Channel 4 news presenter Jon Snow was at the centre of a huge row today after praising the American website that revealed Prince Harry’s deployment in Afghanistan.

The British media and the Ministry of Defence had agreed to a voluntary news blackout for fear of increasing the risk to Harry’s life and to the other soldiers serving with him.

But Drudge, which first became famous after revealing Bill Clinton’s affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, ignored the deal and ran the story yesterday afternoon.

Snow, writing in his blog, then thanked the Report for breaking the "British media’s conspiracy of silence" about Harry serving in the front line in Helmand Province.

And he repeated the comments again on Channel 4 last night, sparking fury among viewers - several of whom pledged not to watch its news programme again.

The almost unprecedented media blackout had largely held bar an unnoticed report in Australian women’s magazine, New Idea, in January.

But it collapsed when Drudge went ahead and published its story yesterday afternoon, forcing the Ministry of Defence to issue an official confirmation.

Snow then praised the Report, a largely right-wing political gossip website, in the regular e-mail he sends out to subcribers and publishes online.

He declared: "I never thought I’d find myself saying thank God for Drudge.

"Editors have been sworn to secrecy over Prince Harry being sent to fight in Afghanistan …

"Drudge has blown their cover. One wonders whether viewers, readers and listeners will ever want to trust the media again?"

In a debate on the evening news, Snow asked: "Can you think of another country where this could ever happen other than in a totalitarian state?"

A British paper that did break the story and had not been party to the news black-out could have had "a real scoop", he said.

His stance set him against top brass in the army and in politics, who expressed their disappointment that the embargo had not been respected.

And viewers reacted with a storm of protest, branding him "shameful", "idiotic" and "disgraceful". Channel 4 later revealed that it had 91 phone complaints and watchdog Ofcom a further four.

Sue Smith wrote in an e-mail: "Tonight’s show talking about a ‘conspiracy of silence’ and the email from Jon … is so far beyond the pale I will never watch Channel 4 News again.

"By these standards you would have been notifying Hitler of all our secrets. Shameful. Utterly utterly shameful."

Another said: "Jon Snow, in one absolutely idiotic, thoughtless stupid statement, has just lost Channel 4 News one viewer."

Meanwhile, Caroline McNicholas declared: "Jon Snow’s petulant reporting of Prince Harry’s deployment to Afghanistan was television at its worst."

Alan Thomas described Snow’s comments as "absolutely disgraceful" and praised the British media for keeping quiet.

Relatives of soldiers currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan were also unequivocal in their condemnation of the veteran presenter.

Sharon Murphy said: "You have put lives at risk in Afghanistan, one of which is my husband. I hope you can live with the repercussions.

Karen Bojanowski added: "Are you insane? "Thank God for the Drudge Report"???? I am the mother of an American soldier deployed in Iraq.

"Were he famous or a high profile target like the prince, I would consider it an act of treason, lunacy, or fatal stupidity to publish his whereabouts.

"And what of the other fine men, serving with the prince? Are their lives so unimportant to you media scum that you would see them overrun and murdered so that you could print a few pictures of the prince?"

Others simply said that if Jon Snow had not agreed with the media blackout, he should have urged Channel 4 to run the story earlier instead of lambasting the British media after the event.

William Scott wrote: "Shame on you! Here you are, part of a TV station that connived at keeping this story quiet, and yet when it breaks you’ve not got the courage or integrity to face your own organisation with the questions you’re only too happy to ask, very condescendingly, of other people.

"Such nauseating hypocrisy. Almost enough to drive me back to the BBC - but not quite. Just do better next time please."

Mail Online readers also expressed their outrage, branding Snow an "idiot", "twit" and a "studio coward". Several called for him to resign.

Jeanette Franklin, from Dudley, wrote: "I take my hat off to the British media! Jon Snow should be made to eat his!"

Ian Turner, from Aberdeen, added: "Self opinionated, pumped up idiot, he should be sacked immediately!"

And Sandi, from Edinburgh, said: "Jon Snow is a left wing, tantrum throwing embarrassment to journalism."

Evan Jones, from Cardiff, wrote: "John Snow is a fool. I’ve always felt he was arrogant, highly opinionated and truculent. Snow should be booted out, he’s a disgrace.

There was no word from the presenter today on his blog, although an article on the site did discuss his controversial comments.

It said: "This story - potent mix of royalty, politics and the media - will go on.

"One newsroom voice even suggests that UK editors have collectively "nailed their colours to the mast", tacitly supporting the war by agreeing to the blackout."

A Channel 4 News spokeswoman said that, as part of ITN, it had backed the deal with the MoD but that it also stood by Snow despite his criticism of the embargo.

A spokeswoman said: "Of course we stand by Jon Snow as our presenter. ITN did agree with the media blackout. They did not agree that it was wrong.

"Jon Snow was not aware of the blackout in advance of the story breaking."

The broadcaster added: "The studio guests all broadly held the view that the media blackout was the right thing to do and so it was vital that Jon expressed clearly that there was an alternative view."

Controversial MP George Galloway, who was expelled from the Labour Party over comments he made while opposing the war in Iraq, was yesterday one of the few other voices to criticise the bargain struck with the MoD.

The Bethnal Green and Bow MP, speaking on BBC1’s Question Time, said that he did not like the British media, particularly the BBC, becoming "part of the war effort".

He added: "Prince Harry was saying on TV that he was engaging the enemy. I don’t know about you, but I have no enemies in Afghanistan."

When challenged by host David Dimbleby over whether the Taliban were the enemy, he replied: "The Taliban are not the enemy for me."

The Drudge Report has so far shown no signs of regret for its "world exclusive" but it too has received a flood of e-mails from readers criticising its decision to go public.

Practically every comment made on the story on its website today was critical, dubbing it "totally irresponsible", "disrespectful" and "disgusting".

Dianne1 wrote: "As somebody who has relatives and friends in Afghanistan, I’m disgusted that you and other media sources would release information that will affect the security of the troops there.

"Obviously there is a reason the British press did not report about Prince Harry. Al-Qaeda is interested in such a high-profile target, and consequently those who serve with Prince Harry are put in harm’s way."

Reader, John Boyle, did not mince his words, writing: "By breaking this news you have placed his and the lives of his colleagues in unnecessary danger.

"I hope the fleas of a thousand camels infest your a***holes."

And another wrote: "What a great shame you people just couldn’t leave alone. You could learn something important from this - but I doubt you will. Such stupidity. Yours, disgusted in the UK."

Yet more anger was directed at the Australian magazine New Idea, which originally broke the story back in January.

Its website was flooded with readers who called for a boycott on the magazine and branded its journalists "guttersnipes" and "brain-dead morons".

One e-mail summed up the reaction as: "New Idea? No bloody idea, more like."

Another reader wrote: "Disgraceful, typical of you useless non-thinking ‘chicklit’ journalists to let this news out and compromise Harry’s chance at being able to do his job.

"You should be ashamed of yourselves."

Further comments flooded in on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s news website.

Paul Hannah wrote: "I see no evidence of any care here, unless of course it is for their own circulation."

A spokesman for the magazine said today that it was unaware of the press embargo and would not knowingly have broken it.

He said: "We take these matters very seriously and would never knowingly break an embargo.

"We regret any issues the revelation of this story in America has caused today."

On its website, any reference to Harry’s deployment had been replaced with a biography of the young royal.

Source