After decades of paparazzi intrusion, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have reached a fragile truce with the mainstream British press that has limited what is published about their children in the UK.
According to an informal understanding, newspapers and websites will not publish unofficial photographs of Prince George or Princess Charlotte while they are growing up.
In return, they are given access to a steady stream of images that have been sanctioned by the royal couple.
These come from three main sources: official photographs taken by the royals themselves that are released several times a year and distributed free of charge to the international media, such as after Prince George’s christening; photographs taken of the children at official royal events by pre-approved “pool” photographers, usually from agencies such as Getty Images or Reuters, which are then distributed to all media; and images shot by trusted freelance photographers who are deemed to “play by the rules”, usually at polo matches or other informal events once or twice a year.
The arrangement is a far cry from the past, when some segments of the press had no qualms about intruding into royal lives.
That came to a head in 1997 when the Duke of Cambridge’s mother, Princess Diana, died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi.
An inquest jury later found that the photographers and her driver, who had been drinking, were both to blame for the crash because of their “gross negligence”.
The finding heralded a new era of deference by the British press. It came to a head in 2008, when it emerged Prince Harry had been serving in Afghanistan for two months without the public being made aware.
The press had struck a “gentleman’s agreement” with Buckingham Palace and MoD chiefs to adhere to a news blackout.
It was the first such agreement since the abdication crisis of 1936, when British editors agreed not to publish the story of King Edward VIII’s love for divorced American socialite Wallis Simpson.
Then, as now, the secret was reported by foreign media. In Prince Harry’s case, an Australian women’s magazine and US website the Drudge Report broke the news of his deployment, to the fury of the royals and the army.
The difficulty of controlling overseas publications was further underlined in 2012 when France’s Closer magazine published topless photos of the Duchess of Cambridge on holiday.
On Friday, the Duke and Duchess’s spokesman, Jason Knauf, said the era of gentleman’s agreements controlling what can and cannot be published is over. His words came shortly after the royals accused paparazzi photographers of harassing Prince George and using “increasingly dangerous” tactics to take pictures of him.
He told the Guardian: “The Duke and Duchess simply expect publishers to do the right thing when it comes to protecting their children. They are happy to provide official photos, but it is not part of a deal. We don’t buy into the argument that giving out official photos stops the paparazzi problem.
“Gentleman’s agreements are a thing of the past. They don’t work when you have overseas publications ready to print anything they like.”
