Piers Morgan has called in lawyers and demanded the destruction of copies of Earl Spencer's new book about Princess Diana after Spencer admitted one of its central claims about Morgan was untrue, a concession the broadcaster says does not go far enough.
The clash erupted on British television as both men took to rival morning programs to make their cases. Morgan appeared on Good Morning Britain to reject Spencer's apology for the error, while Spencer sat down on the program Lorraine to insist the book stands and that the backlash has not shaken him. The dueling appearances laid bare a widening rift between Diana's brother and the British establishment over what the 367-page memoir actually gets right, and what it fabricates.
At the center of the dispute is a passage in Spencer's book describing the aftermath of Princess Diana's death in 1997. Spencer wrote that newspaper editors, including Morgan, then editor of the Mirror, were invited to Diana's funeral, only to have those invitations withdrawn by the Queen's senior private secretary. In the book, Spencer described Morgan as the only editor who "sounded surly" and claimed he "snarled with annoyance before he hung up." Spencer went further, suggesting Morgan must have been feeling "guilt" over intrusive photographs of Diana published by Mirror Group in 1993, images described as "leotard photographs."
Morgan's objection is blunt: the entire account is wrong. He told Good Morning Britain that he was not present for the events Spencer attributed to him.
"I was nowhere near the place when they did this and it was a huge, huge story at the time. This is not a trifling mistake he's made, he's directly accused me of committing the most egregious invasion of royal privacy in history."
Spencer acknowledged the error about Morgan during his Lorraine interview and said a correction would appear in the book's second edition. But he framed the mistake as minor and took a swipe at Morgan in the process.
"Unlike some journalists that we know of, I'm very happy to acknowledge that I made a small error and I've apologised and it will be put right in the second edition, but that's it."
Morgan was not satisfied. He said he had engaged lawyers and demanded that every copy of the book containing the false claim be destroyed. The Sun reported Morgan's position on Good Morning Britain in direct terms:
"Our position is quite straightforward, every copy of the book that's sold with that lie in it is damaging."
Earl Spencer pushed back against the broader criticism that his book is a hit piece on the Royal Family. On Lorraine, he cast the memoir as a tribute from a loving brother.
"There's been all these headlines about criticisms I'm said to have made. This is a celebration from a brother's point of view."
He added: "As a brother I have every right to write about my sister and I can tell you what Diana would've liked, it's 350 pages of compliments, and she loved a compliment!" Asked whether other claims in the book might also be wrong, Spencer did not waver. "I stand by the book," he said.
But the book's most incendiary passages are not about Morgan. They are about King Charles. Spencer alleged that when Charles called to inform him of Diana's death, the then-Prince sounded "giddily elated like a lottery winner" and "strangely matter-of-fact, given the enormity of the disaster." Spencer further claimed Charles hissed, "We'll forget her soon enough" after Diana's 1997 death. He also alleged the late Queen Elizabeth reacted "tetchily" to the news of Diana's fatal car crash.
Buckingham Palace responded with what The Sun described as an "unprecedented" public statement. The Palace said "fraternal grief" had clouded the Earl's judgment, a pointed suggestion that Spencer's recollections are unreliable. The exact wording of the full statement has not been published, but its issuance alone signals how seriously the Crown is treating the allegations.
Spencer dismissed the Palace response on Lorraine, calling it "classic gaslighting." He said: "So what they do is 'maybe his mind's not right to remember these things.'" He then doubled down on the claim about Charles: "No one said the King didn't say that, because he did."
That is Spencer's version. The Palace has not directly confirmed or denied the specific quotes Spencer attributes to the King. What is clear is that the Crown took the unusual step of publicly questioning Spencer's credibility, and Spencer responded by accusing the institution of trying to discredit him rather than address the substance.
Morgan went further than defending his own reputation. On his Uncensored YouTube show, he claimed direct knowledge of the Royal Family's reaction to Spencer's book.
"I am told on good authority, they [King Charles and Prince William] are spitting blood."
He elaborated, saying the royals were angry "at the audacity of this to masquerade it as history when it is just a hatchet job specifically designed to make the British people hate King Charles." Morgan added that "the reality is they're not reacting the way Earl Spencer hoped they would."
On Good Morning Britain, Morgan framed the dispute in sharper terms: "He's telling an untruth to attack and diminish our king and I think it's reprehensible." He also said he knew "for an absolute fact" that the Royal Family was furious about what he called an attempt to destroy King Charles's reputation.
Morgan did not name his sources within the Royal Family. His claims about the royals' private reaction remain his own characterization, attributed to unnamed authority.
Spencer also addressed reports that Prince Harry had known about the memoir before its publication, or that the book was effectively written "by committee." He denied both claims on Lorraine, saying he discussed the book only with his wife while writing it and then informed Harry, Prince William, and his sisters at the same time he told the press.
He also offered a personal reflection about Harry's children, saying he had seen "the two little kids running around" and asking, "Can you imagine what a great grandmother Diana would have been?"
On the question of whether the book could have gone further, Spencer was direct: "If I wanted to write a hit piece on the Royal Family I could do that, that's not my job." He added: "It was impossible to give the full story of Diana's life without putting in certain things. This is not a threat at all because I'm not going to do it."
Spencer explained on Lorraine that the final line of his famous 1997 eulogy for Diana, that she would never be "extinguished from our minds", was a direct reaction to King Charles allegedly saying "she'll be forgotten soon enough." If true, it reframes one of the most memorable moments of Diana's funeral as a pointed rebuke of the man who is now King. If false, it is a fabrication woven into a historic public tribute.
That is the problem Morgan and the Palace are pressing. Spencer has already admitted to one factual error serious enough to require a correction in the next printing, an error that, in Morgan's words, accused him of "committing the most egregious invasion of royal privacy in history." Morgan's legal team is now pursuing the matter. The Palace has publicly questioned Spencer's judgment. And Spencer's defense amounts to: I got one thing wrong, I said sorry, and the rest stands.
Whether that defense holds depends on how many other claims in the 367-page book can withstand scrutiny. Spencer says he stands by every word beyond the Morgan error. Morgan says the admitted falsehood proves the book cannot be trusted. The Palace says grief has clouded Spencer's memory. And no one involved has offered independent corroboration for the most explosive allegation of all, that King Charles greeted the news of his ex-wife's death with something close to glee.
When a man admits he got one major fact wrong and then insists the rest of his book is beyond question, the reasonable response is not to take his word for it, it is to ask what else he missed.
