Even if you'd personally be unperturbed by a similar situation, the vast majority of humans would find it humiliating and invasive in the extreme.
Is a photo published in a disreputable magazine significantly worse than the information already out so far which already got people thinking about him sexting anyway combined with losing custody of ~70 billion dollars in the coming divorce? I'm not so sure. Their privacy was already thoroughly invaded before this latest development.
Yes, unequivocally. I suspect any PR person would agree. You can doubt information published by a disreputable source, but most people believe the images they see, even in this deep faked era.
Any photo you take with a connected device can be eventually obtained and published. I hope all the folks here are aware about that.
That Pecker and his ilk seem to think it is, is the reason they misjudged this situation so fatally.
But if it was "HOT NEW SCANDAL! You'll NEVER believe who's getting a divorce!!!! Cha-ching!" then I'm sure a lot more people would call it a scandal and be inclined to read about it. Clickbait-y titles have been a thing for a long time, and AMI's (as well as basically all other gossipy) magazines use them practically every issue to try and get you to buy it.