The editor of Woman’s Day said she would run the photographs after they were published by an Italian gossip magazine on Wednesday.
Note: This article is from the Guardian.
The Duchess of Cambridge is facing fresh anguish after an Australian magazine said it would print pictures of her in a bikini showing a "baby bump" on holiday in the Caribbean.
Fiona Connolly, editor of the weekly Australian title, reportedly claimed that the former Kate Middleton was on a public beach and that the pictures were taken by a fellow holidaymaker – not a paparazzo.
"It wasn’t a hard decision to run these photos," Connolly is quoted as telling Australia’s Herald Sun newspaper. "She is on a public beach and she was mingling with holidaymakers. There are other holidaymakers in the photos. It’s a very different situation to the nude photos, there is no photographer hiding in the bushes and she is not inside a private villa."
The UK arm of the Women’s Day publisher, Bauer Media, sought to distance itself from the Australian title. A spokeswoman for Bauer Media UK said in a statement: "Bauer Media Australia’s editorial decisions are made entirely independently from those of Bauer Media UK. We would like to reiterate that Bauer Media UK would not publish images of this nature in any of our titles."
‘Breach of privacy’
The royal family reacted angrily on Tuesday after the Italian gossip magazine, Chi, announced its intention to print the photographs.A spokesperson for St James’s Palace said on Wednesday: "We are disappointed that photographs of the duke and duchess on a private holiday look likely to be published overseas. This is a clear breach of the couple’s right to privacy."
The pictures were taken on the Caribbean island of Mustique where the duchess and her husband, Prince William, are on holiday. They are said to show the duchess walking in the surf alongside the prince.
Woman’s Day is a weekly lifestyle magazine in Australia and is published by the global media group Bauer Media, home to titles including Grazia, FHM and Empire.
The editor, Connolly, reportedly said the magazine had bought the exclusive rights to print the pictures in Australia, but would not reveal their value. She was quoted in the Herald Sun: "Everyone but the UK has or will publish these pics. The British press has collectively made a deal with the palace [but a] gentleman’s agreement over there doesn’t affect us over here.
"We are sensitive to photos that shouldn’t be published, for instance I haven’t laid eyes on the nude photos of Kate."
The editor of Chi, Alfonso Signorini, has mounted a robust defence his decision to publish the photos, saying they were taken in a public place and could not be compared with the media "persecution" of Princess Diana.
"This seems to me to be an over-the-top reaction. We have published photos shot in a public place, on a beach amidst other bathers. There was no invasion of privacy. The English press does far worse," he was quoted as telling the Italian news website Corriere.it. He added: "You can’t compare it with the media persecution of Lady D [Diana, Princess of Wales]. I repeat: the photos were taken in a public place." Signorini has not responded to the Guardian’s request for an interview
ITV photo gaffe
ITV’s This Morning was forced to apologise after it accidentally showed the front page of the Italian magazine, including the picture of the duchess, live on air.
In a statement read out later in the programme, presenter Eamonn Holmes said: "Earlier during today’s news review we were discussing photographs of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge on a beach in Mustique published in an Italian magazine.
"Unfortunately we accidentally showed an unblurred image of the magazine cover, which briefly showed the photographs.
"This was a deeply regrettable error and we are very sorry.
"We apologise unreservedly to the duke and the duchess."
A gossip website based in London, named Showbiz Spy, also published a picture of Chi magazine’s front page bearing the photograph of the duchess.
Adam Nutburn, the editor of the website, defended the publication, saying: "People are interested in it and as soon as we put them up the traffic goes up massively. Last time we printed the pictures [of Middleton topless] we got 5 million or 6 million more uniques in the space of a week. It really is a make-or-break thing for us so it would be stupid not to."
Asked whether he believed printing the pictures was a breach of the duchess’s privacy, he added: "To an extent I do but if we don’t [publish them] other people will and we might as well. Unless I get a very angry lawyer’s letter I’ll probably keep them up. I think we can just about get away with it because we’re reporting on the fact that someone else has printed them."
• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email email@example.com or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".
• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter at http://twitter.com/#!/mediaguardian and Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/mediaguardian
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010