To not understand the fuss about this photo?

[beeonmybonnett]

Why is it all over the news about the Princess of Wales’ photograph being “manipulated “ (I assume that means it was photoshopped)

Am I missing something or have the media just lost the plot? It’s a photo? Who cares if she made some changes to it? I’m not sure how that makes our lives any different. Quite frankly, I find it absurd that this is even being given airtime when there’s much more important issues to be concerned about e.g. Gaza/Israel, Ukraine and cost of living!

They aren't celebrities, it's similar to if the PM had done this

If you think we the people are going to give these incredibly privileged toffs a free pass, you've got another thing coming

@Southern68

Once again for the people at the back….

Because she’s not just a nice ordinary mum, she’s the mother of the future head of state. I can’t believe this needs spelling out again and again.

Bless you 😂

Nor did I! Who stares at people's fingers in photos?! And why?

Well, they've managed not to 'obey the mob' before, so I don't know what your point is. Besides, this shambles just made it worse.

Another think coming, not another thing coming.

But anyway... the fact that they are overpriviliged etc etc makes it even less important to me. Even if it is entirely fake, a composite of faces and bodies and she isn't currently any where near well enough to sit for a photo I still don't get why they are important enough to matter.

It's not a photo that fakes a meeting between important people, or fakes a significant political event.

It's a bit silly and a bit embarrassing for the Waleses but important or significant? Nah.

Have you seen the original then?

It’s ridiculous and not worth a second thought.

No it doesn’t matter. They should not have posted it though and just ignored all the ridiculous speculation about her whereabouts. They said what had happened and where she was and the best bet would have been to leave that that. Instead they fed the conspiracy theorists ammunition.

I suspect it's because the press (UK and Non UK) have access to more facts than the general UK public and had every reason to be suspicious of the photo.

They don't want to be seen acting as RF apologists when they know all is not what is being presented. But can't say because of UK law. I'm not being a conspiracy freak, I don't particularly care about the Royal Family or this photo but know that what is reported about the Royal Family in foreign press doesn't make it into the UK press.

I don’t get the hysteria either op. Probably generated by the same people with lots of surplus toilet rolls.

This. I can’t believe people aren’t reading between the lines.

Of course it wasn’t pulled because the photo was touched up. Most of her photos are airbrushed, same as all other celebrities.

Something is amiss and the royals have a gagging order on the press. They’re drip-feeding. Notice that the independent posted an article entitled “who is Rose Hanbury?” Yesterday.

I am Irish and dont normally give two figs about the RF but that photo looks like she is superimposed into the picture. A small bit of editing/filtering is fine but is the real issue that the photo has been completely doctored? If she isnt able to sit for a photo, is she very very ill and they are hiding it?

In other news, Prince William didn't smile in a wedding photo back in 1999, so his face was "altered". BBC News | UK | Smile! William photo touched up Inform the Red Arrows!

It wouldn't surprise me if all is not as it seems, though. I can't help wondering if the Queen actually died at a different time from when they said, possibly years previously, and that in the last few years, we were looking at Dame Helen Mirren in a wig. It's also very convenient that the Queen Mother died soon after her 100th birthday, and that the Queen lived just long enough for her historic Platty Joobs.

Well those that know about these things did, and that is why the image was pulled. It is not just a small matter.

Well yes, like Woody waving with Buzz lightyears arm, pretending everything was ok.

That was In reply to scalt sorry.

I agree it's just a photo of Catherine and her DC on mother's day.

I agree it's just a photo of Catherine and her DC on mother's day

tell me you really don’t get it without telling me.

It’s a heavily photoshopped photo released as an ‘official photo’ from the monarchy. They didn’t tell anyone it was photoshopped. As others have mentioned it’s not just some mum posting a happy snap.

Also concerning that the royal family are photoshopping their children. Talk about creating a false image of perfection. If they photoshop they need to declare it.

How someone so wealthy can stuff up something so simple is beyond me. They must have a massive PR team and they can’t get this right.

But what it claims to show is still unimportant. OK it's a faked photo of Catherine and the children but it's only showing unimportant people for an unimportant event. Like I say, embarrassing sure, but significant? I'm still not getting it.

Sounds like there’s probably lots of things you ‘don’t get’ @DappledThings !!

When I first saw it I saw nothing odd about it. Even with the "16 glaring errors" highlighted I still don't see most of them. People have too much time on their hands if they're noticing that "the top of the step looks wonky", "The bottom of the step looks wonky" etc

@Yasai
This. I can’t believe people aren’t reading between the lines.

Of course it wasn’t pulled because the photo was touched up. Most of her photos are airbrushed, same as all other celebrities.

No. This isn't tabloid press pulling it it's NEWS AGENCIES.

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, make a commitment to their clients that their photos are accurate and not digitally manipulated.

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.

This is because news agencies report on crimes, war, politics, global events. They have to have rules on accuracy so they don't manipulate the narrative by using doctored images.

The rule is firm and there are no exceptions.

You don't seem to have understood the media at all and the difference between news agencies and other press