Prince Harry's 'Life's Work' Leaves Americans Cold

Prince Harry has said reshaping the media landscape in the United Kingdom is his "life's work" but polling suggests he may struggle to convince Americans to care—even when they believe he is right.

The Duke of Sussex became the first senior royal to enter the witness box when he gave evidence against Mirror Group Newspapers at the High Court on June 6 and 7. He is suing the company on historic allegations of phone hacking and other unlawful practices and acknowledged at the end of his testimony that the experience had been "a lot."

Redfield & Wilton, on behalf of Newsweek, asked a representative sample of 1,500 Americans what they thought about Harry's case and found most backed his decision. There are, however, signs that he may struggle to get Americans to care about his battle with the British media after nearly half said the issue did not matter at all to them.

American Attitudes to Prince Harry's Historic Court Testimony

Sixty-six percent of respondents said they had heard at least something about the case, with 15 percent having heard a "significant amount," 23 percent a "fair amount" and 28 percent a "slight amount." Thirty-four percent heard "nothing at all."

Most Americans polled supported Harry's decision to give evidence, which subjected him to a grueling eight-hour grilling by the publisher's lawyer, spread over two days.

Asked whether it was the right decision, 55 percent said it was and only 12 percent said it was the wrong decision, while 33 percent said they did not know.

That bodes well for Harry and there appeared to be support across the political divide with 54 percent of Trump voters backing him and 59 percent of Biden voters.

However, to whatever extent he has support for his decision, only 12 percent felt his testimony mattered a "significant amount" to them, while a further 19 percent said it mattered a "fair amount."

Meanwhile, 24 percent said it mattered a "slight amount" and 45 percent felt it did not matter at all.

The data suggests Harry may meet little resistance to the idea the British media treated him badly, though he may need to acclimatize himself to the fact that his campaign, which he described as his "life's work" in January, may leave Americans cold.

It is not as though he did not get "cut through" as 66 percent heard about the story, though it is easy to see why some may have been less engaged when the newspapers involved, the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People are not household names in the U.S.

This disconnect between support and interest can be seen strongest among 45 to 54-year-olds who were simultaneously most likely to support the decision (63 percent) and most likely to think his testimony did not matter (57 percent).

Explanations for America's Luke Warm Response

Edward Coram James, chief executive of PR agency Go Up, told Newsweek: "I think it's largely brain drain, Harry has consumed so much of the airwaves for the last year and the problem is that he didn't land any punches that came even close to a knockout. There was this big build-up in the advertising campaigns and this huge expectation that he was going to drop some major bombshells, but the bombshells never arrived.

"People are not getting hyped up by anything he says anymore because they're just expecting a little bit of a damp squib."

Coram James said the level of U.S. interest and support would not have a huge impact on the success of Harry's goal to transform the press either way.

He said: "The U.S. audience doesn't matter given the stated aim. There are certain issues, particularly related to Harry and Meghan, where the U.S. audience maybe matters more than the U.K. audience because they've lost the U.K. audience, that's gone.

"His stated goal is to change the British media landscape forever and the U.S. audience will have absolutely no impact on that whatsoever, not even one percent. The only thing that will move the needle on that will be the U.K. audience."

That is its own challenge, however, as Harry is "deeply, deeply unpopular" in Britain, he said.

Prince Harry's War Against U.K. Press Is His 'Life's Work'

Prince Harry has been taking swipes at the media for decades, since at least his 21st birthday when he called out columnists in a TV interview.

In January 2023, he told ITV's Tom Bradby that reshaping the media landscape in Britain was to be his life's work.

"I left the country and for 12 months it was relentless," he said. "So again, one of the reasons why I am moving the mission of changing the media landscape within the U.K. from being personal to my life's work, a large part of that is down to the ongoing legal battles. Right?

"Specifically with phone hacking. That, I put in my claims over three years ago and I'm still waiting. So one might assume that a lot of this, from their perspective, is retaliation, and trying to intimidate me to settle, rather than take it to court and potentially may have to shut down."

Within the lawsuit, Harry made specific allegations against the Mirror Group but also launched a broader attack on the British media.

In a 55-page witness statement, he told the High Court: "I fully accept and agree with the fact that journalists and the media own the public square, in as much as, if you are in a position of responsibility and or are funded by the taxpayer, the media should have the power to be able to investigate anyone, anytime, for pretty much anything.

"The problem is that, over the last 15 to 20 years, there are now incredibly powerful media companies who masquerade as journalists and who have, quite literally, hijacked journalistic privileges for their own personal gain and agenda. It's an unbelievably dangerous place.

"I believe it doesn't matter whether you're a public figure at this point. Whoever you are, if you are of interest to the press at that time, wherever you are, whatever you're doing—if you're in private or if you're in public—you are a target. You become a victim of their system."

Reaction to Prince Harry's Lawsuit

Mirror Group Newspapers denied Harry's allegations and said there was no evidence their journalists had hacked Harry's phone. Lawyer Andrew Green said there was no call data relating to the duke, though Harry said he believed evidence had been destroyed.

At points, Harry appeared to struggle in court when told some of the information he argues came from phone hacking had already been printed in other newspapers before it found its way onto the pages of Mirror Group titles.

When asked to justify his allegations of phone hacking, he would also reply by suggesting it was a question for his own legal team or for the journalists who wrote the stories.

Lawyer Chris Daw, of Lincoln House Chambers, told GB News: "Everything I've heard so far suggests that this is more of an exercise in sort of psychological therapy for Prince Harry than a realistic prospect of successful legal action because there's so much speculation in that which he has put before the court.

"He would just say, 'Well, I got this from my lawyers.' That's not going to wash, and it's quite a risky thing to say because ultimately what passes between client and lawyer is, generally speaking, protected as legal privilege."

"I think the only way it gets back on track, and it's rather difficult to see how it can happen, is with something more substantial in terms of evidence," Daw added.

Manori Ravindran, the international editor at Variety, told True Royalty TV's The Royal Beat last week: "I think overall actually [Harry's] come away from this pretty well. He really didn't shrink at the questions.

"It could have been a very emotional affair given everything he's been through, everything that he's spoken about, his public campaign against the media in this country, which seems to be his legacy.

"This is the thing he wants to take on himself which nobody has really bothered to do in terms of senior royals."

Jack Royston is chief royal correspondent for Newsweek, based in London. You can find him on Twitter at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek's The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email royals@newsweek.com. We'd love to hear from you.