Kate’s doctored photo is particularly troubling – presenting big questions for the Royal Family

Published

2 years ago

March 17, 2024

admin

The Princess of Wales has taken the blame. She has apologised for the doctored Mother’s Day photograph, which was issued officially on behalf of the Royal Family.

“Give her a break”, she’s been in hospital and is recuperating after serious abdominal surgery, sums up a widespread mood of forgiveness.

“What does it matter?” chorus those eager to move on to more “serious” issues.

Sympathy for Kate, and what could be her understandable carelessness, should not wipe away concerns raised by the curious case of the altered snapshot.

This seemingly trivial matter touches on the credibility of the mainstream media in the photoshop era and the fair and accurate reporting of the monarchy and the Royal Family, who are the taxpayer-funded and government-enabled titular heads of the British state.

The Royal Family enjoy enormous privilege in exchange for living in a goldfish bowl. They are subject to public scrutiny because their function is to preside over and represent the nation in public.

The unforced error of the picture has led to global speculation on the state of Kate’s health and marriage.

This incident is also an indicative battle in the existential war between truth and fake news. That explains why the world’s five leading news agencies, including Reuters and Associated Press, took the dramatic step of issuing a kill notice on a picture they had distributed.

It could be a fuss about nothing. A busy mother inexpertly tinkering with the folds of clothing in a picture which she knew were going to be viewed by millions. We will never know unless the “Palaces” – either Kensington or Buckingham – publish the source material on which Kate, if it were Kate, was working.

The unreliable photo is particularly troubling because there was nothing forcing the Waleses to give it out. It was distributed to gain advantage and scotch public curiosity aroused by Kate and her three children staying out of sight since the beginning of this year.

Picture editing is nothing new

Crude airbrushing and cropping of images have gone on since William Fox Talbot invented photography. Alterations were obvious. Professional photographers were even expected “to touch up” the portraits they took.

Drastic doctoring of photographs used to be an almost comical trope associated with dictatorships. Whoops, there goes Trotsky who used to be standing next to Lenin!

In free societies, artfully posed official portraits were welcomed. Independent photographers were also given access to take pictures for themselves. As a result, the public also got to see shots of politicians and dignitaries grimacing, alone or at each other, or even nodding off at official functions.

Not cheating with photographs matters more today because it is so easy to do it. Anyone with a smartphone or laptop has a camera and the tools for editing at their fingertips.

Once digital copies are made it seems to be practically impossible to detect the full extent of manipulation that has taken place. For example, nobody has established definitively whether the picture of Prince Andrew with his arm around 17-year-old Virginia Giuffre is genuine or fake, as he has suggested.

Charlotte’s cuff, Kate’s zip, Louis’s jumper, the wonky skirting board and window frame – glitches have been spotted in the picture. Experts cannot confirm whether or not bigger changes were made.

They have identified at least three separate attempts to alter the central area of the picture, where the family are depicted.

Some media-savvy celebrities worked out how to exploit the public’s taste for candid photographs with studied informality. Who can forget Diana sitting alone outside the Taj Mahal or arriving dressed-to-kill at the Serpentine gala?

William has combined his mother’s taste for informality with a fierce desire to protect his and his family’s privacy. In place of stiffly-posed shoots, the Waleses got into the habit of releasing pictures on red letter days taken by Kate, “a keen amateur photographer”.

Only a bit better than what could have been shot by the average mum, her pictures gave a winning impression of unstuffy informality. This has now backfired given the possibility that the family may have been unable to muster a spontaneous image of relaxed happiness for this year’s Mothers’ Day.

The media’s unique offering

Keeping photography in the Royal Family satisfied the public appetite for pictures, while maintaining absolute control by the Prince and Princess of what we got to see. A similar desire for control is manifested by Kensington Palace, and for that matter Downing Street.

Both have appointed official photographers in recent years, consequently excluding independent professionals from some photo opportunities. Number 10 only released the pictures taken at COVID “parties” when they were forced to by official investigations.

As sources of pictures have proliferated and the struggle for access has intensified, mainstream news organisations have had to take care of what they, uniquely, can offer – fair and accurate reporting.

This includes taking great pains to verify what they distribute. Most reputable news organisations have been caught out by fakes and occasionally distorted their own analogue material in the past.

They have had to tighten up their procedures to deal with the growing ease with which fakes can be produced by anyone so inclined. The picture agencies put out the royal photo in good faith – it had come from an impeccable source after all – but on closer examination their trust was misplaced.

Citizen journalists, people offering their own material for use in reporting, have turned out to be unreliable.

Some, like those trying to get mentioned as “Hugh Janus” or “Ivor Bigun” on phone-ins, are out for a laugh.

Others, such as those who send in images of breaking news events, but which were actually taken elsewhere, just want to take part.

Then there are those who deliberately put out fake material to back up their argument and, just as dangerous, conspiracy theorists who try to discredit accurate material on the grounds that it has been faked.

Reputational minefield

As ever in the IT age, the US has led with the promulgation of fake news, including doctored pictures of both Donald Trump and Joe Biden. The UK is following. To give just one example, an AI-generated soundbite, allegedly spoken by Sir Keir Starmer, was recently widely circulated and discredited.

Monitoring and annulling fake material will inevitably be one of the mainstream media’s most important functions in this year’s elections.

Once one thing turns out to be questionable, bigger questions arise. The Royal Family’s partial openness about the King’s cancer and Kate’s operation without specifics has inevitably raised more questions than answers – likewise William’s sudden withdrawal from his godfather’s memorial for a vague “personal matter”.

Now the Royal Family have stumbled into a reputational minefield with their doctored picture.

Questions are not only being asked in the “sewer” of the internet, as Britain’s official royal correspondents are reporting dismissively.

Major foreign news outlets, including US network television, are openly speculating about William and Kate’s relationship.

The quickest way to dispel doubts will be if Kate is able to resume her full programme of public engagements after Easter, as expected.

The Waleses are not the only ones whose reputations are on the line.

The mainstream media are also under pressure to report truth as never before. Forgiveness, alas, is not the same as restoring trust.

UK

Trump hails ‘highest honour of my life’ at state banquet – as King references trade, Ukraine and environment

Published

12 mins ago

September 18, 2025

admin

Trump hails 'highest honour of my life' at state banquet - as King references trade, Ukraine and environment

Donald Trump said being the first US president to enjoy a second British state visit was “one of the highest honours of my life”, as he wined and dined with royalty at Windsor Castle.

Wednesday evening’s state banquet came after a day full of pomp and pageantry for Mr Trump, who was treated to a carriage procession, military parade, and plenty more lavish treatment.

Trump’s state banquet as it happened

Suited and booted for the banquet to bring the day to a close, sat between the King and Princess of Wales, the president thanked the monarch and Queen for their “extraordinary graciousness”.

Mr Trump said it was a “singular privilege” to be the first American president to be granted a second state banquet, adding: “This is truly one of the highest honours of my life, such respect for you and such respect for your country.”

He suggested it might be the last time it happens, adding “I hope it is actually” to laughter.

Mr Trump’s speech at the banquet followed one from the King, who referenced trade, Ukraine, and environmentalism.

The monarch said the UK and US “fought together to defeat the forces of tyranny” during the First and Second World War, and added: “Today, as tyranny once again threatens Europe, we and our allies stand together in support of Ukraine to deter aggression and secure peace.”

He mentioned trade between the two countries early in the speech, saying: “Today, our alliance spans every field of endeavour and shows vast potential for growth.

“The United Kingdom was your partner in the first trade deal of your administration, Mr President, bringing jobs and growth to both our countries.

“And no doubt we can go even further as we build this new era of our partnership.”

The King also referenced the environment and said that “in striving for a better world, we also have a precious opportunity to safeguard and to restore the wonders and beauty of nature for the generations who follow us”.

And in more lighthearted comments, the monarch said that “I cannot help but wonder what our forefathers from 1776 would make of our friendship” to audible laughter from the president.

Red Arrows, tech giants and French menu

The dinner capped off Mr Trump’s first day of his state visit to the UK, with the US president joining King Charles to watch a military parade – replete with a Red Arrows flyover – held at Windsor Castle.

He and first lady Melania Trump also paid tribute to the late Queen Elizabeth II at St George’s Chapel, where they laid a wreath at her tomb.

The banquet had 160 attendees, including the Prince and Princess of Wales, Sir Keir Starmer, and a long list of American technology CEOs – including Apple’s Tim Cook, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, and Microsoft’s Satya Nadella.

The Silicon Valley executives are in the country as the UK and US announce a landmark technology deal worth billions of pounds.

Sir Keir, meanwhile, has his focus set on talks with Mr Trump at his Chequers country retreat on Thursday.

Photos from Windsor Castle ahead of the banquet showed a lavish arrangement – with a menu in French as has been tradition since the Norman conquests of the 11th century.

Has the royal Truman Show for Trump been worth the enormous effort?

Dominic Waghorn

International affairs editor

@DominicWaghorn

Trump state visit II has so far been like The Truman Show.

A lavish production and spectacle revolving around just one man, while outside the set of Windsor Castle, beyond the big walls put up to fence it in, the world goes on.

The question is – has it been worth all the enormous effort and expense?

Click here to read more

UK-US bond ‘unbreakable’, says Trump

On the relationship between the UK and US, Mr Trump said that “seen from American eyes, the word special does not begin to do it justice,” before adding: “We’re like two notes in one chord or two verses of the same prose.

“Each beautiful on its own, but really meant to be played together. The bond of kinship and identity between America and the United Kingdom is priceless and eternal.

“It’s irreplaceable and unbreakable.”

He then made a reference to former US president Joe Biden, saying: “We had a very sick country one year ago, and today I believe we’re the hottest country anywhere in the world.”

Mr Trump also told the King he had raised “a remarkable son” in Prince William before saying: “Melania and I are delighted to visit again with Prince William and to see Her Royal Highness Princess Catherine so radiant and so healthy, so beautiful.”

UK

Has the royal Truman Show for Trump been worth the enormous effort and expense?

Published

12 mins ago

September 18, 2025

admin

Has the royal Truman Show for Trump been worth the enormous effort and expense?

Trump state visit II has so far been like The Truman Show.

A lavish production and spectacle revolving around just one man, while outside the set of Windsor Castle, beyond the big walls put up to fence it in, the world goes on.

The question is – has it been worth all the enormous effort and expense?

Britain’s constitutional monarchy has mustered all its ceremonial might to pull off an extraordinary show.

Latest updates on Trump’s state visit

Donald Trump has seemed genuinely moved by the performance put on by a cast of hundreds entirely for his benefit.

But there has seemed something missing – people.

Previous state visits have always involved the monarch’s subjects, lining the route as the honoured guest is transported by state coach.

On Wednesday, plenty of deer roamed Windsor Great Park, but not the public.

There was good reason for this royal Truman Show.

Like Truman Burbank, Donald Trump could not be exposed to the reality of life outside the castle fencing and walls.

Such a thin-skinned president might react adversely, it was decided by those organising this visit.

We will get a first sense of what Britain gets in return for all this on Thursday, the business end of this state visit.

What deals have been struck by the tech and business titans the US president has brought with him?

Will there be any sign that he has moderated his positions on Ukraine and Gaza? Will he make concessions to the UK on trade?

The real world starts crowding back in on Trump on Thursday afternoon when he faces journalists at a closing news conference.

Two words threaten to upset the president’s mood. Jeffrey and Epstein.

The gathering storm surrounding the infamous paedophile soured the mood ahead of this visit and claimed the scalp of Britain’s ambassador in Washington, Lord Mandelson.

Could the scandal also upset its outcome?

UK

MSPs vote to abolish Scottish legal system’s controversial not proven verdict

Published

6 hours ago

September 17, 2025

admin

MSPs vote to abolish Scottish legal system's controversial not proven verdict

MSPs have voted to abolish Scotland’s controversial not proven verdict.

The Scottish government’s flagship Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill was passed on Wednesday following a lengthy debate of more than 160 amendments that began the day before.

The new legislation makes a series of changes to the justice system, including scrapping the not proven verdict; establishing a specialist sexual offences court; creating a victims and witnesses commissioner; reforming the jury process to require a two-thirds majority for conviction; and implementing Suzanne’s Law which will require the parole board to take into account if a killer continues to refuse to reveal where they hid their victim’s body.

Following Royal Assent, the legislation will be implemented in phases.

Justice Secretary Angela Constance said: “This historic legislation will put victims and witnesses at the heart of a modern and fair justice system.

“By changing culture, process and practice across the system, it will help to ensure victims are heard, supported, protected and treated with compassion, while the rights of the accused will continue to be safeguarded.

“This legislation, which builds on progress in recent years, has been shaped by the voices of victims, survivors, their families and support organisations, and it is testimony to their tireless efforts to campaign for further improvement.

“I am grateful to those who bravely shared their experiences to inform the development of this legislation and pave a better, more compassionate path for others.”

Not proven verdict

Currently, juries in Scotland have three verdicts open to them when considering the evidence after a trial, and can find an accused person either guilty or not guilty, or that the case against them is not proven.

Like not guilty, the centuries-old not proven verdict results in an accused person being acquitted.

Critics have argued it can stigmatise a defendant by appearing not to clear them, while failing to provide closure for the alleged victim.

Notable cases which resulted in a not proven verdict include Sir Hugh Campbell and Sir George Campbell, who were tried for high treason in 1684 for being present at the Battle of Bothwell Bridge.

The murder of Amanda Duffy, 19, in South Lanarkshire in 1992 sparked a national conversation around the existence of the not proven verdict and double jeopardy rules.

Suspect Francis Auld stood trial but the case was found not proven by a jury and an attempt to secure a retrial failed in 2016. Auld died the following year.

In 2018, a sexual assault case against former television presenter John Leslie was found not proven.

And in 2020, former first minister Alex Salmond was found not guilty on 12 sexual assault charges, while one charge of sexual assault with intent to rape was found not proven.

Victim Support Scotland (VSS) had earlier urged MSPs to put aside party politics and vote “for the intention of the bill”.

Kate Wallace, chief executive of VSS, believes the act is a “solid foundation” on which to build further improvements.

She added: “The passing of this act represents a momentous occasion for Scotland’s criminal justice system.

“It marks a significant step towards creating a system that considers and prioritises the needs of people impacted by crime.”

VSS worked with the families of Arlene Fraser and Suzanne Pilley to spearhead Suzanne’s Law.

Ms Fraser was murdered by estranged husband Nat Fraser in 1998, while Ms Pilley was killed by David Gilroy in 2010. To date, the women’s bodies have never been recovered.

Before the bill, parole board rules dictated that a killer’s refusal to disclose the information “may” be taken into account.

The new legislation means parole boards “must” take the refusal to cooperate into account.

Carol Gillies, sister of Ms Fraser, and Gail Fairgrieve, sister of Ms Pilley said: “We have done everything possible to make this change to parole in memory of Arlene and Suzanne, and for other people who have lost their lives in such a horrific way.

“For our families, the passing of this act and the change to parole are momentous.”

Read more from Sky News:
Why next year’s Scottish elections could get messy

The Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Labour voted against the bill.

Although in support of the abolition of the not proven verdict, the Scottish Tories said they had been left with no alternative but to oppose the bill after the SNP rejected a series of amendments.

The party had called for a Scotland-only grooming gangs inquiry; wanted victims to be told if a decision was taken not to prosecute an accused; and for all victims to be informed if a plea deal was struck between defence and prosecution lawyers.

They also wanted Suzanne’s Law to be strengthened, which would have compelled killers to reveal the location of their victim’s body or risk having their parole rejected – ensuring “no body, no release”.

MSP Liam Kerr, shadow justice secretary, said: “This half-baked bill sells the victims of crime desperately short.

“By ignoring many of the key demands of victims’ groups, the SNP have squandered the chance for a long overdue rebalancing of Scotland’s justice system.

“The Scottish Conservatives’ common sense amendments would have given this legislation real teeth but, by rejecting them, the nationalists have delivered a victims’ bill in name only.

“While we back the abolition of the not proven verdict, the SNP’s intransigence on a number of key issues meant we could not support this bill in its final form.”