On this specific question, I think that Kate’s status as outsider and not royal born means that there isn’t really a duty to disclose the way there would be if it was an actual heir to the throne. So maybe she insisted on keeping this private and the men in grey are purposely screwing it up as a threat for her to stay in line in the future?
Which would track somewhat with the weird apology/non-admission tweet from “c”.
Then why not provide the original? Evidently the news agencies asked for it:
4 Likes
Interesting thread! Back when I played around with PhotoShop a lot, I could remove people, move people closer together, whiten teeth, etc. I once took some pictures of my mother, brother, and me and merged two where everyone was smiling - couldn’t tell. And that was just with inexpensive desktop software.
Also off topic, but there are a lot of Jacaranda trees in the San Diego area; we think of it as “purple tree” season, compared to yellow tree season, and pink and white tree season.
Not proven per se, but the photographers that have weighed in have pointed out a dozen or so areas that are edited that wouldn’t have been edited simply to make someone’s smile or eyes look better. Most credible analysis says that her hands have been altered presumably to remove bruises or swelling from IVs. Lack of wedding ring is also peculiar, and one of her hands is extremely fuzzy to the point that it’s immediately noticeable on the photo. It just doesn’t read like the “amateur editing job of a happy housewife” that her little tweet seemed to imply.
2 Likes
That AFP/BBC video is - wow!!! All the publications that make up the royal pool got on the line and agreed amongst themselves to kill the photo because of its editing. That is huge, and basically amounts to the press revolting against the silent agreement they’ve always had with the royal family.
The AFP guy says that in the past, they’ve only killed photos that came from places like North Korea or Iran 
4 Likes
I think there has been a very long history, for many generations, of such affairs. Not sure anyone can say that he wouldn’t let it happen to his family. Who knows.
1 Like
Far too many inconsistencies in the photo… plus if that was the case, wouldn’t they just have released the original as requested? That would have shut up the whole thing. A normal family photo without everyone smiling at the same time. Big deal. It must be more than that.
3 Likes
Meanwhile in Montecito, Meghan has apparently just launched a lifestyle brand called American Riviera Orchard 
Starting to wonder if keeping a Harry “spare” would have been a good idea.
3 Likes
Judging from the traction this thread has on CC, they really need to get a crisis manager in to handle things.
7 Likes
The evolution of the Kate story has been interesting to observe. This excerpt makes a good point.
“The central mystery of Kate’s disappearance aside, this has been the most fascinating thing about the entire debacle: watching the picture-perfect artifice constructed by the Royal Family crumble to the ground. Having been read to filth for unsuccessfully trying to snooker the news media and the public at large, there’s no longer any reason for anyone to take anything the palace says seriously — and, by extension, there’s no reason for us to take the Royals seriously as well.”
2 Likes
It’s Rolling Stone. Pretty useless in any case.
1 Like
It is certainly an entertaining mystery playing out in real life—who needs books and TV?
4 Likes
Ironically the story underscores the uselessness of the monarchy.
And I’ll add one thing: while I believe Kate (and all public figures) deserve some privacy, it’s been enlightening to see the “we pay, you pose” folk change their tune now that the focus is on Kate, rather than Meghan.
8 Likes
I can think of several reasons but here is the primary one: Its a lose-lose for them. The internet is forever and the damage is done either way, no possible ‘retraction’ of the kill notice or confirmation by any media outlet that the palace just edited a burst of photos for a pic where everyone looked their best will go as viral as the primary event, look at any example of a news story that turned out to be not as it initially seemed for confirmation. The news agencies are the only ones that gain anything. If they get the RAW images they also get one or more of:
- The upper hand, they forced the palace to bend to their will. Major implications to come from that.
- They confirm nothing nefarious and re-circulate the photo again and make (some of) the money they would have had they not killed it.
- They confirm conspiracies and make money from being the source of that confirmation.
- The originals are leaked and the public sees whatever the palace didn’t want seen in the first place.
They admitted the photo was edited, there is no benefit for them to relinquish control of their RAW files so why would they?
2 Likes
Inconsistencies don’t mean the photo was never taken, I am proficient in photoshop, when I look at the pic I think there is a base photo, and then there was another photo in the series (when my kids were that age I took 50+ pictures of the same “session” its easy to do with a rapid fire digital camera) where Louis looked better so he was cut out of that one and edited over top of himself in the base photo. The blending of the surrounding elements confirms that it was the same session, not a completely generated AI photo that was never taken in real time.
As a mother whose done the same for a Christmas card, I don’t understand the vitriol. Louis was captured acting like a normal tired, ornery toddler at the Queen’s Jubilee and the internet blew up diagnosing him with autism. Every public event since has the vultures looking for all the signs that confirm their theories, I can totally see why they want everyone looking their best when they release a photo.
7 Likes
Have you seen the details of the problems with the photo? People shows 16 inconsistencies. Watch the BBC reaction in the post above. But also, the tree behind them is in full bloom, ahead of all other trees in that area. ???
2 Likes
As someone married to a person who had a temporary ostomy, it would be very easy to put out a photo without this being obvious. There are a myriad of clothes options that could hide it, even on a slim woman, and there are a few tricks that can be done which would enable her to discard the bag for a quick photo op.
If she has an ostomy, the only reason there is no photo of her is because she doesn’t want to pose for one, which is certainly her prerogative, or she cannot for some other reason.
2 Likes
According to multiple photo agencies, this photo did not meet their journalistic standards for accuracy, meaning it was so manipulated that the agencies could not be certain that the event pictured actually took place. It’s an extraordinary move to issue a kill notice like this. And given how close a relationship the royal family maintains with the press, it is extraordinary that all agencies felt compelled to kill this photo simultaneously.
7 Likes
Another important layer - all this speculation can feel quite misogynistic and intrusive towards Kate, who deserves privacy and compassion for whatever she’s going through. The growing outrage I believe is directed not at Kate but squarely at whatever royals or advisors have put her in this situation. They are allowing her circumstance to take all the heat and that gives even more weight to the idea that the they’re rolling her under the bus to take attention away from something else. In any case, I’m sure we all wish the very best for her.
14 Likes