 1982,
he took a set of pictures

that generated national outrage

I mean I regret taking these
nowadays. I do.

That's the kind of thing it was.

I never did anything that
before or since.

Charles and Diana were
on a private holiday

in the Caribbean

and Ken was dispatched
by the Daily Star

to land a royal scoop.

I'm about three quarters
to a mile away.

I'm between my knees
and shoulders in water,

with a big long lens,

a bit like a drainpipe

with a bit of glass
at either end of it,

and, to keep it steady,

I tied it onto a tree at one end

and much to my surprise

Diana and Charles, Lord Romsey,

walked down the beach,
Diana was in her bikini

and I took some photographs.

Ken's pictures appeared
on the front page

of the Daily Star

What made them so sensational
was not just the intrusion,

but that Diana was photographed
four months pregnant.

I mean, today, you'd think,
"What's the problem?"

She had her clothes on,
who cares?

But here was the woman
who would one day

be Queen, we thought,

with her pregnant tummy
on display to the world.

Really shocking at the time.

But back in the Caribbean,

Ken Lennox was oblivious

to the impact
his pictures were making.

I phoned the office and said,

"I've got better stuff,

I've got
Diana and Charles kissing,

just their heads
are bobbing in the water,

Diana's throwing a towel
over Charles's head

and she's hugging him".

Silence.

"Is there something wrong?"
He said, "Yes.

Your Editor has just been fired

because they've been published".

I felt I sick.

I think the Palace was appalled.

It's rare for the Queen
to make a statement,

but she called it
"the blackest day

in the history of journalism".

But wind
the clock back fifty years

and the Royal Family
had an iron grip

on the British press.

During the 1930s,

the traditional social hierarchy

where the Crown was at the apex

of the social pyramid

was still largely accepted.

In Britain, there wasn't really,
at that time,

much of a... sort of an appetite

for salacious news.

It was still
a very deferential society.

Two hours ago

I discharged my last duties as King
and Emperor.

Even on the brink
of the abdication,

the British press
remained subservient

to the royal family,

unwilling to report
on the scandalous relationship

between the King
and Wallis Simpson

that had been brewing
for months.

The abdication was
a complete bolt from the blue

for most of the British public.

This fabulous photograph
just sums up

the sense of complete shock.

"The King, grave issues",
"The King and Mrs Simpson".

People had no idea about this.

It does seem extraordinary today

that something as big as this
could stay secret

for as long as it did.
For months!

In the summer of 1936,
you had the King

going on holiday
and cruising the Mediterranean

with his lover.
It was all over the papers.

In America, all over the papers
around the world.

The British public had no idea.

The conspiracy of silence

was orchestrated from the top.

The King went along
to his friend, Lord Beaverbrook,

who controlled
the Daily Express group,

and Beaverbrook agreed there'd
be a gentleman's agreement

that the British press
should not publish any scandal

about the King and Mrs Simpson.

And the press honoured that.

In The National Archives at Kew

royal biographer Robert Hardman

has uncovered
an astonishing document

which reveals the extent

of the Establishment collusion
to conceal the scandal.

This is a telegram
from a South African journalist

back to his office with...

one of the great scoops

really of the twentieth century.

King has abdicated,
leaves England tomorrow, stop.

Arrangement
may possibly be altered

but that is agreement
reached tonight.

Now this is dated
the 6th of December.

It was only three days earlier

that the British public
had any inkling that their King

was about to marry
this divorced woman.

As a journalist reading this,

you can just feel his excitement

at having
this extraordinary scoop,

sending this back to the office.

he knows his editor
is going to be going, "Ye gods!

Clear the front pages,
this is dynamite".

Except, of course, the story

never reaches his editor.

What's happened is
a post office clerk

has spotted this,
has passed it to his superior,

it's gone right up the chain

to the very top
of the Post Office.

From there it's gone
to the Home Secretary

and they've decided,
"We won't let this go through.

We're going to stop this.
This news must not get out".

The journalist was then summoned

for an official interrogation.

Here we have
the Home Secretary's account

of his meeting
with the journalist

and really is sort of read
the riot act.

He says, "There was no truth
in the statement

it contained and if it
had reached South Africa,

and had been telegraphed
back here,

the reactions might have been
of a most serious character".

Here is the government
intervening

to stop a journalist reporting
that the King is abdicating,

and then, a few days later,
the King abdicates.

This is
very heavy-handed censorship.

But that total
control of the press

couldn't last forever,
and, by the 1950s,

royal embarrassments

were becoming
harder to conceal.

Suddenly the door
of this chalet flew open,

and out ran
the Duke of Edinburgh

followed
by a flying tennis racquet,

a pair of shoes,
and a rather angry Queen.

Over the past century

the royal family's relationship
with the press

has often been challenging.

Every generation
has to come to terms with...

With an entirely
new media climate,

what the young Royals put up with
today would have been absolutely

inconceivable to their father,
let alone the Queen.

At the start
of the Queen's reign,

the press could still be relied on

to toe the royal line.

While researching the Queen's
1954 tour of the Commonwealth,

royal biographer Robert Hardman

uncovered revealing evidence

of the royal family's power
over the press,

that was nearly lost to history.

I tracked down a doctoral thesis

on that tour and in there was
this extraordinary story.

This was the longest royal tour
in history.

It had been going on for months.

The Queen and Prince Philip
were given this chalet

in the Australian State
of Victoria

where they
could spend the weekend.

And they were supposed to...
Basically it was time out.

It was a fairly idyllic hideaway

and they'd forgotten the fact
they were due to be filmed

by a Commonwealth
broadcasting unit.

Suddenly the door of this chalet
flew open,

so the cameraman thought,
"Well, okay we're starting",

turned on the camera,
started filming,

at which point out ran
the Duke of Edinburgh

followed
by a flying tennis racquet,

a pair shoes
and a rather angry Queen.

There was
a sort of deathly silence.

"What did we just see?"

The Queen's press secretary
was there in no time.

The cameraman knew
before he'd opened his mouth

what the question was
going to be and, in those days,

there was
absolutely no question.

He undid the back of the camera
and handed over the film.

I mean these were
just very different times.

But three years later one
lone voice of dissent

managed to break through the press
code of silence.

Lord Altrincham
owned a magazine

called
The National and English Review.

And he wrote an article
which he published

in which he criticised
the Queen.

This is 1957.

And he said the Queen is

like a sort of prim schoolgirl.

He said that she had
the debutante stamp,

and suffered from a woefully
inadequate training.

He criticised
the courtiers for being stuffy

and snobbish and tweedy.
That was his word.

Tweedy. And...

They were tweedy.

And he said
that her speaking voice

was a pain in the arse.

I want to tell you all how
happy I am to be amongst you

and how much I look forward to my
journey through Australia.

If you do listen
to early clips of broadcasts

of the Queen at this time,

she does sound
a little bit like schoolgirl.

It's all very sort of...
rehearsed.

This article
got picked up everywhere.

The reaction was absolutely

that the author was a cad.

His criticism of the Queen
hit home

because she was still
in her honeymoon

and nobody
had really criticised her then.

Lord Altrincham
even defended

his views on national television

where he was grilled by legendary
news anchor Robin Day.

To judge from your article,

you expect the Queen
to have the qualities of a wit.

You would like her to be
a better orator,

you would like her to be
a TV personality,

in addition to being
a diligent, dutiful

and devoted monarch
and a mother.

What I'm suggesting is

that in her public speeches

and appearances, spontaneity

should be the key note.

All I would like to see
is the Queen's own...

character coming through.

And I know that if her character
is allowed to come through,

the effect will be terrific.

But Lord Altrincham's
appeal fell on deaf ears.

Lord Altrincham
became a sort of figure of hate

and he had
awful sorts of anonymous letters

threatening him.

He was lucky
not be challenged to a duel.

As he was leaving the
television studios

after his interview,

Lord Altrincham
was physically attacked.

An ex-solider
slapped Lord Altrincham

flat in the face.

He was fined, I think...
A pound... Something...

And the judge sort of said,
"Well, 95% of the population

would agree
with what you've done".

And he, himself, said

he only did what Prince Philip
would have done

had he been able to do it.

The irony is that, in the long
term,

Lord Altrincham may actually have
done the Royals a bit of a service.

There was an awareness
that even the Queen

needed to move with the times.

In the wake
of Lord Altrincham's criticisms

the royal court cut back on outmoded
traditions,

including
cancelling the debutante's ball

But the Palace's changes
were glacial

compared to what was happening
outside in the real world.

Deference
and restraint were giving way

to the freedom and revolution of the
Swinging '60s.

One unpublished picture

taken by veteran photographer
Ken Lennox

in the early '60s
shows how the royal family

were still out of sync
with the public mood.

This is a shot
of the Queen arriving

by royal train in Aberdeen,

and she's got the corgis and she's
stepping off a train.

Now, that's the Queen pregnant.

This is a very unusual picture.

In those days,
you didn't publish photographs

of the Queen being pregnant.

They were very much
sort of private use and so on.

The public would have loved
to have seen the Queen pregnant.

But there was a barrier,
there was a protocol,

and things were done
in a certain way.

I mean it was almost Victorian.

The Royal family had not had
a great time during the sixties.

They were being lampooned,

they were increasingly seen
as remote and aloof.

The monarchy is an oil tanker.

It takes a lot to switch course.

But, very gradually,
it did switch course.

In 1968,

the royal household
came up with an idea

that would show
the British public

the Royals were just like them.

Prince Philip was rightly aware

of the importance
of modernising the monarchy,

stopping it from being perceived

as being sort of fuddy-duddy
and out of date

and tweedy and all the things
that Lord Altrincham had said

the previous decade.

And the obvious sort of new media of
the time was television.

The result was an intimate

fly-on-the-wall documentary

that caused a sensation
when it was broadcast,

but has remained under lock and key
ever since.

The idea was that people didn't
appreciate what the Queen did

so this documentary was
to show her at work.

In every aspect
of her very dutiful life.

And also at play. You know,
show her as a domestic woman.

It was
an incredibly bold thing to do.

To be followed
by television cameras

for an entire year
in very private moments.

It was amazing to see them
having barbecues,

practising the cello...

It had an audience
of about 25 million

and it made
a very powerful impression.

But almost as soon
as the documentary was broadcast

the royal family
had second thoughts.

The Queen,
who has copyright over it,

put the shutters down and
it will not be shown again

unless the Royals agree
and they never have agreed.

The royal ban
remains so complete,

the only footage
still widely available

is a few grainy black
and white clips.

Shall we go
and let the puppies out?

Yes, try!

Try, try, Mum. You must.

Yeah, you must.

We'll see if she's...

If she's allowed
out in the snow.

On the one hand, the access these
cameras were given

is still extraordinary.

On the other, you've got
Prince Philip standing there

at the barbecue up in Balmoral,

the Queen doing the dishes.

It's almost too ordinary.

The problem was that letting
daylight in upon magic

was a dangerous business.

The received wisdom was that this
film had ultimately,

despite its success,

been a mistake
from the Royal's point of view.

That it had somehow
vulgarised them, cheapened them,

and, worse still,
it had opened the door

to other intrusions into their
private life,

which might not be so flattering and
so carefully choreographed.

And in a few years,
one senior royal

would become the object of just such
unwelcome press scrutiny.

Princess Margaret
is always in the newspapers,

she's always going
to outrageous parties.

She had no sense
of self-preservation,

let alone decorum.

She was off her pedestal.

During the late '50s and '60s,

one member of the royal family

captured the attention
of the British press

like no other.

Princess Margaret
was a gift to the press.

She loved to party,
she loved to drink.

She smoked
and had a long cigarette holder.

She was glamour personified, and yet
she was royal.

This was
a very intoxicating combination.

In May 1960, Princess
Margaret married a man

who embodied
the spirit of the new decade:

Antony Armstrong-Jones.

Princess Margaret
first met Tony at my wedding.

He was the photographer.

Lady Glenconner
was Princess Margaret's

childhood friend,
lady-in-waiting,

and life-long confidante.

He was
the up and coming photographer.

But he was just a photographer.

He wasn't allowed
to have lunch with us.

I think
he did have lunch on his own.

My father called him
Tony Snapshot

in a rather sort of rude way.

Of course,
when they became engaged,

a lot of us were
absolutely amazed, actually.

Suddenly, she thought,
"This is the life".

She'd always been
very interested

and keen on film stars
and all that.

Tony Armstrong-Jones really was

a figure
from the Swinging '60s.

He was in that scene,

so he helped to usher Margaret into
that world.

As press fascination
with them increased,

Princess Margaret
and her husband

became
international celebrities.

Can Hollywood with all its stars and
glamour be impressed?

Absolutely.

Just like any other town and
especially if it's royalty.

After a party
until three in the morning,

the Princess and Lord Snowdon
were visiting

one of Hollywood's
dream factories.

It was, if you like, a kind
of typical society set up.

They were both well off.

They were treated
with extraordinary deference,

given unearned privileges,

and inevitably
under these circumstances,

both of them behaved badly.

Tony Armstrong-Jones was only

on extremely loose terms
with monogamy.

He was one of these people who
flitted from lady to lady.

He was essentially a playboy.

Princess Margaret
started having affairs

with various people

and the gossip columnists
started reporting them,

which was, I think,

the first time
that this had happened.

In 1968,

a young Australian media mogul

arrived to shake up the British
newspaper Establishment.

Rupert Murdoch's

taking over The Sun
and The News of the World

would prove hugely important

for the relationship
between press and palace

because Rupert Murdoch was no
admirer of the Royals.

He understood
that in the new media world

you could make money

by intruding
into people's lives.

And the royal family
were kind of easy pickings.

I'm sure the Murdoch press

could be very deferential
when it suited,

but they then turned
when the story turned.

The marriage,
which had been seen

as a happy, royal romance,

pretty soon deteriorated into...

a vast, long...

drunken squabble.

As her marriage fell apart,

and press attention
became more intrusive,

Margaret took refuge

on the Caribbean island
of Mustique.

Biggest mosquitoes you've seen.

It wasn't called Mustique
for nothing.

And it was
steaming hot out there.

The island was owned
by Lady Glenconner

and her husband Colin Tennant.

We hadn't given
them a wedding present.

And Colin said,

"Do you want something
in a little box

or would you like
a piece of land?"

"I think I'd like
a piece of land", she said.

But we also gave it to Tony too
because Tony always after that

said we'd only given it
to Princess Margaret,

which is not true.

And he called Mustique
"Mistake",

which was
rather tiresome of him.

Life out there was a kind of
permanent party

in which infidelity
and drunkenness

and bad behaviour

was the rule
rather than the exception.

In the early 1970s

one young man
became a frequent house guest

at Princess Margaret's
island villa.

Roddy!
-Yes.

This way.

Roddy Llewellyn was
a rather good looking,

rather charming,

rather hippy gardener.

He became
Princess Margaret's toy boy.

He clearly had assets

about which we can know
little or nothing,

but he appealed to her.

Roddy Llewellyn
was introduced

to Princess Margaret
by Lady Glenconner.

I realised very quickly

that they had absolutely
fallen for each other.

And Roddy came and...

talked to me, and he said,
"I absolutely think

Princess Margaret
is the most wonderful person

I've ever met
and she's so beautiful.

So I said, "Don't tell me,
Roddy, tell her".

Perhaps I shouldn't have,
but anyway I did.

But he was so kind,

and I think she had
a very happy time with him.

But the affair
was not to stay secret for long.

Even on the island of Mustique,

Princess Margaret
could not escape the press.

In 1976,
came the famous photograph,

you know, bikini,
cigarette, drink...

Having a wonderful time with a man
who was not her husband,

who was almost
two decades younger,

and perhaps it was
those photographs

that really tipped the Snowdon
marriage into divorce.

The monarchy
was supposed to be

the head of our morality.

It was supposed to be

"The presentation of ourselves
behaving well".

Well, in Princess Margaret's case,

it was the presentation
of ourselves behaving badly,

and the press loved all that.

She had
no sense of self-preservation,

let alone decorum.

She was off her pedestal.

But rather
than outrage at press intrusion

the Mustique pictures
provoked outrage

at Princess Margaret's
behaviour.

The '70s were a hideously
tough economic decade.

Perhaps that's why
there began to be

more discussion,
more hostile discussion,

of the extended royal family

and the amount it cost,

and the privileged lifestyle

it seemed to be living.

That time,

she along with others
were paid for by the Civil List,

and therefore the taxpayer
was paying for her lifestyle.

It was perhaps the beginning
of people questioning

what the monarchy was all about

and should it be financed
by the public?

And were they really
any better than us?

The threat
to the monarchy

is not republicanism,
it's not extremism,

it's not even the media.

The greatest threat is irrelevance.

The minute
you start to be irrelevant,

you start to lose interest
and, then,

it's a short road from there
to what's the point?

But if the Royals in the '70s

was in danger
of being seen as remote,

in 1980 a new star arrived

to make it seem relevant
all over again.

We thought he would

be announcing
on his 32nd birthday.

Have you any comment
to make about that?

No.
-Lady Di.

In the '80s there is a complete
sort of revolution really

in the relationship
between the press and the Royals

and we have
the cult of celebrity.

And then, at the centre
of all this, is Diana,

who is amazingly, probably
rather unexpectedly photogenic

and who becomes
an absolutely central narrative

of the '80s and '90s.

To make a mess of a photograph

of Diana you
have really got to be bad.

Ken Lennox
started photographing Diana

from the moment she was
linked with Prince Charles.

Most photographers

were at least a little bit
in love with her.

Because, here was this woman
in front of you

who looked gorgeous,
photographed beautifully,

and you got
your stuff in the paper,

and you got praise
from back in the office

and all you had done
was photograph

one of the most beautiful women
in the world.

Until the 1980s,

courtiers strictly limited
press access to the royal family.

But with the arrival of Diana,
everything changed.

Buckingham Palace

couldn't get enough
of this fabulous publicity

and suddenly
they were very proactive.

And they wanted to push Diana

and it went on
like an avalanche.

I'd heard that Diana had had a new
hairstyle.

Next day the Palace
phoned me up and said,

"Ken, the Princess
is doing a little thing

for the Red Cross,
private visit,

would you like to go along?"
"Yes, please".

And I'm watching her,

and she's so aware and she realised
after a few minutes

I hadn't taken anything,

and she looked at me
and said, "What?"

And I said, "One, two, three".

So I could see the...

And she did one, two, three.

Then burst out laughing.

She was doing a photocall

in front of three hundred people
at a Red Cross meeting.

And when the royal fairy-tale

started to go sour,

Diana's mastery of the media

became her secret weapon.

Diana was extremely canny,

she was no fool,

nobody's fool at all.

She had the media
wrapped round her little finger.

The shot
in front of the Taj Mahal

is an absolute classic.

There she is in front of this
beautiful building,

all on her own.

Poor, sad Diana.

In 1992, Charles and Diana

were
on an official tour of India,

when this single image
was seized on

by the world's media as evidence of
their collapsing marriage.

Now Charles
had been to the Taj Mahal

twelve years before, and said,

"One day I would like
to bring my wife here".

Well here they were
in 1992 in India

and she was at the Taj Mahal
and he was in Bangalore.

We were looking at...

herbal remedies,

Prince Charles and I, that day

at the request of the President.

And so there was
a job to be done.

Baroness Lynda Chalke

was Minister
for Overseas Development,

and accompanied
Charles and Diana

throughout the tour.

If you move around a country,

as we did,
there are just so many people

who want to see you both.

You know,
you're going to have to split up

and go around separately.

Now in fact,
it would be perfectly normal

for Charles and Diana

to have separate engagements
on that day,

but she was photographed there,

alone, looking wistful,

and the picture
just said it all.

Charles didn't have a chance to fight
her at her own game,

because, you know, he was a man who
was in his forties,

losing his hair,

he didn't have the star appeal or the
glamour that Diana did.

The public saw her as this hugely
sympathetic, empathetic,

lovely creature who'd been
spurned by this curious man.

I was back at base,

in St. James's Palace
and Kensington Palace,

and I got daily phone calls
from the Princess.

Well, I mean, she was unhappy,
everybody was unhappy,

the lady-in-waiting
was in tears...

It turned into an exercise
in damage control.

Patrick Jephson
was Princess Diana's

private secretary at the time

and managed
the fallout from the photograph

That image of the Princess sitting
alone in front of the Taj Mahal

was damaging in many ways,
but...

I suppose, from my perspective,

it was also quite helpful,
because...

I knew that Diana was
very unhappy in her marriage,

I felt that she was being
very unfairly treated,

and I had sympathy with her in trying
to get that message out

to the outside world.

The fact that she could sit down

in front of the Taj Mahal
and not say a word,

and yet convey that message
very clearly.

I thought it was
a very powerful example

of Diana's great ability to convey a
message just with a photograph.

But the media that Diana
used so brilliantly

would ultimately become
her downfall.

The use of the press is always
a double-edged sword

and so Diana found.

I got a phone call
from a photographer.

They said they'd pictures
and they'd send them to me.

And I agreed to pay close to a
million pounds.

On the 31st of August 1997,

Diana, Princess of Wales
was killed in Paris,

her car pursued
by paparazzi photographers.

The use of the press is always
a double-edged sword,

and so Diana found.

There can't ever
had been another royal

and probably
never will be again,

for whom the media play
such a...

vital and vitally destructive
part in their story.

It would appear that
every proprietor and editor

of every publication
that has paid

for intrusive and exploitative
photographs of her

has blood on his hands today.

Unbelievable.

I just couldn't imagine Diana had
been killed.

Ken Lennox
was the picture editor

of The Sun newspaper
on the night Diana died,

and was immediately
offered photos of the crash.

I got a phone call
from a photographer in Paris,

who said there'd been a crash and
that Dodi was hurt,

Diana was OK because

he had a picture
of her talking to the doctor.

So, they'd said they'd pictures
and they'd send them to me,

they wanted
a lot of money from them.

The photographers
all come together

and decided if they clubbed
what they'd got together,

sold it exclusively,
it was much more valuable

than each of them
going to different newspapers.

So, I went into Wapping.

I looked at them
and I agreed to pay

close to a million pounds.

I thought that she would be
as right as rain

within a couple of days

and we'd have
this fantastic exclusive.

And very quickly
the announcement came through

that the Princess of Wales
had died.

I can't believe after 20 years it
still affects me.

Suddenly, one of the biggest

photographic scoops
of the decade

had become a toxic liability.

First thing
the editor said to me

when he come into the office,
he came in about

quarter to seven in the morning

and he said,
"where are the photographs now?"

I said "I've removed them".

And he said, "for God's sake,

don't let anyone get near these,

it's your responsibility".

This is it, this is it!

In the hours
following the crash,

paparazzi who had been
chasing Diana were arrested.

I blame the Sun newspaper.

And across the world
there was an angry backlash

against the media
and photographers.

It was you,
the press that killed her.

You're the scum.
-Yes.

The pictures
bought by Ken Lennox

remain locked away to this day.

They actually belong to the
photographers that took them,

but they don't want to know
anything about it.

I put them into a blind,

which means my solicitor

has given them
to another solicitor

who is not known to me.

And he has made arrangements
for them to be safeguarded.

And instructions are, if I die,

hopefully the Royal Photographic
Society will come along

and safeguard them, because
they're part of a history

and as a photographic history

you can't destroy them.

After Diana's death,
the Press Complaints Commission

drew up a code of conduct and it
reined in

the worst excesses of the media.

British newspaper editors agreed

not to publish invasive
photographs from paparazzi.

During school and university,

the young Princes
were left in relative peace.

But sometimes
their own behaviour

meant the palace once again
lost control of the narrative.

In his late teens and twenties,

Prince Harry's hard partying

made him a tabloid target.

The evolution of Prince Harry

has been quite extraordinary.

It's really not so long ago

that he was being photographed
going to a party in Nazi uniform,

brawls outside nightclubs,

that game of strip poker.

And yet now
he's everyone's favourite royal.

The key
to Harry's public rehabilitation

was a remarkable instance
of media cooperation...

...that enabled him
to serve with the army

in Afghanistan... in secret.

If you recall, every Christmas,

the Queen and the Royal Family
go to church at Sandringham

and there's always
great coverage of who is there.

Well, Prince Harry
was not there that Christmas,

but there was
no speculation in the media,

"where's Prince Harry?"
because they all knew.

The mastermind
behind the operation

was General Lord Dannatt,

then head of the British army.

We had to get around the problem

of the media speculating,

and speculating so accurately that
we could not deploy him.

So, I thought
"let's call together

the main television,
radio, newspapers,

and see whether we can find
a way to get him there".

And we agreed that,
"look,

if we tell you exactly what he'll be
doing,

where he'll be, when he's going,

give you access to him
with a pool of journalists,

but you say nothing
until he comes back.

Then we've achieved our aim,
he's achieved his aim

and you've achieved your aim,
you've got your story".

Pretty much all the British media
signed up to that.

But just a few weeks
before Prince Harry's

tour of duty was due to end,

his cover was blown
by an Australian news outlet.

Harry was absolutely
boiling mad.

He was pulled out of Afghanistan

and he absolutely hated that.

I do recall on one occasion,

he sat in a deep armchair
in my house

and we'd given him
a gin and tonic and his...

his shoulders slightly slumped
and said, "Well,

the trouble is, I'm just
not like other young men".

You know, he knew

that he was special and couldn't
be treated in the same way.

Nice to meet you.

The press would prove
equally challenging

for Harry's brother.

For the four years
William was a student

at St Andrew's University,
he was left in peace.

But as soon as he graduated,

the media spotlight
was back on him...

Big wide world.

...and on
his girlfriend Kate Middleton.

Kate's life was never the same.

Her family, her friends,
her teachers,

anyone who had had anything
to do with Kate Middleton

suddenly found themselves
being called upon,

having their doors knocked
by reporters and journalists.

It was never going to be
an easy relationship.

Serene
and poised in Malaysia today.

But behind the veil,
we're told there's fury.

Stay there! Stay there!
Stay there.

A year after they were married,

in the middle of a high-profile
overseas tour,

Kate and William were rocked
by the publication

of topless pictures taken while they
were on a private holiday.

That was paparazzi,
a kilometre away, long lens.

Pictures never saw the light of day
in the UK,

but they certainly saw the light
of day in the French press.

William was apoplectic.

Kate was absolutely devastated.

She dealt with it I think
far better, actually.

She put on her best face,
she got on with her engagements,

but William
was absolutely seething.

I think
it's not at all surprising

that he should have taken
such prompt and strong action.

He went straight to law

and sued the magazine
for invasion of privacy.

William's
legal action was successful

and the royal couple was awarded
92,000 pounds in damages.

But any sense of success
will be tinged by the knowledge

that millions of people
will have seen

intensely personal
images of them.

It's not that he wanted
the money,

because the money
went to charity.

It was making the point,
"don't mess with us

because we'll mess with you".

Over the past century

the Windsor Dynasty
has used the press

and been used by it.

It's a difficult,
often fraught relationship.

And one that the next generation
will need to manage with care.

William does the right thing,

when babies are born
he stands there,

turns his head to the cameras,

puts his family on show,

but he thinks
it should stop there

and he's done everything
to make sure it stops there.

The younger royals will expect

to be able to step on the stage,

perform their duties,
and then step off it again.

Whether the press
have the same expectations

is another question.

The idea that we'll only be
interested

in the good work they do,
and of course it's good work...

but not interested in everything else
about them, is unrealistic.

You're going to be
a public figure,

Harry, William,
for 50, 60 years.

So, don't worry
about tomorrow's headlines.

Play the long game.

The Queen's old adage is

"we have to be seen
to be believed".

It's always been a problem
with the modern monarchy,

how do you square the quest for
normality with being

one of the most famous
people on earth?

Next time,
we look at how the Queen

has handled some
of the greatest disasters

of her reign.

Anything that could go wrong,
did go wrong.

The flames seemed to be
200 feet high.

My brother and I
actually heard the bomb go off.

And find out
what it takes to be the Queen

when your family and the nation
are tested to the limit.

Being Queen, being monarch,
is a very lonely job.