Earl Spencer’s Diana Memoir Faces Fresh Scrutiny After Piers Morgan Dispute and Calls to Withdraw the Book

The release of Earl Spencer’s new memoir about his sister, Princess Diana, has quickly developed into a wider dispute over historical accuracy, disputed memories and the responsibility that comes with publishing claims about one of the most scrutinized royal families in modern history.

Charles Spencer’s Swan Song: Diana, My Sister was published this week with a series of highly personal recollections about Diana, her marriage to the future King Charles III, the aftermath of her death and the treatment of her sons, Prince William and Prince Harry.

But one specific passage has already forced Spencer to issue a public apology.

The dispute concerns broadcaster Piers Morgan and photographs of Diana taken inside a gym in 1993. Spencer initially connected Morgan with the publication of those photographs, but the chronology was incorrect: Morgan did not join the Daily Mirror until 1995, two years after the images appeared in the Sunday Mirror. Spencer has acknowledged that his assumption was wrong.

That correction has now become one of the most closely watched parts of the book controversy.

And it has raised a larger question that goes beyond one factual mistake: how much confidence should readers place in the memoir's other disputed recollections?

Charles Spencer has published a new book (Image: Getty)

The mistake at the center of the controversy

One of the most significant problems emerged almost immediately after the book reached readers.

Spencer's memoir discussed the publication of photographs showing Diana exercising at a gym in 1993. His account associated Morgan with the newspaper operation responsible for publishing the photographs.

The timeline, however, did not match Morgan's employment history.

The photographs were published by the Sunday Mirror on November 7, 1993. Morgan did not become editor of the Daily Mirror until October 1995.

Following Morgan's challenge, Spencer acknowledged that the assumption was incorrect and apologised.

A statement issued on Spencer's behalf said that, as a historian, accuracy was important to him and that he therefore wanted to clarify the error.

The distinction matters because the book is presented not simply as a collection of opinions, but as Spencer's personal historical account of his sister and the events surrounding her life and death.

Why Piers Morgan is not accepting the apology as the end of the dispute

Morgan has acknowledged that Spencer apologised, but the broadcaster has said he still intends to pursue legal action.

Speaking to ITV News, Morgan argued that the correction did not resolve his concerns about the passage remaining in copies of the book already distributed. He said he had instructed lawyers to pursue the matter against Spencer and the publishers.

Morgan has also challenged another part of Spencer's recollection: the description of a telephone conversation between the two men concerning Diana's funeral.

Spencer maintains that Morgan was "surly and annoyed" when he was told that he was not welcome at the funeral.

Morgan strongly disputes that characterization.

He has said that he was respectful during the conversation and has pointed to his own contemporary records as support for his version of events.

That leaves readers with two separate questions.

The first is factual and can be checked against historical records: when did Morgan work for the Mirror?

The second concerns memory and interpretation: what was the tone of a private telephone conversation nearly three decades ago?

Those are very different kinds of evidence.

Spencer has stood by the broader memoir

Despite the controversy, Spencer has not withdrawn the central arguments of his memoir.

He has continued to defend his recollections of Diana and has said that he expected the book to generate controversy.

The memoir contains numerous claims about the final years of Diana's life, her relationship with the royal establishment and the aftermath of her death.

Among the most controversial are Spencer's recollections concerning King Charles III.

According to the book, Spencer says the then-Prince Charles made a deeply dismissive remark following Diana's death and describes him as appearing unusually elated.

Those are Spencer's recollections and interpretations of events. They are not independently established facts simply because they appear in a memoir.

That distinction has become increasingly important as the dispute surrounding the book has grown.

The Palace has challenged Spencer's account

The controversy surrounding the memoir extends well beyond Morgan.

Spencer's description of conversations with Charles and his account of the circumstances surrounding Diana's funeral have drawn a rare response from Buckingham Palace.

The palace has questioned the reliability of Spencer's recollections, pointing to the emotional circumstances surrounding Diana's death and funeral.

That response places the memoir within a much larger historical debate: whether personal memory, particularly memory shaped by grief and family conflict, should be treated as equivalent to independently documented history.

The issue is especially sensitive because Diana's death in 1997 remains one of the most extensively discussed events in modern British royal history.

The Diana photographs add another layer to the story

The Morgan dispute is particularly significant because the photographs themselves belong to one of the most controversial periods in Diana's relationship with the British press.

The publication of intrusive photographs of Diana exercising became part of the wider debate about paparazzi culture and the intense media attention surrounding the Princess of Wales.

Spencer has repeatedly argued that the press played a major role in the pressures Diana experienced.

Morgan, meanwhile, has rejected the suggestion that he was responsible for the 1993 publication in the manner described in the memoir.

The chronology is now clear: Morgan was not the Daily Mirror editor when the photographs were published. He joined the newspaper in 1995 and later served as its editor.

That factual correction is why the dispute has become more complicated than a simple disagreement over memories.

Calls for the book to be withdrawn

Morgan has called for the disputed material to be removed and has raised the possibility that copies of the first edition could need to be withdrawn.

He has also said that his lawyers have contacted the relevant parties.

The BBC reported that the publisher was expected to amend the disputed point in future editions, highlighting the practical consequences of the controversy.

The development has prompted debate over whether correcting a passage in later editions is sufficient when the original edition has already reached bookstores and readers.

That question could become increasingly important if the legal dispute continues.

Another royal commentator enters the debate

The controversy expanded further after veteran royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams publicly criticized the memoir and called for it to be pulped.

Fitzwilliams argued that Spencer had damaged Diana's memory through what he described as sensational claims and questioned whether readers should accept other disputed accounts in the book.

His comments represent his own assessment of the memoir rather than an established finding about Spencer's motives or the accuracy of every claim in the book.

Nevertheless, the criticism adds another layer to the growing debate surrounding Swan Song.

The argument is no longer limited to Spencer and Morgan. It has become a broader discussion about royal history, memoirs, historical accuracy, publishing standards and the reliability of personal recollections.

What the dispute could mean for the rest of the book

Perhaps the most consequential question is what happens to the memoir's other claims.

A factual error about one person's employment history does not automatically establish that every other claim in a book is incorrect.

At the same time, a correction of a verifiable historical detail naturally gives readers reason to examine other passages more closely.

That is especially true when the disputed passages involve conversations that took place privately and decades ago.

Spencer's account of his relationship with Diana is inevitably personal. He was her older brother, and his perspective comes from someone who experienced the events as a close family member rather than as an outside historian.

That makes his testimony potentially significant, but it also means readers must distinguish between documented evidence, personal recollection and interpretation.

The most controversial claims concern King Charles

The most explosive sections of Swan Song are not necessarily the passages involving Morgan.

Spencer's claims about King Charles have attracted considerable attention because they revisit one of the most painful periods in the history of the British royal family.

His account describes disagreements surrounding Diana's funeral and the decision for William and Harry to walk behind their mother's coffin.

Spencer has presented his recollections as part of his attempt to explain what he believed Diana's sons experienced at the time.

The palace has challenged aspects of his account.

That disagreement means the claims should be understood as competing accounts of historical events rather than as settled facts.

Why the timing matters

Diana's death occurred almost three decades ago, yet public interest in her life remains unusually strong.

Books, documentaries, interviews and television dramas continue to revisit her marriage, her relationship with the royal family, her treatment by the press and the experiences of her children.

Spencer's memoir arrives at a time when Prince William and Prince Harry have also spoken publicly about the effects of their mother's death and the media attention surrounding the family.

That makes every new account of Diana's final years potentially significant.

But it also creates a difficult environment in which old memories can collide with newly available records, conflicting testimony and modern interpretations.

A memoir caught between memory and history

The central issue surrounding Swan Song may ultimately be less about one disputed passage and more about the nature of historical memory itself.

Personal memoirs can preserve details that official records never capture.

A private conversation, a family argument or an emotional reaction may never appear in an official document.

But those same memories can be affected by time, grief, perspective and later events.

That is why historians typically compare personal recollections with contemporary records, correspondence, photographs, diaries and other independent evidence.

In Spencer's case, the Morgan dispute has provided a particularly clear example of why that process matters.

A specific chronology could be checked.

The chronology contradicted Spencer's original assumption.

He apologised.

Morgan says the remaining disputed descriptions of their conversation are also inaccurate.

Spencer maintains that his recollection of that conversation is correct.

The book's biggest question may now be its credibility

The controversy has created an unusual situation for a memoir that was intended to preserve Spencer's account of Diana.

Instead of simply directing attention toward Diana's life, the book is now generating a parallel debate about its own reliability.

That does not resolve the larger claims contained within its pages.

It does, however, give readers a reason to examine each major assertion carefully and consider what evidence exists beyond the author's recollection.

For a book dealing with one of the most documented families in the world, that distinction is particularly important.

Mr Fitzwilliam's message (Image: X)

What happens next?

The immediate dispute involves Morgan's threatened legal action, Spencer's apology and the possibility of changes to future editions.

But the wider debate is likely to continue.

Readers will continue to examine Spencer's claims about Diana, King Charles, the royal family's response to her death and the treatment of William and Harry.

Meanwhile, Morgan's challenge has introduced a concrete test of the memoir's historical accuracy.

One error has already been acknowledged.

Other disputed claims remain contested.

And that leaves Swan Song: Diana, My Sister facing a question that could become more important than any individual allegation:

How should the public weigh a deeply personal royal memoir when its memories, historical records and competing accounts do not always point in the same direction?

For a story involving Princess Diana, King Charles, Prince William, Prince Harry and one of the most closely examined periods in modern royal history, that question may keep the controversy alive long after the book's publication.