Why are so few newspapers running with the story about Prince Andrew and his friendship with the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?
The News of the World published a picture of the men together on 20 February and this was followed up next day by the Daily Mail, Prince Andrew's choice of friends called into question again.
The Mail and Mail on Sunday subsequently carried several articles, including one this weekend in which a woman told how, when she was 17, she flew to Britain at Epstein's insistence to meet the prince. There was a picture of them together.
I would have thought this story was manna from heaven for The Sun. It involves a member of the royal family enjoying what must surely be regarded as an inappropriate relationship. Isn't that Sun territory any longer?
When Rebekah Brooks was editor she took every opportunity to highlight high-profile paedophiles. Has there been a change of agenda now?
Today's Times certainly did. It devoted page 7 to a piece headlined Duke could be stripped of role as trade envoy amid questions over his choice of friendships plus a comment piece by Ben Macintyre in which he writes:
"Long before he began mixing with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted paedophile and American hedge fund billionaire, Andrew displayed a willingness to associate with the sort of people whom his mother would not be seen dead in a ditch with."
This strikes me as the kind of story that all newspapers should be covering. Note also today's Daily Mail article, Former ambassador questions Andrew's role as trade envoy.
Why are so many national dailies ignoring the activities of the man who is bringing the royal family into disrepute?
Learn more : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qn-9-5XtnM