Harry the Prince of Party

Oh, Harry, Harry, Harry.
He's only third in line for the throne, so he may aswell be first to get his wang out? You only live once? Between him famously dressing as a Nazi desert soldier, complete with swastika (*facepalm*) and, more recently, flashing his crown jewels in Vegas, what is our verdict on the ginger prince?
Aged twelve, Prince Harry lost his mother. His mother who was philanthropic and emotional. His mother who, also, left his father and was unhappy in their relationship. Left to be raised by his rigid, collected father, the question of who he would more resemble in his character is still undecided.

Harry in Lesotho where he and William established a charity in 2008

He really is two sides of a royal coin. His charitable work in Lesotho with HIV affected children is an image of his mother, but his swastika- brandishing leaves somewhat to be desired. Recently, it appears the prince partied damn hard in Vegas with like-minded ruffians. They had a jolly olde time and he flashed his bits, something I regularly witness medical students doing down Oxford Road. However, unlike the medical students who can just squint through the hangover, untag themselves on facebook and swear it won't happen again (until the next time), Harry has to contend with national newspapers circling around him like the morning alcoholics in Wetherspoons.

The Sun published an image of him in the nuddy and titled the front cover:
'Heir it is!'
'Pic of naked Harry you've already seen on the internet'

Never has their been more interest in a 20-odd year old stripping off. The Sun claims that the people of Britain had the right to know what the man third in line to the throne had been doing. They also claimed that they believed it wrong that the press shouldn't be free to publish the images. Indeed they should be free to do it, the press should be unaffected by the Royal Family's wishes and information should be free to share. However, we already knew what had happened, because the Sun had already told us, they didn't necessarily need to show us. It's right that they should be able to show the images, but they didn't have to show them. It is in the public's interest to know what Harry is doing, but publishing the images is in the Sun's unique style of bad taste. 

Harry is the Mayor of Funkytown

As far as the Sun 'morally' defending the right's of free press, Murdoch has a warped view on the matter, seeing as hacking and tapping do not constitute 'moral' methods of freeing information to the press. I am not a royalist, and it doesn't bother me what Harry gets up to in Vegas. He could marry a naughty nun, a confused King or gamble with a giant Mexican and, yes, it might be good to know, but freedom of press doesn't always necessarily mean brandishing the images. The Sun has received numerous complaints about their publication of the image, not from the Royal Family, but from readers. Some may have complained believing it was wrong of the Sun to publish the image, and some may just not have enjoyed choking on their cornflakes over Harry's starkers body. Although it may be in the public's interest to know of Royal Vegas parties, the public is not necessarily interested.