Harry, Meghan and a question of privacy

THAT they are a young couple in love seems self-evident, and it would be churlish not to wish them every happiness.

But at the same time, the Mail has difficulty forgetting that it is only a few months since Prince Harry angrily attacked the Press, demanding privacy for Meghan Markle and insisting their relationship was nobody’s business but their own.

Why oh why, then, has Miss Markle spilled her heart out in a huge cover story interview with America’s glossiest celebrity magazine?

Yes, we wish them well, but we can’t help pointing out that they must clearly make a choice. Either they can demand the privacy of ordinary citizens, or they can exploit the prince’s status to solicit media attention.

They can’t have it both ways, expecting the limelight only when they have something to promote – in this case, the 100th episode of Miss Markle’s TV drama, Suits.

Over recent weeks, the young princes have often laid themselves open to charges of hypocrisy, complaining about media intrusion while giving endless interviews about their mother’s tragic death.

Of course the royals are entitled to be treated fairly and with sensitivity. Indeed, a Paris court was right to award the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge damages, after French magazine Closer published paparazzi photographs (which no UK paper printed) of the duchess topless.

Meanwhile, Harry is rightly very popular. He has the makings of a great prince, and this could be the beginnings of a glorious union. But he is also fifth in line to the throne, which gives the British people a legitimate interest in his potential bride.

If he and Miss Markle wish to keep their media exposure to a minimum, may we humbly suggest they stop inviting it?