Prince Harry’s recent legal settlement with The Sun should have been recognized as a landmark victory in the fight for media accountability. His lawsuit forced News Group Newspapers (NGN), owned by Rupert Murdoch, to finally admit wrongdoing and issue a public apology for years of unlawful press intrusion. This included an explicit acknowledgment of the harm caused not only to Harry himself but also to his late mother, Princess Diana. Yet, instead of focusing on the significance of this moment, some media narratives have attempted to reframe it as a failure—simply because Meghan Markle was not included in the apology.

This kind of framing is not just misleading; it is deliberately divisive. It pits Diana and Meghan against each other in a way that serves no purpose except to fuel controversy and stir public debate about a false sense of injustice. The reality is that this legal case was about Harry and Diana—not Meghan.

The Case Was About Harry and Diana, Not Meghan

The lawsuit centered around claims that The Sun engaged in years of illegal news-gathering practices, including phone hacking and the use of private investigators to unlawfully obtain personal information. The court case focused on incidents from 1996 to 2011—years before Meghan was even part of Harry’s life.

Yet, because Harry had also alleged that The Sun targeted Meghan when they first began dating in 2016, some commentators have now chosen to focus on the fact that she was absent from NGN’s public apology. Their argument seems to be that because Meghan’s name wasn’t mentioned, the victory is somehow incomplete. But legal cases don’t work that way.

There are many reasons why Meghan was not included, none of which diminish the significance of the outcome. Settlements are negotiated agreements, and they often involve compromise. There may not have been sufficient evidence in the case files to force an admission regarding Meghan. Or, strategically, Harry’s legal team may have prioritized securing the broader victory rather than dragging the case out further in an attempt to win on every point.

Regardless of the reason, the idea that this should take away from what was achieved is unfair and distracts from what should be the real story: for the first time, The Sun has admitted that its unlawful press tactics extended beyond the now-defunct News of the World.

https://twitter.com/ChanteHudson4/status/1882781032401010939/video/1

A Long-Overdue Apology for Diana

Perhaps the most significant aspect of this legal victory is the formal apology issued to Diana, Princess of Wales. For years, it has been well known that the tabloid press played a major role in the relentless harassment she endured. From her divorce to her tragic death in 1997, the British media treated Diana as a commodity, exploiting every aspect of her private life for profit.

The statement from NGN acknowledged the harm its newspapers caused to Diana and admitted that their coverage negatively impacted Harry’s relationships with friends and family. This admission matters—not just for historical accountability, but because it validates what Harry has been saying for years: that his mother was hounded by the press in ways that were both unethical and, at times, illegal.

For those who have followed Harry’s ongoing battle with the media, this is the culmination of his long-standing mission to hold the press accountable for the way it treated his mother. It is also a stark reminder of why Harry has taken such a firm stance against the tabloids—because he does not want history to repeat itself with his own family.

Why the Meghan vs. Diana Narrative Is Harmful

By shifting the focus of this legal case from Diana to Meghan, the media is once again using a divisive tactic that has become all too familiar. Instead of recognizing Harry’s victory, certain outlets have framed it as a failure because Meghan was not included—suggesting that Diana and Meghan are somehow in competition for recognition and justice.

This kind of narrative is damaging for several reasons:

1. It distorts the significance of the case. The lawsuit was never primarily about Meghan. While her name was mentioned in some of Harry’s claims, the court case focused on long-standing issues of press misconduct that predated their relationship.
2. It reduces Diana’s suffering to a comparison game. Diana’s mistreatment by the press was well-documented, long before Harry ever took legal action. This case forced NGN to acknowledge that wrongdoing publicly. That should be the focus—not whether Meghan was mentioned in the settlement.
3. It plays into the tabloids’ own strategy. The very same press institutions that Harry has been fighting for years thrive on stories that create division. By framing the case as a “loss” for Meghan rather than a win for accountability, these narratives serve only to continue the cycle of distraction and misinformation.

A Win for Justice, Not Hypocrisy

Critics like Carole Malone have used this case as an opportunity to attack Harry, suggesting that settling for a reported £10-20 million payout is hypocritical because he previously claimed “money was no object” in his fight for justice. But this criticism ignores basic legal reality:

• Taking the case to full trial could have cost upwards of £10 million in legal fees alone.
• A full trial would not necessarily have resulted in a better outcome; if anything, it would have given The Sun more opportunity to fight back.
• The settlement still forced a public admission of wrongdoing—something that The Sun has avoided for years.

Rather than being a sign of weakness, Harry’s decision to settle was a strategic and intelligent legal move. He achieved his primary objectives: accountability, an apology, and a significant financial penalty for The Sun.

Conclusion: Focusing on the Real Victory

Prince Harry’s legal settlement with The Sun is a groundbreaking moment in media accountability. The apology to Diana marks an important acknowledgment of the harm done to her and to Harry himself. The financial payout ensures that NGN is held responsible for its unethical practices. And, most importantly, the case sets a precedent that could lead to further challenges against the culture of tabloid misconduct.

Instead of celebrating this milestone, certain media outlets are choosing to shift the conversation toward Meghan’s absence from the settlement, creating an unnecessary and divisive narrative. But this case was never about comparing Diana and Meghan—it was about truth, justice, and ensuring that the press is held accountable for its actions.

The real takeaway here should not be whether Meghan’s name was included. The real takeaway is that Harry won a fight that many thought was unwinnable. That alone is worth recognizing.