The Daily Mail has been reprimanded by the press regulator for flying a helicopter over the Duke of York’s home to take pictures of Princess Eugenie’s “lavish” Disney-themed 25th birthday party.
The Independent Press Standards Organisation received a complaint from Prince Andrew that the use of the helicopter, which made four passes of the grounds at his home at the Royal Lodge in Windsor Park, was an invasion of privacy.
He said that the the helicopter had flown so low that those working in the garden “feared it was in distress”.
The information gathered by the Daily Mail included the “arrangement of tents and a fairground” that had been set up as part of the lavish party that saw Princess Eugenie dress as Snow White accompanied by seven dwarves.
The Daily Mail argued that there was a public interest in the plans as she is eighth in line to the throne and a senior member of the royal family.
The newspaper added that the flight was made the day before the party, when it was understood the family were attending Royal Ascot, and that aerial photography is “routinely and uncontroversially” used to cover sporting events, public gatherings and festivals.
Ipso said that the Royal Lodge was not publicly accessible or visible to the public and so Prince Andrew had a “reasonable expectation” that the grounds would be respected as a private place, whether he was at home or not.
The regulator said aerial photography can be a “legitimate tool” but in this instance the “flight over the private space of the grounds of the complainant’s home, intended to capture images of the preparations for the event he intended to hold there, was a clear intrusion, regardless of whether the complainant was there”.
Ipso said it was “irrelevant” that the Daily Mail did not publish the photo, the flight itself was intrusive.
“The newspaper’s explanation that it sought to confirm details of the party, and to illustrate the story, was not sufficient to justify this intrusion,” the regulator said. “Any public interest served by the information published in the articles was not proportionate to the intrusion caused by the flight.”
Separately, Ipso did not uphold Prince Andrew’s complaint about the Daily Mail’s publication of the article.
“The coverage of the party, which included the arrangement of the tents and costumes, was trivial and had been sourced separately,” said Ipso. “Its publication did not constitute a further intrusion”.
Ipso forced the Daily Mail to publish its adjudication in the first 10 pages of the newspaper and to put it online for 12 hours on the homepage.
