Tabloids falsely accuse Harry and Meghan of photo manipulation, just like Kate Middleton did

After credibility in Kensington Palace was undermined by a photo manipulation scandal attributed to Kate Middleton, tabloids tried to drag Prince Harry and Meghan Markle into the fray by making false allegations against professional photographers.

It's been an embarrassing few months for the Prince and Princess of Wales at Kensington Palace, culminating in them no longer being considered a reliable source and becoming like North Korea and Iran, according to Getty, Associated Press, Agence France-Presse and Reuters. after termination of A photo of Kate Middleton with her children was shared because it was manipulated in its original source.

A second photo of Queen Elizabeth II, Kate Middleton, with many of her grandchildren at Balmoral in August 2022 was marked by Getty as “source enhanced” on Monday, after media outlets issued a “kill alert” for the Mother's Day photo. Kate Middleton with her children, which was manipulated to the point of inaccurate representation of events. On Wednesday, Reuters updated “its procedures for verifying images from Kensington Palace after confirming the second altered photo,” a spokeswoman said.

Pete Souza, a former presidential photographer for Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan, said that the manipulation of Middleton's Mother's Day photos was not just “Photoshop” used to process professional pictures, but rather “fake”. or “altered” image. something he pointed out that former President Donald Trump also did while in office.

For more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.

And so, naturally, on Wednesday, Rupert Murdoch's Page Six accused a professional photographer of digitally enhancing the christening portrait of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's son Archie, based on an editorial in Getty's system.

However, this post has since been removed and the Getty has confirmed that the image has not been altered. Photographer Chris Allerton called the suggestion that he had substantially altered the image not only false but defamatory, “It would be completely false and indeed defamatory to suggest that I have in any way altered or materially manipulated any subject or content of the image.” €:

How did that note get there?

Maybe the post was when the photo was “under review” because it seems like all the royal photos are correct in the wake of KateGate (but why isn't that post on all photos?), but a professional photographer and recent. Oscar nominee for his short film then, Misan Harriman wrote that the post should never have been put there.

“I just spoke to Chris Allerton, Getty Images should never have put that editors note on his image, I'm sure @gettyimages will make a statement about this in due course. More importantly, the papers should have talked to him and Getty to be 100 percent sure BEFORE publishing what has now become a global non-story about his work. He's a great photographer who doesn't deserve all of this. Please leave this man alone.''

This is not the first time that the tabloid media has tried to confuse what is happening with photos of Kate Middleton with the Sussexes, who left royal life in March 2020 and eventually settled in Southern California.

Last week, the aforementioned Misan Harriman was falsely accused of manipulating an image of the Sussexes' pregnancy announcement for their daughter, Princess Lilybeth. Harriman responded by doing what Kensington Palace (KP) had not yet done, which was to share the original and metadata:

Original Jpeg with no black and white grade, I expect a full apology and disclaimer @MailOnline: @Telegraph: @victoria_ward

No trees or lawns have been moved or swapped, this is the image straight from the camera.

Also, it's a Jacaranda tree, not a Willow tree. pic.twitter.com/A9wmrlq5Ow

Misan Harriman (@misanharriman) March 13, 2024

It is noteworthy that both of these cases of false accusations Photo manipulation plays, perhaps unwittingly, into online conspiracies about Sussex children, steeped in dangerous racism.

Not only are both allegations about the Sussexes' photos false, but neither image has the cloning issues that the two Kate Middleton pictures have, which are visible even to the untrained eye when you know where to look.

News agencies are currently on high alert for fake and deceptive AI images and videos, as well as deep hoaxes, such as a fake call using President Biden's voice to tell voters not to vote that day. A fake photo of Kate has been offered to their fans in an attempt to convey that she is fine, although they have not seen her since the surgery was announced. When it turned out to be fake, concerns grew.

News services are now scrutinizing photos of Kensington Palace, which many royal supporters say are unfair. Some proponents say “everybody does it.”

But that's the point. People apply filters or “photoshop” family photos at home because it's hard to get good pictures of squirming kids. not the same thing as a photo shared by members of the royal family, especially during a period where the Princess of Wales has not been seen since Christmas.

However, unlike King Charles, who has also been battling health problems, the Princess has not been seen leaving hospital, nor has her family been seen visiting her, except for a brief one-off visit from her husband, the Prince of Wales.

Kensington Palace's secrecy came under international scrutiny when Prince William failed to make a last-minute appearance at his godfather's memorial service, for which he was due to give a speech in Windsor Square, where he said: to live

Kate has now been seen a total of three times, one of which accompanied her in a car with her mother looking ill, which was shared by the US TMZ, which was not confirmed by the palace and therefore not shared by the British media, the second. Was this Mother's Day photo pulled from the news services, and the third was a TMZ video released Monday that is so grainy it's fueling more conspiracies?

Of course, everyone has a right to their privacy, but there are pretty standard ways to reassure people that a public figure is okay, including a clear video of a person opening cards from well-wishers or a still photo as a message to supporters. When they don't, it raises questions.

History:

Perhaps the tabloids mean that Princess Diana was hounded by tabloid photographers, although her brother Charles Spencer noted that the surveillance of Kate Middleton was not as dangerous as the press attention given to Princess Diana. But then, the tabloids don't show the same level of concern for the privacy of others. For Americans, awareness of the difficulties faced by several “marrieds” is being raised, which is perhaps not a welcome outcome, given that it confirms the issues recently raised by Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex.

It's troubling to see the impact of media intrusion, especially on the women our culture loves to build up and bring down, from Diana to Hillary to Meghan to Britney to Kate; Misogyny is rampant.

For example, Kate Middleton took responsibility for the changes made to the Mother's Day photo, which led to the highly unusual “murder notice”, at the same time that the British press was saying how terribly sick Kate was. The original photo was also labeled as taken by the husband. It's hard to imagine Kate working from her sick bed to create a fake photo, but then the latest video released by TMZ and Sun showed what we're told is a healthy Kate Middleton carrying a bag after tummy tuck surgery (although the internet isn't buying this video either).

It is worth asking why the husband does not take responsibility for his alleged photo.

When racism is added to this toxic mix, it can become untenable.

In January of this year, two neo-Nazis were sentenced to 15 years in prison for terrorizing Prince Archie, the first child of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. In 2019, a “far-right” teenager who called Prince Harry a “race traitor” and suggested he be shot was jailed for four years.

Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, were recently hounded by photographers after an event in New York. In February, an NYPD letter filed as part of the prince's lawsuit in Britain backed the couple's claims “that they were the victims of 'reckless' paparazzi stalking.”

These threats of violence against the couple and their children are alarming and raise questions about why the tabloids are trying so hard to drag the dysfunctional royal Sussexes into this PR disaster, knowing that inciting hate is dangerous.

Prince Harry is currently suing several British tabloids over allegations of illegal news-gathering tactics, which they deny, and recently filed a lawsuit with the Mirror Group. On Wednesday, March 20, “lawyers for victims of the illegal information gathering, including Prince Harry,” will try to add more explosive allegations to the mix… sources likened the allegations to “a crime novel where the twists and turns read; like a mob story,” Byline Investigates reported. Indeed, earlier on Wednesday, “The Sun's current editor Victoria Newton has just appeared in Prince Harry's High Court case for allegedly gathering illegal information.”

Notably, most of the media mentioned do not mention this potential conflict of interest in their articles about the couple.

As the royal family grapples with this photo PR crisis, confidence in the stability of their role is undermined. If we look at this in the larger context of the attempt to destabilize the West, and add that Russia spread a false story a few days ago claiming that the king was dead, we can see connections to our own institutional crisis in the US, as well. the results of the exploitation of hatred and division.

All Kensington Palace photos will be reviewed, and this will likely include photos of the Sussexes when they were in the royal family.

But the tabloids, some of whom are currently being sued by Prince Harry, are making the mistake of mistaking the fake photo for their general hate machine against the Sussexes. The world is now watching, and it turns out that much of what the tabloids say about Prince Harry and his mother, Princess Diana, is true. Just look at how soon they try to do it again, disregarding the professional authority of the photographers or threats against the subjects.