News

Sun refuses pictures of royals for publication, claims royal editor

09/01/2012

Newspaper
✕ Press claim

✓ The truth

Reach
Up to
people misled
Help us fight back

Join 71,384 others who are taking action to share the truth & raise standards in the press

1. Share the truth
Post this rebuttal on social media
2. Fund the fightback
Help us challenge more stories like this
Donate
3. Tell your MP
Send a ready-written email in 30 seconds
Email your MP

Duncan Larcombe has claimed that the Sun does not publish “more than fifty percent” of paparazzi photographs showing the royal family.

The evidence submitted by Larcombe, who has been royal editor at the Sun since 2011, included several examples of refusing pictures of the royals for publication.

He described a member of the public calling the Sun newdesk in 2009, claiming to have “explosive” pictures of Prince William and Kate Middleton. After asking for £25,000 the individual was arrested with the paper's cooperation after it was discovered that the pictures were obtained from a camera stolen from Pippa Middleton.

Larcombe also said he checks exclusive stories about the royals “every time” with the palace or Clarence House press office to make sure they are “100 percent” right.

He added: “If we get royal stories wrong then readers may well be on the prince’s side rather than ours.”

The discussion over paparazzi pictures was continued in the evidence of John Edwards, the Sun’s picture editor, who told the inquiry that pictures of a heavily-pregnant Lily Allen shopping in London were not run in the paper after a discussion with the singer’s agent.

Edwards also mentioned the harassment of Hugh Grant and Tinglan Hong following the birth of their child last year, but claimed photographers working on behalf of the Sun moved on from Hong's house before a PCC letter was issued to the press.

Edwards went on to defend photographers, saying: "I do think paparazzi is not a great name – we all think of it as a nasty word – but they are effectively freelance photographers.”

Hacked Off is funded by supporters, not newspaper owners. Help us take this to Parliament: give £10 a month.

Give £10 a month

Download the full report:

Download report

Queries: campaign@hackinginquiry.org

related Posts

Coverage of Professor Arday was not legitimate: the letter The Times refused to publish
Guest blog: Professor Paul Wragg replies to the letter published in The Times on 25 August defending the press coverage of Professor Jason Arday. The Times declined to publish his reply. We publish it here in full.
8/28/26
News
Defensive, evasive & hypocritical: The press reaction to the death of Jason Arday
The reaction of national newspapers to the death of Professor Jason Arday has exposed a brittle defensiveness at the heart of the press, and a determination to remain outside any meaningful accountability.
8/26/26
News
When media abuse of academics becomes the norm in HE
Following the death of Jason Arday, Corinne Fowler writes on the toll of media abuse on academics and what universities must do to protect their staff.
8/19/26
News
IPSO ties itself in knots over Telegraph complaint
Media lawyer Jonathan Coad complained to IPSO about a Telegraph article claiming Hacked Off wants "state control" of the press. IPSO's response contradicted itself within the space of a few paragraphs.
8/14/26
News