'Dim' Edward gives tabloids the last laugh

It took Andrew Neil, former national newspaper editor, television pundit and rector of St Andrews University, to sum up the latest fiasco involving the royal family: "You just couldn't make it up."

Months of preparation for the arrival of Prince William at university, and years of press stand-off, negotiated by St James's Palace to allow the young prince to grow up without the harassment endured by his mother, went up in smoke last week. And the culprit? William's uncle, the Earl of Wessex.

Days after William began life as an undergraduate, and the press politely retreated after a freshers' week photocall, one set of cameramen stayed on. Appeal after appeal to leave was ignored. Then came the astonishing revelation: the crew that was lurking about the ancient halls of St Andrews was from Ardent, the television company run by Prince Edward.

The Prince of Wales was said to be "incandescent" and furious phone calls went to and from St James's Palace. And all of it, every last juicy detail, was served up with trimmings, such as asterisked headlines ("You F***ing Idiot, Charles Tells Edward") in the tabloids. It was hugely entertaining for the readers, and a PR shambles for the royal family. It was made even worse yesterday with the revelation that the Countess of Wessex had also become embroiled, offering advice to beleaguered Ardent staff. How could they all have got it so wrong?

Since 1995, a code of practice has protected Prince William and his younger brother, Harry, from the long lens. That the six-year-old "gentlemen's agreement" between the press, the Press Complaints Commission and the royals should have been broken by Prince Edward defies belief.

The Ardent crew were told once on Monday – the day after William's arrival – and twice on Wednesday to leave St Andrews, but carried on filming. On Wednesday evening Prince Edward, aware of his brother's fury, telephoned his producer at St Andrews. But what happened? The crew carried on filming. Either Edward failed to tell them to stop, or his control over his staff is so negligible that they carried on despite him.

Some put Edward's ineptitude down to arrogance about his talent, though Ardent's record would have caused most producers to shut up shop. In 1993, Edward said Ardent would be among Britain's top dozen independent producers by 2000 and he would not rely on his royal connections.

Most of Ardent's non-royal programme ambitions have failed. Annie's Bar, a comedy about the House of Commons, was scrapped after one run. A series of Inspector Pitt dramas was discussed with ITV, but never commissioned. His company has a trickle of revenue and a mountain of debt, close to £2m.

But those who have worked with Ardent say there is another reason, other than the prince's arrogance, for its problems. Edward, they explain, is hard-working, but dim. "In the early days he would get into Ardent's offices in Charlotte Street at nine in the morning and work hard through to seven at night," says a former colleague. "He really took the work seriously and was extremely anxious to prove himself." Television commissioners wanted him for one thing – access to his relatives. "You would get him into a meeting in the hope that he might offer a programme on his mother learning to windsurf," says one, "but of course that never happened."

Gauche and unimpressive in meetings, Edward was constantly humiliated by a lack of commissions. Since then, things have got worse. The royal family has become less willing to grant Edward favours in order to save his career. The Queen gave him access to Windsor Castle to make a documentary about the effects of the fire there but since the scandal over his wife's use of her royal contacts for her PR business, such special treatment is no longer on offer. The events last week highlighted Edward's failure to realise that things have changed.

His team continued filming St Andrews, seemingly under the impression that he still had "special status", allowing him to break the rules which every other press and broadcasting outlet is supposed to abide by. His behaviour might also be explained by desperation. The crew was filming Ardent's The A-Z of Royalty for E! Entertainment in the US. This is Ardent's most vital project because the £180,000 commission (plus royalties) would help relieve its financial woes. It is not hard to imagine Edward's discomfort when he explains to E! – a cable channel keen on glitz – that he has no special access to Prince William.

It is Edward's further misfortune that Prince Charles regards his brother's television career with disdain. Perhaps his low view of Edward's job helps explain Charles's contribution to last week's catalogue of blunders. St James's Palace was quick to supply details of the unfolding story and proclaimed that: "To say we are disappointed is an understatement".

Articles in tabloid papers were liberally strewn with quotes from senior aides' briefing that "disappointed" was code for absolute rage. The Prince of Wales, it seems, was happy that his unseemly quarrel with his family should receive maximum tabloid attention.

His temper cannot have been calmed by the knowledge that Neil, his old adversary, was on television expressing his dismay, while appearing to be enjoying himself enormously. In 1992, Neil, who was then editor of The Sunday Times, infuriated Charles by serialising Andrew Morton's book on Diana. Piers Morgan, the editor of the Mirror, who has also had his battles with royalty, was on screen too, expressing "shock", although his face was suffused with pure glee. "Has your privacy been invaded by a member of the royal family?" screeched The Mirror on Friday morning. "Call our hotline."

The mockery hides a serious point: if the royal family's own members cannot restrain themselves when it comes to William's privacy, why should anyone else? The whole episode happened because Edward and Charles could not manage their quarrel in private or with dignity. They brought it on themselves

With Sophie Wessex now entering the fray, demanding that Ardent's crew, rather than Edward, take the blame, the controversy is likely to be exacerbated. A PR shambles indeed.