Father’s Day 2026 was supposed to be about heartfelt family tributes, proud papas, and matching England kits. Instead, ITV News managed to expose something far more telling than any royal photo op ever could: the media’s protection racket in action.
Because here’s the thing, ITV covered both Prince William’s birthday/Father’s Day tribute and Prince Harry’s Father’s Day post on the same day. Both stories were perfectly nice. Both featured adorable photos of dads with their kids. And both should have been simple, uncontroversial fluff pieces. But only one of them had its comments switched off.
And why is one brother getting the Prince Andrew treatment, meaning closed comments and careful protection, while the other gets thrown to the wolves?
Prince William’s Post
Kensington Palace shared a new photo of William in his Welsh Guards uniform with Princess Charlotte, and curiously, his sons were not in the picture. However, the photo was reportedly taken after Trooping the Colour. The caption, written by Kate and the children, read: “Happy birthday and Father’s Day to the best Papa in the World! We love you very much. C, G, C & L.“
ITV News reported positively on this, highlighting the family tributes and calling William a devoted dad. Their Facebook post about it received mixed reactions, some praise for William alongside some anti-monarchy or critical comments comparing him to Harry. But on X (formerly Twitter), something interesting happened.
ITV News posted a link to their article around midday with the caption: “Prince William called ‘best Papa in the world’ as family mark his 44th birthday.”
Replies? Zero. Because comments were disabled. Not a single public reply. Just silence and press protection.
Prince Harry’s Post
Meanwhile, Meghan Sussex shared a family photo on her Instagram of Harry kneeling and hugging Archie, in an England football top, and Lilibet with a toy giraffe. The caption: “They’re so lucky to have you. We all are. Happy Father’s Day to our one and only.”
ITV News covered this too, with a headline: “Harry beams and Archie wears England top in Meghan’s Father’s Day post.”
Their post on X went up later and, unlike William’s, the replies were wide open. The comment section quickly filled with 88 responses and counting, some supportive, many critical, and a number of users directly calling out ITV for the glaring inconsistency in moderation.
The Double Standard
ITV News posted about both brothers on Father’s Day, but the difference in comment moderation is impossible to ignore. William’s birthday post, an uncontroversial tribute from his family, had comments completely disabled, resulting in zero public replies. Harry’s Father’s Day post went up later and, unlike William’s, the comments were left wide open, quickly filling with 88 responses and counting, ranging from supportive to critical, with several users explicitly calling out ITV for the glaring inconsistency.
News outlets sometimes disable comments on royal stories to curb toxicity, but that explanation falls apart here. William’s post was tied to a birthday and an official family tribute, hardly controversial material. Yet ITV decided it needed protection. Meanwhile, Harry’s post was left exposed, inviting the usual suspects, the anti-Sussex brigade crowd, to have their say. One brother gets shielded from any dissent, while the other gets thrown to the wolves.
This isn’t just about two social media posts; it’s about a media establishment that has made its choice and isn’t even pretending to hide it anymore. The British press runs a protection racket for the royal family, acting as cheerleaders for William and Kate while acting as attack dogs for anyone who threatens their narrative. They’ll threaten to sue over a Tatler profile calling Kate “perilously thin” but sit silent when a global front page calls Meghan a bully. They’ll trade Harry stories to protect William, as royal commentator and anti-Sussex critic, Kinsey Schofield admitted: “The palace would swap out that story for a story about Harry… Harry has been a victim of this forever.“
Related Stories
Consider the Dan Wootton case: when he faced a High Court lawsuit over disturbing allegations, the BBC quietly disabled comments on its coverage, citing the need to avoid prejudicing an ongoing case. Yet when Wootton, under his editorial leadership at The Sun, published blood-splattered crime scene photos of Caroline Flack or called Meghan a “selfish grifter,” no one closed comments then. The press protects its own when it suits them, and throws everyone else to the wolves.
The public is finally starting to notice. One commenter put it perfectly: “Why have you disabled comments on this post and left that regarding his brother’s Father’s Day post open? Anyone would think that you have ulterior motives.”
Final Thoughts
So why did ITV treat William’s post as if it needed protection, while leaving Harry’s open to public pile-on? Because the message is pretty clear: one brother gets protected, the other gets thrown to the wolves. And the media expects us not to notice.
But we do notice, and we see the double standard, the protection racket and a media establishment that has made its choice and is no longer even pretending to be neutral.
British media run a protection racket for the royal family. ITV disabled comments on the Wales post but left comments open on the Sussex one. The message is clear: protect one family from criticism while inviting it for the other. The double standard is staggering. And the only question that remains is: how long will the public keep falling for it?
What do you think? Did ITV make a deliberate choice to protect William, or was this just a moderation error? And why is one brother getting the Prince Andrew treatment while the other gets left to the wolves? Let us know in the comments, assuming they’re open, of course.
Discover more from Feminegra
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Harry and Meghan told us this very thing in their documentary.