Mailwatch(ed) Forum

I had the misfortune to land upon a royal conspiracy video while scrolling through the facebooks.

The commentator was concerned about Kate's (Princess of Wales for less engaged viewers) lengthy absence.
A collage of all the best conspiracies followed.
* Died during surgery and "they" are covering up.
* In an induced coma because of complications.
* In detention after - failing to be perfect, protesting about husband's extra-curriculars, demanding an expensive divorce.
* Murdered by Hazza and Megs.

A reflection of what happens when you don't feed the 24 hour news cycle.

What about “she’s had the final procedure to become an Illuminati Lizard”

Watchman wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 2:05 pm What about “she’s had the final procedure to become an Illuminati Lizard”

I'm pretty sure the comments covered that.

Whilst all the conspiracy theories are batshit somebody did make the point that lots of journalists will be very unforgiving if they discover that the palace have been withholding information about the Princess of Wales while churning out press releases claiming that all is fine and dandy.

satnav wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:01 pm Whilst all the conspiracy theories are batshit somebody did make the point that lots of journalists will be very unforgiving if they discover that the palace have been withholding information about the Princess of Wales while churning out press releases claiming that all is fine and dandy.

They did it for Brenda and Phil, so there's a precedent.

Then again, I think it was when George VI was terminally ill that one of the broadsheets had a front page headline "WHAT IS WRONG WiTH OUR KING?" They'd never get away with that now - we're going backwards in so many ways.

Also, you are obliged to offer up fawning coverage of people who almost certainly regard you as a nuisance at best and swamp-dwelling scum at worst.

Old 70s band still touring with the original bass player and drummer.

Apparently the image that has been circulating all day of Kate with her 3 children has been dropped by multiple photo agencies on the grounds that it has been manipulated. This will throw the conspiracy theories into overdrive.

It certainly looks that way. Look at the boy on the right's right hand, and the girl on the left, where her clothing joins her wrist.

So the 'Prince' of 'Wales' uses a Google Pixel 8 and believes the marketing hype about its ability seamlessly to manipulate photos.

Get a professional in next time, mate. You can afford it.

Walked past William and family on Brancaster beach in Norfolk a few months back while out dog walking.
It was a strange set up. While William chatted away to someone, his wife stood stone silent in a baseball cap that celebs wear to hide from the paps. Meanwhile the protection officer was making sand castles with the kids and keeping an eye on the royal dog. Doubt those tasks were covered in his Special Branch training.
My dog usually acknowledges passing humans but walked straight past the royal couple. Dogs can smell a wrong ‘un.

A wife not seen for a while, passed off by the husband as illness. This is the plot of Rear Window. Has anyone checked the flower beds at Adelaide Cottage?

She’s looking pale

AOB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2024 10:19 am A wife not seen for a while, passed off by the husband as illness. This is the plot of Rear Window. Has anyone checked the flower beds at Adelaide Cottage?

Not to be outdone by that outlandish theory

Have to smile at the Mail’s coverage of the “photo”; day of issue they had one of their on-call body language experts telling us all the signs that tell us everything was absolutely fine, today it’s minute examination of every aspect that may have been edited

This really does look like amateur hour on the part of Kensington Palace. Whoever released this picture must have known that it was bound to receive an enormous amount of scrutiny yet they released a picture that had been heavily doctored. Instead of quelling all the recent speculation the picture has actually lead to more speculation. Why didn't they just bring in a respected photographer like Arthur Edwards who could have just taken a few snaps which would have closed down all the conspiracy theories that have been flying around for the last couple of months?

There's a good possibility she's got something like Crohn's or colitis, had surgery and she's getting used to the recovery process.

Most damning part of the meta data on Katie's doctored image is surely that it was taken with a Canon DSLR that retails at about £2,500 .

satnav wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2024 9:29 pm This really does look like amateur hour on the part of Kensington Palace. Whoever released this picture must have known that it was bound to receive an enormous amount of scrutiny yet they released a picture that had been heavily doctored.

I suspect an amount of "I can do that, how hard can it be?" arrogance from someone in Kensington Palace.

I'd be inclined to take her at her word. She is an 'amateur photographer'- albeit with access to the very best gear, and the latest Lightroom and Photoshop. We all mess around with photos and I doubt she's ever thought about the difference between editing and manipulating.
Editing is cropping, altering colour saturation, colour balance and perhaps definition.
Manipulation is altering the image in some material way (for example, at its simplest, using the Photoshop 'Replace Sky' command or one of the other presets). I do that all the time, makes for some nice images.
For publication editing is OK but manipulation isn't - for AP even removing red-eye counts.
I very much doubt she has made that distinction, or even heard of it.

And I can't for the life of me see what she has done - unless she has taken two images, where one of the kids has a happier face and swapped them over. Easily done and wedding photographers do it all the time.

So - TL:DR - nothing to see here, move along, leave the poor bitch alone.