Ernegirl Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 I think the PR people are managing this very carefully now. A video as opposed to a photo. Kate’s statement was filmed right in front of spring daffodils, just before the truthers contest the timing I hope the wording will pull up the trolls. She made it more about her children, and about everyone dealing with the big C. Actually her terse public statements recently including the response to the photo saga seem especially poignant now, signed off as C 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernegirl Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 8 minutes ago, Crombek said: I do not get the drama about the 'doctored' photo. Not one single posed shot of them exists on the internet without some form of digital cleaning up. Not one single photo of MOST people exists on social media without some form of altering. It's utterly ridiculous. I think it’s just context. Whether KP intended it or not, the world expected proof of life. A photo with questionable authenticity was only going to add fuel to the flames. The internet is peopled now with reverse Mulders: “I want to disbelieve.” 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post StillFreddiesMum Posted March 22 Popular Post Share Posted March 22 I am freaking devasted about this news. Just heartbroken. She's so young and so healthy with 3 little kids. All I can see is that William and Catherine adore each other and love their kids to bits. That's a rarity even outside royal marriages. I wish her as much time, space and privacy they need as a family to get to the other side of this. 15 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STBG 2 Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 11 minutes ago, Crombek said: I do not get the drama about the 'doctored' photo. Not one single posed shot of them exists on the internet without some form of digital cleaning up. Not one single photo of MOST people exists on social media without some form of altering. It's utterly ridiculous. It is important to the reputable news agencies who publish the photos. I read an article about the work that goes on in these places by people who are employed just for the purpose of identifying fakes is much bigger than we all realised. They pay huge money for photos, they have to be real. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amdirel Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 Such sad news. The video must have been so hard to do. Chemo's a bitch. I hope she doesn't get too many side effects. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crombek Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 1 minute ago, STBG 2 said: It is important to the reputable news agencies who publish the photos. I read an article about the work that goes on in these places by people who are employed just for the purpose of identifying fakes is much bigger than we all realised. They pay huge money for photos, they have to be real. Only in the sense that the media willfully fuelled the hysteria around the whole thing. Even the language they use was obnoxious. They'd be rejecting photos all day every day now that AI is being used, funny how we never hear about 'kill orders' being sent out about those... 5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie3Girls Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 11 minutes ago, Crombek said: I do not get the drama about the 'doctored' photo. Not one single posed shot of them exists on the internet without some form of digital cleaning up. Not one single photo of MOST people exists on social media without some form of altering. It's utterly ridiculous. Especially photos with multiple kids. They have targeted in on the photo of Queen Elizabeth with the children as well … that many kids, getting a shot with every single child looking and smiling nicely, eyes open. Especially when you know even the slightest flaw in the photo will be picked over and pointed out. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amdirel Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 26 minutes ago, Crombek said: I do not get the drama about the 'doctored' photo. Not one single posed shot of them exists on the internet without some form of digital cleaning up. Not one single photo of MOST people exists on social media without some form of altering. It's utterly ridiculous. Agreed. There's literally been a phone developed that has the capability of replacing faces with a better version, and everyone I know that has kids, has said what a fantastic idea it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STBG 2 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 18 minutes ago, Crombek said: Only in the sense that the media willfully fuelled the hysteria around the whole thing. Even the language they use was obnoxious. They'd be rejecting photos all day every day now that AI is being used, funny how we never hear about 'kill orders' being sent out about those... I think there is more to lose with BRF stuff. It was not the legitimate media who fueled this it was the tabloids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crombek Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 minute ago, STBG 2 said: I think there is more to lose with BRF stuff. It was not the legitimate media who fueled this it was the tabloids. Which is owned by... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STBG 2 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Crombek said: Which is owned by... Not Rupert Murdoch. It was Associated Press and Reuters amongst others who 'killed' the photo. Edited March 23 by STBG 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamferalz Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 44 minutes ago, Crombek said: I do not get the drama about the 'doctored' photo. Not one single posed shot of them exists on the internet without some form of digital cleaning up. Not one single photo of MOST people exists on social media without some form of altering. It's utterly ridiculous. I think it’s more of an issue today because of the threat of AI, especially in the context of elections. I feel bad that Kate was given a hard time but I am glad the scrutiny is there. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STBG 2 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, purpleduck said: Apparently it was a BBC film crew used for the clip, probably partly to prevent the "editing" issues of late. Won't stop the nutjobs but should keep some happy https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a60255677/kate-middleton-farm-shop-video-conspiracy-theories/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinsel Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) 4 hours ago, Andi said: I shouldn't have even brought it up now, but in the BBC video Kate looks like what you would expect a 42yo mother to look like who has been going through a hard time, not a spritely 20-something bouncing through the market. Anyway just my opinion, not everyone will agree obviously! I'll stop now, I feel awful about her news and wish her all the best. Hmmmm, out shopping with my husband at a farm market for a change of scenery/break from my cares vs sitting down in front of a BBC film crew announcing to the world that I have cancer? I'm sure my demeanor would be completely different in those two scenarios, too. I think most people's would. Edited March 23 by Tinsel 10 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Anne Bonny Posted March 23 Popular Post Share Posted March 23 I really don't quite get the general public's "relationship" with the royals, particularly with the female royals. It's like so many people regress to being very young children who feel insecure whenever mum is out of sight. I feel like all I've been hearing for weeks is half of England screaming "MUMMY!!!" because the mum in question needed to have a wee in peace. I really hope The Firm don't expect anything much further from her in terms of dealing with the public. Having recently done adjuvant chemo- the cognitive impairment it gives you is really something else. I couldn't write coherent sentences let alone speak them, I couldn't read because I had no short term memory. Even at my 3 month post treatment checkup I lost the car in the hospital carpark because I couldn't remember where I'd parked it. It basically gives you a preview on what life will be like if you get dementia. Everything is confusing and it takes everything you've got to fake like you know what's going on so you don't freak out the people who care about you. I imagine when "the people who care about you" expands into being a good half of a nation it would be a nightmare. 6 23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooguru Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 28 minutes ago, STBG 2 said: I think there is more to lose with BRF stuff. It was not the legitimate media who fueled this it was the tabloids. 23 minutes ago, STBG 2 said: Not Rupert Murdoch. It was Associated Press and Reuters amongst others who 'killed' the photo. Are you saying Reuters and AP aren't legitimate media? I'm confused by these two posts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Void Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, Julie3Girls said: Different situations. William and Kate’s very young children made it a very different scenario. She didn’t get diagnosed with cancer until more recently, it was initially just what they said - abdominal surgery. Might have suspicious and worries, but they were probably in limbo state waiting on results. When they did get results, she needed time to process it herself, and then they needed the time to work out and what to tell their children. There is no way they could have told the media/public straight away, they needed time. People thought 3 months off for surgery was weird, that was the first thing people started questioning...I suspect they knew it was cancer much earlier. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STBG 2 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Mooguru said: Are you saying Reuters and AP aren't legitimate media? I'm confused by these two posts. No I was saying that they very much are which is why they are more likely to kill a photo and they are not owned by Rupert Murdoch. It was in response to the question 'who owns the legitimates'. Edited March 23 by STBG 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crombek Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 But Reuters & AP weren't the ones fanning the hysteria. It was just such an overblown reaction to a typical, everyday media process. Was the photo even sent to media with the intention of a PR release? Or posted to their SM account and picked up on by the media? Because that's the impression I got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaitForMe Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 25 minutes ago, Romeo Void said: People thought 3 months off for surgery was weird, that was the first thing people started questioning...I suspect they knew it was cancer much earlier. I reckon it was "probably not cancer" due to her age, health and other risk factors, but not ruled out of course. They didn't want the speculation of cancer when it was seen as unlikely. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Julie3Girls Posted March 23 Popular Post Share Posted March 23 9 minutes ago, Romeo Void said: People thought 3 months off for surgery was weird, that was the first thing people started questioning...I suspect they knew it was cancer much earlier. The time off never seemed weird to me … yes, longer than most people would normally take off work, but if you had a job that allowed you to have a bit longer off, and you could financially afford it, why wouldn’t you? Especially when your “job” involved so much scrutiny of every little move you made, where your physical appearance was the topic of every gossip magazine … she needed to be 100% before she came back. That said, I’m sure they did have suspicions and worries. She obviously had a mass removed. Testing, then probably more testing to make sure it hadn’t spread etc. There was no way they were going to tell their children until all the testing had been finalised. And if I had a cancer diagnosis, I would be needing some time to process it myself. Really though, does it matter WHEN they knew? Cancer is a big horrible scary diagnosis, and people need to deal with it in whatever way works for them. For Catherine, for their children. 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaitForMe Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, STBG 2 said: I think Harry would have had a smaller PR set up than the future king though because Will must be the more protected one. Let's face it, Harry has not really had one at all if outcomes speak for their worth. As for conspiracy therapies I have just heard a beauty. It is H&M's fault for Charles and Kate's cancers because they've been brought on by the stress they have caused. He shared an office for much of the time, and he spoke generally about all of the offices. Each family has their own small independent office that is essentially disconnected to the others. Its a very odd setup but I reckon is likely because of a lack of trust in the wider family. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiglet Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, WaitForMe said: Based on everything Harry has said, they really don't have these big PR teams. They have a small office, with not a lot of people, and not necessarily a dedicated PR person let alone a team, its more a media team than PR. Theres an assumption that the royals have the same setup as a typical big name celebrity but they don't, they operate very differently. Its basically all in-house for royals for one thing. According to the 2023 Sovereign Grant report, they have 50 different members of staff - I wouldn't call that small. https://www.forbes.com.au/news/careers/prince-william-kate-middleton-royal-ceo/ If they can't manage at least one dedicated PR person with that many on staff, I'd be very surprised. So either someone is not doing their job properly, or there is a lack of communication with /information coming through from the principals that is preventing them from doing so. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STBG 2 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 5 minutes ago, Crombek said: But Reuters & AP weren't the ones fanning the hysteria. It was just such an overblown reaction to a typical, everyday media process. Was the photo even sent to media with the intention of a PR release? Or posted to their SM account and picked up on by the media? Because that's the impression I got. That is what I said exactly. They simply announced the photo had been killed and why it came to their attention. The rest of the gutter stuff was not driven by them. They probably would have published the photo if it had passed the sniff. It would have been sent to them or been picked up elsewhere I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bethlehem Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 1 hour ago, STBG 2 said: I think Harry would have had a smaller PR set up than the future king though because Will must be the more protected one. Let's face it, Harry has not really had one at all if outcomes speak for their worth. As for conspiracy therapies I have just heard a beauty. It is H&M's fault for Charles and Kate's cancers because they've been brought on by the stress they have caused. I hadn’t given any thought on the whole thing until it started to blow up and then it was “oh wow. People be crazy” Has it been poorly handled by the palace? I think that it could have been done better. Is any of this Harry and Meghan’s fault? Absolutely not. it’s completely nuts that people are saying that. Right up there with the other conspiracy theories. And nasty. I hope that Catherine recovers well. Same for Charles. Same for all with cancer. 4 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now