That this is MASSIVE news

[Flowerfairie]

Princess of Wales: Kate image withdrawn by three news agencies amid 'manipulation' concerns https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68526972

There was an horrendous photograph that was released ( assuming with permission) of a young woman deceased in a bathroom from purging- The pathology reports were there too.
It was on an anti - pro ana site.
A swift death.
Bulimia is a terrible condition .

Because the press and the royal family have an arrangement, and they are now at odds with one another. Why would the press be disgruntled with the royal family?

The question of why there have been no pictures of Kate released in the last few months that haven't been a grainy pap shot or faked in some way, is a side issue but also interesting. When you link these two things, conspiracy theories naturally arise.

That's some very interesting timing ...

The Independent article is very interesting timing. Either an Easter egg, or a bit of pressure on the RF. There's almost definitely something the press want to release.

100% this! The idea that Kate tinkered about on Photoshop then circulated this photo to the world's media is ridiculous. People will believe literally anything...

Why? Because it shows that some of us refuse to take things at face value?

If the press really do know the 'real' story and are hushing it up, that's odd - strange that a secret like that can be kept in this day and age.

Then again, there are black spots in the media. Try to get local or national press to ever mention the name or activities of any social worker or safeguarding head, for instance, even if you offer proof, and they won't do it. It's off limits. They also allowed not to turn up to any coroner's inquest, in Surrey, at least. Likewise the press seem to know about proactive end-of-life decisions in hospitals and care homes - basically, euthanasia - and while they certainly have hinted at it, the truth is generally repressed, it's impossible to get the story out there. It's been shut down...

After the Britney controversy, this feels relevant. Given the hush-up over the late Queen, where it must have been known she had bone cancer for maybe two years before she died, and how on earth does someone just depart this earth when having been pictured standing and smiling with the then PM just the day before? Not saying it's impossible - of course, one could suffer a heart attack or a stroke - but none of that has been put out there. So it feels as if another cover-up would be expected. And, of course, it's in contrast with the previous tone, where Kate would be wheeled out for every photo op.

Have you been taking your meds?

There was no cover up over the Queen's death. She was 96 years old and it was obvious that she was becoming frailer over the last couple of years of her life. None of us needed to know all her medical details and it is very common for elderly people to die with cancer, but not necessarily of it.

Latest is that Kensington Palace is REFUSING to release it.

If that doesn't scream suspicious, I don't know what does!

Conspiracy theories arise because of social media giving platforms to nonsense which is no-ones business.

And once someone has their teeth into a conspiracy theory there's social contagion and it all goes very, very bad.

It was a year ago that Nicola Bulley drowned. Seemed pretty f-ing obvious to me from the beginning that she'd gone into that river, intentionally or not. And that's exactly what happened.

But it blew up into madness and MN was guilty of playing a part, and you had 'experts' inserting themselves into it and making money off their podcasts, books or YT channels.

You can't win with the social media monster.

The official statement said she was having planned surgery and would not return to public duties (aka public life) before Easter. Which is still weeks away.

And weirdos online couldn't accept that and came up with nonsense and online harassment. Same as they did with the Nicola Bulley case and numerous others. And whatever is released as an attempt to quell it just won't satisfy the weirdos and they'll see any engagement as evidence of something sinister.

And the fact is, it's none of our business.

I don’t think the fact that she plays around on photoshop is cause for concern or a falsehood, it’s the fact that countless PAs, press secretaries and not forgetting family members, didn’t pick up on what a poor job it was.

Again for those saying it’s not a big deal, press agencies deemed the editing too much to fit in with their guidelines so won’t publish it. It’s more than a bit of airbrushing in a magazine.

I still can’t understand, and I’ve said this on the thread already, why a picture was posted at all. Especially with the bonkers conspiracy theories, if you don’t look well, don’t post at all. Post a picture of the children, post an old unseen picture from Christmas, post a picture of you sitting in the garden from behind, there were so many other options than this.

The fact that I can see that, and I have little interest (usually!) and absolutely no knowledge of social media/PR management, makes it all the more suspicious to me.

What, the fact that the British royal family could be hiding something significant from the taxpayers who fund them?

I'd say that's fairly massive...

Yes, gastric rupture, that's what I said.

My theory is it’s a recent photo of the children but it’s a less recent photo of her photoshopped in. For the simple reason that she probably isn’t happy with the way she looks at the moment after illness and surgery and despite asking for privacy to recover, hysterical people with nothing better to do with their time than speculate and make up rubbish about someone they don’t even know, are hounding her to bounce back and prove that she is the supernatural perfect embodiment of a person that her PR are paid mega bucks to portray her as. Where being portrayed as perfect falls down is that it makes other people feel inadequate and the only way they can feel better is to try and tear down the perfect (or seemingly perfect) people. It’s very sad really.

Will you just stop with all your sensible, non hysterical explanations. Please.

This is what I don’t understand - every single photo I see (in the press or on social media) is edited. I’m one of the few people I know who posts unedited photos, most of my friends edit pictures even if its just adding a filter. I’d be more shocked if a royal photo wasn’t edited! She attempted editing and failed - hardly news.

This is more of less where I am.

Although I do think it remains very wrong, in principle, that the RF would circulate highly edited images, to the media, as if they were genuine newsworthy photos.

An explanation:

Mother takes photograph with her three children. In no shot do three children and a mother all look sensible whilst looking at the camera. Therefore, the final photograph is a mix of four different photographs.

Kate is an amateur photographer, and therefore will have tools like Photoshop. She has just taken the best headshots and put them together. It's like Google's Best Take, but instead of it being built into the camera software it was just made by Kate.

Sorry not sorry. It’s just human nature I suppose. There are the people striving to make themselves and their lives look perfect and then the people who let that superficial nonsense get to them to such a point that they pounce on any sign of vulnerability like a pack of wolves.

Social media, sure, but I don’t think most photos you see in the press are edited in any meaningful way. This was from the bbc’s article yesterday:

”Most news organisations follow their own strict guidelines on the use of manipulated photographs, only using them when accompanied by an explanation that the image has been changed from the original.

News agencies, such as AP, therefore make a commitment to their clients that their photos are accurate and not digitally manipulated.
AP's rules only allow "minor adjustments" in certain circumstances, including cropping and toning and colour adjustments, as well as the removal of dust on camera sensors. It says changes in density, contrast, colour and saturation levels "that substantially alter the original scene" are not acceptable.”

What are you on about?

Who is pouncing where?

Do you mean people discussing their publicly funded heads of state?

The RF are the wolves.

I doubt it’s quite as minor an explanation as this, given the palace’s refusal to release any unedited photos.

So, now Kate is editing photos to send to the media? Yep.