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

oh come on. Her team can put out a statement of thanks no problem, its no hassle to her whatsoever. You're reaching a bit there.

They don't share photographs of the children other than official occasions, and things like birthdays. Understandably, the children's privacy is protected. There's no reason to see them. Particularly going to and from school.

Nope, he wasn’t releasing stories, that’s what their PR team is for

He was vetting. He would get the final say on whether an article ran.

Really? So the RF control the press, then? Ok.

Stories about them, they sure do

If the country is her employer, where is her employment contract and who signed it? What are the terms? If you were in the same position as Catherine right now, and your employer was hounding you whilst you were on sick leave, would you consider yourself as being bullied and harassed by the workplace? Not to mention your employers posting all sorts of misogynist and sexualised crap about you all over social media as well. Gosh, Catherine, the country's employee, has a very strong case for a successful employment tribunal on the grounds of sexual harassment and bullying.

I feel what is making this situation stranger is that King Charles is being pretty public about his health condition whilst Kate isn’t. So that juxtaposition is probably making people wonder why their press teams aren’t approaching their illnesses in the same way.

If Charles was also quiet I’m sure we would assume they are both recovering and William is covering.

I think she has the right to be undercover for a while whilst she gets better. There may be more to the story but it might come out in a long while.

Granted, but it does mean we're just relying on the official line, just as we are re Kate. No more evidence that they're at school than there is that she's at home in bed until further notice.

This thread seems to be divided into people who feel more comfortable accepting things at face value, and people who feel more comfortable asking questions.

So why can't they control the Times?

Goodness. Well the control can't be very effective. I've seen loads of negative stories about them over the years.

My employer would know why I was on sick leave, expect updates and ask an estimated date of return.

Nobody is ‘hounding’ Kate. You’re being deliberately naive as to her unique status and the extremely foreseeable reaction to her situation.

As for sexual harassment, what on Earth are you talking about? You sound hysterical.

I have wondered whether the long recuperation time is because she requires a series of operations to correct whatever the issue is. I know this happened to both my mother and I - albeit over a longer period with healing time between each.

Anyway, I do hope she is on the mend and people would stop questioning why she hasn’t been seen in public.

I believe everyone is asking questions. Some are asking people who appear to "know" the RF controls the media how that is being achieved and where the evidence is. Given that apparently the RF's PR on this has been a disaster, that begs the question: where is this control you speak of?

Ask all the questions you want to, @Pluralism . Nothing is stopping you. I have no idea why we need to see the children, personally.
I also think that curiosity and asking questions is fine, however it's not the same as crossing the line into conspiracy theories and tinfoil hat behaviour, which has been prevelant on this topic of late.

Calling me hysterical is rather sexist. And my post was tongue in cheek at the notion that the nation is Catherine's "employer". We are not, and that is precisely the reason she's not required to give us any more information than has been given.

Yes, sexual harassment. You clearly didn't see the numerous revolting SM posts about what is really ailing Kate in their warped opinions. They are all over the earlier threads on Catherine on this board, go and take a look. If those were the words of an "employer" they would constitute sexual harassment.

wtf should she?
All this prurient nonsense and hysteria is just ridiculous. The Palace have said what she wishes to be disclosed. End of.
I am beginning to wonder if the MNers on here demanding information would be happy for every minutiae of their surgery/health/business to be published worldwide on social media and in the press?. Imagine your local Facebook speculating on your health issues? Everyone giving their opinion of every single detail.
I actually suspect not.
Ffs give it a rest.

They don’t photograph them going to school day to day

But anyway they are there and going to school matches and whatnot.

This is what I think. Her face looked bigger than normal in that photo (maybe due to steroids or lack of activity weight gain). I don’t think she wants to recover in the public gaze and have fun poked at her. Twitter would be vile (not that it isn’t already).

Charles has cancer, not sure if it’s been named or treatment or stage of cancer and the press and social media mostly leave him to it. Kate has abdominal surgery and certain areas of press, social media want details, some even to the extent demand details and if that is not enough make shit up.

We’re not members of the royal family

this ‘oh I don’t understand why they’re remotely interesting to anyone and should be treated like any other person’ is faux naive and silly

Another point is that her extended convalescence seems so at odds with most contemporary medical advice for those who've had major surgery. I was forced to get up and shower a few hours after my c-section, and to try and move around as much as possible to avoid blood clots etc. Sent home a couple of days later (which was quite late by most people's standards) and the health visitors and midwives I saw were clear that getting out and about in the fresh air, as long as i didn't overdo it, would aid my recovery. It was a very complicated C-section and I had other major health concerns at the time, just for context. Even in the victorian era, women like Kate would be convalescing in the fresh air of Margate or wherever, not stuck indoors for half a year.

It's a shame for Kate as a person if this is the concern. If people would be so nasty as to run her down if she didn't look well, then shame on them.

The pressure she must/puts herself under must be mind boggling if so.

This ìs what is so odd. In the past they have been able to ' control' the press. Especially William. But it looks like they have basically ramped up speculaton about Kate and then printed a press release about William in the same article. The Palace have managed to get the papers to hold the line re an innocuous photo of Kate in a car, and get the announcement that she would be inspecting the Coldstream Guards in June, so way after her expected recovery time pulled, for an event she would be expected at.

The palace have released two statements about her operation and condition and when she is planned to return. It said she had abdominal surgery and was doing well and thanks people for the well wishes. She is expected to return to duties after Easter. What else do people need to hear? Respectfully, her health is absolutely none of our business.The palace have said they won't make any more updates on the matter unless there is something significant to share. The implication being no news is good news. The press are stirring this up knowing full well that some people love to openly worry about these things and have an opinion on someone who they think they own. I wish her a speedy recovery and the privacy she is entitled to while she is recovering.

Well, for an institution which "controls the press" they sure have had some bad headlines, articles and news stories over the years.