Nazi Prince?
The Trouble with Harry’s Poor Costume Choice
Case Facts
Prince Harry, the 20-year-old son of Princess Diana and grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, attracted a plague of unflattering media attention when a photo of himself dressed as a Nazi soldier was released in the winter of 2005. The picture was taken at a friend’s costume party and featured the “Nazi Prince” holding a drink in one hand and a cigarette in the other.
As the photograph circulated the global media, the royal public relations department shifted gears from planning the fast-approaching 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz Nazi prisoners, which the queen planned to commemorate. This PR crisis was amplified by the royal family’s affiliation with this significantly solemn ceremony. The observance was intended to honor survivors of the holocaust that “exterminated more than 6 million Jews and ‘undesirables’ during World War II” (Cases in Public Relations, 204).
The day following the photo’s release, Prince Harry’s team released this brief apology: “I am very sorry if I have caused any offense. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize” (Cases, 204). London’s Jewish Chronicle editor, Ted Temco criticized the prince’s apology in his newspaper; Temco disapproved of Prince Harry’s implication that his mistake was centralized around his wardrobe, rather than his “utter lack of awareness of the context of the Holocaust and the war” (Cases, 204). In addition to this public criticism, several calls urging for more than the prince’s apology surfaced in the media and remained unanswered.
The royal family uninvited Prince Harry to the Auschwitz ceremonies. A royal official explained Prince Harry’s absence with this statement:
“It would be a distraction and a detraction from the importance of the occasion because it would become a different story in media terms… He recognizes he made a very bad mistake and he apologizes for that” (Cases, 204).
Public Relations Issue: Crisis Mismanagement
The image of the British Monarchy was jeopardized. Think Public Relations informs us that when we are assessing an issue as a conflict or not, it is important to ask, “Could this movement gain coverage and support, resulting in embarrassment?” The answer in this case is yes. Prince Harry made an embarrassing mistake. Although many mistakes made by young adults are expected and typical for this stage of life, as a royal, Prince Harry is obviously going to face more media and public scrutiny.
This crisis could have been anticipated if the prince’s public relations team was more proactive. If Prince Harry’s PR team incorporated environmental scanning and crisis planning into their agendas, they could have prevented the prince’s big mistake. If only they had been aware of the prince’s weekend plans or heard about his costume choice before he left for the party. Of course with our global 24-hour news cycle, the young prince’s every move is likely to be chronicled by the media. Therefore, his public relations crew should have excess crisis plans ready for the young prince. Young adults are mistake-prone; Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood would classify the 20-year old prince’s misbehavior as “typical,” as young adults are still developing crucial structures in their brains associated with decision-making. This fact, though not an excuse, allows a window for Prince Harry to initiate a dialogue with his public.
Unfortunately, Prince Harry’s strategic phase was also flawed. Though risk communication allowed for him to realize an apology was necessary, his conflict positioning was lackluster; Think describes this step as preparing for the worst outcome—facing “the court of public opinion” (Think, 50). Instead of facing his public or addressing the negative media surrounding his snafu, he missed the Auschwitz ceremonies. Public relations scholar Lisa Lyon tells us: “a good reputation is created and destroyed by everything an organization does, from the way it manages employees to the way it handles conflicts with outside constituents” (Think, 58). In this explanation, if the British Monarchy were the “organization” they demonstrated a muted, indirect “answer” to their public. We know that it is best to say something than nothing at all, and therefore the British Monarchy failed at their conflict management strategy. There were no further words from the prince about this issue, so the public is left with the image of the Nazi Prince, his two-sentence indirect apology and his absence from the Holocaust memorial.
Suggestions and Solutions
I believe that this situation could have been handled much better than it was. Crisis management was aborted halfway through its course; Think illustrates the conflict management life cycle: the proactive phase, the strategic phase, the reactive phase, and the recovery phase. As I previously mentioned, the proactive and strategic phases were both handled poorly, but the reactive and recovery phases were outright ignored.
The only positive action from Prince Harry’s public relations team was the prompt apology, even if the apology was subpar. Any apology is a step in the right direction, but the first suggestion I would make to the prince would be to apologize again. The Chronicle was not the only medium that criticized his mediocre apology. The Washington Post’s Foreign Service indicated that leaders of Britain’s two main political parties called on Prince Harry to “appear personally and apologize more fully,” and former military official Doug Henderson even “demanded” that the prince resign from Sandhurst, the military academy where the prince was soon expected. Henderson expressed his disappointment in an article: “After the revelations, I don’t think this young man is suitable for Sandhurst; If it was anyone else the application wouldn’t be considered” (Prince Harry’s Nazi Blunder). The Post also disparaged the young prince and his brother in an editorial citing Prince Harry’s “ever-expanding reputation for bad judgment.” This quote accurately sums up the tone of the article:
“William is two years older than his brother and supposedly better equipped in the brains and judgment department. But it apparently did not occur to him to tell his brother to lose the Nazi regalia.”
The Washington Post was certainly very opinionated in regard to this issue. The article was posted online from the US almost immediately after the picture of Prince Harry was released. This article, and articles like it indicate a public relations crisis.
After scanning the hostile environment, we could plan and express a second more sincere, thorough apology. After researching this topic thoroughly, I understood the prince was criticized for being insensitive—not for his wardrobe, so I would get him up to speed with Holocaust history and relevance, before he makes a public apology. I would even suggest that Prince Harry attend the memorial and say something thoughtful to address his most significant audience.
I would be sure to keep every media outlet covering the scandal updated with our statements in response to the public’s criticisms. Esteemed crisis manager Judy Smith gives some insight in Fast Company, a business trade periodical: “Some things can’t be fixed by an outside person; there has to be some honest discussion and owning your mistake. There’s always an opportunity with crisis. Just as it forces an individual to look inside himself.” As I mentioned earlier, this second apology requested by the public allows for a window of opportunity to tell Prince Harry’s story.
Growing up as a prince comes with an invasive, unavoidable spotlight. Every mistake made by a political family member is scrutinized by the whole world because the world unrealistically expects royal decorum from conception forward. Political Theory and the Evaluation of Political Conduct points out the difference between acting as a political leader and being a human citizen. The article speculates the differing realms of judgment as a citizen and as a leader. Both of these realms require separate thought processes, with political decision-making being the more complex, strategic process, requiring more energy to pursue. I would be sure to include this information as a pretense in our first written statement; as a young adult, decision-making abilities are significantly underdeveloped, but as a prince, the world will always expect more. In young adulthood, mistakes are commonplace, but with age and experience, more mistakes lie behind us.
The final stage of the conflict management life cycle is the recovery phase, in which we would focus on repairing Prince Harry’s image. I am sure the public would appreciate the prince’s extra effort in repairing his relationship with them; it seems this little snafu was just a blip on the young prince’s radar; six years later, in 2012, a poll ranked William as the “best royal ambassador” for the U.K., followed by Harry and Kate” (Heir Apparent). If this mistake did not cause Harry to lose his positive image, a more sincere apology and a campaign to win public forgiveness might have pushed Harry to the top of the polls.
Olivia Barton 