The Leveson Inquiry provided a fascinating, if voyeuristic, catharsis for all those appalled by the excesses of media intrusion into people's lives - most notably the phone-hacking scandals of celebrities and other members of the public. But the resulting press regulation has thrown up a lot of questions - and confusion - over who exactly is to be regulated.
Hypocrisy and hysteria has marked the reactions of whole sections of the press when faced with a challenge to their own power. But remember that it was precisely the abuse of this power that led to the phone hacking scandal, that was uncovered during the Leveson Inquiry, that was mobilised in attacking Leveson's conclusions and that, most recently, has resulted in cross-party agreement for a Royal Charter.
Facebook and twitter came at a pivotal time in history. The chicken or the egg theory can be applied here in asking: Did twitter and facebook help revolutions grow, or did they help track people involved in uprisings? (In both the case of the Arab uprisings and the Occupy movement.) I would say both.
If you stop and think for a moment, this whole thing isn't really about Kate Middleton. Sure, she's the focus of this round, but you're noticing it because she's ubiquitous enough that everyone feels they can give an opinion and because it involves talking about women's bodies and women's representations in the media.
The idea of the free press is a product of modern democratic systems, and one that such systems purportedly support and aspire to. According to Reporters Without Borders, a French-founded organisation campaigning for freedom of expression and information worldwide, almost half of the world's population is denied this liberty.
Talking with a group of former spies and Julian Assange about all the different ways to be eavesdropped on is a sure-fire way to lose any and all illusions about privacy. Fortunately for now, such aggressive surveillance need only be of concern to people who visibly and effectively speak truth to power.