The Royal Family #46

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
MemoryLane said:
No, the majority of folk don’t care if a photo is edited, but a lot don’t care that the family themselves are a magnet for child abusers. They still queue up and wave their flags.

The PR thing. I meant it’s created a lot of sympathy for her. As in leave her alone, she’s not well blah, blah, blah.
Click to expand...

Again I think the wrong language is being used here. They didn't just take a photo and edit it. All available evidence suggests it is a combination of more than one photo and/or was not taken in 2024. Issuing false images to media agencies is a big deal. Especially given the issues about fake news, AI generated content etc. It's silly IMO to insert the stuff about Andrew etc in response to my comment. I am replying to posts about it being an edited social media post like many others. But it is not like a celebrity having vanity edits made to an original image.

While it may have generated some sympathy for her, it also brought various rumours about the couple into the mainstream. That is absolutely an example of why I think this has backfired. Doing absolutely nothing and having a PR friendly interview about whatever part of her illness she wishes o discuss would have garnered more sympathy. Creating a global series of rumours about whether she is even alive and having US talk shows querying if the Marquess of UpTheBumley will be replacing her is less positive.
 
MemoryLane said:
No, the majority of folk don’t care if a photo is edited, but a lot don’t care that the family themselves are a magnet for child abusers. They still queue up and wave their flags.

The PR thing. I meant it’s created a lot of sympathy for her. As in leave her alone, she’s not well blah, blah, blah.
Click to expand...

Can I ask you something? As an anti-monarchist wouldn't it be more useful to advocate your views as why having a monarchy as a head of state should be abolished instead of hoping that the RF destroy itself? I think - as someone who doesn't oppose the idea to abolish the monarchy (but I am not british so my view doesn't matter) - it's not really about the people constituting the RF but about the principle in itself that should be discussed. But anti-monarchists seem to just wait in the wings that one member of the RF does a mistep to make a move and make their whole line of arguing around a specific incident.

Kate, William, Camilla, Charles and all are humans with their flaws and are deeply priviligied. As anyone in the spotlight they want to craft a narrative that suit them. But they are who they are because of the function than the british people want them to occupy. I don't think anyone else would do better or worse than they do (or not in a decisive way at least). The idea that a family is chosen by God is a fiction to explain their position and it only works if the British people accept that myth.

I see nothing wrong in having a constitutional monarchy as political system as long as the people under that system are happy with it. Its relevancy should be questionned as it is healthy to have this debate. But it does surprise me that people believe its relevancy should be discussed upon the desire of a RF member to have some privacy around her health or family pictures released to satisfy the curiosity of the public.
 
IrishMeeja said:
Again I think the wrong language is being used here. They didn't just take a photo and edit it. All available evidence suggests it is a combination of more than one photo and/or was not taken in 2024. Issuing false images to media agencies is a big deal. Especially given the issues about fake news, AI generated content etc. It's silly IMO to insert the stuff about Andrew etc in response to my comment. I am replying to posts about it being an edited social media post like many others. But it is not like a celebrity having vanity edits made to an original image.

While it may have generated some sympathy for her, it also brought various rumours about the couple into the mainstream. That is absolutely an example of why I think this has backfired. Doing absolutely nothing and having a PR friendly interview about whatever part of her illness she wishes o discuss would have garnered more sympathy. Creating a global series of rumours about whether she is even alive and having US talk shows querying if the Marquess of UpTheBumley will be replacing her is less positive.
Click to expand...
My comment wasn’t worded well! The constant pressure from people “on a gossip site”not wanting gossip or opinions and stating it’s not a big deal to edit the photo is what I’m really getting at. I’m in complete agreement with you. The photo being edited is a problem for every reason you have just stated. I don’t get why people think it’s no big deal. Their behaviour over the last few weeks is just plain weird.

I never even said I opposed the monarchy. What I said was, regardless of their behaviour and who they associate with, you will have people who will always wave a flag for them.
 
Great_Kate said:
It was sarcasm. I don’t believe for a second Wiliam has any super injunction out there. Neither for Rose or Kate‘s disappearance or whatever. If the press sits on dirt it’s because they choose not to release it for their own gain. Either to not piss KP off and loose any intel/spot on the rota or because it doesn’t suit them right now and they run it when they need it. If he has an affair or divorce it’s not affecting in anyway the running of the UK. A super injunction is not out there to protect his personal profile. It doesn’t matter if people think he is the devil himself. He is second in line and he will be king (if they don’t get abolished or he says he drops out). Just look at Charles. And Queen Camilla crowned alongside him. Who would have thought it possible just ten years ago? The public’s opinion can be changed or at least make the majority stop to care. Their strategy was a master class. I really don’t think a judge would grant it and I doubt he even thinks he needs it.
Click to expand...

Oh. That will teach me to read things half asleep😂
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest Kate cut together several photos? That’s just what some internet sleuths came up with and some experts jumped on it. Is it possible to manipulate a photo that much - yes. Do we really believe she is that good at photoshop? And if they employ someone that is that good they wouldn’t have made all the other mistakes that are easily spotted.
The biggest problem is that it’s very probably not from Mother’s Day or even 2024 while that’s how they submitted it. Adding some minor edits that clash with their guidelines (guess KP should have read the fine print). There is some reasonable guessing it was taken late autumn oder early winter. It’s hard to say because the plants next to houses (sunny and protected spots) can be in full bloom/green already and the children won’t change as much in just 3 months.
 
Great_Kate said:
Correct me if I am wrong, but there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest Kate cut together several photos? That’s just what some internet sleuths came up with and some experts jumped on it. Is it possible to manipulate a photo that much - yes. Do we really believe she is that good at photoshop? And if they employ someone that is that good they wouldn’t have made all the other mistakes that are easily spotted.
The biggest problem is that it’s very probably not from Mother’s Day or even 2024 while that’s how they submitted it. Adding some minor edits that clash with their guidelines (guess KP should have read the fine print). There is some reasonable guessing it was taken late autumn oder early winter. It’s hard to say because the plants next to houses (sunny and protected spots) can be in full bloom/green already and the children won’t change as much in just 3 months.
Click to expand...
It’s one explanation for some of the issues with the photo: https://news.sky.com/story/the-came...e-data-says-about-kates-edited-photo-13093203

"It was fairly dark conditions it was taken in. I don't think there is any flash on it," he said.

"It's exposed fine and composed well. What has almost definitely happened - several pics taken, kids are goofing around, you know what kids are like, pulling faces, etc - and she may well have gone, 'I have not got a perfect one'.

"It's possible the original frame has image blur - and she has decided to take parts of a frame from another shoot and make changes.

"She has sat there for too long looking at - and worrying about something. She had a picture and she wanted it to be absolutely perfect - studio perfect. If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
 
As I understand it if they had just put it out on social media it wouldn't have mattered if it was photoshopped but they sent it out to the news agencies. They now aren't now trusting of what comes out of the Kensington Palace which for relies heavily on PR and their image is a big issue. THis guy from one of the news agencies explains what happens.


---
Multi-21 said:
On This Morning today they said there was no way the sun would publish that video without an ok from KP first
Click to expand...


But given they put out the dodgy photo on Mothers Day even if they did OK we can't trust them as a source and that's why the original photo was an issue.
 
The dedication 👏🏼😂

IMG_7686.jpeg
 
Multi-21 said:
On This Morning today they said there was no way the sun would publish that video without an ok from KP first
Click to expand...

It was originally shared by TMZ? They would have paid the person a fee for verified footage or they usually get tipped off by publicists, agents, lawyers or not very famous celebrities themselves so they can send their own paparazzi to capture a story.

I guess people were looking for unedited, real-life footage of Kate. Since the edited photo was pulled as it didn't meet the allowed standards, no one would probably believe any footage shared directly by them.

As @Multi-21 said, it seems likely they were looking for this photo to be taken, as Kate isn't wearing anything to be discreet/not wanting to be recognised. So most likely it is a setup photo.

I'd be interested to know what the TMZ fee was 💸🫰 the nosier bastard in me wants to know where that money came from 😂


---
Sharing just for the LOLz:
 
Last edited:
SunshineRae said:
The dedication 👏🏼😂

View attachment 2824762 q
Click to expand...

Why did everyone assume those were Xmas decorations and not just fairy lights and fake plants or whatever on the hut? Critical thinking has truly been lost.

PS, if those are your Xmas decs, you need to get more festive 🎄😁
---

---
@Shesaidwhat? This one's for you, Ja'mie's not not quite Mr G though 😂
 
Last edited:
Irena said:
Neither me, nor my husband wear a wedding ring at home. Occasionally when we go out, one of us might forget to put it on 🤷🏻‍♀️
There are also fairy lights above our fireplace, but it’s definitely March. I kept them because it’s been a long winter and they look pretty.

Beginning to wonder if I really exist or if I’m generated by AI 😆
Click to expand...


Have you been to a farm shop though and does your husband have a baseball cap?
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top