If the DM used unethical methods to compile files of personal information against any of the plaintiffs, that's wrong. All of us have the expectation of a measure of privacy, even those with public profiles. The DM has, in the past, shown absolutely no decency in pursuit of a story when families refuse to comment. They've hacked royal phones so I wouldn't put much past them. On a good day the DM is small 'j' journalism, although I will concede that there have been some good opinion columns and articles in the past. Not regularly, but when not positioning themselves as a low-rung entertainment rag there have been glimmers. Not of greatness, just glimmers. They do have a lot of very good photos, but their captions are often horrendous.

Harry's main complaint seems to be that her bad press has made Meghan unhappy. Well now, at whose feet to we lay those woes? Harry says that unkind press coverage has made Meghan miserable. Could it be that she's been a miserable person for the press to follow? If she thinks she's been treated roughly up to now, just wait until the eventual passing of her father. Both of them will be excoriated for their treatment of both their families.

Is it possible that the press, and much of the world, has not forgotten how the Sussexes treated a beloved queen in her last years, grieving the loss of her husband and facing her own last days? The DM was there to happily report on the many complaints and accusations of the Sussexes against pretty much anyone who they decided had aggrieved them, so the press was fine when there were useful. But they aren't obedient and deferential, so they must be stopped. Is that where we are with this? Or have the Sussexes seen what life is like without the palace to run interference and protect them and they're anticipating a very rough summer?

===