Kate Middleton

[Heartstrings]

31 minutes ago, Alice said:

But I think it is somewhat difficult to ask people to respect the privacy of someone who is basically living a life of extreme privilege with the understanding that her job is to perform public "duties

I guess I see the duties differently.  I think of their duties as going to this and that event, shaking hands, kiss babies, walk in parades.  I don’t see video of private moments, medical details, recordings of private phone calls etc. as being part of the royal duties.   

[Laura Corin]

8 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I guess I see the duties differently.  I think of their duties as going to this and that event, shaking hands, kiss babies, walk in parades.  I don’t see video of private moments, medical details, recordings of private phone calls etc. as being part of the royal duties.   

https://www.royal.uk/media-centre/future-engagements

A search here for the Princess Royal - Prince Anne  - will give an idea.

[gardenmom5]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

100%. People would hyper analyze the video and whether it was really her or a body double, etc. etc.

by chance I happened to catch part of an interview with a body double.  (she does appearances, people know she's not really Catherine). 

SHE was irked she had to provide an alibi to the media (they were hounding her) and that it wasn't her in the farm video.

[Laura Corin]

I hope this link works

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b396391f-5067-4625-beee-c22c88892a4f?shareToken=f894ba49154d677a3955eba4f210baa5

[livetoread]

I think there can be a difference between being a member of a royal family and being a celebrity. One can fulfill their duties by attending things and shaking hands and doing ceremonies without being a celebrity. 

Being a celebrity means sharing more of your life to the public, which, honestly, is a large part of what makes you a celebrity. It means giving interviews about yourself, appearing on magazine covers, releasing information about your clothing choices, sharing interesting aspects about your life, all of which have nothing to do with your public duties. The public gets interested in you because you give them things to be interested about, and then you try very hard to control what you have created, namely public interest.

I don't know enough about the state of the monarchy there to say this for sure, but maybe without celebrity the public would decide the monarchy isn't worth it, and maybe the royal family knows this. Regardless, there are members who are celebrities, and they have absolutely chosen this route. Again, doesn't mean they deserve the violations, but they have chosen to fan public interest in themselves which is a tough thing to control.

[marbel]

48 minutes ago, SHP said:

I think the speculation from those in US is because we do get anywhere near that amount of sick paid time off. The Family Medical Leave Act only guarantees some, not all, employees 12 weeks of unpaid time off a year. 28 weeks off and you will be working on your resume and trying to find another job or spending time and energy on paperwork if you have short term disability, which is voluntary and not available to everyone. 

But so what? Are those of us in the US too stupid to understand that other countries have other policies? We can't understand what "I'll be back after Easter" means?  She was supposed to consider the US health care situation and plan her communications accordingly? 

(I'm not trying to be snarky but really, the bolded makes no sense to me.)

[Harriet Vane]

8 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

I hope this link works

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b396391f-5067-4625-beee-c22c88892a4f?shareToken=f894ba49154d677a3955eba4f210baa5

Fabulous article and absolutely spot on. Thanks for sharing.

[Heartstrings]

6 minutes ago, marbel said:

But so what? Are those of us in the US too stupid to understand that other countries have other policies? We can't understand what "I'll be back after Easter" means?  She was supposed to consider the US health care situation and plan her communications accordingly? 

(I'm not trying to be snarky but really, the bolded makes no sense to me.)

Have you ever met The Public??  At least some number assume we have the bestest, mostest, greatest of everything and could not possibly conceive of a longer allowed sick leave.  

[Rosie_0801]

54 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I guess I see the duties differently.  I think of their duties as going to this and that event, shaking hands, kiss babies, walk in parades.  I don’t see video of private moments, medical details, recordings of private phone calls etc. as being part of the royal duties.   

They do a lot of diplomatic work too. It is my understanding that the Gulf countries don't like to deal with mere elected members of parliament. Not that Prince Andrew is anyone's favourite anybody, but he was a trade ambassador at one point, schmoozing to sell British products. It's not just kissing babies to keep themselves in a palace.

[MrsMommy]

I think the whole response to her surgery and recovery has had a very "Mean Girls" vibe about it, particularly in the way people (and especially women) feel a need to speculate and comment on what should be her private medical business. Let's call it what it is...gossip. We really don't need to know everything just because information is usually so easy to come by.

[SHP]

36 minutes ago, marbel said:

But so what? Are those of us in the US too stupid to understand that other countries have other policies? We can't understand what "I'll be back after Easter" means?  She was supposed to consider the US health care situation and plan her communications accordingly? 

(I'm not trying to be snarky but really, the bolded makes no sense to me.)

I wouldn't use the word "stupid", but yes, many people are not able to comprehend that other places are different and often they do not care. At the risk of stepping into politics, a policy like described would have some in the US screaming about "socialism" and "lazy mooches who need to suck it up and get back to work". 

 

[SKL]

54 minutes ago, marbel said:

But so what? Are those of us in the US too stupid to understand that other countries have other policies? We can't understand what "I'll be back after Easter" means?  She was supposed to consider the US health care situation and plan her communications accordingly? 

(I'm not trying to be snarky but really, the bolded makes no sense to me.)

I agree with "so what."

Come on.  Even we Americans all know people who have taken a leave of absence due to health issues - theirs, their kids', whatever.  Some paid, some unpaid, what does any of that have to do with Kate?  Are we saying we won't believe it until we see the HR documents?

[Ausmumof3]

As I said when I started the thread, I’m not usually a royal watcher or speculator at all. But when major non-sensational news agencies were commenting on the photoshopped image it definitely made me think something was up. Had that never been released, I think most mainstream people would not have got into the discussion at all. I think most in this thread fit that description. Yes, there’s people that are always speculating and spreading rumours about the royal family. This was a different situation to that, and had the original plan to not go with anything to the public until Easter this would have remained in the domain of the royal gossip/speculation type people. Releasing the photoshopped image meant many more people started wondering what on earth was going on.

Now we know, I imagine most of us will feel sympathy for her and go back to leaving her be. I don’t think it’s fair to lump those who had genuine concern about what seemed like a pretty weird situation in with the usual rumour mongers around the royal family. 

[SKL]

I guess I don't see "I reasonably expect to be told if the princess is sick" as consistent with "I believe nothing the royals say, I only trust sneaky leakers to keep me informed." 

[marbel]

@Heartstrings and @SHP I take your points about US people possibly, uh, misunderstanding the nuances in healthcare in different countries. Doesn't matter though. Whether people know it or not, whether they like it or not, the policies are different. And what if they were the same anyway? The woman said "after Easter." Maybe people think Easter comes earlier in the UK than in the US? (Rhetorical question.) 

Edited March 24 by marbel

[Heartstrings]

5 minutes ago, marbel said:

@Heartstrings and @SHP I take your points about US people possibly, uh, misunderstanding the nuances in healthcare in different countries. Doesn't matter though. Whether people know it or not, whether they like it or not, the policies are different. And what if they were the same anyway? The woman said "after Easter." Maybe people think Easter comes earlier in the UK than in the US? (Rhetorical question.) 

*in this context "Americans" means USA people, not all people in the Americas

I completely agree.   I didn’t expect to see her until April.  I saw someone say that it might be mid April because “after Easter” could plausibly mean “after the children’s several weeks of Easter Holiday” and that sounded acceptable to me.  
 

I have no idea why everything popped off the way it did, other than Americans wanted something to talk about besides the election.  It makes all of us look like morons if you ask me.  

Edited March 24 by Heartstrings

[SHP]

23 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I completely agree.   I didn’t expect to see her until April.  I saw someone say that it might be mid April because “after Easter” could plausibly mean “after the children’s several weeks of Easter Holiday” and that sounded acceptable to me.  
 

I have no idea why everything popped off the way it did, other than Americans wanted something to talk about besides the election.  It makes all of us look like morons if you ask me.  

I think there is a lot about the US that makes us look like morons but our our non American boardies are too polite to list them all.

[SHP]

28 minutes ago, marbel said:

@Heartstrings and @SHP I take your points about US people possibly, uh, misunderstanding the nuances in healthcare in different countries. Doesn't matter though. Whether people know it or not, whether they like it or not, the policies are different. And what if they were the same anyway? The woman said "after Easter." Maybe people think Easter comes earlier in the UK than in the US? (Rhetorical question.) 

I agree with you, just explaining things I observe. I LOL at the bolded because yeah...

[Heartstrings]

29 minutes ago, SHP said:

I think there is a lot about the US that makes us look like morons but our our non American boardies are too polite to list them all.

I’m sure you’re right.  It would be nice to stop creating new things to add to that list though.  

[KSera]

4 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

As I said when I started the thread, I’m not usually a royal watcher or speculator at all. But when major non-sensational news agencies were commenting on the photoshopped image it definitely made me think something was up. Had that never been released, I think most mainstream people would not have got into the discussion at all. I think most in this thread fit that description. 

I fall into this category, except from somewhat the other direction in that my interest came from the Photoshop angle but then once I saw the picture, I couldn’t figure out why people were making THAT big a fuss over it. I get that there are rules about that, but I still think most people who are so shocked by the photoshopped image don’t know just how normal that is. I’m sure everyone sees similarly photoshopped images constantly on people’s walls, Facebook timelines and on mommy blogs and amateur photographer sites, without ever realizing that there have been some head swaps to get the best shot of everyone or some retouching to remove flyaway hairs or whatever. This just isn’t a shocking or nefarious thing in any other context. So I have found that whole aspect wild. 

[Pawz4me]

6 minutes ago, KSera said:

I fall into this category, except from somewhat the other direction in that my interest came from the Photoshop angle but then once I saw the picture, I couldn’t figure out why people were making THAT big a fuss over it. I get that there are rules about that, but I still think most people who are so shocked by the photoshopped image don’t know just how normal that is. I’m sure everyone sees similarly photoshopped images constantly on people’s walls, Facebook timelines and on mommy blogs and amateur photographer sites, without ever realizing that there have been some head swaps to get the best shot of everyone or some retouching to remove flyaway hairs or whatever. This just isn’t a shocking or nefarious thing in any other context. So I have found that whole aspect wild. 

It caught my attention exactly because it wasn’t a photoshopped picture on FB, a blogging site, or hanging on someone’s wall. It was a photo supposedly released by the royal family’s PR people and posted by the world’s most reputable news outlets. And then retracted by those outlets. Which certainly isn’t a common occurrence. That seems plenty enough to make people like me who wouldn’t otherwise waste two seconds of their time on the royal family start to wonder what the heck was really going on. 

[SHP]

2 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

I’m sure you’re right.  It would be nice to stop creating new things to add to that list though.  

I think this is probably on the list just not terribly high

[Heartstrings]

52 minutes ago, Pawz4me said:

It caught my attention exactly because it wasn’t a photoshopped picture on FB, a blogging site, or hanging on someone’s wall. It was a photo supposedly released by the royal family’s PR people and posted by the world’s most reputable news outlets. And then retracted by those outlets. Which certainly isn’t a common occurrence. That seems plenty enough to make people like me who wouldn’t otherwise waste two seconds of their time on the royal family start to wonder what the heck was really going on. 

I thought the story was that Kate posted it on her Instagram for Mother’s Day and it got lifted by the news outlets?  Which I guess could happen to any of her Instagram pictures, but probably doesn’t happen to all of her pictures.  And I think under normal circumstances  no one would have thought twice about a paper running her Mother’s Day picture, no matter how photoshopped.  

I don’t fully get the bruhaha about this picture anyway, there have been other “bad photoshop” pictures ran from the royals over the years. This one shouldn’t have been different.   They get called out as bad quality, critiqued, we all tsk and move on.

[Katy]

4 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I thought the story was that Kate posted it on her Instagram for Mother’s Day and it got lifted by the news outlets?  Which I guess could happen to any of her Instagram pictures, but probably doesn’t happen to all of her pictures.  And I think under normal circumstances  no one would have thought twice about a paper running her Mother’s Day picture, no matter how photoshopped.  

I don’t fully get the bruhaha about this picture anyway, there have been other “bad photoshop” pictures ran from the royals over the years. This one shouldn’t have been different.   They get called out as bad quality, critiqued, we all tsk and move on.

So the conspiracy theories actually started with the Spanish press, not with Americans. My Spanish is poor, but from what I understand, several people from the palace (and some people have said Camilla, others said a now former Spanish nanny, others both) contacted a mainstream Spanish royal commentator (the equivalent of Good Morning America, not a tabloid show) and said that the palace was lying about Kate almost immediately. That the surgery went badly, that she had to be put in a medically induced coma, that her health was very poor, that the reason Will only visited once when Camilla was there constantly is because Kate wasn’t conscious. Or maybe their marriage was on the rocks. Or both. And that spun into a lot of Spanish medical speculation, including of her possible death. I do think the palace put out a statement that this was all false, but that seemed to only inflame the Spanish press. 

Then came numerous leaks, reportedly from Camilla’s people to the Spanish press that Kate was alive but had actually had a mental breakdown in response to Will’s affair with Rose, or possibly all of Rose’s children being Will’s. And I gather suddenly multiple major tabloid articles about Rose in the UK, and the gossip was that they were doing this because of Will’s plan to divorce and marry Rose. I don’t think many Americans paid attention to any of it, at least not those that weren’t gen Z on TikTok or X watching people talk about what the Spanish press was saying. 

Then, after days of press (Spanish, then French, then globally), asking for proof of life, the palace started with the fake pictures. The first was published by TMZ, which brought in Americans. It was apparently Kate being driven by her mom. Except it looked like Pippa, not Kate. But it couldn’t be Pippa because she was on vacation out of the country. And Pippa named her daughter Rose, which would seem to dismiss any affair speculation as well as any concern that her sister was on her deathbed, but that was ignored. 

Then comes the picture initially released by on Instagram, but minutes later officially released by the palace to major news agencies. People realized that not only was it photoshopped badly, but the clothing also looked like it exactly matched some public event they’d done as a family back in November, except Kate’s sweater and one of the boys shirts had been changed color. That’s when mainstream American news started talking about the mystery. And the attention increased because news follows social media trending topics, as it has for the last 15 years. 

I’m not saying Americans don’t have plenty to be ashamed of, but this instance didn’t start with us. And I don’t think it would’ve been mainstream here at all if the palace wasn’t putting out fake photos that needed to be retracted. I’m still not convinced Kate had anything to do with any of the pictures, even if someone did post an apology on instagram and sign it -C.  To be clear, my mistrust is more of the palace communication department than it is the princess. 

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Katy said:

And I don’t think it would’ve been mainstream here at all if the palace wasn’t putting out fake photos that needed to be retracted.

You know that the photo wasn't a face swap of her from Vogue, right? I'm not sure if you're still buying into that being what happened and why you call it fake. I didn't see any photo expert who weighed in see that as anywhere in the realm of possibilities.

I have no idea what the process is for the palace to get photos from the various royal families to release, but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility that they saw the photo Kate shared of her lovely kids on social media and decided it would be good to share it right then, so they turned around and sent it to the press. Who knows if they had any idea that Kate had retouched it beyond what new outlets allow?

[Katy]

8 minutes ago, KSera said:

You know that the photo wasn't a face swap of her from Vogue, right? I'm not sure if you're still buying into that being what happened and why you call it fake. I didn't see any photo expert who weighed in see that as anywhere in the realm of possibilities.

I have no idea what the process is for the palace to get photos from the various royal families to release, but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility that they saw the photo Kate shared of her lovely kids on social media and decided it would be good to share it right then, so they turned around and sent it to the press. Who knows if they had any idea that Kate had retouched it beyond what new outlets allow?

I never looked further into it because I honestly don’t care if the face was swapped. I still think the picture was from November from clothing and foliage alone. And I think anyone working in that office would be well aware of the photo requirements for press release. There’ve been plenty of instances in the past where the morning news shared the Instagram post instead of just the photo.  I think they were getting constant inquiries for proof of life and cared more about putting out the fire than about ethics. 

[Laura Corin]

2 hours ago, Katy said:

I still think the picture was from November from clothing and foliage alone. 

I can't see the tree foliage but the grass is green in England year round and sweaters are necessary most days in early March for an outdoor photo. Growing up in southern England I never left home without a cardigan year round.

I've no idea when the photo was taken, but nothing shows me that the March date is a problem.

Edited March 24 by Laura Corin

[Pawz4me]

7 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

I thought the story was that Kate posted it on her Instagram for Mother’s Day and it got lifted by the news outlets?  Which I guess could happen to any of her Instagram pictures, but probably doesn’t happen to all of her pictures.  And I think under normal circumstances  no one would have thought twice about a paper running her Mother’s Day picture, no matter how photoshopped.  

I don’t fully get the bruhaha about this picture anyway, there have been other “bad photoshop” pictures ran from the royals over the years. This one shouldn’t have been different.   They get called out as bad quality, critiqued, we all tsk and move on.

Maybe all of that's true, and maybe (probably?) it's stuff people who follow them would actually know. I don't follow them (to the point that I didn't even remember they had three kids, let alone what their names are), so all I know is that the picture was posted by major, reputable news outlets whose reporting on serious events I usually respect, then retracted as manipulated, and then everybody was talking about it. It doesn't make sense to me that they would have pulled it from her personal Instagram page and posted it. Reputable media outlets don't typically do that, I don't think, or at least w/o a bunch of disclaimers. And I don't recall seeing any of those types of disclaimers with this picture, but I only started paying some attention after it was retracted. At that point I had to go find it on the sleazier (IMHO) sites, since it was no longer on the reputable ones.

I have no idea what kind of paparazzi or social media crap she was dealing with before the publication of The Picture, but from where I'm sitting, based on what I know, it seems to me that the increased interest following that was totally self inflicted, and I totally do not get the blaming and shaming of people who are curious because of that incident.

[Heartstrings]

6 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

I can't see the tree foliage but the grass is green in England year round and sweaters are necessary most days in early March for an outdoor photo. Growing up in southern England I never left home without a cardigan year round.

I've no idea when the photo was taken, but nothing shows me that the March date is a problem.

I’d like to use this as a point that a)Americans typically have no idea about weather/climate of other countries, despite most taking a year of geography in school at some point and b) evidence that Americans almost certainly have no idea about sick leave policies in other countries if we don’t even understand weather.  
 

[Heartstrings]

8 hours ago, Katy said:

So the conspiracy theories actually started with the Spanish press, not with Americans. My Spanish is poor, but from what I understand, several people from the palace (and some people have said Camilla, others said a now former Spanish nanny, others both) contacted a mainstream Spanish royal commentator (the equivalent of Good Morning America, not a tabloid show) and said that the palace was lying about Kate almost immediately. That the surgery went badly, that she had to be put in a medically induced coma, that her health was very poor, that the reason Will only visited once when Camilla was there constantly is because Kate wasn’t conscious. Or maybe their marriage was on the rocks. Or both. And that spun into a lot of Spanish medical speculation, including of her possible death. I do think the palace put out a statement that this was all false, but that seemed to only inflame the Spanish press. 

Then came numerous leaks, reportedly from Camilla’s people to the Spanish press that Kate was alive but had actually had a mental breakdown in response to Will’s affair with Rose, or possibly all of Rose’s children being Will’s. And I gather suddenly multiple major tabloid articles about Rose in the UK, and the gossip was that they were doing this because of Will’s plan to divorce and marry Rose. I don’t think many Americans paid attention to any of it, at least not those that weren’t gen Z on TikTok or X watching people talk about what the Spanish press was saying. 

Then, after days of press (Spanish, then French, then globally), asking for proof of life, the palace started with the fake pictures. The first was published by TMZ, which brought in Americans. It was apparently Kate being driven by her mom. Except it looked like Pippa, not Kate. But it couldn’t be Pippa because she was on vacation out of the country. And Pippa named her daughter Rose, which would seem to dismiss any affair speculation as well as any concern that her sister was on her deathbed, but that was ignored. 

Then comes the picture initially released by on Instagram, but minutes later officially released by the palace to major news agencies. People realized that not only was it photoshopped badly, but the clothing also looked like it exactly matched some public event they’d done as a family back in November, except Kate’s sweater and one of the boys shirts had been changed color. That’s when mainstream American news started talking about the mystery. And the attention increased because news follows social media trending topics, as it has for the last 15 years. 

I’m not saying Americans don’t have plenty to be ashamed of, but this instance didn’t start with us. And I don’t think it would’ve been mainstream here at all if the palace wasn’t putting out fake photos that needed to be retracted. I’m still not convinced Kate had anything to do with any of the pictures, even if someone did post an apology on instagram and sign it -C.  To be clear, my mistrust is more of the palace communication department than it is the princess. 

At this point it seems reasonable to assume that those “leaks” were actually fake, either fake on the part of the leaker or fake on the part of the “journalist” who reported them.  It sounds a lot more likely that it was all a figment of someone’s imagination.  “Sources close to the palace” could mean a crazy person who thinks the queen is sending them messages through their breakfast toast.    

 

[maize]

4 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

I’d like to use this as a point that a)Americans typically have no idea about weather/climate of other countries, despite most taking a year of geography in school at some point and b) evidence that Americans almost certainly have no idea about sick leave policies in other countries if we don’t even understand weather.  
 

It's so silly too because there are places even here in the US where the grass is green year round! It's not just a matter of latitude either; the pacific northwest has a much milder climate than my part of the country even though it is further north. The idea that someone who isn't at all familiar with the local climate could judge the time of year based off a photo is not plausible. That particular photo had no glaring indications that the season was not early spring--no ripe fruit hanging on trees or autumn leaves, for example. 

[Katy]

6 minutes ago, maize said:

It's so silly too because there are places even here in the US where the grass is green year round! It's not just a matter of latitude either; the pacific northwest has a much milder climate than my part of the country even though it is further north. The idea that someone who isn't at all familiar with the local climate could judge the time of year based off a photo is not plausible. That particular photo had no glaring indications that the season was not early spring--no ripe fruit hanging on trees or autumn leaves, for example. 

I'm in the Midwest and it's been such a warm winter that my grass is green right now. My discussion of foliage has nothing to do with grass and everything to do with local reporters claiming they live in the area and admitting the leaves on the shrubbery behind them haven't looked like that since late fall.

Also, the clothing, minus a few color changes, was exactly what the entire family wore to an event benefiting children in November. If you search you'll see that many articles and videos analyzing why that picture is most likely from November, down to the designer of every item worn and what colors her sweater was released in. Which isn't new, there are style blogs devoted to tracking exactly what all of them wear every day they appear in public.

[Heartstrings]

I googled England in the fall and it’s just stunning with all the autumn leaves but that still green grass.  😍.  My grass turns brown along with the tree leaves. 

[Laura Corin]

16 minutes ago, Katy said:

 

Also, the clothing, minus a few color changes, was exactly what the entire family wore to an event benefiting children in November. If you search you'll see that many articles and videos analyzing why that picture is most likely from November, down to the designer of every item worn and what colors her sweater was released in. Which isn't new, there are style blogs devoted to tracking exactly what all of them wear every day they appear in public.

'Hmm... I've been wearing pyjamas since January and the kids have been wearing strict school uniform since Christmas.  Why don't we just wear what looked good in November '.

[Katy]

9 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

'Hmm... I've been wearing pyjamas since January and the kids have been wearing strict school uniform since Christmas.  Why don't we just wear what looked good in November '.

And that would be absolutely understandable, unless you’re the most photographed woman in the world and an entire industry relies on your fashion choices. When she re-wears outfits, she gets praised for practicality, and not wasting money. But when the entire family are together at a single benefit, when have they ever ALL worn exactly the same thing? I don’t follow those royal fashion accounts closely, but if they are to be believed, it’s never happened before. And frankly with 3 children, what’s the likelihood that all of the exact same garments fit the same 5 or 6 months later? 

[SKL]

I don't understand why this is even a topic.

Who effing cares if she took a fall photo and posted it in February?  I just posted a December 2022 photo of my kids.  It's not easy to get a photo of everyone looking pretty, awake, smiling, with no boogers and no traces of food/drink around their mouths, nobody's pinching a sibling, eyes open, and looking more or less toward the camera at the same time.  Or is that just my family?

Social media has doubled down and gotten crazier since the video.  Why are people so invested in this?  It's bizarre.

I guess it's a good reminder of how much sheer BS is out there, and how smart some people are about manipulating the public.

[Katy]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

I don't understand why this is even a topic.

Who effing cares if she took a fall photo and posted it in February?  I just posted a December 2022 photo of my kids.  It's not easy to get a photo of everyone looking pretty, awake, smiling, with no boogers and no traces of food/drink around their mouths, nobody's pinching a sibling, eyes open, and looking more or less toward the camera at the same time.  Or is that just my family?

Social media has doubled down and gotten crazier since the video.  Why are people so invested in this?  It's bizarre.

I guess it's a good reminder of how much sheer BS is out there, and how smart some people are about manipulating the public.

The reason it’s a topic is that photo was used as “proof of life” that the Spanish & French press were demanding. It wasn’t a current photo, so it stirred up even more controversy. That’s all. 

[SKL]

3 minutes ago, Katy said:

The reason it’s a topic is that photo was used as “proof of life” that the Spanish & French press were demanding. It wasn’t a current photo, so it stirred up even more controversy. That’s all. 

Did Kate refer to it as "proof of life," or is that other people's interpretation?

[SKL]

And since when do the Spanish and French press get to "demand" proof of anything from another country?  This is ridiculous.

[Pawz4me]

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

I’d like to use this as a point that a)Americans typically have no idea about weather/climate of other countries, despite most taking a year of geography in school at some point and b) evidence that Americans almost certainly have no idea about sick leave policies in other countries if we don’t even understand weather.  
 

I don't understand this, but perhaps it just illustrates how we all think differently. I would never, ever in a thousand years expect a foreigner to know what the typical weather is in my particular locale at any given time of the year, nor would I expect a  foreigner to have knowledge of American sick leave policies. It would be incredibly egotistical (to me) to expect a foreigner to have that kind of knowledge. I'd think it much more unusual for someone from a different country to know those things than to not know them.

[Katy]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

Did Kate refer to it as "proof of life," or is that other people's interpretation?

1 minute ago, SKL said:

And since when do the Spanish and French press get to "demand" proof of anything from another country?  This is ridiculous.

This is obviously speculation, but I seriously doubt Kate had anything to do with it. Who cares about press wars when you’re starting chemotherapy?  Even her “apology” was signed -C, and no it didn’t use the term proof of life. But that’s absolutely the term they used both in the press and in social media. 

IMO, everything about it is a bit ridiculous. But if previous royal autobiographies are to be believed, they all take it very seriously. Apparently hundreds or possibly thousands of jobs are people reporting on these people, every aspect of their lives, and the official releases and constant unofficial leaks are real, even if it’s more like an adult game of telephone than anything to be taken at face value. 

[Laura Corin]

1 hour ago, Katy said:

And that would be absolutely understandable, unless you’re the most photographed woman in the world and an entire industry relies on your fashion choices. When she re-wears outfits, she gets praised for practicality, and not wasting money. But when the entire family are together at a single benefit, when have they ever ALL worn exactly the same thing? I don’t follow those royal fashion accounts closely, but if they are to be believed, it’s never happened before. And frankly with 3 children, what’s the likelihood that all of the exact same garments fit the same 5 or 6 months later? 

I guess what I'm suggesting is that Occam's Razor is a useful tool in these febrile times.

[Katy]

14 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

I guess what I'm suggesting is that Occam's Razor is a useful tool in these febrile times.

To me Occam’s Razor would suggest the photo was more than likely an old, unreleased one edited by someone in the communications office, while Catherine was at home trying to heal, not getting the family to pose for a happy picture. 

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Katy said:

Also, the clothing, minus a few color changes, was exactly what the entire family wore to an event benefiting children in November. If you search you'll see that many articles and videos analyzing why that picture is most likely from November, down to the designer of every item worn and what colors her sweater was released in. 

 

1 hour ago, Katy said:

it’s never happened before. And frankly with 3 children, what’s the likelihood that all of the exact same garments fit the same 5 or 6 months later? 

Kate Middleton rumours about Vogue front cover are 'absurd', says expert

(Yahoo isn’t one of my usual sources, but Eliot Higgins, the expert they talk to, literally looks at manipulated pictures for a living-usually they’re of more consequential/terrible things.)

‘Addressing another conspiracy theory doing the rounds, Bailey adds: "Would also really like everyone to engage some critical thinking skills about a theory based on them all wearing the same outfits as Nov 23, except that the outfits are all different in at least one way."’

My understanding is some of the outfit differences involve not just color changes, but changes in the pattern on a a sweater, or layering a cardigan over something else. Implausible. Particularly not in a case where there are much simpler things that resulted in misalignments in the photo. 

39 minutes ago, SKL said:

Did Kate refer to it as "proof of life," or is that other people's interpretation?

No, she referred to it as “Happy Mother’s Day”

[Katy]

7 minutes ago, KSera said:

 

Kate Middleton rumours about Vogue front cover are 'absurd', says expert

(Yahoo isn’t one of my usual sources, but Eliot Higgins, the expert they talk to, literally looks at manipulated pictures for a living-usually they’re of more consequential/terrible things.)

‘Addressing another conspiracy theory doing the rounds, Bailey adds: "Would also really like everyone to engage some critical thinking skills about a theory based on them all wearing the same outfits as Nov 23, except that the outfits are all different in at least one way."’

My understanding is some of the outfit differences involve not just color changes, but changes in the pattern on a a sweater, or layering a cardigan over something else. Implausible. Particularly not in a case where there are much simpler things that resulted in misalignments in the photo. 

No, she referred to it as “Happy Mother’s Day”

It really doesn’t matter whether you change my personal opinion. The discussion was on how the press got to the point that it mattered that a photo had to be given a “kill order.” Or why the controversy from the release of that photo led to worldwide speculation that something was seriously wrong with the missing princess. Clearly, after her video, she’s alive. Exactly how fake that photo was no longer matters. She’s clearly alive. It no longer matters if it was completely fake or 20% fake. She’s alive. 

I’m probably always going to be much more cynical of everything the palace says than you. And you’ll probably always be much more likely to take everything they say at face value than I do. I don’t feel the need to change that about you. And you are not going to change my mind on the idea that everything they release has an agenda. That doesn’t mean I believe every ridiculous conspiracy theory. It just means I’ve read the books that discuss all the times they’ve blatantly lied to the public, so I pretty much take nothing they say at face value. 

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, Katy said:

I’m probably always going to be much more cynical of everything the palace says than you. And you’ll probably always be much more likely to take everything they say at face value than I do.

Nah, I have zero particular feelings or beliefs about trusting what the palace says (I rarely even hear what they say, since the royals aren’t an interest area of mine). My comments are purely to do with the photoshop aspects and what is or isn’t likely. That’s the only thing that got me looking at any of this. And then as a side effect of reading this discussion, I became very bothered by the health privacy/treating someone like a human being aspects of the discussion. That’s all though. I expect the palace is likely full of it on a semi regular basis. Who knows, but I don’t really care about that part. 

[Lawyer&Mom]

2 hours ago, Katy said:

The reason it’s a topic is that photo was used as “proof of life” that the Spanish & French press were demanding. It wasn’t a current photo, so it stirred up even more controversy. That’s all. 

This.  I was mildly following the “where is Kate” chatter, and was relieved when the picture was issued.  No matter what health/marriage drama may or may not be going on behind the scenes, at least she was fine.  Nothing to see here.  And then the picture was killed by the news agency.  Yikes.  And then they wouldn’t release the original picture.  Double yikes.  I didn’t need to know she had cancer, I didn’t want the intimate details of her health, I just wanted a nice clear “proof of life” picture, and I’m glad we finally have the video of her on the bench.  I’m very sorry she is dealing with cancer, but my interest in the story is basically over now that we know she’s okay (or as okay as you can be under the circumstances.)

[Corraleno]

I don't even understand why people felt entitled to "proof of life" — what if she really was dying or was in a coma and her family were desperately trying to come to terms with the situation while shielding the children? 

Why wasn't "The Princess has had surgery and needs time to recover, but she is expected to resume her duties some time after Easter" not an acceptable statement???

Edited March 24 by Corraleno

[Katy]

5 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

I don't even understand why people felt entitled to "proof of life" — what if she really was dying or was in a coma and her family were desperately trying to come to terms with the situation while shielding the children? 

Why wasn't "The Princess has had surgery and needs time to recover, but she is expected to resume her duties some time after Easter" not an acceptable statement???

I don’t know. The only sentiment I saw was that this was just like Diana all over again, the apple didn’t fall far from the tree, almost like people wanted the worst to be true in some kind of sick schadenfreude. My guess is that Harry’s claims that the leaks all come from inside the palace made people think at least some of the crazy rumors were true.  And historically, many of the leaks were true, even if twisted. 

While I do think it’s possible she had a turn for the worse in surgery and then recovered, I can’t imagine the dead or dying rumors being true and Pippa still going on vacation. I can’t imagine the accusations of domestic violence being true - shoving an annoying brother one night isn’t proof of any behavior towards a spouse. And while I absolutely believe the late Queen and current King and Camilla spin and leak stories, I have a harder time thinking that of Kate. Frankly she’s always seemed emotionally healthier than the rest of them, and far more gracious. Zero proof of that, just my impression of her. 

I do believe most people would have given her the time to recover if it wasn’t for the retracted photo. 

[TravelingChris]

On 3/17/2024 at 12:46 PM, Heartstrings said:

I think tik tok just lets more people make money from it.  Spreads it around instead of concentrating it at the top.  100s of tik tokers are making a bit of money instead of the Enquirer making 100s of thousands.  And none of those tik tokkers are getting into high speed chases.  

And remember that TT is a Chinese (PRC) company and creating social discourse and generally making people do dumb stuff is all part of the partially Cold partially hot world wae we are in. Our world has changed so much since WWIi, But we still have Axis of evil countries doing all sorts of things on not only us but other allies of ours.  I was reading a few weeks ago how the Russians have made fake news sites that  can seem legit.   They use mispellings, ,names that sound like something either a conservative or a liberal might think it is a new site for people like them. Which is very similar to what they were doing in 2016 election where they announced fake rallies on one topic or another and hoped peoplecwho supported a certain position would also have the con position people too and maybe there would be violence.

Quote