THE TIMES: Where is Kate? The royal family attracts more speculation by the day

[TallerSally]

On today's front page, the Times' Kate Mansey reports on the contrasting approaches taken by KP and BP's comms teams in their handling of the extraordinary situation the RF's currently in. It kicks off with the current host of the US's Daily Show (formerly hosted by the formidable Jon Stewart) asking some questions:

"While the King hosted friends and met world leaders, the Palace’s reluctance to comment on the Princess of Wales’s condition has created a rising sense of panic
One of America’s most popular TV comedy programmes was asking the question that had captured the nation. It was not about the Super Tuesday primary contests ahead of the US elections, or the State of the Union address, which elicited an exaggerated yawn from the presenter.

Instead, The Daily Show’s Ronny Chieng turned to look straight into the camera to ask: “Where is Kate Middleton? Where are you, Kate?”

There was no rush to provide reassurance this week from the Prince of Wales, who appeared to begin his working week on Friday with a visit to the Oval cricket ground for his Earthshot environmental campaign. Aides said that William had been busy all week, just not in a way that was visible to the public.

The King was doing the opposite. Away from public duties on doctors’ orders while he undergoes cancer treatment, the monarch had been expected to take this week as scheduled time off. Despite being told to “slow down” by the Queen, who took her own advice and flew to sunnier climes for a few days of relaxation, the King was ramping up.

He was photographed meeting world leaders and ambassadors from his living room at Buckingham Palace. Away from the cameras, he hosted friends who rallied round for afternoon tea and dinner dates. He insisted on the “more public” option of travelling between Buckingham Palace and his more comfortable private quarters at Clarence House in the State Bentley, so that he could “be seen”. Quite what the Queen made of it all from her sun lounger is anyone’s guess, but there are those in the palace who have an idea."

A tongue-in-cheek piece, but raises some interesting questions: have KP messed up the comms around Kate? and William? What is really going on with them? Why is the Royal family-funding public kept in the dark for so long, when usually not a couple of days go by without us having some nicely staged photo of some kind from Kensington Palace?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/where-is-kate-prince-william-king-charles-cancer-khktpx9bm

People were like "That's a bit odd" or "this doesn't quite stack up" and you and your fellow thread police took that as "we want to see Kate's medical records! And bits of her stomach! Now!" for some bizarre reason.

Hmm... people weren't just "like that's a bit odd" though, were they? People suggested there should be "evidence" of her illness. And they have suggested she is getting divorced, that she obviously has mental health problems, has anorexia, has been spirited away by the security services, has disappeared for six months, that it's much more serious than we were led to believe, she's disfigured, this is bigger than a medical condition or surgery, she's on steroids, she's gained weight through lack of activity, "she's stuck indoors for half a year", she's fallen out with William, it's a physical condition brought about by mental health issues, it could be a pregnancy loss or medical menopause, maybe she's got a stoma, she's going to be gradually faded out.

I'm sorry I couldn't get through the whole thread but that's a flavour of it.

Not quite as reasonable as you are trying to make out there...

People have a tendency to speculate when things don't quite add up. It's not necessarily malicious, it's just natural curiosity.

Most of what’s been posted has not been the result of natural curiosity. There has been a concerted campaign to find things to ‘not add up’ and amplify theories and rumours online. Actually there hasn’t been anything which didn’t add up. They said she was hospitalised following surgery and would be away until at least Easter. That’s what’s happened.

Because any surgery that takes someone out of comission for 2-3 months will have at least some psychological effect. And it is imperative that the people around are sensitive to that. And in this case, "the people around" does include the British public.

What do you think doesn't add up?

There was nothing that "didn't add up" so no reason to speculate about anything.
There were details that quite reasonably were not given out and thats what people started speculating about. There's a difference.

I disagree. Lots of things were atypical for someone hugely famous in hospital: no known visits from friends and family (apart from William. Once.) No photographs of her coming or going at all for months on end, despite our hugely disrespectful and intrusive msm. "LOOK! OVER HERE!" Stuff from BP that gave us all unwanted mental pictures of Charles and his enlarged prostate.

I could go on, but I suppose if you're determined to see everything above as perfectly normal then that's what you'll do. That's your comfort zone. Mine is asking awkward questions.

I could go on, but I suppose if you're determined to see everything above as perfectly normal then that's what you'll do. That's your comfort zone. Mine is asking awkward questions.

On MN? You are funny.

It's got nothing to do with comfort zones, it's about logical thinking. The bizzare theorising was not "asking awkward questions " - it was prurient speculation.

I think she fancies herself a modern day Woodward and Bernstein. Asking those awkward questions, interrogating the establishment, unearthing the big scandals etc etc.

You really can't fathom that when they said she wanted privacy and there wouldn't be any updates, that meant no photos of her or her visitors?

It's "perfectly normal" to want privacy when going through medical treatment. It's "perfectly normal" to decide they're not going to update unless there is something to say. And it's "perfectly normal" then for there to be no photos or updates.

Maybe she didn't want her medical condition picked apart in the papers and social media when she has children whom I'm sure they are trying to protect from worrying about their mum.

https://apple.news/A9g57JvHeSnytd26KaYeHcg

oooooohhhh!

Celebs/their staff manipulate photos all the time, surely. I remember Gigi Hadid’s arm being lengthened in a shot, it looked absurd. I also remember the Spice Girls having nine legs in a magazine in the 1990s.

As someone said on another thread - the point isn’t it’s photoshopped. It’s that the press are publicly pulling it over ‘concerns’

Ah ok. Well, I guess we’ll see what those “concerns” are in due course.

The concerns are that it was manipulated from its original source.

Does anyone think the press are more aware of something going on than is being said and this is their way of saying it.

(It happens when there is a big story about to break but the press aren't allowed reveal it in case they are sued, so instead they publish unrelated stories about the person in question for seemingly no reason at all?).

Holy Maloney!!!!!

Just when you thought KP’s PR team had started to get their act together… this!!

The mother of all embarrassments!…

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/10/uk/news-agencies-recall-image-of-catherine-princess-of-wales/index.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68526972.amp

Get their act together about what? Not giving constant updates like they said they wouldn’t?

A “kill notice” sounds pretty dramatic:

from The Independent:

“The first picture of the Princess of Wales after her surgery has been pulled by major picture agencies over fears it has been manipulated.
The image, taken by Prince William in Windsor this week, was released by the royal family to mark Mother's Day and showed Kate smiling surrounded by her three children.

But just hours after it was posted on social media, picture agencies including the Associated Press and Reuters issued a "kill notice" over the image and asked its clients to remove it from all platforms.
“At closer inspection it appears that the source has manipulated the image,” AP said. “Clients please be advised that the following story has been killed and should no longer be used”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/kate-middleton-surgery-latest-news-gary-harry-meghan-b2510195.html

This is all so weird.

Newspapers have very strict rules about photos. These are the AP guidelines. It can be something quite minor.

Yes, but this photo isn't by a photojournalist, is it?

So I was right...it was photoshopped and has been pulled 🤨