Private Eye logo
twitter
twitter
rss
rss
rss
gnitty
street of shame
From the Eye archives
Richard 'dirty' Desmond: A Humbuggery Special
Issue 1323, 18th September 2012
richard desmond 2.jpg
HUMBUGGER OFF: Richard ‘Dirty’ Desmond, who was appalled by the topless pictures that appeared in Ireland… and whose own TV porn tribute to last year’s royal wedding, ‘A Royal Romp’, featured a character called Kate Fiddleton and someone who looked like the Queen.
“I’M very angry at the decision to publish these photographs,” declared Richard Desmond primly after the Irish edition of the Daily Star, in which he has a 50 percent stake, ran the pictures of Kate Middleton sans swimsuit.

“The decision to publish these pictures has no justification whatsoever and Northern & Shell condemns it in the strongest possible terms,” he added. “Northern & Shell is profoundly dismayed at the decision made by the Irish Daily Star, which would never have been made by any of the newspapers or magazines under our editorial control.”

A character called Kate ‘Fiddleton’ (geddit?)
So respectful is Desmond of the royal couple that he celebrated their nuptials last year by commissioning a tasteful tribute, broadcast on two of his television stations and heavily publicised in the Daily Star.

A Royal Romp featured a character named “Kate Fiddleton” (geddit?) engaging in hardcore sex with lookalikes of both Princes William and Harry, as well as a blonde woman purporting to be the latter’s ex-girlfriend Chelsy Davy, in the presence of lookalikes of Prince Charles and the Queen.

“We have chosen to put A Royal Romp on both Television X and Red Hot TV across the Friday and Saturday of the Royal Wedding bank holiday weekend to make sure as many people as possible get a chance to view,” announced Desmond’s head of programming Chris Ratcliff.


Totless photographs

BAUER, publisher of the UK edition of Closer magazine, was swift to distance itself from the title’s French edition.

“Closer France is published under licence by Italian business Mondadori, and Closer UK would like to make it clear that the two publications make entirely independent editorial decisions,” the company announced as the inevitable internet backlash built up last Friday. “Closer magazine UK takes its obligations under the PCC Code extremely seriously and would never publish topless images of a member of the Royal family.”

So respectful is the UK magazine of people’s privacy that its cover last week was devoted to “exclusive” speculation as to whether “Posh’s Bump Riddle” meant she might be in the early stages of pregnancy, whether Cheryl Cole could be attempting to conceive, and whether a photograph of actress Jennifer Ellison proved she was failing to keep to her diet.


Mirror's image problem

“THERE is something very admirable in Prince William’s determination to protect the privacy of his wife,” declared the Daily Mirror last weekend.

“The young couple are showing maturity, or their Palace advisers are, in realising they must make a stand against a French Peeping Tom celebrity gossip magazine… A long lens prying on Kate sunbathing topless on a private estate is a clear breach of this right.”

As several other media outlets managed to note over the weekend, one of the legal precedents in this case is the £1.2m paid by, er, the Daily Mirror after it published photographs of William’s mother Diana exercising in a gym, taken with a hidden camera. Did this deter the paper from claiming the moral high ground? Did it heck.

“Lord Leveson may care to note that an officially regulated French press is the transgressor, while the self-regulating British papers are respecting the Duchess’s privacy,” its editorial loftily intoned.


Rogue mail

“THE pictures were taken on private property using cameras with extremely long lenses, which means no British newspaper would publish them,” the Daily Mail pointed out on the day the Closer shots were printed.

Really? The same criteria apply to a series of fuzzy shots of model Heidi Klum relaxing on a beach with her children which were published by, er, the Daily Mail at the end of August. Indeed, the paper acknowledged as much by describing them as showing an “intimate family holiday” and “a seemingly private chat” between Klum and her new partner, leaving little doubt that these were circumstances under which she had what the Press Complaints Commission calls “a reasonable expectation of privacy”.

But then the Mail – which unequivocally banned the use of all paparazzi photos in a front-page promise after the death of Diana – has never been known for its consistency. Last weekend the lead story on its website was the outrage over the Kate photos. Directly adjacent were no fewer than seven stories based on paparazzi photographs of celebrities going about their day-to-day business, three of them with children under 10 in tow.


Sun stroke

“KATE: It’s pure greed,” screamed the front page of the Sun last Sunday as it condemned the Irish Daily Star on Sunday for publishing the topless photos. “Prince William’s wife is entitled to feel fury and disgust,” it opined, “at those lowlife rags printing pictures of her topless.”

This is clearly quite different from the Sun’s altruistic decision to publish naked photos of Prince Harry in Las Vegas two weeks earlier, when every other British newspaper declined to print them.

“The Prince Harry pictures are a crucial test of Britain’s free press,” the Sun explained on 24 August. “It is absurd that in the internet age newspapers like the Sun could be stopped from publishing stories and pictures already seen by millions on the free-for-all that is the web. It was vital for us to run them.”

For although the much-discussed Harry photos were already a mouse-click away for the 77 percent of British households with internet access, “the many millions of people who get their news in print, or have no web access, could not take a full part in that national conversation because they could not see the images”.

No “pure greed” there: just selfless, heroic generosity.

Tags: Topless pictures
More top stories in the latest issue:

SUICIDEWATCH
Newspapers tear up the editor’s code and Samaritans’ guidelines to write whatever they want about the death of US comedian Robin Williams.

LOOM MONGERING
From a harmless craze to being an ‘eco timebomb’ and even prompting a cancer alert, loom bands get the full, frothing Daily Mail treatment.

HACKED OFF HACKED OFF
Why papers joining the new, non-statutory regulator IPSO will be targeted by Hacked Off – but not unregulated rogues like the Indy, Guardian (or Eye).

MOVE THE NotW ONE!
The tough-on-crime Telegraph wants Andy Coulson moved to a softer jail (but NOT because he and chief exec Murdoch MacLennan were once chums).

MEMORY LAPSE
Recording how an ex-Sun hack is cleared of hacking, the Mail forgets to say that when he was arrested, he was working for… the Mail. Which promptly sacked him.

TELEGRAPH TURMOIL, Pt 94
As ex-sportsmen (and one woman) replace Telegraph writers, while hacks wonder if new editor-in-chief Jason Seiken will ever return from his hols.

private eye issue 1373
To read more from issue 1323 you can order a copy from our archive of back issues here.
gnitty
More From This Issue
Number
Crunching
more »
Number
Mediaballs
All the latest gaffes
more »
Mediaballs
In The Back
The latest stories
more »
In The Back
Also Available Online
More From This Issue
Private Eye Issue 1373
private eye Only In The Magazine

‘No Boots on Ground’ as Army No Longer Has Functioning Boots… David Caesar Welcome Brutus Johnsonius Back to His Team… Seventeen Ways Mainstream Media Misrepresent BuzzFeed as a List Site… ‘We’re Bitter Together’ – Best Jokes from Scotland’s Festival of Fun… Fruity A Level Girls Jump 10% Less High on Front Pages than Previous Years… That Denis MacShame Prison Diary in Full.

And also...

- Stat attack: BBC’s statistics expert forced to backtrack over Gaza casualty statistics
- SuicideWatch: Editor’s code torn up as papers report the death of Robin Williams
- Doom & loom: From harmless craze to cancer warnings: how the Mail went potty
For all these stories you can buy the magazine or subscribe here and get delivery direct to your home every fortnight.
Next issue on sale: 2nd September 2014.

Private Eye Issue 1372
gnitty