Kate's New Picture

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe we live in a world like this. Everyone edits photos. It's like she did something no one's ever seen before.

Agree. There was some bad photoshopping - so what? There's a lot of bad photoshopping out there. Is the AP really going to pull half their pictures? Or was their statement inaccurate?

I take it you have not followed any of the developments in this story, nor read the thread?

I've read the entire thread. I think y'all are really really nuts and I also think the news agencies are playing strange games right now. They are either lying in their reason for taking down the picture, or are setting themselves up for huge problems with other edited pictures.

I wondered this as well: what celeb pic out there which is posed like that is NOT edited? Why pull it when all other pics of all other celebs which were edited are out there?

+1 Also I don't know how their press offices work, but do wire services and other news organizations routinely distribute pics posted on their social media accounts? That's what the problem seems to be.

A family's social media account is not the same as an official "news" photo. The wire services picked up the photo because of the "Where's Kate?" hoopla and failed to ensure a family photo (that would be perfectly fine for tweaking) met their "news standards." In their haste to put out the picture, they obviously didn't follow standard protocols.

Are y'all just not paying attention and hopping in at page one-hundred-eighty-whatever without context? Honestly.

No, the press did not just pull a photo from their Instagram. Their press office posted the photo to the Instagram and then also distributed a copy of the photo to news agencies for wider publication. This is part of the problem -- these agencies then published the photos as an official release of Kensington Palace, with the context that it was taken by William earlier in the week, as evidence that the Princess was recovering from surgery. And then it was revealed that the photo was heavily edited and may in fact have been 5 months old and that major elements of the photo, including what people were wearing, their expressions, etc., may have been altered.

The news agencies followed protocol, including killing the photo when evidence of photoshopping became so overwhelming that they could no longer justifiably use the photo as evidence of what they were reporting.

They're doing it on purpose because they don't like the pushback KP, William, and even Kate are getting. They know exactly what's wrong with this situation. If they were actual fans of Kate they would be worried and concerned as well. Instead, they're worried the fantasy with Kate/William has been broken.

I think you're right. There was a lot of this with Diana, too. I was a teen when the divorce went down, but I remember women my mom's age (age wise right between Diana and Charles) flipping out over it all in part because they'd bought in so hard to the fairy tale. They'd watched that wedding on TV and coveted Dianas big princess dress and the jewels, watched this tall striking couple jet around the world and be cheered by adoring crowds, seen them welcome home two healthy babies, one an heir to the British throne. They didn't want to give up their fantasy and there was a lot of denial about the reality (which was tawdry and sad) for a long time. You can actually track public sentiment on everyone involved (Diana, Charles, Camilla, the Queen) based on who seemed to most threaten that fairy tale at the moment. Sometimes Camilla was the villain for being the AP, sometimes Diana for not finding a way to make it work, sometimes Charles for cheating, sometimes all of them for spoiling the image. But the Queen rarely came in for criticism because she was part of the fantasy. It was only much later that people started realizing (in part due to the Crown, which yes is fiction but these aspects of the show were based heavily on books about this era and interviews done later that shed light on what happened) that a lot of the problems in that marriage were caused by a family that basically forced Charles to marry Diana because she was a "suitable princess" and they needed an heir, ignoring the many, many reasons why they should not have married. And Diana was really young and poorly parented and the royal family did very little to support her or protect her. But it took years for people to understand that, because the image of this fairytale romance with a prince and a carriage and a castle and a happily ever after were so strong.

And it persists. That's why the royals have those big televised weddings and funerals and coronations. They want you to buy into the fantasy. That's what they are selling.

Bingo!!! There's actually a lot of great videos on how illustrated newspapers back in th 1800's helped shape the royal's family image/brand as we know it.

I remember how badly Diana/Charles divorce went down as well. Back then it was a lot easier to sell that fairytale then it is now with the internet. It's a slippery slope that never ends well for the people involved or their fans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I must say Kate has nice thick hair for an anorexic.

She wears a wig. It's been documented.

Yes, documented. The Vidal Sassoon of M16 put out a dossier about this, because unlike better famous duchesses, almost none of her hair is real. She started getting wiggy in college to further entrap William.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All the online sleuths have shown very clearly that the doctored photo of Kate with her kids is actually a photoshopped Vogue cover shot of her pasted onto this picture.

The TMZ picture of her and Kate is also photoshopped if you look at the bricks.

I think they are going to announce a divorce or she is in a coma. Likely divorce.

what's "the TMZ pic of her and Kate"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m all in on the eating disorder theory. It all came to a head at Christmas after she spent so much time in spotlight with her new role. I’m sure there are likely other stressors that impacted it as well but something clearly happened at Christmas and it was the tipping point. She is probably going to need a long time to come to terms with her new body, being in public and photographed. That’s why she isn’t out in public for pictures because it’ll set her back.

How does the ED theory square with KP treating her so poorly? Like giving her the blame for the photo, not visiting her, etc.?

They’re trying to kill her to put Rose in her place. Duhhhh.

I can't imagine they would actually want to put in Rose. That would take decades to recover from. Kate is a huge asset. Kate either can't or won't give them the proof of life they need, and they are botching the job of covering for that.

But people here claim they killed Diana. Let’s just go with that logic.

They in fact absolutely destroyed Diana. May she rest in peace.

She was talking on the stretcher to the paramedics.

Somehow she dies at the hospital but she was conscious and Alive right after the crash. The driver died instantly. I don’t recall about Dodi but his father has always said Diana was conscious and talking after the accident . She wasn’t near death at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This reporter did not impress me at first (she worked for buzzfeed news) but in reading her interview, she notes some interesting points regarding the rarity of Kensington palace responding to what is basically gossip (but doing so now), the rare footage of ambulance on 12/28, the Spanish reporter who doubled down on idea that Kate was quite seriously ill, etc. It's a good timeline of events as well as a good summary on how UK royal rota and tabloids in UK functioned and past and are behaving in the midst of this story.

https://www.niemanlab.org/2024/03/this-is-just-weird-buzzfeed-news-former-royals-reporter-on-kate-middleton-palace-press-and-distrust-in-the-media/

This is pretty much what I figured: "It’s worth noting that a lot of the conversation was initially driven by pro-Harry and Meghan accounts, and many of the darker conspiracy theories (the ones described as “deeply sinister and highly libelous” by the Daily Mail) seemed to originate from those online spaces."

"I’m not saying this is “The Crown’s” fault, but it doesn’t help matters that for years pop culture has been dominated by a fictionalized narrative that depicts the monarchy and its employees scheming behind the scenes and manipulating the media, happily throwing certain members of the royal family under a bus in service to the overriding goal of preserving the power of the sovereign. Even without the Netflix series, a lot of people still hold a grudge against the royals because of Princess Diana and wonder about the circumstances of her death. I also feel like a lot of this distrust stems from what Harry and Meghan have said since leaving working royal life. Their descriptions of a back-stabbing, Machiavellian organization in interviews and Harry’s memoir Spare have definitely made an impact on the public’s perception of the monarchy and the royal reporting beat."

We forget that Diana, in all of her beauty and deep compassion, was also a provocative "flame thrower" toward the Royal family during her most painful years and Harry became the same. She did the public interview discussing her and her husband's affairs, she woukd take her young son to interviews and dissertation their father. She still however, deeply respected and saw her mission as one that was embedded in the monarchy while married and while she dissed it, she still respected it. Her son, not so much.

DP we also rather conveniently forget that Charles too, participated in writing a book that was highly critical of his parents; that Charles, too, did a public interview that resulted in the end of Camilla’s marriage; and that Charles too, reportedly used his position with the press to vilify Diana.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All the online sleuths have shown very clearly that the doctored photo of Kate with her kids is actually a photoshopped Vogue cover shot of her pasted onto this picture.

The TMZ picture of her and Kate is also photoshopped if you look at the bricks.

I think they are going to announce a divorce or she is in a coma. Likely divorce.

Now DCUM has turned into Reddit? Online sleuthing? Convinced we're right even when we're wrong?

How embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But if she were ill why would William not visit her? Why was Camilla photographed with fanfare as she arrived to visit her husband on more than one occasion, but William was only once?

Sometimes if a patient is in treatment visitors even spouses and children are restricted to a certain point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe we live in a world like this. Everyone edits photos. It's like she did something no one's ever seen before.

Agree. There was some bad photoshopping - so what? There's a lot of bad photoshopping out there. Is the AP really going to pull half their pictures? Or was their statement inaccurate?

I take it you have not followed any of the developments in this story, nor read the thread?

I've read the entire thread. I think y'all are really really nuts and I also think the news agencies are playing strange games right now. They are either lying in their reason for taking down the picture, or are setting themselves up for huge problems with other edited pictures.

I wondered this as well: what celeb pic out there which is posed like that is NOT edited? Why pull it when all other pics of all other celebs which were edited are out there?

You guys aren’t getting it. The Mother’s Day photo wasn’t “edited” in the way you’re thinking. They either spliced in different images of the kids/kate or completely retouched a photo from 2023 to pass it off as something more recent. This wasn’t some innocent contouring or lighting changes.

So what?

You’re purposely moving the conversation back to around page 2 of this thread. I’m guessing to continue to obfuscate the entire discussion. But AP & Reuters issued the kill on the photo and news agencies the world over have reported on it. Almost all indicating it was not a good move/look for KP. KP even issued a “my bad” statement. You really need to move beyond the “so what”. Makes you look like an ignorant fool.

That's exactly what it seems like they're doing.

Guys, do you think the Palace is watching us? How can we report the courtiers directly to Jeff Steele???

I'd love to think it is absolutely bananas/hilarious to suspect that pro-KP agents read this website, but DCUM did sleuth out the truth about Hilaria Baldwin. So crazier things have happened.

I spent a link to this site /discussion to several people in media, including one person in London.

Thank you for doing the good work of a truly good woman. No one will ever have to ask of you, is she kind?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe we live in a world like this. Everyone edits photos. It's like she did something no one's ever seen before.

Agree. There was some bad photoshopping - so what? There's a lot of bad photoshopping out there. Is the AP really going to pull half their pictures? Or was their statement inaccurate?

I take it you have not followed any of the developments in this story, nor read the thread?

I've read the entire thread. I think y'all are really really nuts and I also think the news agencies are playing strange games right now. They are either lying in their reason for taking down the picture, or are setting themselves up for huge problems with other edited pictures.

I wondered this as well: what celeb pic out there which is posed like that is NOT edited? Why pull it when all other pics of all other celebs which were edited are out there?

+1 Also I don't know how their press offices work, but do wire services and other news organizations routinely distribute pics posted on their social media accounts? That's what the problem seems to be.

A family's social media account is not the same as an official "news" photo. The wire services picked up the photo because of the "Where's Kate?" hoopla and failed to ensure a family photo (that would be perfectly fine for tweaking) met their "news standards." In their haste to put out the picture, they obviously didn't follow standard protocols.

Are y'all just not paying attention and hopping in at page one-hundred-eighty-whatever without context? Honestly.

No, the press did not just pull a photo from their Instagram. Their press office posted the photo to the Instagram and then also distributed a copy of the photo to news agencies for wider publication. This is part of the problem -- these agencies then published the photos as an official release of Kensington Palace, with the context that it was taken by William earlier in the week, as evidence that the Princess was recovering from surgery. And then it was revealed that the photo was heavily edited and may in fact have been 5 months old and that major elements of the photo, including what people were wearing, their expressions, etc., may have been altered.

The news agencies followed protocol, including killing the photo when evidence of photoshopping became so overwhelming that they could no longer justifiably use the photo as evidence of what they were reporting.

I'm the pp you are quoting/answering. I asked about how the photo was initially pulled and how their press offices work because I hadn't seen that addressed even though I've skimmed some pages of this thread.

Having read your comment, my next thought it is: This is not amateur hour. They have some of the best people in the world working for them and none of this is coincidence. You guys can come up with your nutso theories for the next 3 weeks, but you will not know what is going on with Kate and the royal family until they want you to know. And you need to accept that it may be never.

In the meantime, leave the woman alone. We don't know her condition, but she owes you people nothing. Even if she were taking a break (with no medical issue) I wouldn't blame her at all. She has done her duty, kept a stiff upper lip for 20 years now, birthed three children even though she suffers with hyperemesis gravidarum, has recently lost the beloved Queen with whom she had a strong relationship and is dealing wither her father-in-law's diagnosis.

Some of the outrageous, mean-spirited, speculative nonsense on this thread is appalling. And I say this as someone who doesn't follow RF at all, unless something major happens.

Signed,
regular woman/wife/mom in solidarity with Kate

This is hilarious because not one of these conspiracy theories is anti-Kate.

Exactly. No one here is hateful/anti-Kate at all. It's the maga-level Kate worshipper(s) who insists this is a shameful, hateful thread. And it's just not.

DP, We are all concerned for her. Including journalists. This is not Kate's normal behavior and she's being thrown under the bus by her so called husband and family in law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I must say Kate has nice thick hair for an anorexic.

She wears a wig. It's been documented.

Yes, documented. The Vidal Sassoon of M16 put out a dossier about this, because unlike better famous duchesses, almost none of her hair is real. She started getting wiggy in college to further entrap William.

can we just mark every time this pp posts like so we don't have to spend time reading or responding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m all in on the eating disorder theory. It all came to a head at Christmas after she spent so much time in spotlight with her new role. I’m sure there are likely other stressors that impacted it as well but something clearly happened at Christmas and it was the tipping point. She is probably going to need a long time to come to terms with her new body, being in public and photographed. That’s why she isn’t out in public for pictures because it’ll set her back.

How does the ED theory square with KP treating her so poorly? Like giving her the blame for the photo, not visiting her, etc.?

Diana was treated with ridicule and disgust by the BRF for her eating disorder. I could imagine that current members 1) still have that same opinion of eating disorders, and 2) feel especially strongly because they're triggered by the memory of Diana.

[Anonymous]

Has the Spanish journalist updated?

The idea of a coma is very sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe we live in a world like this. Everyone edits photos. It's like she did something no one's ever seen before.

Agree. There was some bad photoshopping - so what? There's a lot of bad photoshopping out there. Is the AP really going to pull half their pictures? Or was their statement inaccurate?

I take it you have not followed any of the developments in this story, nor read the thread?

I've read the entire thread. I think y'all are really really nuts and I also think the news agencies are playing strange games right now. They are either lying in their reason for taking down the picture, or are setting themselves up for huge problems with other edited pictures.

I wondered this as well: what celeb pic out there which is posed like that is NOT edited? Why pull it when all other pics of all other celebs which were edited are out there?

+1 Also I don't know how their press offices work, but do wire services and other news organizations routinely distribute pics posted on their social media accounts? That's what the problem seems to be.

A family's social media account is not the same as an official "news" photo. The wire services picked up the photo because of the "Where's Kate?" hoopla and failed to ensure a family photo (that would be perfectly fine for tweaking) met their "news standards." In their haste to put out the picture, they obviously didn't follow standard protocols.

Are y'all just not paying attention and hopping in at page one-hundred-eighty-whatever without context? Honestly.

No, the press did not just pull a photo from their Instagram. Their press office posted the photo to the Instagram and then also distributed a copy of the photo to news agencies for wider publication. This is part of the problem -- these agencies then published the photos as an official release of Kensington Palace, with the context that it was taken by William earlier in the week, as evidence that the Princess was recovering from surgery. And then it was revealed that the photo was heavily edited and may in fact have been 5 months old and that major elements of the photo, including what people were wearing, their expressions, etc., may have been altered.

The news agencies followed protocol, including killing the photo when evidence of photoshopping became so overwhelming that they could no longer justifiably use the photo as evidence of what they were reporting.

They're doing it on purpose because they don't like the pushback KP, William, and even Kate are getting. They know exactly what's wrong with this situation. If they were actual fans of Kate they would be worried and concerned as well. Instead, they're worried the fantasy with Kate/William has been broken.

I think you're right. There was a lot of this with Diana, too. I was a teen when the divorce went down, but I remember women my mom's age (age wise right between Diana and Charles) flipping out over it all in part because they'd bought in so hard to the fairy tale. They'd watched that wedding on TV and coveted Dianas big princess dress and the jewels, watched this tall striking couple jet around the world and be cheered by adoring crowds, seen them welcome home two healthy babies, one an heir to the British throne. They didn't want to give up their fantasy and there was a lot of denial about the reality (which was tawdry and sad) for a long time. You can actually track public sentiment on everyone involved (Diana, Charles, Camilla, the Queen) based on who seemed to most threaten that fairy tale at the moment. Sometimes Camilla was the villain for being the AP, sometimes Diana for not finding a way to make it work, sometimes Charles for cheating, sometimes all of them for spoiling the image. But the Queen rarely came in for criticism because she was part of the fantasy. It was only much later that people started realizing (in part due to the Crown, which yes is fiction but these aspects of the show were based heavily on books about this era and interviews done later that shed light on what happened) that a lot of the problems in that marriage were caused by a family that basically forced Charles to marry Diana because she was a "suitable princess" and they needed an heir, ignoring the many, many reasons why they should not have married. And Diana was really young and poorly parented and the royal family did very little to support her or protect her. But it took years for people to understand that, because the image of this fairytale romance with a prince and a carriage and a castle and a happily ever after were so strong.

And it persists. That's why the royals have those big televised weddings and funerals and coronations. They want you to buy into the fantasy. That's what they are selling.

Bingo!!! There's actually a lot of great videos on how illustrated newspapers back in th 1800's helped shape the royal's family image/brand as we know it.

I remember how badly Diana/Charles divorce went down as well. Back then it was a lot easier to sell that fairytale then it is now with the internet. It's a slippery slope that never ends well for the people involved or their fans.

Yes and this is exactly what people expect from any rulers. Without pomp and ceremony they're just people who are getting money from the government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I must say Kate has nice thick hair for an anorexic.

She wears a wig. It's been documented.

Yes, documented. The Vidal Sassoon of M16 put out a dossier about this, because unlike better famous duchesses, almost none of her hair is real. She started getting wiggy in college to further entrap William.

Megaloon

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I must say Kate has nice thick hair for an anorexic.

She wears a wig. It's been documented.

Yes, documented. The Vidal Sassoon of M16 put out a dossier about this, because unlike better famous duchesses, almost none of her hair is real. She started getting wiggy in college to further entrap William.

Both Kate and Meghan trapped but Meghan did get the better fish. Less wait time and he’s more in love with her than she is with him.