The Fort Worth Press - Photo furore a 'PR disaster' UK royal family can ill afford

USD -
AED 3.672976
AFN 68.000247
ALL 88.850316
AMD 387.359994
ANG 1.802868
AOA 936.500085
ARS 965.246696
AUD 1.45265
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.696925
BAM 1.758101
BBD 2.019776
BDT 119.537957
BGN 1.754762
BHD 0.376868
BIF 2895
BMD 1
BND 1.289137
BOB 6.91267
BRL 5.459902
BSD 1.000315
BTN 83.687537
BWP 13.14486
BYN 3.273675
BYR 19600
BZD 2.01636
CAD 1.344615
CDF 2865.469215
CHF 0.84462
CLF 0.033109
CLP 913.970149
CNY 7.031901
CNH 7.01917
COP 4150.05
CRC 519.304238
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 99.340032
CZK 22.469801
DJF 177.719793
DKK 6.679625
DOP 60.374994
DZD 132.331218
EGP 48.702303
ERN 15
ETB 120.075027
EUR 0.89579
FJD 2.18685
FKP 0.761559
GBP 0.746315
GEL 2.725003
GGP 0.761559
GHS 15.850215
GIP 0.761559
GMD 68.502909
GNF 8622.999901
GTQ 7.732482
GYD 209.285811
HKD 7.785175
HNL 24.870011
HRK 6.799011
HTG 132.194705
HUF 353.24038
IDR 15157.6
ILS 3.75645
IMP 0.761559
INR 83.6248
IQD 1310
IRR 42092.509472
ISK 135.380267
JEP 0.761559
JMD 157.85878
JOD 0.708702
JPY 143.441997
KES 128.999845
KGS 84.2222
KHR 4074.999591
KMF 441.949869
KPW 899.999433
KRW 1329.77497
KWD 0.30516
KYD 0.833655
KZT 479.751899
LAK 22082.506766
LBP 89600.000263
LKR 303.096768
LRD 193.875014
LSL 17.339846
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 4.749977
MAD 9.672977
MDL 17.46056
MGA 4545.000264
MKD 55.123824
MMK 3247.960992
MNT 3397.999955
MOP 8.021934
MRU 39.720089
MUR 45.870227
MVR 15.359783
MWK 1736.000219
MXN 19.37048
MYR 4.15398
MZN 63.850049
NAD 17.340459
NGN 1627.504511
NIO 36.774956
NOK 10.41835
NPR 133.899951
NZD 1.579065
OMR 0.38497
PAB 1.000315
PEN 3.770992
PGK 3.91725
PHP 55.9915
PKR 277.850214
PLN 3.811904
PYG 7785.51845
QAR 3.64075
RON 4.457002
RSD 104.88267
RUB 92.802053
RWF 1342
SAR 3.751574
SBD 8.309731
SCR 13.504512
SDG 601.490189
SEK 10.11332
SGD 1.284598
SHP 0.761559
SLE 22.847303
SLL 20969.494858
SOS 570.999958
SRD 30.24899
STD 20697.981008
SVC 8.752753
SYP 2512.529936
SZL 17.33989
THB 32.709985
TJS 10.633467
TMT 3.5
TND 3.057499
TOP 2.342103
TRY 34.129702
TTD 6.806598
TWD 31.898803
TZS 2730.999729
UAH 41.330487
UGX 3700.840487
UYU 41.70974
UZS 12764.99994
VEF 3622552.534434
VES 36.766964
VND 24605
VUV 118.722009
WST 2.797463
XAF 589.650771
XAG 0.031067
XAU 0.000377
XCD 2.70255
XDR 0.739988
XOF 589.498855
XPF 107.304112
YER 250.299903
ZAR 17.3262
ZMK 9001.203679
ZMW 26.533327
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    3.1000

    60.1

    +5.16%

  • SCS

    0.1100

    13.12

    +0.84%

  • CMSC

    0.0299

    25.1

    +0.12%

  • CMSD

    0.1150

    25.12

    +0.46%

  • NGG

    -0.3700

    70.11

    -0.53%

  • GSK

    0.1200

    40.98

    +0.29%

  • RELX

    -0.3300

    48.53

    -0.68%

  • BCC

    0.1300

    141.78

    +0.09%

  • RIO

    2.8400

    67.42

    +4.21%

  • BTI

    0.2000

    38.1

    +0.52%

  • AZN

    -0.2700

    76.87

    -0.35%

  • RYCEF

    0.0100

    7.07

    +0.14%

  • JRI

    0.1200

    13.42

    +0.89%

  • BCE

    0.0300

    35.13

    +0.09%

  • BP

    -0.0300

    32.83

    -0.09%

  • VOD

    -0.0200

    10.09

    -0.2%

Photo furore a 'PR disaster' UK royal family can ill afford
Photo furore a 'PR disaster' UK royal family can ill afford / Photo: © KENSINGTON PALACE/AFP

Photo furore a 'PR disaster' UK royal family can ill afford

When the UK's Daily Mail, a loyal champion of the monarchy, splashes the headline "How did Kate photo become a PR disaster?", it is clear the royal family has a problem.

Text size:

In an extraordinary episode for the family, Catherine, Princess of Wales, on Monday apologised and admitted to editing an official portrait of her released by the palace on Sunday.

The edits had prompted AFP and other agencies to withdraw the altered image.

Kate, 42, has not been seen at a public event since attending a Christmas Day church service, and underwent abdominal surgery in January, fuelling speculation about her health.

The photograph dominated the front pages of UK newspapers landing on doormats on Monday, which had gone to print before the alterations were detected.

The Sun tabloid ran with the headline "Looking Great, Kate", adding the picture "puts online rumours to bed".

But the rumour mill instead went into overdrive when the photographs were pulled late on Sunday.

Not only has the incident intensified speculation over Catherine's health but it has tested the bond of trust between the royal family and friendly media outlets.

Even the Press Association, which has among the closest working relationships with the monarchy, killed its distribution of the photograph.

Daily Mail columnist Richard Kay warned that "trust and integrity are precious commodities" in maintaining the public support that underpins the institution.

- 'Suspicions' -

Royal-supporting tabloids would normally have "waited for it to blow over", Laura Clancy, lecturer in media at Lancaster University, told AFP.

Other outlets have also often been reluctant to dip into royal controversy over fear they could lose access, she added.

But the rise of social media now means that "people can question and talk about it and there's news outlets around the world who don't stick to that line".

In the digital media age, "any manipulation of an image, even relatively minor edits done with no intention to mislead, can raise suspicions", Chris Morris, chief executive of fact-checking service Full Fact, said in a comment sent to AFP.

Part of the problem is that the family distributes pictures from self-described "amateur photographer" Catherine for use by professional media outlets, which have strict rules on using manipulated images.

While there have been calls to use professionals, "there are some ... individuals whose brand is based on authenticity", explained Hannah Perry, lead digital researcher at the London-based think tank Demos.

But royals must weigh that up against the fact that "trust is so low in public institutions and we know that people are becoming incredibly sceptical and also savvy" about analysing information, she added.

"The best-case scenario in that situation would be to be transparent," suggested Perry.

On the streets of London, public reaction was mixed.

- 'Obsessive need for secrecy' -

"I was actually quite shocked. I would think it would be a lot more seamless coming from such an official source," said 21-year-old student Flora Canavan.

She added that her trust in the royal family had not been eroded as "I don't think I trusted them beforehand".

However, solicitor Jen Chambers said the incident had been "massively blown up out of proportion" and that "the kids probably weren't pulling good faces in the photo".

Although the furore has caused embarrassment for loyal media outlets, they still remain supportive, for now.

The Sun's front page on Tuesday urged "social media trolls, idiotic conspiracy theorists and sniping media critics" to "lay off Kate".

It accused critics of waging "a bullying campaign against a devoted mum, recovering from a serious operation, who simply wanted to offer the public a perfect portrait of her and her kids".

While the Daily Mail's Kay said it was "easy to see why the couple acted as they did", he offered a stark warning.

"They are down to earth and unshowy. But it is this desire for ordinariness which conceals one significant flaw: a near obsessive need for secrecy.

"If pictures can be digitally altered, what else can be twisted? The British public adore the Royal Family but that adoration rests on them being told the truth.

"There are precious commodities at stake here: trust and integrity."

J.P.Estrada--TFWP