Kate's New Picture

[Anonymous]

They always said after Easter, people took that to mean Easter weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It feels like they are moving the timeline for her return? What has been stated for a while was "Easter" which if she attended a church service (Luke she did at Christmas) would be March 31.
Now it sounds like they are talking about releasing a photo for George's birthday, and returning to public duties after kids return to school after Easter break, and those aren't until mid April.

They said after Easter. They never gave any specific date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It feels like they are moving the timeline for her return? What has been stated for a while was "Easter" which if she attended a church service (Luke she did at Christmas) would be March 31.
Now it sounds like they are talking about releasing a photo for George's birthday, and returning to public duties after kids return to school after Easter break, and those aren't until mid April.

No, they said from the beginning "after Easter." Louis's birthday in April would be totally in keeping with their it final timeline.

I think one mistake they made early, which they may now be attempting to correct, is that they were intentionally very vague-- regarding her illness, her recovery, her condition, etc. From the start they stated that this was for her privacy, which is understandable. But I think knowing her immense popularity, the better approach would have been to be much more specific about a limited number of things. Like without disclosing her illness, they could have very specifically said "the princess will be solely focused on her health and her family during this time, and will not be making appearances even by photograph or video during this time" and "while the exact date of her recovery cannot be known it will not be until April at the earliest." Providing firm, clear language would have made people talk, yes, but it also would have stamped out a lot of the speculation. So many people are expecting her to rise like you-know-who on Easter morning and when it doesn't happen, even though they never said it would, it's going to give rise to ANOTHER round of speculation.

They created this controversy even before the release of that idiotic photo and the lies about it's provenance, by playing coy with a public and press that have a clearly demonstrated appetite for photos of the princess. They needed to be more clear and declarative from the getgo. It would have shaken people up at first but been better in the long run.

I hope this is a lesson learned. This is why transparency is useful. Lots of organizations need to learn this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If this were a normal family, law enforcement would be getting involved by now. A welfare check on the kids and Kate would have been done

What? No. Her husband, parents, in-laws, siblings all know where she is and how she is doing. She doesn't need to tell YOU

[Anonymous]

One theory I have regarding the photoshopping and Kate's confession, which I find so odd because there's just no way she was totally rogue in that:

I wonder if the photoshopping occurred due to pressure from Kate (and possibly William), or out of a sense of trying to protect Kate. But in any case I wonder if it was internally clear that the press office decisions around its release were driven by intentions to protect the princess, and if then W&C were unwilling to publicly lay the blame with the press office if it seemed like a well-intentioned screw up, and that's why Kate shouldered the blame. If they'd revealed the press office was involved (which they must have been because there was an announcement to the rota that a photo was coming and a palace spokesman went if record regarding the photos date/location/photographer), there would be pressure to fire someone, and perhaps the details of the situation would have made this feel unjust.

I know this is a very generous read, but I'm trying to understand why someone who is recovering from surgery and clearly not running press operations would be left to shoulder all the blame, without resorting to wild speculation about divorce or affairs (which also might be true, I don't know, but some of that speculation sounds so soap opera-y to me).

[Anonymous]

I’d like to take a moment to thank the moderator for cleaning up the thread after one of Kate’s fan girls tried to trash it last night. That particular Kate supporter, who incidentally self-identified as a Trump supporter too, said her intention was to get the thread deleted and proceeded to post pages of insults. Thank you, Jeff

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This seems to be the official response.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13205231/kate-middleton-health-update-public-engagement-friends.html

My new assessment based on this:

Most likely it’s colon surgery with or without a colostomy bag and possibly with steroids that are giving her a puffy face. The Mother’s Day photo was just a giant f— up own goal using an old photo with the clothes changed in photoshop because of current puffy face.

Second most likely it’s ED treatment.

I don’t see anything new in that article. But I’d agree with you. I don’t think an ED is the reason for surgery or the main focus of her recovery.

But for post surgical wound healing, getting enough protein and calories is crucial. Even if she doesn’t have an ED, I’m sure she is being followed by a dietitian and her doctor to make sure her intake for optimal wound healing is met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems to be the official response.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13205231/kate-middleton-health-update-public-engagement-friends.html

My new assessment based on this:

Most likely it’s colon surgery with or without a colostomy bag and possibly with steroids that are giving her a puffy face. The Mother’s Day photo was just a giant f— up own goal using an old photo with the clothes changed in photoshop because of current puffy face.

Second most likely it’s ED treatment.

I don’t see anything new in that article. But I’d agree with you. I don’t think an ED is the reason for surgery or the main focus of her recovery.

But for post surgical wound healing, getting enough protein and calories is crucial. Even if she doesn’t have an ED, I’m sure she is being followed by a dietitian and her doctor to make sure her intake for optimal wound healing is met.

If she couldn't get enough calories she'd get TPN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like Kate. She’s a human being probably going through some stuff. How about we give her a break?

She’s been nothing but dutiful and lovely to everyone she encounters. I hope she knows so many people absolutely adore her.

Have you encountered her? How do you know she is lovely to everyone she encounters? I know in our fantasy we would like to believe this.

DP here. I think it's safe to say that PP's comment is correct if you're talking about the people she encounters during her public-facing, royal duty encounters. You're right, we dont know how she is in private but I'm inclined to believe she isn't awful. I do believe Meghan's statements but I also dont' think that even those paint Kate as an awful person, as far as I can remember.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It feels like they are moving the timeline for her return? What has been stated for a while was "Easter" which if she attended a church service (Luke she did at Christmas) would be March 31.
Now it sounds like they are talking about releasing a photo for George's birthday, and returning to public duties after kids return to school after Easter break, and those aren't until mid April.

No, they said from the beginning "after Easter." Louis's birthday in April would be totally in keeping with their it final timeline.

I think one mistake they made early, which they may now be attempting to correct, is that they were intentionally very vague-- regarding her illness, her recovery, her condition, etc. From the start they stated that this was for her privacy, which is understandable. But I think knowing her immense popularity, the better approach would have been to be much more specific about a limited number of things. Like without disclosing her illness, they could have very specifically said "the princess will be solely focused on her health and her family during this time, and will not be making appearances even by photograph or video during this time" and "while the exact date of her recovery cannot be known it will not be until April at the earliest." Providing firm, clear language would have made people talk, yes, but it also would have stamped out a lot of the speculation. So many people are expecting her to rise like you-know-who on Easter morning and when it doesn't happen, even though they never said it would, it's going to give rise to ANOTHER round of speculation.

They created this controversy even before the release of that idiotic photo and the lies about it's provenance, by playing coy with a public and press that have a clearly demonstrated appetite for photos of the princess. They needed to be more clear and declarative from the getgo. It would have shaken people up at first but been better in the long run.

I hope this is a lesson learned. This is why transparency is useful. Lots of organizations need to learn this.

I completely agree.

And I think the MD photo was a HUGE mistake. It made people think, she looks FINE! Why can’t she XYZ?

But then the pic was found to be fake and well, here we are!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems to be the official response.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13205231/kate-middleton-health-update-public-engagement-friends.html

My new assessment based on this:

Most likely it’s colon surgery with or without a colostomy bag and possibly with steroids that are giving her a puffy face. The Mother’s Day photo was just a giant f— up own goal using an old photo with the clothes changed in photoshop because of current puffy face.

Second most likely it’s ED treatment.

I don’t see anything new in that article. But I’d agree with you. I don’t think an ED is the reason for surgery or the main focus of her recovery.

But for post surgical wound healing, getting enough protein and calories is crucial. Even if she doesn’t have an ED, I’m sure she is being followed by a dietitian and her doctor to make sure her intake for optimal wound healing is met.

If she couldn't get enough calories she'd get TPN.

Right. I’m guessing she may have been. Hopefully she is back on track and eating now. I’m sure her recovery hasn’t been easy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It feels like they are moving the timeline for her return? What has been stated for a while was "Easter" which if she attended a church service (Luke she did at Christmas) would be March 31.
Now it sounds like they are talking about releasing a photo for George's birthday, and returning to public duties after kids return to school after Easter break, and those aren't until mid April.

No, they said from the beginning "after Easter." Louis's birthday in April would be totally in keeping with their it final timeline.

I think one mistake they made early, which they may now be attempting to correct, is that they were intentionally very vague-- regarding her illness, her recovery, her condition, etc. From the start they stated that this was for her privacy, which is understandable. But I think knowing her immense popularity, the better approach would have been to be much more specific about a limited number of things. Like without disclosing her illness, they could have very specifically said "the princess will be solely focused on her health and her family during this time, and will not be making appearances even by photograph or video during this time" and "while the exact date of her recovery cannot be known it will not be until April at the earliest." Providing firm, clear language would have made people talk, yes, but it also would have stamped out a lot of the speculation. So many people are expecting her to rise like you-know-who on Easter morning and when it doesn't happen, even though they never said it would, it's going to give rise to ANOTHER round of speculation.

They created this controversy even before the release of that idiotic photo and the lies about it's provenance, by playing coy with a public and press that have a clearly demonstrated appetite for photos of the princess. They needed to be more clear and declarative from the getgo. It would have shaken people up at first but been better in the long run.

I hope this is a lesson learned. This is why transparency is useful. Lots of organizations need to learn this.

I completely agree.

And I think the MD photo was a HUGE mistake. It made people think, she looks FINE! Why can’t she XYZ?

But then the pic was found to be fake and well, here we are!

+2

It's bizarre that Buckingham Palace is doing press so perfectly and Kensington Palace is bungling it so spectacularly. And I'm resentful about it because my curiosity about this has wasted far too much of my time. I really want them to just rip off the bandaid and take the road they should have taken before. Now they will have to disclose more since they have created more to disclose but just come out and say "apologies for the way we have managed this, here is Kate's general condition, here is the approximate time period when you'll have more updates." And then don't put out any more updates before that date unless they are going to be substantial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It feels like they are moving the timeline for her return? What has been stated for a while was "Easter" which if she attended a church service (Luke she did at Christmas) would be March 31.
Now it sounds like they are talking about releasing a photo for George's birthday, and returning to public duties after kids return to school after Easter break, and those aren't until mid April.

No, they said from the beginning "after Easter." Louis's birthday in April would be totally in keeping with their it final timeline.

I think one mistake they made early, which they may now be attempting to correct, is that they were intentionally very vague-- regarding her illness, her recovery, her condition, etc. From the start they stated that this was for her privacy, which is understandable. But I think knowing her immense popularity, the better approach would have been to be much more specific about a limited number of things. Like without disclosing her illness, they could have very specifically said "the princess will be solely focused on her health and her family during this time, and will not be making appearances even by photograph or video during this time" and "while the exact date of her recovery cannot be known it will not be until April at the earliest." Providing firm, clear language would have made people talk, yes, but it also would have stamped out a lot of the speculation. So many people are expecting her to rise like you-know-who on Easter morning and when it doesn't happen, even though they never said it would, it's going to give rise to ANOTHER round of speculation.

They created this controversy even before the release of that idiotic photo and the lies about it's provenance, by playing coy with a public and press that have a clearly demonstrated appetite for photos of the princess. They needed to be more clear and declarative from the getgo. It would have shaken people up at first but been better in the long run.

I hope this is a lesson learned. This is why transparency is useful. Lots of organizations need to learn this.

I completely agree.

And I think the MD photo was a HUGE mistake. It made people think, she looks FINE! Why can’t she XYZ?

But then the pic was found to be fake and well, here we are!

+2

It's bizarre that Buckingham Palace is doing press so perfectly and Kensington Palace is bungling it so spectacularly. And I'm resentful about it because my curiosity about this has wasted far too much of my time. I really want them to just rip off the bandaid and take the road they should have taken before. Now they will have to disclose more since they have created more to disclose but just come out and say "apologies for the way we have managed this, here is Kate's general condition, here is the approximate time period when you'll have more updates." And then don't put out any more updates before that date unless they are going to be substantial.

(This sounds way more ranty than I meant it, the part about my being resentful was meant to be lighthearted.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It feels like they are moving the timeline for her return? What has been stated for a while was "Easter" which if she attended a church service (Luke she did at Christmas) would be March 31.
Now it sounds like they are talking about releasing a photo for George's birthday, and returning to public duties after kids return to school after Easter break, and those aren't until mid April.

No, they said from the beginning "after Easter." Louis's birthday in April would be totally in keeping with their it final timeline.

I think one mistake they made early, which they may now be attempting to correct, is that they were intentionally very vague-- regarding her illness, her recovery, her condition, etc. From the start they stated that this was for her privacy, which is understandable. But I think knowing her immense popularity, the better approach would have been to be much more specific about a limited number of things. Like without disclosing her illness, they could have very specifically said "the princess will be solely focused on her health and her family during this time, and will not be making appearances even by photograph or video during this time" and "while the exact date of her recovery cannot be known it will not be until April at the earliest." Providing firm, clear language would have made people talk, yes, but it also would have stamped out a lot of the speculation. So many people are expecting her to rise like you-know-who on Easter morning and when it doesn't happen, even though they never said it would, it's going to give rise to ANOTHER round of speculation.

They created this controversy even before the release of that idiotic photo and the lies about it's provenance, by playing coy with a public and press that have a clearly demonstrated appetite for photos of the princess. They needed to be more clear and declarative from the getgo. It would have shaken people up at first but been better in the long run.

I hope this is a lesson learned. This is why transparency is useful. Lots of organizations need to learn this.

I completely agree.

And I think the MD photo was a HUGE mistake. It made people think, she looks FINE! Why can’t she XYZ?

But then the pic was found to be fake and well, here we are!

+2

It's bizarre that Buckingham Palace is doing press so perfectly and Kensington Palace is bungling it so spectacularly. And I'm resentful about it because my curiosity about this has wasted far too much of my time. I really want them to just rip off the bandaid and take the road they should have taken before. Now they will have to disclose more since they have created more to disclose but just come out and say "apologies for the way we have managed this, here is Kate's general condition, here is the approximate time period when you'll have more updates." And then don't put out any more updates before that date unless they are going to be substantial.

(This sounds way more ranty than I meant it, the part about my being resentful was meant to be lighthearted.)

Nope, I agree! It’s my own damn fault, but I’m still upset about it.

[Anonymous]

It’s been a week and this story hasn’t disappeared, if anything, it’s gotten worse and the royal family seems to be only losing respect and credibility by the day. Is this the beginning of the end? I mean, it started when Liz died, but will it perpetuate once Charles dies? Will anyone respect Will?