William and Kate BUSTED by the Associated Press!

Media outlets have sent notice to "Kill" this story put out by William and Kate, due to photo manipulation.

Ruh Ruh!

You've been BUSTED!

What am i missing? I cannot see where the photo was manipulated?

So what if it’s manipulated? Most photos are now.

Tempted to read the replies, but don't want to step into the cesspool that is X (formerly Twitter).

If AP, Reuters, and AFP all think it's fake then it probably is.

Yawn

Wow, their "perfect life" is really crumbling now.

Looks like the curtain is finally pulled back.

They're proven liars.

This is the new Kensington Palace theme.

They probably colored some gray hairs.

Watching NBC Nightly News and they opted not to show the photo as they cannot “verify the authenticity of the photo”.

Dumbest thread of the year?

NGL, this is very odd.

Does the AP actually issued notices titled “Kill Notification”? That seems like something that could easily be misconstrued.

[quote] This is big. Really big.

Get. A. Life.

As anyone with young kids knows...most photographers will take multiple shots and will mesh the best takes together to create the best photo. I don't give a shit about the royals but the media are making a mountain out of nothing.

Im started to think she is dying from some incurable cancer. Rich people can still die young from non trauma accident or murders.

This is a zillion times worse than lying about being suicidal and in-laws being racist! Much, much worse.

R14 if the Palace issues a photo that NBC Nightly News won't show because they can't “verify the authenticity of the photo”, well, that actually is pretty big news.

R15 You bitches are so full of shit. Mesh for the best shot. Stop that lying. They choose the best photo and manipulate that one if necessary. It is amazing the lengths people on DL go, to cape for William and Kate just to spite the Markles. It’s so annoying. Be real. This is a fkin family portrait. It looks to have been photoshopped for some unknown reason. But don’t lie about common practices.

R18, what’s the conspiracy theory? What illegal thing are they doing? Come on, Alex Jones, tell us Kate is one of the Lizard People. Who gives a shit?

R19 I take you don't have kids?

R17 when did she ever say they were racist. That bitch be lying but there are some truths to everything. They were concerned about how dark the baby would be. What is that. It’s not hardcore racism but it’s definitely prejudice.

R21 you are an idiot or a liar. I can’t decide. I think just the latter.

It’s pretty rare that major news organizations do this.

Why does anyone care? If she’s dying, she’ll die. It’s not like they’re getting anything by lying. They’re not pulling a financial scam. Do people think she’s already dead? It makes no difference other than their wanting to keep it private, which is their right. They’re not elected officials.

Personally, I believe the eating disorder rumour.

R13 It does. I will agree on that.

R26, so what? What does that have to do with a photo?

Are you saying she’s in rehab for eating disorders and didn’t have surgery?

This is such frau thread/story.

They did some bad photoshopping of the kids and the background. But it's unhelpful.

Klan Grannies are FREAKING OUT over their Queen.

LIES! LIES! LIES~~~

Will they off themselves now?

R24 That’s because the photo is a fkin fake. If it were the Markles we would all agreedand laugh and read the cunts for filth. But it’s THEM so cunts on DL want to act brand new. Actually not so brand new. Pretty typical all these cunts would be caping. God knows DL loves the royals. Hell I love em too but will always call a spade a spade.

R29 I think that poster is saying she had a stroke or a life altering incident from said eating disorder.

[qquote]what’s the conspiracy theory? What illegal thing are they doing? Come on, Alex Jones, tell us Kate is one of the Lizard People. Who gives a shit?

You are tiresome.

The Wales' are finished.

No more credibility whatsoever.

No manipulation here

R25 They’re not elected officials.

Bahahahaha. I hate when people play thick. They are public figures. Then stop being royals then. Of course they aren’t elected but their profession, how they make a living, is germane to the public because they chose to partake and live as the royal family, as well as argue for its legitimacy. If you don’t know many people, and not just here in the states, have argued why does it even need to still exist. You tried it.

Are anorexics prone to strokes?

It is not a profession. They do not earn a living. They do not argue for its legitimacy. You're a fool.

R39 yes the low blood sugar can cause one. I suffer from male bulimia actually and had what doctors call a pre-stroke.

Jeez, a slightly edited photo on Instagram. So what? It was a photo for Instagram, not for the press.

Just chill, OP. Beautifying pictures is perfectly normal. You do it with your dick pic on Grindr (big, really big), they change flannel in their pictures. Both is probably a good idea anyway.

I honestly don't see the big deal here.

Are the Klan Grannies in sackcloth and ashes, over their FRAUD of a Queen?

She has forsaken them!!!

Bwahahahahaha.

R44 How many times are you going to say that?

If anything has been doctored it's the repro of the "issue" with Charlotte's sweater cuff and skirt. In the first image I saw on DM there was no tartan in that gap it was Kate's jacket cuff.

R40 You are tiresome. You are either choosing to be dumb or actually are. Everything they do including public speaking, events, ritualistic ceremonies are tied to them being royals and Prince William in succession to be King. They also are partially funded by the Sovereign Grant. I know a little about British culture.

[quote] Are the Klan Grannies in sackcloth and ashes, over their FRAUD of a Queen?

I still don't know what klan grannies are.

Normally this would not be a big deal, even for a public figure. But we’re talking about someone whose health status has been called into question. If this photo was meant to ease those concerns, it’s unethical for news organizations to present it as authentic, hence why they’re pulling it.

[quote]Does the AP actually issued notices titled “Kill Notification”? That seems like something that could easily be misconstrued.

Misconstrued how? Will people think the AP is instructing them to commit murder?

Nobody sees that stuff besides wire editors anyway.

R48, only Geeg is more tiresome than you. Thank God for the block and fuck off, loser. Get some meds.

Perhaps the eldest son has limp wrists and they covered that up. Lawd knows he is smiling, having the time of his life while smelling the best cookies he has ever smelled.

R52 Bye. God bless. I don’t deal with sensitive or neurotic hoes online.

And just for the record it is not me making these Klan granny comments on this thread. Yall are tiresome but haven’t done or said anything to warrant klan grannny.

Do the royal spawn have all their fingers?. Are they missing ears?. Does Willy have hair.? Or is it because Katies head is clearly from 2022?

They really shot themselves in the foot by trying to go for the perfect photo. Now people are speculating about Kate even more. I suspect a new photo will be released in the coming days.

R51 I think what that person means is that AP is a breaking news organization often reporting on someone dying or traumatic deaths. I admittedly understood what he was saying. I am fairly knowledgeable on journalistic practices and too am surprised about the phrasing. I am about to actually google to see if it’s fairly common.

R48, if you know anything about British culture then you will know the we don't give a shit.

Apparently the problem is Charlotte's skirt. Big deal.

[quote]if you know anything about British culture then you will know the we don't give a shit.

The way you are hovering over these threads leads one to believe you do.

BRF are lying POS. The Rota serves it up to you Klan Grans piping hot . You continue to scarf it down . Bon Appetite Tiny

R28 - did you take a wrong turn to DL? Pointless bitchery. It’s why we’re here. If we want to speculate she has an eating disorder, it’s our Muriel given right.

R60 explain Louis hand. Did he have a finger amputated?

Shouldn’t EVERY picture of the Kardashians be withdrawn? They are all fake.

R59 Hilarious you don't give a shit but you've posted five times on this thread already😂

R61, we don't give a shit about your criticisms. It's fun to tell you that, though, when you're dribbling nonsense.

We don't give a shit what you think and we like William and Kate.

R65 Dolt. The Kardashians are not funded by American taxpayers.

[quote] if you know anything about British culture then you will know the we don't give a shit

But the media does.

If they know that you're lying to them, they will start to scrutinize everything you do and say - past, present, and future.

Their credibility will always come into question from now on.

What does that have to do with AFP, r68? Kate isn't funded by British taxpayers, by the way.

R67 - George?

R67 Cultists gotta cult.

No, r69, their credibility won't come into question, expect perhaps by irrelevant people online like you. William will succeed Charles as king and George will succeed William as king and George's eldest will succeed him as monarch and so on and so forth, whether you like that or not.

My god, who knew there were so many Chicken Little conspiracy theorists?

Also, r69, why do you care so much? These people have absolutely nothing to do with you, yet you get worked to into a pompous, bombastic rage about them. Is your life so empty?

Kate isn't funded by British taxpayers, by the way.

She works at the pizzeria😂

Poor, delusional Klan Granny R73.

Defending their fraudulent King and Queen, no matter how many of their lies are exposed.

How embarrassing for you.

Considering that Kate is really the glue that keeps EVERYTHING together, I understand OP's concern. I mean prime ministers can be replaced. But if the ceremonial head of state's son's wife withdraws from the public eye for a few weeks it can only mean that the UK is doomed.

Q : Who knew there were so many Chicken Little conspiracy theorists?

A : Anyone who's looked at hundreds of you Royalass Chicken Shite Meghan Markle Threads

Once again, all of this could have been avoided with a simple, "The Princess of Wales had GI surgery and developed sepsis in hospital. She is currently recovering. The Palace thanks you for your well wishes and prayers."

No one would have questioned a thing. And even if she didn't have sepsis, no one could prove it or disprove it. She's the most popular royal, treat her as such.

Mrs. Betty Bowers cracked the case wide open.

William and Kate aren't King and Queen yet, r77, but they will be one day.

What about all Harry’s doctored hair? He's almost as bald as his brother, yet many photos don't show it whereas some less doctored ones taken from other angles do. And, yes, it is relevant to bring him up because only the Harkles' stan uses the dumb phrase "klan grannies".

The only "doctored" thing in the pic of Kate and her kids is a bit of Charlotte's skirt. So what?

r41 "had what doctors call a pre-stroke"

I'm going to guess this was multiple times, and had included full-on strokes.

Tragic that the threads on DL that have the most posts are about this irrelevant obsolete crime family and all the culty freaks (mostly Muricans) who are obsessed with them. Pathetic loons.

[quote]My god, who knew there were so many Chicken Little conspiracy theorists?

Would that include the AP, Reuters and NBC?

News agencies annoyed that the royals won't tell people what's going on?

[quote] News agencies annoyed that the royals won't tell people what's going on?

And rightly so.

Especially when William and Kate keep lying, and lying, and lying.

They're total FRAUDS.

If it were a single part of the picture, it might be fine.

But, there are multiple aspects of the image which combined suggests the entire picture is a fake - or at least Kate is not actually in the picture. If you look at the part of the picture where Louis' leg is and the wonky step in the background, it's what would happen if you superimposed him into the picture. Why would you need to adjust Louis' leg if the picture were as taken?

I admit I'm showing my ignorance here, but surely these agencies receive doctored/airbrushed photos from celebrities (including the BRF) all the time? I've never heard of them refusing to circulate one before. Why this one specifically?

R88 There are people saying that it can be common for different pics of kids to be mashed together so that all of the kids are smiling because often you can't get them to do that at the same time. It's still fake as fuck though.

Holy shit…I just got a New York Times update about this story, filed by their London correspondent. All jokes aside, this is a massive fail by Kensington Palace. What the fuck is going on over there?

R89, that’s what seems so questionable. What’s the problem? Is William going to be charged with “spreading false cheer and undue optimism?”

[quote]I think what that person means is that AP is a breaking news organization often reporting on someone dying or traumatic deaths.

People reading the news wires know it means to kill a story.

When there's a sudden death, they'll send out one sentence titled "AP NEWSBREAK" or something like that* saying "LAPD reports former Laker Kobe Bryant has died age whatever." Then subsequent stories will say "Kobe Bryant 1st Ld-Writethru" with more detail.

Source: I've worked at newspapers since the '90s.

*I have a migraine and am on so many drugs I can't remember the exact wording. But tbh these emergency newsbreaks are not common.

R89, it is entirely due to Kate’s status. If she weren’t sick and they released this, people might chuckle at the photoshop, but that’s about it. The fact is that this photo has been interpreted to be—for lack of a better phrase—proof of life due to all the controversy surrounding her illness. And the fact that it’s been doctored makes it unreliable for that purpose. Hence the pullback from the news associations. This isn’t a fluff celebrity, this is a member of the ruling family and the eventual queen. It’s a “news” photo as opposed to a feature of celebrity photo.

Really, it’s just an Instagram pic, but they should have taken greater care. News organizations

R89 Kit I think you are mistaken. You are thinking of People magazine, or Us weekly. AP is a respectable news source and the most prominent in reporting “breaking news”. It’s not the same as some from flavor of the month celeb selling fake pics to a major magazine. And even Time wouldn’t publish fakes.

R89: I spent some time in a newsroom. When it comes to news photos (not editorial photos in fashion magazines, but actual news photos), they can be photoshopped to sharpen the image and correct colors, but they cannot be manipulated to remove subject imperfections or to imply something happened that didn’t.

[quote] Holy shit…I just got a New York Times update about this story, filed by their London correspondent. All jokes aside, this is a massive fail by Kensington Palace. What the fuck is going on over there?

This ball is going to keep rolling, and rolling, and rolling.

And it's going to get bigger, and bigger, and BIGGER.

They won't be able to do any damage control.

I LOVE IT!!!

r92 - the issue is that the point of the pic, as another DLer noted, was to provide proof of life (or at least health) for Kate.

If you were paying a randsome, would you accept a doctored picture?

They're trying to convey that she's alive and healthy. A doctored picture doesn't instill confidence.

I honestly don't understand what's the big deal about this photo? What's been photoshopped and why are people so up in arms? Also, wasn't Kate seen out and about with her mom last week?

This should prove to William that his grandmother's mantra of "Never complain. Never explain." was the right road.

They should have held the line and not bothered with any photos of Catherine at all until she returned (as promised) to schedule royal appearances. (The photo of Kate & her mother in the car was a pap photo - not authorized.)

The conspiracy loons have taken over the story, so fuck that whole crazy bunch of loonies.

Any further statement on Kate's progress should just be the same as previous statements. They expect she'll be back after Easter.

R97, unless Kate is really dead or they’ve been lying about her health, they’ll move past this. If this was just a doctored image because the kids wouldn’t sit still, then it will pass. It just can’t be used as proof that Kate is ok (whatever that means). Of course, if there’s something more going on with Kate, her health, her marriage or whatever, that necessitated this doctored photo, that’s a different story. There will be repercussions from that.

I wonder if there’s someone leading their press that’s inexperienced.

[quote]They won't be able to do any damage control.

So what? They're still the Waleses. William's still the heir. Do you think a photo will change that?

Let the press grumble. The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.

R99 are you being purposely obtuse?

READ R98.

Honestly, this could’ve been avoided by cropping the photo…it included way too much of the subjects’ bodies for no reason.

Even the BBC has been forced to cover the story.

[quote]This should prove to William that his grandmother's mantra of "Never complain. Never explain." was the right road.

That worked for a beloved old lady. The rest of the family don't have the luxury of being a beloved old lady. It's a new world for this family and they have to adapt their PR strategy.

Fuck right on off R103, I didn't see R98.

There’s no “controversy” about Catherine’s health. She doesn’t owe us her medical records. And nothing turns on her being “alive and healthy.” If William wants to keep her preserved corpse in the basement, that’s his choice. It wouldn’t be the worst thing a royal has done.

Thank you to those who answered my question. What a strange gaffe from the royals' PR team.

Kate is not dead or dying. There would be no purpose in covering those things up. When Diana died so suddenly no one covered anything up. But conspiracy theories never die. They just get more and more fabulous.

People like R99 and others whose love of the Royals cloud their judgment, need to get one simple fact through their thick skulls:

The British Royal Family NEEDS the press. Prince William would be happy to see every journalist flayed alive after what happened to his mother, but in adulthood he recognized they have to play ball or the press will simply make up facts or hound his family to death.

Kate helped foster a peaceful coexistence by releasing self-snapped photos to the press on special occasions, but their blatant amateurishness came through loud and clear (poor composition, inconsistent lighting). William has now put the press on guard and they’ll be less likely to be satisfied with photos released by KP.

[quote] It's a new world for this family and they have to adapt their PR strategy.

Charles had the right strategy, but know-it-all William decided to do it his own way.

Just look at how Charles handled his cancer diagnosis.

He put out an honest statement of THE TRUTH.

After that, people just gave him his privacy.

William and Kate were secretive and shady from the very beginning, and compounded that with more secrecy, and then LIES.

This is a tale of two press teams.

Charles' team handled his story correctly. ' William and Kate fucked their story up majorly.

William is the loser here.

[quote] If William wants to keep her preserved corpse in the basement, that’s his choice.

Better that than the dining room table, like Evita:

[quote] The body was exhumed and taken to Juan Perón’s home in Spain, where he kept it on the dining room table. His new wife Isabel diligently combed Eva’s hair daily, and Juan even encouraged her to lie beside Eva, in the hope that she might absorb some of the charismatic goddess’s magic.

R100 or since it’s the 2024 and people are less deferential he should fallow the current king’s model of honesty and transparency. Charles said what’s going on, showed multiple photos of himself, had his lazy wife do multiple hospital visits in front of the press (William could only muster one), and has been consistent.

Charles’ model simply works. In the social media era, Liz’s process will lead to more gossip and speculation. Though, Liz never locked herself away from the public.

Anyone else a total cynic and thinking that they may actually be enjoying all of this speculation and fevered attention on them? Better than fading into obscurity.

[quote]r25 If Kate’s dying, she’ll die. It’s not like they’re getting anything by lying.

She’s still getting publicly funded paychecks.

R115 Technically she personally isn't. Her husband is the one with the money.

R109 It’s hard to cover up a traumatic death caused by car accident with the vehicle going 100 miles in a tunnel. Something smells funny. No one actually thinks she is dead. These extreme retorts are used to deflect. There are countless reasons why this fake photo would be published. Phoniness never wins. They tried it and so did you.

[quote]r49 I still don't know what klan grannies are.

Old racists.

R114 naw, William has never seemed to enjoy a single second of the Royal spotlight nor does he seem like the type to handle criticism. Remember the articles from even favorable Royal Rota reporters about his incandescent rage issues.

Kate is obsessed with the perfect image of herself so I’m sure those two are not happy with their team right now.

R118 old gay racist. Let’s get it right now.

LOCK THEM UP! LOCK THEM UP!

What do conspiracy theories think is really going on with her?

R119 If that's so, whoever does their photoshopping does need to be fired. Likely it was the same person who did their Christmas card which left out Louis's MIDDLE FINGER and also messed up his legs.

This is a manufactured scandal. The image was posted to social media. All such photos are presumed "manipulated." I disagree it was meant to be "proof of life." It was a Mother's Day message from the second highest-ranking female royal in the UK. No doubt she is much more ill than she's willing to admit, but that is her prerogative. We did not know how badly off Elizabeth was until the day she died.

R122 one theory is that they are separated. William insisted that he took today’s released photo this week. News agencies and AP refuse to accept it. Now LP is once again stuff in a cornier.

Last week’s TMZ shot of Kate was supposed to be of her during a school drop off. A few days later a KP spokesperson said that William was doing all school runs.

So if, those two were separated while LTE recovers the weird PR actions by the palace would make sense. I don’t know if I believe that theory, but I’ve lived through one PoW leave an heir already in my life.

Kp* corner*

Hopefully this causes Fleet Street to revive the 'Lazy William' stories. Workshy fucker barely does anything, even by royal standards.

[quote]Last week’s TMZ shot of Kate was supposed to be of her during a school drop off. A few days later a KP spokesperson said that William was doing all school runs.

TMZ said nothing of the kind. It said she was photographed riding in a vehicle with her mother. Full stop. This kind of fit my theory bullshit is why the in internet is unreliable when it comes to news.

I don't understand the context of the photo. Was it supposed to be a new one taken after her surgery? Or just a file photo used for the Mother's day greetings. Either way, it's been doctored and to what extent and why, they might have to do some explaining.

Looks like the Queen was the only thing holding that place together.

First of all, anything that comes out of KP is "official." And So what if the photo isn't a fresh, new picture. We have no idea of the circumstances of 99% of the pictures they release over the years. It is only because Catherine has withdrawn from public life to recuperate from an undisclosed illness that so much controversy has been generated. It is bullshit. If it is legitimately from the palace it must have been the B team that prepared it for release to celebrate Mother's Day.

This is a crisis situation, R131.

[quote] So if, those two were separated while LTE

LTE?

[quote] If you were paying a randsome, would you accept a doctored picture?

Oh, dear. It's RANSOM.

The face on Kate, alone, looks like something from a few years ago.

Happy Mother's Day!

Lying BITCH!

[quote] This is a manufactured scandal. The image was posted to social media. All such photos are presumed "manipulated."

UNTIL they ask media outlets to run the photo for publicity purposes.

Which is what Palace Officials did.

And then it becomes an ACTUAL scandal.

MORON.

Her hair was too different. How stupid they were.

I thought the hair was smart. An attempt to shift to more realistic hair going forward.

But not having Kate wear her rings was odd. And the amateurish editing is crazy.

My theory is that Kate is being fanatical about her privacy and insisted that she and William do the photo without any help or input. And she didn’t understand the rules for photos distributed to news agencies.

R-41,so sorry and thank you for sharing,do did not know.

The story is now front page news at the NYTimes.

This is so delicious!!

Sorry R-140,was on the phone too and walking the dog ,he was on the phone too!

R143 Hey, you should leave off the - so that it gets linked. So instead of R-143 it's R143.

IIf you lose a lot of weight, your rings can fall off.

I think the ring thing is only a flag if she normally wears a wedding band in her casual time. Unlikely that she would wear that huge cocktail engagement ring for sure. Anyone know?

I don't think the no-rings thing means anything. These 2 are always trying to seem down-to-earth. Too much so, actually.

I think her face in the photo looks way healthier than she looked about 6 months to a year ago. IMO, obviously fake.

The Wash Post has pulled it as well.

Let's see how the Prince and Princess of Fails deal with the blowback from this fiasco.

Not the “Royal Source” being so publicly outed by all the news agencies.

“Now remember the source of this photo, we were told by Kensington Palace, was Prince William himself.”

In the photograph, the royal children are positioned so as to hide their mother’s colostomy bag.

Nothing in that photo was recent OR real, R151.

The whole thing was a fraud.

The photographer was Prince William. You think he photoshopped it and sent it to Reuters himself? Really?

[quote] The photographer was Prince William. You think he photoshopped it and sent it to Reuters himself? Really?

Basically, yes.

Either that, or it was sent by Kensington Palace cronies, making up fake stories and photos, as they usually do.

If it was them, it's because William wasn't actually near Kate because they're getting a divorce.

In any case, the photo was a fake.

And there are only two sources who could have doctored the photo - William or his Lackeys.

I saw this on Nightly News tonight—they declined to show the photo in question because of concerns it was manipulated.

Who TF is on Buckingham Palace's PR team? Is it some twink and a hamster in a wheel?

The thing that arouses controversy is that Kate is brimming with youth and vigor in that photo. I mean, she looks incredible. If she was in that good shape, why not make a public appearance?

Why is no one talking about what is in that window???

OP has William and Kate Derangement Syndrome.

Lol R157.

Is that Louie's school drawing of "Aunt Meghan?"

The big sweater and darkening of the photo around her midsection is giving colostomy bag.

It's me, R157. Kate and I have... grown close... during her recuperation. AND I WILL MAKE HER WELL, DAMMIT!

I think her eyes look a little weak in that photo, which would imply healing from surgery.

This seems like such a non-story

To the loon shrieking "klan grannies", Ginger & Pecan Tan will never be anything but what they are right now: Failed reality tv stars.

[quote] Kate is brimming with youth and vigor in that photo

Exactly. She looks better than she has in a long time. It's ridiculous.

Time off to recuperate often leads to one looking healthier than when they are run ragged dealing with constant pain.

William and Kate need to just go into seclusion, never to be heard from again.

The internet is going to be so disappointed when she turns up looking normal in a month or so and they never mention why she was missing. That said they could probably do with hiring a better photo editing guy given this is I think the 3rd or 4th time its become an issue for the royal family.

[quote]She looks better than she has in a long time. It's ridiculous.

Erm, no she doesn't? She looks a decade older, especially around he eyes. Whatever she had quite obviously knocked some life out of her.

[quote]Kate is brimming with youth and vigor in that photo

Something a blind person would say.

What the hell is a pre-stroke? Is that like a mini stroke?

[quote] What the hell is a pre-stroke?

It's when you get all your porn videos ready and your handi-wipes for clean up, before you jerk off.

Pre stroke could be like a TIA.

Her thighs look frighteningly skeletal in the photo. I think they got the kids to pose with her corpse and then photoshopped a head from a different photo where she wasn’t quite as dead.

Britain's local governments are so broke that they literally cannot keep the lights on in libraries and care homes.

Britain's economic inequality has grown so bleak that they're now using a "misery index" to track the number of suicides connected to systemic poverty.

But sure, this family of unemployed millionaire fuckwits is worthy of everyone's close scrutiny and panic.

[quote]r148 The Wash Post has pulled it as well.

People are refusing to trumpet their [italic]lies.

Consider the source.

I always think about threads about royals, oh this looks interesting, but I forget about the nut jobs who post in these threads.

It would be the worst PR gaffe in history if they separated right when Kate went into or came out of the hospital, especially if she was recovering for several months after.

Unless the "recovery" is just a cover for hiding from public view immediately after separating, it makes no sense.

If she insisted on separating at this time, she may as well scream "I HATE HIM" from the rooftop and do a BBC interview talking about all his indiscretions and go full Diana on him.

Like this person ⬆️

Kate has a colostomy.

Kate is dying.

Kate has a colostomy AND is dying.

Kate has a colostomy, is dying, has an eating disorder and is getting divorced!! And she wears a wig from chemo! And she used a surrogate of all her pregnancies!!

One more post and you’re a nut job, too.

Everyone looks strange in the photo.

Are they replicants?

If so, where are the REAL ones?

Charlotte's hopes of becoming Queen are fading.....

Poor Kate.

British media are still reproducing the photo but with the bottom part cropped out. Therefore, it's a genuine photo of Kate and her three kids with some clumsy editing around Charlotte's skirt. It's ok Americans, no need to get hysterical.

The sheer MARY overdrive of this thread!!

Why don’t you leave the poor woman the fuck alone? What a bunch of jackals.

[quote] Why don’t you leave the poor woman the fuck alone? What a bunch of jackals.

Do you feel the same way about the "jackals" who relentlessly and viciously attack Meghan Markle?

Somehow, I think that you don't.

In fact, you probably cheer them on.

If that picture is current, she looks fantastic. I’m thinking brow lift, eye lift and surgical grade microdermabrasion.

Take a deep breath girls, and consider whether this affects your life or sanity in any way. If it does, you need professional help.

R189. When was anything similar done to Markle?

Kate might be in a coma or is dying due to a domestic violence incident occurred between Christmas and NYE.

R192,

There was a crazed discussion in the Daily Heil’s online forum about Meghan’s pregnancy. Nutcases arguing over whether she was actually pregnant, and poring over photos of her bump to find proof she was lying.

Yeah, crazy conspiracy theory, r194. I think what gave rise to it, however, are some photos taken from odd angles when Meghan was pregnant. For example, when Harry and Meghan visited Wigan in January 2019 and she was pregnant with Archie. In the photo linked here, they were just starting their visit and Meghan has a big pregnancy bump.

At first glance Kate looks happy and healthy, but she has rheumy eyes.

In this photo, following on from the photo linked at r196, at the end of the visit Meghan's stomach area looks quite flat. It could just be the angle the photo was taken from though.

It's interesting that this happened not long after the racism accusations dropped against her. It wouldn't surprise me if that pushed her over the edge mentally. Or put major stress on her marriage. The fact that she is gagged from speaking out and defending herself is probably not healthy. Her whole life situation is probably not good for a person's mental health. Given her brother's severe depression she may be genetically more vulnerable.

The conspiracy theorists think this photo from the January 2019 event shows a slipped "moonbump", but it could just be the camera angle or the folds of the dress. It's all silly.

She recently had major surgery, r196, of course she isn't 100% fit. She should be allowed to get better in peace.

I have it from a confidential palace source that Kate was abducted by aliens during her surgery. She was later returned, but now she has 3 navels and a chartreuse arm protruding from her back.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

^ Called this at R139. Smart for her to own up right away.

[quote]She should be allowed to get better in peace.

Well, she IS getting better in obscene luxury.

I heart R187. Sheer Mary Overdrive needs to be a thing on here.

I hate the age we live in. This is absurd. The nonsense that's spewing out transcends gossip. So much isn't even intelligent, it's so illogical, inconceivable, embarrassingly stretched to fit a bias. I've got no time for Markle at all but disputing her pregnancy was ridiculous. The same with whatever is happening now.

If we're not careful, in a few more decades we're going to gut everything and be left with nothing but a crazy, angry, semi-anarchic world where you can't trust or believe anything, where there can be no general consensus, let alone majority agreement. I hate the weirdness of where we are, that the crazies and the stupid aren't just confined to their own little worlds any longer. We may be in danger, gurls. I'm honestly starting to wonder if this is it. We're fucked.

Nah. This doesn’t quiet this mess at all. Who even knows at this point if it’s her releasing that information.

[quote]This is big. Really big.

Well, it's put OP into hysterics. The rest of the world doesn't give a shit.

[quote]IIf you lose a lot of weight, your rings can fall off.

A foreign concept to the FAT WHORES of Datalounge.

I think the more important question is why do they celebrate Mother's Day in March? Do they hate their mothers?

r209 Church holiday that got repurposed

Damn you, R195. I had completely forgotten about Harry's wife's constant baby bump exhibitionism.

Kate admitting to an error in photo cleanup should now provide cover for Meghan to make a full public confession about all the lies she has told about the royal family.

R209,

Mother’s Day in the UK has always fallen during Lent, and is three weeks before Easter.

[quote]Do they hate their mothers?

What's wrong with March for Mother's Day?

[quote]Do you feel the same way about the "jackals" who relentlessly and viciously attack Meghan Markle?

[quote]Somehow, I think that you don't.

[quote]In fact, you probably cheer them on.

Yes I feel exactly the same way. Sorry to disappoint, r189 but I don’t live in your bizarre, obsessive binary universe.

[quote]What's wrong with March for Mother's Day?

March is just not a great month for celebrations. It's the also ran month.

Nobody believes KM’s “confessed” foray into photoshopping.

I hope Kate tells everyone to sod off!

R216 Weird that you think that. It seems like a good month. In April you have Easter while Christmas and the New Year were two months ago.

[quote]March is just not a great month for celebrations. It's the also ran month.

The St Patrick's Day Parade has somehow escaped the above dismissal.

[quote]The St Patrick's Day Parade has somehow escaped the above dismissal.

That's why they stuck St. Patrick's Day in March. It's just not a quality month. Go ahead and give that one to the Irish, no one cares.

[quote] If we're not careful, in a few more decades we're going to gut everything and be left with nothing but a crazy, angry, semi-anarchic world where you can't trust or believe anything, where there can be no general consensus, let alone majority agreement.

Yes. Even in the few years I've been here there's been a noticeable shift from wit and putdowns with a playful quality to conspiratorial imbecilities offered up with apparent seriousness.

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity.

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

[quote]Go ahead and give that one to the Irish, no one cares.

And the Americans.

R189 also overlooks the fact that Meghan is the one who threw out all the "nobody asked me how I'm doing!" whines and made all the racism accusations. She, with Harry in her wake, have created this whole "rivalry" with William and Kate. Meghan and Harry have made all sorts of public accusations and even left the UK because it was apparently so terrible living there, while Harry's book is one stream of whining complaints, accusations and aspersions. They have basically thrown red meat to their online trolls to attack the BRF, spurred on by their online proxies Omid Scobie and Misan Harriman. Moreover, while their great complaint is allegedly the viciousness of the media, they and their stans overlook the fact that the real targets of the media - cheered on by the Sussex Squad - are William and Kate. The media hates them, William especially, because he totally ignores them and won't succumb to their constant provocations.

So, yes, while online bullying is inexcusable whoever it's targeted at, let's not overlook who is deliberately goading their stans on to bully online.

[quote]the real targets of the media - cheered on by the Sussex Squad - are William and Kate.

R224, the palace has probably 10 times the money and media clout of the Sussexes. Maybe 100.

What are you people doing on mothers day that requires nice weather? I'm starting to feel bad I only got her a card and flowers.

I'm telling you, this whole rivalry disaster could be ended by William acting like a grownup and a future King.

He could be the bigger person - the bigger ROYAL person - and forgive Harry for whatever happened in the past, and then move on.

But William is incapable of doing that.

He's a petty, vindictive, and unforgiving tyrant.

He wants everyone to bow down to him, and if they don't, then he will forever hold a grudge.

AND IT'S KILLING HIS OWN FAMILY.

Just look at all of the horrible things that have been coming his way, and it just keeps getting worse.

Until William puts an end to this meaningless war, and calls off his dogs (the Klan Grannies, the Men in Gray, etc.), then this war will never end. And his family and his reign as King could be potentially destroyed.

It's up to William.

Keep attacking Harry and Meghan, and your life will continue to implode.

End the foolishness, and your life will improve.

That's the way with anything in life.

[quote]What are you people doing on mothers day that requires nice weather? I'm starting to feel bad I only got her a card and flowers.

You are a horrible son. Don't expect anything in the will.

When did William attack Harry and Meghan, r228?

I know this is awful but one of my psychic friends has predicted that William will die young like his mum.

LOL R228 = deranged Sussex stan completely divorced from reality

What do you mean by "media clout", r226? The truth is that William doesn't need to brownnose to the media - and that's what's killing them.

r230 HE RIPPED MY NECKLACE AND BROKE MY DOG BOWL!

Keep pretending that William has no part in this disaster, R230.

I'm sure that William thinks that he's blameless.

But KARMA IS REAL.

His treatment of Harry and Meghan has been abysmal. From day one.

He kept telling Harry not to marry Meghan, and that's really what kicked off this whole rivalry.

Then he and Meghan got into a fight when he kept pointing his finger at her face, and she told him to stop.

Then he gets into a physical altercation with Harry and shoves him to the ground.

Then he ditches Harry with the royal plane to Balmoral to see their deceased grandmother.

Then he refuses to speak to Harry after that, and continues to hold a grudge.

KARMA IS REAL, William.

Until you start doing the right thing by Harry and Meghan, everything you do will FAIL.

[quote] AND IT'S KILLING HIS OWN FAMILY.

MARY!!!

No, it isn't really big, OP.

Poor, innocent Harkles! Always the victims! Wahhh wahhh! The world doesn't revolve around them, as much as you and they seem to think it should.

And William has nothing to do with it, either.

[quote] Smart for her to own up right away.

Silly of her to do it in the first place.

Who gives a fuck?

There is no disaster, r235, and the fact that you write "men in gray" [sic] shows that you have absolutely no fucking clue about a single thing you are spouting off about.

r240 Why? If bad photoshop were a crime 90% of Instagram is going to be serving life in jail. Its just a part of the world now.

According to the Sussex loon above people deserve the illnesses they get. Harry and Meghan have the supporters they deserve.

[quote] Kate Middleton "apologizes" for manipulated photo

The Princess of Wales has personally apologised after a photograph released on Mother's Day sparked controversy after claims it had been digitally altered.

The image of Kate with her three children, said by the palace to be taken by the Prince of Wales, was posted on social media on Sunday. But rather than quelling ongoing speculation about her health following abdominal surgery in January, it instead raised further questions after eagle-eyed observers raised discrepancies in the picture shortly after it was released. Four international photo agencies later retracted the image, followed by the UK's main press agency, PA Media.

On Monday, the Princess of Wales posted an apology on X, saying: "Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I wanted to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother’s Day. C"

She was later spotted leaving Windsor in a car with William as he was driven to the Commonwealth Day service in London. Kate was not due to attend the service but instead understood to have a private appointment.

Yahoo News UK examines what we know and don't know about the controversial picture released on Mother's Day, which traditionally falls on the fourth Sunday of Lent in the UK.

[bold]What we know[/bold]

At 9am on Sunday, Kensington Palace published the photo with Kate surrounded by her three children, George, 10, Charlotte, eight, and Louis, five. The photo was said to have been taken by Prince William last week at the family's home in Windsor.

It was published on Sunday to coincide with Mother's Day and to attempt to put an end to speculation about Kate's health as the first official photo of her since her surgery in January. The last time Kate was photographed in public was on Christmas Day while attending a church service at the Royal Family's Sandringham estate.

In the post, Kate said: "Thank you for your kind wishes and continued support over the last two months. Wishing everyone a Happy Mother's Day. C."

However, observers on social media raised concerns about the image almost immediately.

They pointed to two main areas where the image was potentially doctored – the cuff on Charlotte's cardigan does not appear to align with her left hand and has a circle that appears out of place, and part of Louis' jumper where the pattern appears to be out of sync. It was also noted that Kate does not appear to be wearing a wedding ring on her left hand.

Later on Sunday, Associated Press (AP) became the first of a series international news and photo agencies to retract the image. AP issued a "kill notification" for the photos, an industry term meaning it had been retracted and was not to be used. The agency said: "At closer inspection it appears that the source has manipulated the image. No replacement photo will be sent."

Then a second agency, Reuters, announced it too had withdrawn the photo "following a post-publication review". A third news agency, Agence France-Presse (AFP), also issued a "mandatory kill notice" on the photo, while Getty Images became the fourth group to retract the picture.

On Monday morning, the UK's PA Media also said it would be withdrawing the image from its picture service, saying the Palace had still yet to respond to requests for an "urgent clarification”.

After the Princess of Wales's statement was released on Monday, royal sources said the Kate made “minor adjustments” and that she and the Prince of Wales wanted to offer an informal picture of the family together for Mother’s Day.

“The Wales family spent Mother’s Day together and had a wonderful day,” the source added.

Kensington Palace said it would not be reissuing the original unedited photograph of Kate and her children.

The controversy follows recent attempts by the palace to quell rumours about Kate's condition with various recent statements to media outlets. Referring to William, a spokesman for the palace told People magazine last week: "His focus is on his work and not on social media."

At the end of last month, it told the BBC: "Kensington Palace made it clear in January the timelines of the princess's recovery. We said we'd only be providing significant updates. That guidance stands."

At the beginning of this month, royal aides reportedly told The Sun: "We were really clear from the start we weren’t going to provide a running commentary on the Princess of Wales’s health and only provide significant updates. Obviously, we’ve seen the madness of social media and that is not going to change our strategy."

[bold]What we don't know[/bold]

While the Royal Family may be hoping that Kate's mea culpa will put an end to the controversy, it is unclear whether the story will now die down. Certainly, the palace – and Kate – shouldn't be surprised by the scale of the coverage sparked by some clumsy editing practices.

In December, the Wales's Christmas card prompted similar questions over the festive black and white picture, pointing out that William's legs appeared to be missing from behind Charlotte's chair and, more obviously, Prince Louis' middle finger also seemed to be absent.

Kensington Palace will have known the first picture of Kate following her prolonged absence would be poured over, and the decision to allow it to be edited will raise questions over how the royals put such intimate portraits into the public domain.

The photo was the first official image of Kate since she was admitted to the London Clinic for a planned operation on 16 January. Kate left the hospital on 29 January and returned to Adelaide Cottage in Windsor.

Details of the princess’s condition have not been disclosed but Kensington Palace previously said it was not cancer-related and that Kate wished her personal medical information to remain private.

The 42-year-old future queen was last pictured in public during a Christmas Day walk in Sandringham, Norfolk, and is not expected to return to official duties until after Easter.

On Monday, public relations and crisis consultant Mark Borkowski described the situation as a "massive own goal" for the royals, that exposed a public relations problem for the monarchy.

“That’s the issue, there doesn’t seem to be that much joined up strategic thinking at the heart of the royal family at the moment, which leads to these problems where it’s a very difficult organisation to manage in terms of PR," he said.

[bold]Kate 'may have edited family image with AI' says expert[/bold]

A photography expert has said the Princess of Wales may have used artificial intelligence to alter part of the image of her and her children.

Stephen Davies, known as The Photoshop Guy, is a photographer and digital artist near Cardiff, Wales, and has 25 years of Photoshop experience.

He told Yahoo News UK there were a number of discrepancies with the image, but that Kate's right hand around Louis' waist could have been added using AI.

"With Kate's hand around Louis, it's very low-res compared to the rest of the image," he said. "I believe that looks like it's been inserted with AI because it's got all the signs of using artificial intelligence. It's not as sharp as the rest of the image and there's no texture in that part as well.

"If you look at the jumper there's lots of texture but if you look at the shadow area there's no texture there. I know that's not motion blur by the camera, it's just soft.

"I use AI all the time to manipulate things and that's a sign, you have to sharpen it a bit more afterwards to blend it back into the image. I don't know why but maybe her hand wasn't there and they wanted to put her hand in to balance it. To create a hand in that area from scratch would be near impossible but in AI you can do it with the click of a button."

Davies said there are signs that two or three photos were "merged together" for the final released image. He said: "I don't think they're trying to hide anything, I just think they wanted the perfect photo of everyone looking at the camera."

On Monday, Sky News said an examination of the photo’s meta data revealed it was saved in Adobe Photoshop twice on an Apple Mac on Friday and Saturday and the picture was taken on a Canon Camera.

Under the licensing agreement issued to photo agencies for use of official royal photos, Royal Households usually stipulate: “This image must not be digitally enhanced, cropped, manipulated or modified in any manner or form.”

[quote]Who gives a fuck?

The 50 million who viewed the picture yesterday. Given plot development, that number is likely to have been increased by new viewing millions today.

R248, I assure you 50 million people do NOT all give a fuck. Not to mention the areas photoshopped were utterly trivial--like the tiles on the floor and her sleeve.

[quote] She was later spotted leaving Windsor in a car with William as he was driven to the Commonwealth Day service in London. Kate was not due to attend the service but instead understood to have a private appointment.

It's ridiculously weird and shitty statements like this that make people ask, "WHAT THE FUCK?"

If they wanted the "perfect picture" then why did they use this one with all of its obvious distortions?!

Is Kate going blind too?

Jesus, the world is burning down around us, and THIS is the type of story that gets people riled?

She should've released a photo of just herself and maybe one of the kids, e.g., Charlotte.

That way, she wouldn't have had to "herd cats."

Yoda says...

[quote] Not to mention the areas photoshopped were utterly trivial--like the tiles on the floor and her sleeve.

I don’t rly care about the main story in general, but R249 the implication is that she was photoshopped into the image entirely. Idk if you’ve used photoshop much in your life but let’s say you’re superimposing a person in an image, the most common areas where you’ll see mistakes lie along the border of whatever item you’re importing, becuase you’re trying to match the various zoom borders and the grain at the junctions. Hence floors, sleeves, hair etc. anywhere two objects touch, especially when they’re in a background / foreground junction. The photoshop errors in this image suggest that the entire image is doctored, not that they were trying to make the floor or sleeve look better.

Second point on it is I saw a vid earlier on twitter where a user had tracked down video from last November or December of Kate and the kids in very similar clothing, suggesting the base image was taken then, and a new background added now.

[quote] He wants everyone to bow down to him, and if they don't, then he will forever hold a grudge.

That's the whole point in being a king.

Having people bow down to you.

[quote] This is big. Really big.

Yes, Gaza is the Warsaw Ghetto 2.0, Congo is a bloody smear, Haiti is in chaos … but never mind all that, as a rich white lady has photoshopped a family snap!

Quickly, nuclear arsenal to DEFCON 1!

[quote] A photo editor says it's 'astonishing' Kensington Palace released the recent image of Kate Middleton

Photo agencies retracted a picture of Kate Middleton and her children because of concerns that the image could have been digitally manipulated.

Kensington Palace released the image of Kate and her children — Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis — on Sunday, writing that the photo was taken by Price William. The post on X has been viewed more than 67 million times to date.

Kate was last seen in public on Christmas Day, and this is the first official photo of her that has since been released. Kensington Palace previously announced that the princess underwent a planned abdominal surgery in January.

Several inconsistencies in the photo, including blurred edges along body parts and window panes, have sparked speculation that it was photoshopped or generated by artificial intelligence.

One photo editor who dissected the image told Business Insider he was surprised the photo was released in the first place.

"It's astonishing that Kensington Palace released it and even more bewildering that the wires distributed it," Patrick Witty said. Witty was a photo editor at The New York Times from 2004 to 2010 and a deputy director of photography at National Geographic from 2016 to 2017.

Witty also shared a version of the image in which he drew white circles around the areas that raised red flags for him.

"The first issue that I noticed was the weirdness around Charlotte's left wrist — a portion of her sleeve strangely disappears," Witty said.

"Another glaring problem is with the zipper on Kate's jacket. It's as if that area was sloppily pasted and misaligned," he added.

He also said there were "over a dozen areas around Kate's head that are unnatural," suggesting that "they took the expression from one image and pasted it on top of this one."

Some of the latter could be attributed to smartphone camera settings, Witty said.

"A lot of the issues with this photo could have been caused by Portrait mode or perhaps the Best Take mode on the Google Pixel 8," Witty said. The Best Take feature automatically chooses the most flattering expression for each person in a group photo and merges them into one image, Witty said.

Witty said the background of the photo, which appears blurry and pixelated, could be the result of a phone camera blurring the background so the focus is on the subject.

In a post shared on Kensington Palace's X account on Monday morning, Kate said her own photo editing was to blame.

"Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I wanted to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother's Day," Kate wrote in the post.

Reuters, Agence France-Presse, and the Associated Press all issued kill notifications to media outlets regarding the image. While the move has further stoked the speculation over the image's authenticity, Vivek Prakash, the Asia-Pacific managing editor for Getty Images, told BI it wasn't unheard of for agencies.

"It is not unusual for wires and agencies to retract images for a variety of routine reasons, manipulation being among them," Prakash said.

"All agencies do take retractions extremely seriously, so it would not have been done without careful consideration," Prakash added.

Kensington Palace didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

"This is big. Really big."

I'm embarrassed for you, OP. Really embarrassed.

This proves she's dead! Her, Paul McCartney and Avril Lavigne!

But Elvis is definitely alive.

William entered Catherine's bedchamber, his face grim and solemn, he uttered two words... 'fix this'. He threw the doctored photograph at her feet then walked away. Catherine, her eyes shaded, her hands trembling, and still in pain from surgery limped to the window pulled back the curtains and looked out into the darkest night wondering dear Heaven what have I done.

And all this matters WHY?

It's more an indictment of the general public than Middleton. This is insane and anybody seeing anything important in it is nuts.

She should not have apologized. She has absolutely nothing to apologize for.

Klan Grannies at R262 and R263 and R264 seem quite bothered.

This story is making their heads explode, especially because it's making front-page news all around the world.

William and Kate are total FRAUDS!

[quote] She should not have apologized. She has absolutely nothing to apologize for.

But she did, Blanche. She DID apologize.

Total humiliation!!

Hey idiot R265, can you explain why this is an important story? We'll wait, Sussex loon.

According to the Telegraph "the section of the image featuring her face was cut out & replaced"

And?

Hey, R265, still waiting to hear why this story is globally relevant.

The most obvious photoshop is Kate’s tight jawline, especially compared to the puffy pap picture last week.

I imagine they're sorry they didn't stick to their guns and just stay silent until Easter.

I mean, this too shall pass. It all passes and the monarchy goes on, but it's also another reminder the world around the monarchy has changed and while the lunacy sucks, it's a factor that has to be considered.

The general public doesn't care, r263. It's the demented media that thinks it has found a vulnerable spot so it can go in for the kill.

Talk about a nothing burger. I hate that term but it really applies here.

Probably right, R263. $$$. I do think a big part of it was escalated by the drama of a "photo kill" warning. Factually, it's correct, but whoa, sexy! And reporters and consumers react.

Then the timing, comparatively late at night (at least in North America) and on a Sunday, when the news cycle is always slow.

In truth, these lines from AP make it a lot less exciting:

Why the AP retracted the first official photo of the Princess of Wales since her abdominal surgery

The first official photo of Kate, the Princess of Wales, since she underwent abdominal surgery nearly two months ago, was pulled from circulation by The Associated Press and several other news organizations because the image appeared to have been manipulated

While there was no suggestion the image was fake, AP pulled the photograph from circulation because it did not meet its photo standards. Kensington Palace declined to comment.

AP's standards are pretty high, but also preclude even seemingly innocuous fixes like removing red eye:

AP’s news values and principles explain that minor photo editing, including cropping and toning and color adjustments, are acceptable when necessary for clear and accurate reproduction and should maintain the authentic nature of the photograph.

Changes in density, contrast, color and saturation levels that substantially alter the original scene are not acceptable. Backgrounds should not be digitally blurred or eliminated by burning down or by aggressive toning. The removal of “red eye” from photographs is not permissible.

R272, the “demented” media wouldn’t be publishing anything if there was no public interest. It is obviously getting clicks and views.

The demented media have a longstanding tradition of hounding the royals r276. This is their life blood, their reason for living for some of them. Just think back to the Diana era and the bizarre media frenzy then. The general public in the UK really do not give a shit about Kate's photo and just want her to get well. There are probably lots of clicks and views from the US, though.

[quote] Yes, Gaza is the Warsaw Ghetto 2.0

Are you seriously accusing the Jews of perpetrating the murder of 6 million people by being thrown into ovens and gassed, you fucking psycho? Something that happened to THEM? Shut your fucking mouth, you fucking moron.

Also, r277, the media think that the royals owe them something and that if the media demand it then they should get whatever "content" they want. William drives them into an absolute frenzy, because he does not give a shit about their demands. The media now thinks it has spotted an opportunity to put William in his place, but he is still ignoring them which drives them even crazier. This is a long-term "relationship" that goes back decades if not centuries, it's about a lot more than just getting clicks and views. The media doesn't even care about how much it's damaging its own reputation here, because they think this frenzied attack gives them power over power. It's about the power of the media and the role it believes it should be able to play in British life, not simply clicks and views.

[Quote]the media think that the royals owe them something

Sorry but as a Brit, they do owe us something.

Remember that at any time any of these royals like, they can resign officially and enter private life just like Edward VII did. Get a normal job (likely don't even have to, they will still have plenty of money) and so on. If they want to remain in their position, they have to accept this scrutiny.

^ sorry, Edward VIII

I've worked with Photoshop in my profession for the last 25 years, and I can tell you after looking at that photo, Kate's statement is bullshit: "Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing."

The editing mistakes seen in that photo could only have been done by someone trying to cobble together various images into a new picture.

That kind of intervention is often called for in a group photo where you take the best expressions from a number of shots and combine them into a new whole.

But it truly takes someone with a lot of experience to pull it off. It's a complex thing to do. Someone who "occasionally experiments" would make a far greater mess of it. In other words, the editing done on that photo was done by someone who is experienced, but didn't go the extra mile to clean up the inconsistencies.

And this: look at Louis' hand at the table. Look at how mangled up it is. Look at the stub for a finger. Would a mom have not seen that and let it be published?

Sky News to discuss it at 8PM Greenwich Time. I'll post again when it's on, if I'm still connected. Here's the live stream for now. Story starts now.

[quote]Sorry but as a Brit, they do owe us something.

Something or everything? Do you deserve to know exactly what happened to Kate last month? Do you need to know precisely what cancer the King has? Should Kate have been holding a newspaper in the photo, so we can know she's alive? I'm curious where you think something begins and ends, R280. Genuinely curious. I mean, I get it, I don't like not knowing either, but I'm totally honest it's pure nosiness. If I know, it means nothing more to me nor can I do anything more about it than if I don't know. I'm not saying you're nosy but I am curious as a Brit what you think they owe you.

R284 They are our representatives. So if they want to carry on being unelected, they have to accept scrutiny of their lies or misrepresentations like in this case. I don't find this complicated.

[quote]R227 What are you people doing on mothers day that requires nice weather? I'm starting to feel bad I only got her a card and flowers.

Who? Kate Middleton? Don’t send her Mothering Day flowers - that’s creepy.

Well, the fact you leap first to accusations of lies suggests you've got a point of view that would be hard to satisfy, but I understand what you're saying.

I don't even like the royals and I feel sorry for Kate. Leave the bitch alone and let her recover.

R288 How about Kate retires/abdicates from royal life and leads a quiet life in the countryside or something? Most of the public would get bored and accept that. Why is she still doing this?

R289 Or even better the press stops being misogynistic?

[quote]R228 AND IT'S KILLING HIS OWN FAMILY. MARY!!!

[quote]R236 MARY!!!

Well, where’s Kate?? I’d hardly think family feud’s are good for the abdomen.

And the dramatic sibling rift’s really not great for their own kids to grow up see as normal.

I gotta say I do love all the people SM who are posting mirage scores on journalists profile pics!

I can’t tell what the issue is with the photograph even when it’s circled in red.

All of this hoopla is ridiculous.

....

[quote]R261 William entered Catherine's bedchamber, his face grim and solemn, he uttered two words... 'fix this'. He threw the doctored photograph at her feet then walked away. Catherine, her eyes shaded, her hands trembling, and still in pain from surgery limped to the window pulled back the curtains and looked out into the darkest night wondering dear Heaven what have I done.

This made me laugh.

I want a whole book on their shadowy exploits! Just call them Wilbur and Cate and you’ll be safe, legally.

[quote]I can’t tell what the issue is with the photograph even when it’s circled in red.

Are you blind or just stupid?

Video suggesting the photos are from November because the outfits match with then.

The Guardian pretty much reaffirms R282’s points. There were more than a few edits, and they go far beyond what an amateur photographer might otherwise attempt. All signs point to a ham-fisted attempt to cobble together the best shots from a series of photos. I can just picture William getting pissed as Kate tries to offer tips and the kids get increasingly rowdy.

Deep dive analysis

If only all these sad fuckers picking apart a photo, got off their fat crusty asses and went to a voting booth once in their lives, how different the world might be.

Another vid pointing out the similarities between this one and her vogue cover.

The Zapruder film received less analysis than this photo

.......

I'm enjoying the couple of grumpy luddites on these threads who keep posting "I see nothing. Big deal. We all tweak photos! What's all the brouhaha! Leave her alone!"

Ok, now who’s exaggerating, r302?

Here's the Sky News report.

[quote] the “demented” media wouldn’t be publishing anything if there was no public interest. It is obviously getting clicks and views

Over 67,000,000 views already.

Clearly, people are interested.

Which is why the media is interested.

Nailed it, R308.

Double standard for the white lady, versus the black lady.

As it has always been.

Her face is fatter in the picture that was taken with her mother driving her the other day. I think that picture she photoshopped is from November.

Oh, come on. Meghan Markle is not a “black lady.” She is biracial.

Apparently the princely communication staff have all the finesse and expertise as Melania Trump's speech-writers.

copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-copy-paste-

I agree with the hypothesis that Kate didn't produce this photo. This seems typical of the post-covid shoddy work performance in many office jobs of the pink and low-skilled white collar variety. The image was requested (proposed?) and created, then disseminated through official palace communication channels to the press, passing through a chain of disinterested workers who aren't paying attention and don't care about details, excellence, and ethics.

I think Kate's boots are the weirdest edit. It's like she's wearing two boots on her left foot!

Photoshopcalypse!

[quote] Why? If bad photoshop were a crime 90% of Instagram is going to be serving life in jail. Its just a part of the world now.

Because she sent it for distribution international press and photographic agencies when it doesn’t follow their remit for news accuracy.

She would have no idea about that. She did the work and then sent it to staff. Staff will not in the habit of asking how much she photoshopped it.

At least be fair, if you can't be rational.

It's like some of you get off on the loonier the better. Fascinating.

I have been listening to all the speculations about Kate and I listen to the psychics. None have resonated with me except this one IF you are interested. Don't even listen if you aren't. WhImsey is a remote viewer which mean she can place herself in a room with people that she wants to be with to know what is going on. In this instance she placed herself in the palace the day something happened to Kate and lets you know what she saw and heard. It isn't long but quite interesting. I am not sure why this one made so much sense to me. please don't bother with all your "this is crazy" people who believe in psychics are nuts etc. I think people that don't leave themselves even open to some of these things are quite backwards as they don't try to figure out if something can be true or not and just dismiss it and live life closed off to what is out there.

[quote]WhImsey is a remote viewer which mean she can place herself in a room with people that she wants to be with to know what is going on. In this instance she placed herself in the palace the day something happened to Kate and lets you know what she saw and heard.

Bless her heart.

It’s good to finally get the real story @ R319

So Kate's resting and recovering for a few months after what sounds like fairly intense surgery. We've been told she isn't quite up to appearing for any kind of reassuring/PR photo, yet somehow, she *is* well enough to sit and focus on making a series of alterations to a picture using Photoshop?

Nah. Not buying it. This bizarre incident/claim just makes the situation worse. The BRF needs to fire all of their PR people.

[quote]I think people that don't leave themselves even open to some of these things are quite backwards as they don't try to figure out if something can be true or not and just dismiss it and live life closed off to what is out there.

I know you're a fucking idiot. Peace out, Mesmo.

Which palace did the psychic place herself in, R319? Just asking because the Princess of Wales was at Anmer Hall in Norfolk over Christmas/New Year then down to Adelaide Cottage in Windsor before being hospitalised.

If the psychic teleported herself to any of Buckingham, Kensington or Holyrood palaces she may have scared the staff but missed Kate.

I used to subscribe to Whimsy's channel (along with a bunch of other "psychics") but I stopped a long time ago because I just couldn't take her (and most of the others) seriously. Has she *ever* been right about anything? I don't disagree that some people have certain abilities, or that what Whimsy "saw" could have happened, we'll never know.

This has to be one of the stupidest stories ever to mesmerize the media. Now we’re going to be treated to act least a week’s worth of “analysis” of “what did it all mean?”

[quote]This has to be one of the stupidest stories ever to mesmerize the media.

No it's not.

It's actually pretty fascinating.

And after 327 posts on this thread, you're still here.

Well mostly because of the clown car posts. I mean, if there's an accident most people have a look, don't they?

I don’t buy the mental health aspect, but who knows? One thing though, if it’s true, you have to wonder about the Windsors. Diana was called crazy, but Kate seemed well adjusted and comes from a normal family If they drove her crazy, you have to say it’s not the wives.

I don’t believe she’s in any coma. That was her in the car with her mother last week.

You’re right about the left boot R314!

This whole drama is very entertaining!

r323 sorry. you live in a tiny world with no possibilities. If you think this way and are happy with what you believe why did you feel the need to tell me?

Then as proof she is okay they post a picture of her with her head turned in the car with William. They are bad at this.

[quote]I think Kate's boots are the weirdest edit. It's like she's wearing two boots on her left foot!

Not only that, but if you look immediately to the left at her left calf you can see a piece of denim behind the chair. What's that all about?

It could be George's leg and shoe...but does he have only one leg?

I pity the prince with the mangled hand. The poor dear.

Is this even dumber than Meghan’s first trip to Uvalde with a sandwich platter and the “high speed car chase claim?”

I think it might be.

The high speed car chase was confirmed recently.

That does not confirm a high speed car chase.

William and Kate look like absolute fools now.

The Princesz received 100 million views on two posts. Good job, PR dept.

Kate from her Vogue cover?

[QUOTE]You’re right about the left boot [R314]!

I don't see this at the picture at r315. The sole of the boot is on the dark tile making it look extra thick, but I don't see two boots at all. Louis's mangled hand and the obvious digital straight line on Charlotte's skirt are glaring, though.

I wonder if the AP and other news agencies are being more strict about examining photos thoroughly now in the advent of AI and the Wales were a casualty.

[quote]I don't see this at the picture at [R315].

Look at the top of the boot. The opening.

It is as if there is a boot inside of the boot.

The NYPost has a source who seems to be suggesting that Kate didn't sit for that picture but was superimposed in:

"A source close to the situation expressed deep concern, suggesting that Middleton’s health struggles might be more serious than initially perceived. “Something is terribly wrong,” the source told The Post. “The idea that Kate could not sit for one photo session tells me this is a much more dire situation than anyone knows.”

Nobody seems to be saying what is going on though.

[quote]I wonder if the AP and other news agencies are being more strict about examining photos thoroughly now in the advent of AI and the Wales were a casualty.

You don't need to examine the photo closely to notice Louis' mangled hand.

Post's "source" is the pervasive observation online today that the photo is a collage. They have no scoop.

All it would take is one (real) photo, video, or public appearance to end this. The fact that they haven't done that in all this time makes it obvious to anyone who doesn't have royalty-loving blinders on that something serious is going on.

I do not accept they are trying to hide the truth about a much more seriously ill Kate. There's no upside to it. What purpose could deception possibly serve? Deception would only make matters worse. It doesn't float.

Maybe she's pulled a "Princess Charlene" and flown the coop.

R348 Something embarrassing they don't want the public to know about and could be damaging for their reputation?

It is VERY EXTREMELY serious and big, really big. HUGE. Catherine, even after going to the trouble of that prostate and kidney transplant with the king, was murdered by Will because she knew too much about his involvement with his dead cousin-in-law (that was a body double in the car today). Rose has been homeschooling the children, and has pawned all of Diana's jewelry, while tending to the bruises Will sustained in the murders. And worst of all -- THE PHOTOSHOPPING, really, what kind of person photoshops? Well, i never, and am shocked, outraged, and breathing heavily

hardeeharhar R351.

Keep your day job R351

It’s all so shameful.

Hearting you, R351.

R347 It means Kate is not even capable of simply taking a picture at this point. It doesn’t look good

Maybe she already died?

Ah..... true love.

I believe the face came from the Vogue cover.

Louis' hand is the most obvious fuck-up.

Also, why is Kate taking the fall for this? Can't they blame the Photoshop on some staff member? I'm sure somebody got fired over this.

Only 1 pic of her looking at what looks like a brick wall when in the car? Very strange. I can only assume that she was looking at the wall the whole time otherwise the photographer would have got something better?

[quote] Royal Expert Omid Scobie Weighs in On Kate Middleton Photo Controversy

Sometimes a picture is truly worth 1,000 words. Or at least a few words from thousands of people.

After agencies including the Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse pulled a photo Kensington Palace shared March 10 of Kate Middleton with kids Prince George, 10, Princess Charlotte, 8, and Prince Louis, 5, royal expert Omid Scobie weighed in with his snapshot of the situation.

"It's fair to say that most photos released by the offices of public figures have been retouched in some way, so as an isolated incident this is just an unfortunate error," the Finding Freedom author wrote on X (formerly known as Twitter) March 11. "But with the Palace's long history of lying, covering up, and even issuing statements on behalf of family members without their permission (cc: Prince Harry), it's becoming increasingly difficult for the public to believe a word (and now photo) they share."

Omid's missive seemed to reference a statement the palace put out from Prince William and Prince Harry in January 2020 slamming a report that William's "bullying attitude" toward Harry's wife Meghan Markle was part of why the Sussexes were stepping away from the family—one Harry said he never signed off on.

Combine that with Harry's claim in his and Meghan's Netflix series that palace spokespeople "were happy to lie to protect my brother," and, as Omid said, the task for the palace to once again earn the public's trust could be a tough one.

Noted Omid in his March 11 tweet, "Gaining that back at this point is an almost impossible task."

She wants to leave his ass.

**Kate:** Mum, I've been thinking a lot lately...

**Mother:** About what, dear?

**Kate:** About William and me... I don't know if I can keep doing this.

**Mother:** But Kate, you have the whole world with him. What about your duties, the children, the crown?

**Kate:** I know, Mum. But I'm exhausted. Pretending everything's perfect when it's not.

**Mother:** You'd be giving up so much, Kate. Think about your role, your responsibilities...

**Kate:** I know, Mum. But what about my happiness? What about what I want?

r363 I gasped because I thought that was Kate on the left.

R294, the image on the left is AI enhanced and useless.

If that car pic with her mother is real, maybe one of the reasons she can't be seen is that her face is puffy from steroids? Just a theory.

What will her silly new (possibly permanent) nickname be in the British press?

A little puffiness could only help her face

What does this family have against dentists?

^ Can you imagine how the non photoshopped teeth look. Yikes.

I really hope that she's okay. I really feel for that family sometimes, they seem to be cursed. I couldn't imagine losing my mother so tragically being as young as he was, then growing up and having to lose my wife too, all while my creepy pederasty uncles/grandpa were out cavorting with god knows who and my hotter redhead brother formed his own identity leaving me all alone to navigate the death throes of my crumbling imillenium-old institution I failed to uphold as vanguard bearing the cumulative disappointment of millions across generations. Lulz. Good luck you crazy kids! Don't Michael Hutchence your way out dearie.

They are lost without me

[quote] Royal Expert Omid Scobie Weighs in On Kate Middleton Photo Controversy

So this is how Meghan attempts to capitalize on the situation,

It's strange how the story at R361 calls him "Omid" after the first reference. How cozy.

[quote] Kate seemed well adjusted and comes from a normal family If they drove her crazy, you have to say it’s not the wives.

She’s thin to a disordered degree and was too nervous to speak in public with any regularity until she was 40. Her eye has been on the prize of Queen since she was a teenager, that has left no room for error and wouldn’t put anyone into a good mental state.

[quote] Inside Anmer Hall where Kate Middleton is hiding amid public concerns: ‘Something is terribly wrong’

Anmer Hall, a 19th-century country house in the quaint village of Anmer, England, has long held its place as a cherished retreat within the British Royal Family.

However, recent events have thrust this property into the global spotlight, with concerns swirling around the health and whereabouts of Kate Middleton. She shares this residence with Prince William after the couple received it as a wedding gift from the late Queen Elizabeth II.

Reports suggest she’s been recuperating there following a mysterious abdominal surgery, with no expected return to public engagements until after Easter.

Theories regarding Middleton’s health also reached a fever pitch over the weekend, when a doctored family photo was released, prompting a swift apology from Middleton herself.

A source close to the situation expressed deep concern, suggesting that Middleton’s health struggles might be more serious than initially perceived.

“Something is terribly wrong,” the source told The Post. “The idea that Kate could not sit for one photo session tells me this is a much more dire situation than anyone knows.”

Despite the turmoil, Middleton was spotted briefly leaving Windsor Castle alongside Prince William on Monday. But her head was turned away and cameras could not catch her face. The couple embarked on a journey to Westminster Abbey, marking Middleton’s first appearance in more than two months since her surgery.

Anmer Hall, with its 10 bedrooms, swimming pool and private tennis court, has long been a sanctuary for the royals and their three children, especially during the pandemic.

Moreover, it’s an escape that seems calming. As seen in property images, verdant houseplants adorn the cozy space, while cream-colored walls serve as a soothing neutral tone.

After receiving the home as a gift from the Queen, extensive renovations ensued. The work included a new roof, a kitchen, a conservatory and a redecoration of the interior. Notably, the addition of trees surrounding the property further enhances their privacy.

From 2015 to 2017, Anmer Hall served as the couple’s primary residence, providing respite from their royal duties.

However, as they transitioned into full-time royal roles, their base shifted back to Kensington Palace.

Anmer Hall is also just a stone’s throw away from Sandringham House, the historic venue where the Royal Family gathers for Christmas festivities.

Sounds like Kate is being held captive in Anmer Hall.

BBC "reconstructs" the original photo that was doctored by William and Kate. Lol.

[quote] Princess of Wales: How might have Kate's photo been altered?

The Princess of Wales has apologised for confusion over edits to a newly released photo which was pulled by several major photo agencies over concerns the image was "manipulated".

The picture, taken by Prince William for Mother's Day, had been the first image released by Kensington Palace since Catherine's surgery in January amid intense speculation about her health.

But major photo agencies stopped distributing the image.

BBC Verify has spoken to experts about how the image might have been altered.

BBC Verify has spoken to Prof Hany Farid, an expert in image analysis, who said the editing could be a "bad job of photoshopping".

He identified a missing portion of the cuff on Princess Charlotte's jumper and a blur on Catherine's right hand and in hair on the right of her face.

He said it was consistent with a couple of different explanations - poor photoshopping, artefacts of post-processing done by the camera to remove features like blurs, or a bad composite of images.

"There is a relative new feature where you have a group of people, the camera identifies them through face detection, and it takes a series of photos in rapid succession," he explains.

"And invariably what happens when you take a photo of a group of people is somebody has their eyes closed or someone's not smiling, and so what this feature does is it looks at four, five, six, seven, ten photos, whatever, and composites them together.

"When it does that it sometimes makes mistakes."

Prof Farid could not find any evidence the image was generated by artificial intelligence (AI) after running it through his own dedicated system.

He also says there is not anything to suggest Catherine's face was added in after the photo was taken.

BBC photo editor Phil Coomes also identified the issue with Princess Charlotte's sleeve, as well as an issue near Louis's legs where there is what looks like a jagged edge on the base of a wooden door.

One possible explanation for some of the glitches would be if several photos were taken and shots were overlaid - perhaps because not all the children were smiling in a single image.

Questions remain around blurring on Catherine's right hand, and misalignment of her hair and the zip on her jumper.

There is also a green blur around Princess Charlotte's right knee which is inconsistent with the grey paving stones in the background.

Photo agencies have a very low tolerance for any digital alteration of images.

For example, the AP's photo standards allow minor photo editing, such as cropping and colour adjustments "when necessary for clear and accurate reproduction" - but say an image "should maintain the authentic nature of the photograph."

Backgrounds should not be digitally blurred, and changes to the contrast or saturation levels that substantially alter the original scene are not permissible.

Arthur Edwards, a Royal photographer for the Sun, spoke to the BBC and described the process of submitting photos to agencies.

"You photograph it, you can crop it, you can put a bit of sharpener on it if you have to... and then you send it," Mr Edwards said.

"You don't alter the actual picture itself. For instance, if one of the people in the picture has red eye, you can't take the red eye out, you have to leave it as it is."

Kensington Palace said it would not be re-issuing the original unedited photograph of Catherine and her children.

But BBC Verify has analysed an image released by the agencies PA and Reuters. PA initially distributed the photo from the Palace to British news outlets under embargo.

Analysis of the image's metadata - data about the photo image - shows that the picture was taken with a digital camera using a Canon lens.

It was saved twice on photo editing software Adobe Photoshop, using an Apple Mac computer. But we do not know if both of these versions were saved on the same device.

The first version was saved on 8 March at 21:54 GMT, and the second was saved on 9 March at 09:39.

Metadata in the Reuters version of the picture does not include any information about Photoshop saves, and says the version was created at 11:34 on 10 March.

Kensington Palace had initially declined to comment when news outlets like BBC News and photo agencies such as PA Media asked for further information about the images.

But in the last few hours, Catherine apologised and said she occasionally edited pictures.

Catherine's admission about editing pictures raises questions over whether and to what extent images have been altered in the past.

[quote]March is just not a great month for celebrations.

I won my Oscar in March, so that's all changed now. Everyone is invited to join me (in spirit) in celebration or a simple remembrance every March 12th to help brighten their day.

R280, do you really believe what the media is doing right now is a reasonable level of "scrutiny" and that they have a genuine interest in seeking information that is in the public interest? So, what you're saying is that the royals should not be afforded the same rights to medical privacy as every other British citizen? Well, please publish your medical records because all our fellow Brits are paying for your health care and we have the right to know!

Precisely r287, that poster is one of the tiny number of supporters of shifting to a republic. A valid view, but at least be honest about it.

Since we've got so many photoshopping experts on this thread, I was wondering about this photo. Something about Andrew's arm seems a bit odd. If you look at the direction his arm is going in from the fabric of his shirt as visible between him and Virginia, it looks as though his arm is moving upwards. But from the position of his hand he's apparently moving his arm further down to reach Virginia's waist. Someone pointed this out to me and it is an interesting discrepancy. The original of this photo is nowhere to be found, however, so it's hard to check.

[quote]Catherine's admission about editing pictures raises questions over whether and to what extent images have been altered in the past.

*sigh*

I still don't get why everyone began demanding answers a couple weeks ago. The original announcement made it clear that her recovery would take quite a few weeks, she would appreciate privacy, she would not be making public appearances until after Easter and there likely wouldn't be updates during her recovery. Yet people suddenly began wondering where she was about four weeks before she was even expected to have recovered. What brought about the premature questioning?

This seems media/social-media driven at an (temporarily) ill woman's expense.

[quote] ‘Photoshop fail’ has left palace more exposed than it has been in years

In 2013, after the birth of Prince George, Kensington Palace released a family photograph taken by Michael Middleton and quietly changed royal history.

The amateur snap of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, their first-born son and their dog was endearingly candid. It also set the tone of a decade of royal coverage: pictures taken by the family, of the family, and sent out under their control.

While the young Prince William made countless walks in front of hundreds of camera lenses, his own children have been photographed under strict conditions, either by their mother or a friendly professional photographer allowed into their world at home.

In most ways it has worked, resulting in a photo album of wholesome images of Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis growing up.

The pictures have all but ended the market for paparazzi snaps, spared the children the pressure of regularly posing for a press photographer, and struck the right balance between their public and private lives.

There has been little cause for complaint. Until now.

As the Royal family faces what can only be called a crisis – the King with cancer, the Princess of Wales recovering from surgery and the Prince of Wales mysteriously missing from an engagement without explanation – a “Photoshop fail” on Mothering Sunday is leaving the palace more exposed than it has been in years.

A doctored picture, pulled from distribution by the world’s major photographic agencies over accusations it had been “manipulated”, has caused chaos.

Showing the Princess of Wales with her three children, it was intended, in part, to reassure the public that she was safe and well, recovering nicely at home just as the palace has always said.

Instead, it has left the unfortunate impression that the conspiracy theorists may have had a point after all.

They may not have evidence for their more outlandish theories, including denied reports that the Princess has been in a coma or jokes about her having cosmetic surgery, but such a slip-up is succour to those who delight in seeing the Royal family on the back foot.

Kensington Palace has not yet confirmed specifically how the photograph has been edited, with a confession to “minor adjustments” raising more questions than answers over the extent to which the public can now believe what they see.

A personal statement from the Princess admitted that “like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing”, but does not reveal precisely was changed.

That anyone is even questioning the veracity of the photograph is the stuff of nightmares for the palace in a world where fake news is spinning out of control.

Disturbing questions over the Princess’s health have now become harder to dismiss. Was the photograph really taken this week? Was she really there? Were all the three children smiling so perfectly for the camera?

It has given the perfect opportunity for republicans, critics and social media mischief-makers who delight in the misfortune of the Royal family to make their case.

Omid Scobie, Prince Harry and Meghan’s biographer – now one of the Royal family’s most vocal critics – cited the episode as proof that “it’s becoming increasingly difficult for the public to believe a word (and now photo) they [the palace] share”.

“Gaining that back at this point is an almost impossible task,” he added.

Peter Hunt, former BBC royal correspondent, said the challenge “is that people will now question whether they can be trusted and believed when they next issue a health update”.

In all likelihood, the reality is closer to this: the Princess tweaked and tidied up the image to create the perfect comeback picture, in a high-pressure situation that is unique to this moment and this family.

It is not too much of a leap of the imagination to think of her at home, recuperating at Adelaide Cottage in Windsor with time to study photos taken by her husband before releasing them to a critical world in which the public is ready to spot any small blemish or change.

But that a baffled public now wonders whether the entire picture has been fabricated should be cause for huge concern.

It speaks not only to a world of AI-generated fakes, in which the press and public must be on higher alert than ever for doctored pictures, but an era where trust in institutions is also at a low.

If the Covid lockdown encouraged greater palace control, allowing aides to vet all videos and pictures of the royals at home, this is the moment to return to a spirit of openness.

If there was ever a case for “lessons being learned” this is it.

A swift and personal apology from the Princess will have gone a long way to smoothing the waters, and the palace is surely duty bound to confirm the steps it is taking to prevent such “manipulation” happening again.

Queen Elizabeth II once said she “had to be seen to be believed”. Perhaps a more useful motto for the new generation: they have to be seen and be believed.

[quote]What brought about the premature questioning?

William missing his Godfather's memorial service, attended by most other members of the Royal Family.

And?

r389

Wowzers, look at that straight line across the image.

There are dozens and dozens of think pieces, articles, and tv clips about this covering every major publication and tv news network around the world. And it’s not going away. This is a huge international scandal for them. Directly goes to trustworthiness. Damn, the queen dying has really left the royals in a total shambles.

It's really not a fucking scandal. The general public in the UK - aside from the odd fringe republican - and even in places like the US are not at all outraged by Kate's illness or Kate's photo and are more inclined to think this is horrific bullying by the media and some online loonies.

Only a complete moron would say that the royals are in a total shambles because of press hounding. But keep spouting your drivel, the royal family will continue for several more generations and several more after that.

*aside from the odd fringe republican who is faking outrage

This faux scandal that the press is trying to whip up is reminiscent of the weeks after Charles became king, when the press were trying to force his hand by faking bullshit stories about Charles callously sacking 100 members of staff and throwing the Queen's loyal staff out of their homes, or how he was supposedly going to give Charlotte the title Duke of Edinburgh in about 20 years instead of giving it to Edward as his parents wanted, and this all indicated that the royal family was going to pot now that the Queen died. Except it was all complete bullshit.

I think the answer is obvious. Kate did the photoshopping, banging high on the best Oxy money can buy. At one point she probably superimposed Meghan and Harry's faces on the poster for Titanic. Probably the most fun she's had in twenty years. Cut her some slack.

I don’t think people are outraged. Nor do they think this is bullying. They’re just perplexed. One of the most famous women in the world is ill but no one knows what it is (not to say they have a right). And then a fake picture is issued supposedly to set minds at ease.

No one should be surprised by the reaction.

[quote]This faux scandal that the press is trying to whip up

This situation is all on William and Kate. They started it, then made it worse. Once again, look at Charles and the way they handled his cancer and prostate stuff. All they had to do was duplicate what Charles was doing.

They could easily put an end to all this with Kate appearing on the telly saying 'I'm fine. I send my love.'

Hence the dilemma, r399. If she’s not well… that won’t work.

They should just send out the original or release another untouched photo. Maybe say something about Kates illness. The length of time she was in hospital and her recovering time is very long which is why people are curious.

BUCKINGHAM Palace has admitted that no such person as ‘Kate Middleton’ ever existed outside of digital imaging software.

Following a cyberattack in January, the Palace no longer has the ability to animate the Princess of Wales character and has made the decision to retire it and tell the public the truth.

A Palace spokesman said: “This is the heir to the throne. And we know how disastrously wrong it went the last time we tried to get one a decent wife, don’t we?

“William was blown away with The Phantom Menace’s amazing CGI, so we contracted a crew of digital artists and told them to create a woman fit for a Prince. And we think you’ll agree they did an incredible job.

“We distilled every aspect of the classic English rose, made her a commoner so there would be no record of her existence, and with motion capture from none other than Andy Serkis created the perfect Princess.

“But she’s been getting a bit glitchy in recent years – we couldn’t stop the neck aging – because she’s still running on a pair of PowerMac G5s from 2005, so this hack is the perfect excuse to scrap the whole project and start again. We’ll give the next one bigger boobs.”

He added: “Oh, the children are real. I saw them hatch with my own eyes.”

Maybe Kate is now like Vina in the Star Trek episode The Menagerie. The NHS rebuilt her. Photoshop has created a Talosian-like illusion to give her an appearance of youth and vitality.

This all got so weird so fast. It's gone beyond wanting privacy during recovery and into the realm of trying to portray Kate as being in better health than she actually is. I think either she's seriously ill or she's had a nervous breakdown.

I don't think she had a nervous breakdown or is locked in the Tower. My guess is they somehow feel that whatever Kate's surgery was would somehow reflect poorly on her image.

I'm currently enamored with the A Royal Divorce is Looming theory. Oh, the "what-ifs" we have before us!

[quote]more inclined to think this is horrific bullying by the media and some online loonies.

Finally, someone with sense.

I'm sure it's all quite stressful but as I recall the advice the King and William gave to a once Royal couple, who were shocked at the vile, invasive stories coming at them, was to ignore the stories. Simple. It's part of the job dears, why are you so bothered?

Thus I am sure Kate will shake this off, maybe even find it all very funny that she has no privacy, unlike those other two babies who flounced.

[quote] find it all very funny that she has no privacy, unlike those other two babies who flounced.

They have never given me the impression that they wanted privacy. They just wanted to be out of the constraining rules and control that comes with being part of the Royal Family. To be able to have public political views, make money how they want and so on. Privacy though - ha! They still wanted fame and without the negative parts (unrealistic).

Yet another manipulated photo? The bricks also don’t match through the window to those outside the car 😂😂😂

I still can’t believe the extreme outrage, confusion and MARY-FICATION this “story” has elicited. It boggles the mind.

Maybe she’s just rebooting the ladyparts

[quote]They have never given me the impression that they wanted privacy.

Me neither, except for very personal things, just like Kate. But don't get me wrong, I don't care about them, find them spectacularly uninteresting, but I do think it's funny that the Palace and the Princess thought they could get away with her dropping off the face of the earth for months without Britain thinking "what the fuck's going on here?"

She is one of the most famous women on the planet, and in pretty shocking news, she was hospitalized for a seemingly long time. Then, she’s not seen for over two months. To think that people wouldn’t be curious is naive thinking.

Latest Kate shock.

Anyone know if the kids have been seen? I’ve seen some videos saying they haven’t been seen either. They’d be back at school, right?

R416 Yeah, they are back at school but there's an agreement with the press to not photograph or run stories on them other than what's officially agreed.

[quote]I still can’t believe the extreme outrage, confusion and MARY-FICATION this “story” has elicited. It boggles the mind.

Oh please.

Here is the leaked unretouched photo

Just a bit of fun that is. Here’s the actual unretouched one of course.

Do they need help moving? I’m guessing they have to surrender their jobs now and downsize, as no one trusts them.

The alleged photo of her traveling with William in a car is bullshit. Why would she go with him, yet not attend. I think it was an aide.

There aren't two boots, eejits! There's a leather loop at the back of the left boot, FFS.

[QUOTE]don't see this at the picture at [[R315]].

[QUOTE]Look at the top of the boot. The opening.

[QUOTE]It is as if there is a boot inside of the boot.

R423 Nice try, but that not what we see in the photo.

The conspiracy theories are ridiculous. If Kate left William and the whole surgery thing was a cover, someone at the hospital would eventually leak that she's not even there. Also we would've heard serious whispers about the state of marriage within the press as we did with Charles/Diana, Fergie/Andrew and even Meghan/Harry (Harry having his own Meghan free hotel suite). Also they remain tactical with each other when they think the camera's aren't on them. Kate is very fond of putting her hand very near William's ass, and he usually puts his hand on her back.

If he beat her up, domestic violence just doesn't happy over night. There would have been some clue by now and I also think the kids would be more awkward around him as he would probably be just as strict with the kids.

If she were dead...that's just bonkers. No way that would stay secret. What is the plan here? Weekend at Bernie's her?

Jesus wept at this whole “controversy”

Too bad they stopped making The Crown, I would have loved this episode of KateGate.

[QUOTE]but that not what we see in the photo.

I hope your society meant this to be funny.

Agreed R426. The melodrama of the aides walking through the palace with the news would be hilarious. They probably printed out the headlines for Charles and some Lascelles-like aide explained it to him delicately. "Some...with more vivid imaginations even think that Her Royal Highness was impregnated by the late Mr. Kingston, and is now...being held against her will, sir"

[quote]Jesus wept

Pics please.

[quote]The conspiracy theories are ridiculous

Note that there were no conspiracy theories going around about the King's illness. That's because he was up-front and transparent. If they had done as the King had, none of this would be happening.

The conspiracy theories about Kate are getting pretty bizarre...but that does not negate the fact that there's some funny business going on.

I didn't read through this thread to see if this article has already been posted, but thought you nutters would appreciate it.

R430 Funny how so? The King told us he has a form of cancer, that is it. There were no further details beyond saying he would withdraw from public life for the time being but will continue his constitutional duties. He's the UK's head of state, the state of his health is more important than Kate's frankly.

Kensington Palace told us that Kate had abdominal surgery. They told told us how long she would be in the hospital for and how long her recovery would likely take and she would not be undertaking any public duties until after Easter. I don't understand what people don't get about will not be seen until after Easter?

Because, r432, she is one of the most famous women in the world, and she hasn’t been seen for months. I don’t get what’s so hard to understand. Of course, she doesn’t owe anyone an explanation. At the same time, we live in a world of instant news and social media, hence why everyone and their mother has a media strategist on their payroll. To expect people to just ignore it and wait until Easter is naive. People are naturally curious, and the clumsy attempts with the photo just makes people more curious.

Too bad for you. ^

They are the ones who put out a “picture of health” photo before Easter. They could have waited until after Easter.

And?

I don't believe the divorce rumors. That bitch didn't wait this long and work this hard and is this close to the crown to walk away from it now. Will could be fucking every whore in London and she wouldn't leave. My guess is she looks like someone who is recovering from surgery and doesn't want to show herself now or the colostomy bag hasn't been fitted properly.

Exactly, R437.

There is no fucking way that Waity Katy would EVER leave now. She plotted and planned with her mother for this.

All these people saying divorce or her leaving are ridiculous. She isn’t going anywhere.

🙄🙄

That you two even accepted divorce as something to ponder, r437/8 makes you look rather dim.

There’s a reckless, almost whorish component to Kate Middleton’s stupid stunt that almost makes me reappraise her.

Who superimposes a magazine cover of themselves onto a candid shot? Kate, I guess.

R431 Buzz Feed reporter Ellie Hall had an exclusive on Meghan in Ulvade. She kept defending her against the outrage people expressed. I would take what she says about Kate with a grain of salt. It appears if you as a reporter support the Sussexes you don't care for the Wales and BRF in general. Usually Meghan is the drama llama, bt Kate has really messed up. I suspect she does have a colostomy bag and feels iher medical issue isnobody' business, but after the photo fiasco she needs to be a little more forthcoming.

R437 - maybe she's not the one who wants a divorce. In any case, I'm enjoying all the sordid speculation and conspiracy theories. The internet can be such a dreary place insofar as news media stories go, but this one is almost a relief with which to play.

My favorite conspiracy is the Thomas Kingston knocked her up one. The very idea that Kate would be into sport fucking.

On the bright side for royal watchers she's ensured the entire worlds media is going to be following her for a few weeks post Easter with such riveting headlines as "Kate still not dead, as she opens new doctors surgery wing in Basildon" and "Catherine lives! Does school run In stylish new red dress" appearing on every news site on the planet.

r228 William isn't attacking Harry and Meghan despite much provocative actions. The logic of your argument is the worst kind of abusers mentality- I can treat you however I like, do to you and your loved ones whatever I like but you must forgive me and take me back into your life or you are a terrible person. Many an abusive spouse or partner adheres to a version of this logic. Only the abuser is allowed to have grievances, red lines and terms and conditions nobody else. Ie the accountability of a toddler. Forgiveness is a secondary issue to the more apt issue of trust. William and other royals could never trust Harry again. Harry stabbed them in the back, went for the metaphorical kill but failed. When someone knives you but you make it through you'd be crazy to trust that person again. Harry and Meghan wouldn't if it was done to him. Look how they are keen to reconcile with the wealthy royals who they claim abused and mistreated them but not her non wealthy dying father.

People online simplistically demand the royals reconcile but in comparable circumstances in their own lives they wouldn't reconcile in a million years. There is a PR campaign to force the royals to take them back likely initiated in part because the Harkles are floundering financially away from the royal family. They are millionaires who thought they could become billionaires and won't adapt to their failure to do so.

[quote]Kensington Palace told us that Kate had abdominal surgery. They told told us how long she would be in the hospital for and how long her recovery would likely take and she would not be undertaking any public duties until after Easter.

And note: people were fine with it.

[quote] I don't understand what people don't get about will not be seen until after Easter?

But that's not the way it's gone.

She has been seen before the arrival of Easter, in an obviously manipulated photo sitting next poor Louis with a badly mangled hand and missing a finger.

People will speculate.

r235 If Karma is real then by your logic all of the so called shit Harry and Meghan have experienced is their karma for their bad actions towards others. No doesn't suit your agenda?

The "I-don't-understand-what-the-fuss-is-about" trolls are as dumb as those coming up with the wild conspiracy theories.

The "I-don't-understand-what-the-fuss-is-about" trolls are as dumb as those coming up with the wild conspiracy theories.

(sorry for the double post and typo!)

Thst's the Sussex lovers for ya. Stupid is as stupid does.

They're almost as dumb as the ones who are trying to insert Harry and Meghan into this mess.

[quote]They're almost as dumb as the ones who are trying to insert Harry and Meghan into this mess.

Meghan inserted herself in this mess, when she had her mouthpiece Omid Scobie attack Kate and the rest of the family.

[quote]Meghan inserted herself in this mess, when she had her mouthpiece Omid Scobie attack Kate and the rest of the family.

Seek help.

The Daily Mail comments are all supporting Kate and scolding anyone who questions it. You can really tell what way the DM audience leans.

DM readers are low IQ, R455

^I see same in 95% of the comments I read elsewhere yesterday and today. The other exceptionally informed 5% moan about how Catherine wouldn"t give MegKaren her lip gloss etcetera.

The sad 5% must have been crestfallen that no-one asked how Megain is doing. Aww

The Spanish press are reporting her operation wasn't planned, she was in a coma, intubated and at one point doctors feared she would die. The Spanish press are saying there is a blackout in the UK media on it

Does the Spanish press say why she needed an operation in the first place?

Old nade-up news

I heard that yesterday, R459

Kate's on the computer again.

People are calling it Waterkate. ha

[quote] The Spanish press are reporting her operation wasn't planned, she was in a coma, intubated and at one point doctors feared she would die. The Spanish press are saying there is a blackout in the UK media on it

Damn, that's CRAZY!

Thanks to the Spanish press for doing their job, and fuck the British rags for hiding the story.

Now the bigger question is, WHAT CAUSED HER HEALTH CRISIS?

r465 It doesnt really make sense that only the Spanish press would do this.What about the Swedish,Danish, Swiss press etc

And why would the US media or even australian media go along with a UK media blackout?? Has anyone provided a link to the spanish media articles??

[quote]The Spanish press are reporting her operation wasn't planned

It's hard to believe the surgery was planned.

Kate's last public appearance was Christmas Day.

On Jan 17th the Palace announced she had undergone surgery. In other words, they only announced it after the fact.

And then this:

"The Princess of Wales wishes to apologise to all those concerned for the fact that she has to postpone her upcoming engagements".

Does that sound like the surgery was planned?

Yes, it does. Details are not my business

Ozempic gone wrong.

Is Catherine being treated in Spain? Or is this just another example in the long history of Spanish media beating the rest of the world media to the punch?

[quote] Yes, it does. Details are not my business

You're pathetic.

Could you possibly BE more up the BRF's arsehole?

How sad.

I think it is related to the digestive tract. And not just the gall bladder.

For everyone saying, "Well, we were warned far in advance that Catherine wouldn't be attending any public events before Easter, and therefore this whole calamity concerning 'proof of life' is obscene" have got it wrong. I believe that the public accepted quite graciously that she wouldn't be making official appearances. It's understandable to most people that regardless of the time we peasants are allotted for similar medical woes, she is a princess, and therefore can afford the luxury of a proper healing. What the public was not told was that she would be dropping off the map in every conceivable way during this period of healing. I mean, in this day and age, celebrities and peasants alike post regular updates every step of the way from diagnosis through convalescence. We get instagram and Twitter updates of Oscar winning actresses suddenly bedded in the ER or ICU that we didn't even know were sick. We live in a time when we get concerned if someone hasn't posted both a shot of the lobster dumplings they ordered for their appetizer AND a full mirror selfie of the outfit they wore to order said dumplings.

Basically, as a society, we've become accustomed to deeply personal updates we never even asked for from our doorman to our A-list celebrities. A sociological debate about whether that's something we SHOULD be expecting is an entirely separate conversation. The point is we do. And that's what's feeding this fevered public response.

All this to say, taking a break from official public duties is one thing, and it's one thing the public "agreed to", so to speak. But the Princess of Wales dropping off the map unabomber style for nearly three months in 2024 was not something we were told to expect, and THAT is what is concerning people. No one was told at the start of all this that Catherine would basically be dead to the world for up to four months or longer—just that she wouldn't be showing up in person to cut ribbons or accept bouquets of flowers from unfortunate looking children at official events. There is a difference. There aren't many medical conditions that one could conceive of that would prevent someone with a full glam squad at their disposal from getting a blowout, slapping on some mascara, and giving the world a thirty second video waist-up wan smile and nod to their adoring masses, aside from the most unimaginable. And that's why the public is beside themselves.

You can't ask for the world to care deeply about a person or institution and not at all at the same time. People either care or they don't, and you can't have it both ways.

Anorexia and bulimia catch up with one. It’s misusing your insides.

[quote]R378 Basically, as a society, we've become accustomed to deeply personal updates we never even asked for from our doorman to our A-list celebrities

Beyond that, she is a public servant, handsomely paid by The People.

Jeremy Renner was half dead and posting from the hospital acting like everything was going well

r473 Nope you are overstating this.Certain parts of society have become accustomed to and expect this but it is not the social norm that you describe.Lots of famous and non famous people take social media breaks for health or personal reasons. The so called trend you describe is so recent that really it is too early to know if its a new normal or a fad that will fizzle out.Lots of social trends from the 1980s 1990s or even 2000s are no more just a few decades on

The idea that a trend becomes mandatory an obligation to disclose ones health details or post health updates and make appearances for others benefit is bizarre and perverse. It actually sounds like bullying.

r475 As are doctors , nurses and civil servants in transport offices-If they take sick leave do they to post updates online? The law says not.

Team R473!

You nailed it.

You can't ask to be entirely funded by the public (in privilege and wealth that most of the world cannot even conceive of) and not be answerable to them, literally in ANY way they demand you to be. You can't compare the privacy expectations of normal UK citizens to that of the royals. They are literally beholden to the public in every way. They are not private citizens, and therefore do not have the same expectations of private citizens.

r476 And lots of celebrities health issues only become known after its announced theyve died because they exercised their freedom to keep things private.This social trend is being exagerated to pressure people to feel obliged to behave like this.

R473 The bitch had major surgery. The priority is to rest up and heal. And if we're talking about a massive abdominal incision, your muscles take some serious recovery time to get to the point to get it back to anywhere near normal. Even sitting down is an ordeal at first.

There was zero expectations from the public, only basement dwellers with a tenuous grip on reality.

The people who think there something nefarious going on with Catherine, are just as stupid as the idiots who think Meghan was never pregnant.

[quote]It doesnt really make sense that only the Spanish press would do this.What about the Swedish,Danish, Swiss press etc

[quote]Is Catherine being treated in Spain? Or is this just another example in the long history of Spanish media beating the rest of the world media to the punch?

It's ONE Spanish journalist who has a source she trusts. That's all. Up to you whether you believe her (or believe that she has a good source she trusts).

r480 But their not entirely funded by the public.There is no sense of balance in your philosophy.Either someone is a private citizen or they are owned outright in every way and beholden to the public. No reasonableness at all . There is a degree of accountability and always has been but everyone has the right to some privacy .to say there are exceptions to having human rights is dangerous folly.

r483 I dont believe and I thought my scepticism was self evident.

R477 You sound like the people who talked about television or the internet just being a passing fad. Social media is NOT a passing fad—it's here to stay. And yes, you or I, or even celebrities CAN opt out, but the royals are NOT private citizens. They belong to the public. That's the Faustian deal they make for the absurdly privileged existence they live on the tab of the people.

[quote]Either someone is a private citizen or they are owned outright in every way and beholden to the public.

When it comes to the British Monarchy, they are the latter, full stop.

r486 Nope I am talking about social attitudes, social values and trends not technology which Obviously I embrace given I am on an internet forum. Are you implying the existence of social media creates an obligation on people to document all of their private business on social media??? Twitters importance is overstatd.Only 1 in 6 people in the UK are on twitter and many of those are not accounts used with any frequency.So no people cant be told they are obliged to post updates and photos when they are ill to satisfy others. r280 Do Walmart emploees who receive all their money via a salary from Walmart owe the company a justification and explanation of everything they do in life? are they beholden to them? It is not an argument that stacks up.

r487 You cant argue by assertion.What you claim has never been the case.A degree of access has always been granted as has a degree of accountability and transparency but what you are talking about total ownership has never been the case. It is an extreme and militant mindset to suggest it should be that way.

R489 I'm not having the sociological debate about the concerns of of social media in 2024—like I said, that's a separate conversation entirely. The point is, like I said, that the expectation exists, like it or not. It's no different from the sudden expectations in terms of communication/availability in the 21st century that arrived alongside cell phones and email. Like it or not, they came, and they stayed.

I am also not making an argument that a royal is beholden to the public in the same way that the media expected Diana to be, at the risk of their own health and safety. But like many people upstream and in other royal threads have noted, the era of deference is behind us. People now expect transparency of the monarchy. That's never going to change. It's not a trend. Social media, like it or not, has changed the relationship that the public has with the "ruling class". The parasocial paradigm can't be reversed at this point. People expect more, demand more of the people that they bow down to, whether that be movie stars or politicians or royalty.

If they don't like the new rules, they're welcome to exit the game. It's been done before.

And check your jewels on the way out!

r490 The foundation of your argument is wrong .The expectation does not exist in any widespread form.I dont know ANYONE who expected Kate to make any kind of appearance or update before Easter.

The sociological debate about social media is not a separate debate at all. You are making inadequate comparisions. We ALL have norms, rules, etiquettes redlines etc about how we email or text people.You are suggesting that technology dictates social values and social expectations when actually the social values work in tandem with the technology.We all know for instance that harrassing people on the phone is an abuse of the technology and the opportunities it affords.We know that because of human values. Human values that many share include a belief that people can not be told they have to use technology to update people on their health regardless of how ill they are, how recovered or whether frankly regardless of whether they wish to share.

The technology does not tell people what their values are or should be.The technology to screen embryos or have an abortion does not tell you that you should have to abort or have to discard an embryo.The technologys existence doesnt even mandate that you have to screen an embryo.all technology has rules and human values around it.You wouldnt want to mandate people have to have guns because the technology to make and use guns exists? You wouldnt want to have no rules or values around guns or oblige people to shoot anyone they wish on sight?? Of course not. That is because technology and values are not the same thing .Your argument is the technology creates an obligation.it doesnt.It creates an option.

r490 Asking for privacy about health is not calling for a return to deference. You keep asserting things as being the new reality when really they are your opinion on what the reality should be rather than a true reflection of what most people expect.The last sentence of your post pretty much confirms this is about your opinions rather than the reality of public opinion you are claiming to just be describing.

R476 you’re comparing the Princess of Wales with Jeremy Renner?

You’re not especially bright, are you, R476?

[quote] But the Princess of Wales dropping off the map unabomber style for nearly three months in 2024 was not something we were told to expect, and THAT is what is concerning people.

MARY. Some things in life are ... UNEXPECTED.

How many of you concerned / furious / angry / outraged posters are American? Why do you care so much? Why do you think that your opinions matter?

Kate is not a celebrity - she is famous. The two are not always the same.

If you want to focus on a “royal” celebrity, cast your eyes in the direction of Montecito.

I mean for what its worth nearly half the responses to a Yougov poll sad they're fine with how much info has been released about her mysterious illness. Which is more than double the amount who wanted more. Granted its from Monday so that might have gone up as the weeks gone on.

Tom Bower, who claims to know exactly what type of #Surgery Kate had, insists Kate is still “very ill” — 🔍🤔

TalkTV @TalkTV Royal biographer Tom Bower says the Princess of Wales “bowed to the pressure of social media ghouls” by releasing a photo on Mother's Day.

"She's very ill, she's had a very serious operation and the Palace handled it appallingly."

"Never explain" just isn't going to work for the BRF any more.

We're living in a different era.

They can't get by any more with their usual lies and secrecy.

And however much the old men who run the affairs of the BRF would like to think they hold all the power, the truth is that they don't.

This incident was their rude awakening.

Actually "never explain" was working fine other than for about 100 royal watchers on twitter. Its the public outreach program of releasing an apparently very heavily edited picture that's fucked them over and make everyone notice. If they'd not bothered with that they could easily have never explained themselves until Easter.

R473 nailed it. They do have a right to privacy up to a point but their current bizarre behavior just demonstrates how they take their public for fools. They obviously don’t respect their public and expect them to swallow anything.

The Times puts the Sussex intervention in context:

ook, I know you’re hurting and it feels like the end of days because Princess Charlotte’s cardigan sleeve was edited in a photo and her mother’s zip was slightly misaligned. These are dark, dark times. Don’t even ask me to look at the marginally askew pattern on Prince Louis’s jumper. The betrayal cuts too deep. I just hope those of you who need it are seeking counselling. I know I am.

And yet let’s at least try to salvage something positive from this national crisis, which, let’s face it, puts Ukraine’s into the shade. Because, hark — what’s that? Could it be joyous peals of laughter wafting from a certain $21 million Montecito mansion amid the popping of champagne corks? Is that also the sound of a couple dancing a merry jig?

I suspect “Kategate” is making two shy, reclusive individuals very happy. “Oh dear, what a shame, never mind,” I imagine Meghan and Harry chorused as they made the Princess of Wales’s photo into laminated coasters to send to all their new friends, after double-checking what their names are. “Looks like we’re not the only ones who fake it.”

In 2022 the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused of being, erm, inventive with the photography in their modest, six-part Netflix opus about wanting to be left alone with their camera crew and publicity assistants.

The footage chosen to show how they were hounded by the evil media featured photographers gathered outside a building, lenses pointed. But were these snappers waiting to invade Meghan and Harry’s privacy? No. They were waiting for the former glamour model Katie Price to exit Crawley magistrates’ court. Meghan and Harry weren’t even in the UK at the time.

“We know the full truth,” Harry said. But in two one-minute trailers for their reputed $100 million series there were four fibs. More footage suggested the paparazzi were jostling for position to monster them again. Oh, except they weren’t doing anything of the sort. Once again Harry and Meghan weren’t there. It was a Harry Potter premiere with no royals present.

To be fair to the Sussexes their allies waited, ooh, hours before gloating over Kategate. “Sources close to Meghan and Harry” reportedly told Page Six: “This isn’t a mistake that Meghan would ever make … she has a keen eye and freakish attention to detail.” And so modest too!

The source added that Meghan and Harry would “have been annihilated” had they handed out photoshopped images (true, actually). “The same rules do not apply to both couples,” the source said. But had they not noticed that Kate was on the front page of every newspaper alongside headlines such as “Picture of chaos” and “PR disaster”?

I’ll be honest: I’m not losing much sleep over it. But there seems to me a big difference between a) using footage that is naff all to do with you to make it look as if you were being persecuted in order to court sympathy and b) trying to create a family photo involving three children under 11 in which one of them isn’t yawning, blinking or sticking a finger up a royal nose.

Doesn’t everyone touch up photos now? Course they do. If I took selfies, which I don’t, I’d cane the life out of the filters. I hate to admit this but once, years ago, when I heard that another mother had put fake tan on her five-year-old’s face to make her look better for the school photo, I did not think “God, how appallingly tacky” but “why didn’t I think of that?” What? Who wants to shell out all that for a photo of their kid looking pasty-faced?

And if the Sussexes are enjoying a period of schadenfreude, who are we to deny them? It might almost make up for that time Kate allegedly made Meghan cry over a pair of tights.

Hilary Rose on the theories... did you make the grade?

Was our invisible princess caught up in the farcical Willy’s Chocolate Experience event in Glasgow? Had she somehow got lost on the way out? Well, possibly, to be sure, but on balance unlikely. Had she had a Brazilian butt lift, others wondered, pointing out that recovery time is long for those seeking a Kardashian rear end?

Now, it is true that BBLs are popular and it also true that recovery time is long, and credit where it’s due, it’s not often that social media gets things right. However, imagining the Princess of Wales telling a doctor “make me look more like Kim Kardashian” is one hell of a stretch, and one that could probably land you in the Tower.

My favourite mad theory is that she had a bad haircut, possibly involving a fringe, and is waiting for it to grow out, because goodness knows we’ve all been there. A bad fringe is a low point in any woman’s life, and imagine having a bad fringe when you’re due on the front pages next day?

And then came That Photo, possibly the biggest PR own goal in recent royal history: an official royal portrait, issued by the Palace, and swiftly condemned by reputable photographic agencies as misleading. Take your pick as to how: the missing wedding and engagement rings — is divorce imminent? — the full leaves on the trees in early March, Charlotte’s hair, Kate’s zip, whether it was actually physically possible for Kate’s hands to be in that position, and on and on it went, until eventually she had to issue an apology for her “amateurish” attempts at photo editing.

Prince William has apparently been furious about the online speculation, which is about as pointless a fury as it’s possible to indulge. And besides, this whole katespiracy thing was so entirely predictable. An international news blackout was never viable. You can’t silence the conspiracy theorists in Iowa or Ipswich, and social media doesn’t need to be indulged, but you can’t as a PR strategy simply ignore it.

Leave the Wales alone!

I'm wondering why the photo agencies and the AP didn’t just quietly return the picture to KP with a note that it didn't meet submission requirements? Am I missing something?

Catherine is trending on Twitter with some of the highest numbers I've seen, nearing 200K. It's just nuts. I imagine the strain of this isn't good for her recovery. I sincerely feel bad for her

It’s incredible how far this has spun out of control for the palace. Kate’s “statement” has made everything about a hundred times worse. In the past twenty minutes I’ve seen three more think pieces. They really need to pull their shit together.

[quote] Kate truthers are as deluded as QAnon HORRIBLE DAY FOR THE PALACE!!!!

Cool.

[quote] There was zero expectations from the public, only basement dwellers with a tenuous grip on reality.

Your ridiculous repetition of this lame statement in an attempt to distract and discredit is about the same level of ability as the palace’s office. It’s not working, and is only making the situation worse. The NY Times, Atlantic, and hundreds of other publications and media rooms worldwide are not basement dwellers, dear. They are literally the mainstream.

Kate and William's Mother's Day offering is now as famous a collage as the album cover for 'Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.'

Their anus horribilus keeps getting more horribilus!

[quote]I'm wondering why the photo agencies and the AP didn’t just quietly return the picture to KP with a note that it didn't meet submission requirements? Am I missing something?

[quote]I'm wondering why the photo agencies and the AP didn’t just quietly return the picture to KP with a note that it didn't meet submission requirements? Am I missing something?

Because the AP had released the photo and it was in circulation before it was noticed that it was manipulated. They then had to make an announcement.

r508 You are conflating what the media want with the public. Most of the public were nor pushing for photos of Kate .

I think the first thing some of you need to except is that Queen Elizabeth is dead. A lot of people gave that old broad a lot of grace because she was an old lady. I think William and Catherine and certain Royal Watchers have been trying to play up the successors to Queen Elizabeth thing and they have gotten some good will because of it. But that only goes so far. William and Kate are going to have to do some explaining from time to time. And that doesn't mean giving every ugly detail of their medical history. They can't follow granny's playbook much longer.

[quote]Do Walmart emploees who receive all their money via a salary from Walmart owe the company a justification and explanation of everything they do in life? are they beholden to them?

I'm pretty sure a Walmart employee cannot just phone in and tell their boss that they'll be undergoing some unspecified surgery and will therefore be expecting completely uninterrupted paid leave for a minimum of four months and they'd be providing absolutely no updates or details of their condition or whereabouts until further notice, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. They'd be told to get fucked, tout suite.

R513, they weren’t, except for a few things. They were viewing it compared Charles’ actions, which couldn’t help but force comparison. Charles has been forthcoming and been observed a few times. His wife visited him in the hospital. There is no real mystery. On the other hand, Kate’s relatives were not seen visiting the hospital, and William only once. And this is important: she was in the hospital for two weeks, signifying something very serious. There was weird stuff with a supposed trip to the hospital Dec. 28. And then she hasn’t been seen for more than two months. It all came to a head with the fake photo. I think people would have been patient (not all) but the photo was very troubling to many people.

Not saying it’s right, just saying what’s happening. And even though supposedly only a quarter of people surveyed want to kmow more, that’s a shit ton of people.

If they would have stayed the course and not leaked the photo of Kate and her mother and then the photoshopped mess this past weekend, the conspiracy theories wouldn't have stopped but they wouldn't be in this mess right now.

Agreed r517. People who are defending what they did and telling everyone to be patient don’t get it—the palace perpetrated a deception on the public to show Kate is well and it blew up in their face. What are people taking away from it? That Kate is so sick they had to pony up a fake picture. How can this not be of interest to the public?

In the end, I think they should have been forthright—Kate was seriously ill, but she’s now recovering. Health wise, she is not where she needs to be, so please be patient while she recovers. In the meantime, we won’t be releasing photos.

I’m not conflating anything. You are not “the public.” You don’t know what the public opinion is around it. Your desperate desire for this not to be a story changes nothing. The reason the mainstream media is going after this is because they’re getting clicks and eyes and selling papers. It’s easy to surmise “the public” is interested.

[quote]The idea that a trend becomes mandatory an obligation to disclose ones health details or post health updates and make appearances for others benefit is bizarre and perverse. It actually sounds like bullying.

Bingo.

Just because a Real Housewife would have a million hospital selfies on Instagram by now doesn't mean anyone else has to.

How could anyone say this doesn't have public interest. The woman is the most popular royal.

It’s a symbiotic relationship r519. It’s getting clicks and selling papers because the public is interested. Do u think I click on stuff I don’t care about? Btw, someone upthread posted the results of a Yougov poll, so we do actually know what the public thinks.

lol. Polls show nothing. Look no further than the election to understand that.

Anyone who keeps saying that this is a "nothing story," is an idiot.

[quote] Kate Middleton messed up. But the royal family has bigger problems than one photo

The Kate Middleton photo debacle is an unforced error from a person usually seen as picture, and princess, perfect.

Yes, Catherine, Princess of Wales, apologized on social media Monday for “any confusion” over the image manipulation that led five major news agencies to recall the family photo the royals had shared hours earlier. Yet all the #WhereIsKate speculation that has gone viral recently is about more than Middleton’s “amateur” photo editing. It’s rooted in questions of privacy and shortsighted palace media strategizing.

Understanding the furor starts with its origins. On Jan. 17 came the announcement that Kate had been admitted to a London hospital a day earlier for a “planned abdominal surgery” and would likely be recuperating “until after Easter.” The princess wanted her personal medical information to remain private.

The same day brought other unexpected royal health news: King Charles III would be hospitalized for a prostate procedure. The next month, Buckingham Palace announced that Charles, 75, had cancer and would not appear in public while undergoing treatment.

Although Charles was soon photographed leaving the hospital and has appeared in social media posts shared by the palace, Kate’s convalescence has been conspicuously image-free. Gradually, discussion of her absence morphed from chatter online, including among conspiracy theorists, to mainstream hypothesizing. Memes took off after Prince William, Kate’s husband, withdrew from attending a memorial service, citing personal reasons.

Some of the curiosity was driven by the fact that Kate for years has been a running, sailing, field-hockey-stick-wielding embodiment of fitness. There were humorous theories: Had the princess disappeared into a Willy Wonka scam event? Was she recovering from a Brazilian butt lift? But there was darker speculation, too, such as a Spanish media claim that Kate was in a coma. That drew royal pushback, though the Windsors rarely respond to media reports.

If recent quotes from unnamed “friends” are to be believed, William and Kate simply wanted her to be able to recover from surgery in peace, and not on anyone else’s timetable. If reports are to be believed now, the photo debacle was a human mistake made only in pursuit of royal perfection.

Sounds reasonable, but one doesn’t have to be generally skeptical of the palace’s motives to see how sending out a doctored image when seeking to quell rumors about Kate’s health is bad PR. The photo alone won’t break most people’s trust in the monarchy, but it’s not the royals’ only public relations problem.

Queen Elizabeth II famously said that she had to be seen to be believed. That’s how the British monarchy works. But the palace is operating under a labor shortage that is especially noticeable when it comes to the photogenic younger generation. Of the dozen royals regularly carrying out public duties on behalf of the crown, only William, 41, and Kate, 42, are younger than 50. Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, are out of commission. The royal who logged the most public engagements last year was Princess Anne, the king’s 73-year-old sister.

The absence of younger “working” royals to pick up the slack is a long-term problem for the Windsors. Part of the reason William’s absence from the late February memorial service stood out was that his disgraced uncle Prince Andrew, who was dropped from public duties over his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, ended up leading the royal family entourage into the event. In a family firm, relatives remain in the picture after dismissal — even when the optics are poor.

Managing optics overall is also a challenge, partly because there is no centralized royal press operation: The teams staffing Charles and Kate are based in different palaces. That makes some sense, until different approaches, such as Charles’ and Kate’s to their health situations, conflict with, or distract from, each other.

Unless there’s more controversy to come about photos — CNN, at least, has said it is reviewing all previous handout images from the palace — sympathy for Kate’s health challenges is likely to outweigh criticism, and the Windsors will stay in their subjects’ good graces. But amid the royal health crises, the health of the monarchy overall is being tested.

[quote]They can't follow granny's playbook much longer.

Except wasn't part of 'granny's playbook' that she had to be seen to be believed? I'm pretty sure she said that. So that's why she made sure to give the public appearances even right up to the end when she must have been very sick. If Kate is well enough to sit in a car?

R112 Hey Google, how do I unread something?

Kate isn’t actively malevolent, but she does seem to be one of those women who just refuses to do anything she doesn’t want to do. Apparently, she doesn’t want to do most things. I’m not sure how that will square with increasing total duties.

She might be very ill, so the latest events shouldn’t be held against her.

R523, which election? Also, we’re not talking about an election, we are talking about public opinion. If the clicks haven’t convinced you people are interested, then nothing will. You’re in this thread, right? If you were truly uninterested, you’d ignore it.

The Princess of Wales has made many public appearances from before her marriage to William up through last year. She does exist and in real life she does look like her photos.

Oh good now #IStandWithCatherine is trending. I thought ww3 would come from Ukraine or Israel but nope apparently the Waleses mothers day collage is what might do it.

The posters in these threads loudly and repeatedly declaring their boredom for this subject are like the idiots who announce their departure from social media about thirteen times a month.

They stand with her for what?

WE STAND BECAUSE KATE CANNOT!

r534 Medical privacy and this is exactly like Diana all over again seems to be the main thrust

By discussing this issue, we’re raising awareness, which is almost as good as actually doing something.

Diana hugged AIDS patients and walked through fields of landmines. Kate botched a Mother's Day collage.

Oh yeah, just like Diana.

she ain't real she dead

If Kate actually dies, she'll take the Internet with her, like Michael Jackson nearly did.

[quote]Oh good now #IStandWithCatherine is trending

More challenges for the police - managing London protest marches needs so much co-ordination and tact.

Is the a GoFundMe account set up yet, or someplace I can send money to show support?

[quote] Except wasn't part of 'granny's playbook' that she had to be seen to be believed?

Yes, that was QE's policy. That's why she always wore something bright-colored, so that people could say they saw her.

That said, I think it would have been OK for Kate to lie low (be unseen) until Easter, as they had planned. This was indeed an unforced error, publishing a Photoshopped photo where she looks healthier than she has looked in a long time.

[quote]this is exactly like Diana all over again

R543 I noticed that Charles did the same. He OK-ed the press to take video and photos of him leaving the hospital and he also released a video looking at cards from the public. Yes, he did 'explain' about the cancer but it was brief and satisfied the public. This is just the Streisand Effect by now with regard to Kate.

As said above, it only became weird when they put out manipulated images. Up until then, they could just reiterate that she’d be back after Easter. But by doing that repeatedly, it makes people wonder why they can’t just have her come out and say she’s fine.

I normally have zero interest in this family but no doubt about it, this is strange behavior and that is why I’m curious. I feel like the only two explanations are she isn’t physically capable of appearing in public, or she is “on strike.” It’s going to be hard to explain away if it turns out she’s dead or something.

The media is beyond delighted with kate. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[quote] The bitch had major surgery. The priority is to rest up and heal. And if we're talking about a massive abdominal incision, your muscles take some serious recovery time to get to the point to get it back to anywhere near normal. Even sitting down is an ordeal at first.

People convalescing, bed bound, is advice decades out of date. As long as the patient is able to stagger, doctors want them walking the corridors with a physiotherapist, even for as little as 2 or 3 minutes at a time, after everything from hysterectomies and c-sections to heart and brain surgery. Movement aids healing exponentially.

r515 You are missing the point. The poster I replied to simplicity if you are paid money from someone and are reliant on that money you are effectively owned by those people in every regard of your life. That's the logic they applied to the royal family but if you believe in that principle why just restrict it to the royals family? I was poiting out the monstrous implications of their inconsistent 'logic'. Kate doesn't get a salary of the government but from Charles who I am sure knows all about her health issues. Kate doesn't

r521 I am interested in lots of things that I don't have a divine right to know the details of. Its really not that complicated.

[quote]I am interested in lots of things that I don't have a divine right to know the details of. Its really not that complicated.

What? You really buy into the Divine Right? Seriously? In this day and age? JFC.

^^ if anyone doesn't get what the 'divine right' implies, it means that the royals are chosen by God and therefore can do whatever they want - they don't have to answer to any 'earthly authority' such as Parliament or the public. It was the biggest reason why Charles I was deposed and beheaded.

r551 I didn't use the metaphorical phrase in relation to the royals and it is a turn of phrase not a literal belief. So quit the whatabouttery and address the fundamental point that there are lots of things I am interested in or curious about that I don't have an automatic right to know. If anything my use of the phrase divine right is a mockery of the idea of divine right but something tells me you already know that and are being obtuse and contranian or your not nuanced enough of mind to grasp it

R550, I think you still are not getting it. You’re trying to get people to police themselves on what they should and should not be interested in. And you’re claiming they shouldn’t be interested in Kate. But the fact is they are. It isn’t anything you can fix or control.

SurvivingAngel, you are on the wrong side of this argument, and you know it.

You're like a lone soldier, fighting a losing war.

The sheer volume of magazine covers listing this story as front-page news will tell you that people want to and need to know.

No matter how much of a fuss you put up about it, William and Kate were wrong to do what they did.

And quite foolish, too.

^Too stupid to breathe

Surviving Angel is a Klan Granny. A huge racist. Just ignore it.

r554 I have no problem with people being interested but that doesn't mean people have a right to know. I haven't questioned peoples right to be interested or too speculate. I have questioned their right to know. I might be interested how many men my favourite barman has slept with but I don't have a right to know.. Nowhere have I tried to police what people are interested in.

r557 Please do tell me Internet gobshite what is my race??? How do you know I am not biracial like Meghan.

Oh God the hypocrisy coming from some of you.

I don’t care what the fuck you are or a single thing about you or your opinion. So fuck off.

r555 How does wanting to know translate into need to know?? It doesn't How is it essential to your life to know as a right the health status and details of any famous person. If you don't understand the difference between want to know and need to know then you have a problem with boundaries.

r561 If your going to call me racist without evidence then my race might be rather relevant. Don't throw around baseless accusations and then claim your not interested when you get pushback. You care that's why you replied and that's why you made your initial claim of racism. If you don't like it then it might be an idea if you took your own advice about f ing off.

R553 Anyone who invokes the Divine Right (of kings) has not even taken basic GCSE history. Just fucking stop, you sound stupid.

r564 I didn't invoke the divine right anymore than you just invoked it by using the same phrase. You can't be that stupid. If use the phrase your comparing apples and pears you do realise I am not talking about actual apples and pears?? You are either very dim or misconstruing intentionally. You are definitely avoiding the question and issue that being curious about something doesn't give you a right to know. Me thinks you have issues with boundaries.

r564 Look up the meaning of the word invoke. I didn't do it. Not only have I ten GCSES but higher qualifications too. Loved my time at university. ❤️

R565 So what did you get in GCSE history? Let me guess, you got a D or an E? Because you really cannot be this stupid? Every Brit who pays attention is taught what the 'divine right of kings' means and what it resulted in for Charles I.

r567 I didn't mention the divine right in relation to royalty but in relation to any member of the public having an automatic right to know another person's business whether famous or just a neighbour or anyone and I definitely did not use the phrase the divine right of Kings. Reread and comprehend because I haven't said or implied any of what you are stating. None of my gcses were d or e grade and quite a few were A. Do yourself and father and stop being a disingenuous nasty motormouth. You are doubling down on a false claim. Grow up. Your entitled to your own opinion not your own facts.

Well, I got an A* grade at GCSE history myself and then the top grade at A level. You just can't admit that you used an awful phrase.

[quote]Your entitled to your own opinion not your own facts.

If only this sentiment were applied across the board.

r569 There's nothing awful about the phrase at all. The only awful thing is your obvious twisting of words and meaning. I really am beginning to think you have boundary issues because you are clearly and obviously avoiding the core issue of being curious about something doesn't give anybody a right to know. Try making that mentality stand up in law.

aaaa

bbbb

cccc

R571 How is it not awful? The 'divine right' means that royals consider themselves 'chosen by God' and not subject to any earthly influence such as Parliament or the public. It's a de facto dictatorship.

dddd

eeee

ffff

gggg

hhhh

eyee

jjjj

okkkk

r575 But I didn't use the phrase in relation to royals or their rights as has already been explained to you. You must be confusing me with someone else. The phrase divine right is used in many contexts including as a secular turn of phrase. Like when I say what's good for the goose is good for the gander doesn't mean I am talking about actual geese. Anyway I hope you find whoever it is your confusing me with.

Link to Part 2, if needed.

llll

mmmm

nnnn

FFS divine right when used informally just means an unearned right, something you're born with. The poster is simply saying the public wasn't bestowed with the right to know more than Kate wants to tell us about her health. Obviously this is true, but it begs the question of what right DOES the public have to know anything at all about the Royals? No one seems to be asking for Kate's medical chart, or even where she is. I think people have been very patient given she's been MIA since Christmas.

If the BRF is serious about modernizing, why is there no recognition that in the age of instant communication, the silence is very bizarre. As one article put it, the Palace hasn't changed the way it communicates, it's just not working anymore.

[quote]R505 I'm wondering why the photo agencies and the AP didn’t just quietly return the picture to KP with a note that it didn't meet submission requirements?

Because reputable news organization generally try to avoid back room dealings.

You’re right r590. The kill order needed to go out to warn other news organizations sourcing their photo from AP, etc., to pull the photo and/or not use it in the future.

[quote]r548 People convalescing, bed bound, is advice decades out of date… Movement aids healing exponentially.

Well, Kate’s too lazy for that. She chooses Option A.

Are there HIPAA laws in Britain?

xxxx

yyyy

zzzz

You know her, do you, R592?

In her dreams every night.

R597 I'm not that poster but I find it semi-believable given that supposedly William's nickname for her is 'Duchess of Doolittle'. And she's never done a lot of public work or appearances compared to other royals.

Megan has stinky breath.

Really, R599? You sound remarkably well-informed and not just another clueless American.