The Media & Their Narratives.

[BIAD]

Allowing for the public's acceptance that the fashion business relies heavily on photo-editing and manipulation
of images to enhance their products, along with colour-enhancing in commercials for the same reason, a lazy
legacy media decided that members of the Royal family should not be allowed to tinker with their own shots
of themselves and their kids.

However, after discovering that the image sent to the 'news-creating' agencies of this dying trade wasn't from
anything connected to artificial intelligence, a technology that threatens thousands of jobs in their litte fiefdom,
the short-lived outrage quickly died down.

The image of the recently hospitalised Princess of Wales and her children was briefly discussed in another
thread her at Rogue Nation and a day later, the furore had quelled in the established shovellers of shite when
they begrudgingly accepted what their dwindling followers had dealt with for decades.

But then came the grumblings from a sector of their kind that are known as 'Royal Photographers' and 'Royal
Correspondents', a small group who speak in a high social-class voice and offer a perception that they have a
greater access to thr realms of royal households than the regular plebians.

As we slowly move away from the divisive acts of race and gender, the class/caste levels of 'privilege' -a status
many in all the types of information-gathering enjoy, will be quickly butter-patted to hopefully reflect that even
with wealth, happiness will still be beyond the reach of all of us.
................................

Anyway, Kate admitted she messed about with a picture and if I were her, I would wonder if I'll end-up
hitting a pillar in the Alma tunnel because of this defiant act.


Here's Politico's version of they call a 'scandal'.

Kate Middleton photo scandal shows Britain’s royals are flailing in the digital age

The Prince and Princess of Wales have fallen foul of increasing public suspicion about manipulated images.


'Britain’s royal family is learning the hard way about navigating the AI-driven world of deepfakes.
Kate Middleton, wife of the heir to the British throne Prince William, was forced to publicly apologize
Monday for the clumsy editing of a family photograph she released over the weekend.

Ironically, the Mother’s Day snap had been released — in part — to quell a surge of online conspiracy
theories about the whereabouts and wellbeing of Kate, who is yet to make a public appearance after
spending two weeks in hospital in January for an unspecified medical condition.

But the move backfired spectacularly when online commentators immediately spotted the image of the
princess and her children had been doctored prior to release. International picture agencies refused to use
the photo after confirming the image had been manipulated.

The subsequent furor only added fuel to the fire for the online conspiracists — and sent trust in the British
establishment plummeting even lower. “In today’s information environment, any manipulation of an image,
even relatively minor edits done with no intention to mislead, can raise suspicions,” said Chris Morris, chief
executive of the London-based fact-checking charity Full Fact.

“The rapid spread of image manipulation tools has changed the rules of the game. Conspiracy theories thrive
in information vacuums, so if you want to be trusted, you have to be transparent.”

Anatomy of a photo
Suspicions about the photo began to surface on social media almost immediately after it was released by
Kensington Palace on Sunday morning.

The most obvious photo-editing error appeared to be the inconsistencies in the sleeve of Middleton’s daughter
Charlotte, social media users pointed out. Other X (formerly Twitter) users pointed to various background details
they deemed suspicious as further indications the photograph was not fully authentic.

The wild online speculation which then flowed ranged across the spectrum — from the suggestion the photo
had been taken on a Google Pixel 8 phone, which automatically selects and merges the most flattering pictures,
to claims that Kate’s head had been supplanted onto someone else’s body to hide her supposedly mysterious
absence.

Experts said it was unclear exactly what had happened. Middleton’s statement Monday said only that “like many
amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing,” and apologized for the “confusion.” “It’s all but
impossible to say what tools have been used — it could be photoshop style tools, which incorporate elements of
AI and generative AI, or something else. Currently the technology doesn’t allow you to trace what tools have been
used,” says Hannah Perry, lead digital researcher at the London-based think tank Demos.

Trusted sources
The royal family’s latest PR disaster stems from a growing trend within the U.K. establishment — both among
the royal family, but also senior politicians — to maintain tight control over their public images, either by taking
their own photos or by employing private photographers to release only carefully-sanctioned images to the public.

In the past, the U.K. royals would frequently bring in a trusted photographer from a big news agency like the Press
Association, or a member of the pool of accredited news photographers, to take an official image marking key
occasions like birthdays or anniversaries.

But the Princess of Wales, herself a self-styled amateur photographer, has often preferred to release her own
pictures of her family. And in a world where the public is increasingly suspicious about the provenance of images
—  AI-generated images like the “Balenciaga pope” and the arrest of Donald Trump went viral last year — taking
ownership comes with risks.

Matthew Usher, a former staff photographer for U.K. regional newspaper the Eastern Daily Press, who photographed
the royals at their Sandringham estate for 22 years, said changes in technology which allow sophisticated photo
editing mean people already “question every image.”

Photos that come from a “trusted agency” like AP or the Press Association, or via local newspapers, are governed
by agreed standards which mean you “don’t mess about with [a photo] at that level,” he added. AP’s official “editorial
standards” state that it does not use altered or digitally manipulated images.

It was because of this, amid suspicions the picture had been manipulated, that AP joined the Press Association,
Getty Images, AFP and Reuters in issuing a “photo kill” notice — an industry term that retracted the image and
instructed clients to remove the photo from their systems — on Sunday...'

Archived Politico Article:


Here's the BBC's version of what outrageous act was performed by the Princess of Wales and after looking
closely at the image posted in EndTheMadness' 'Meme Scholar' thread, I would suggest this latter offering
has been enhanced too!