EDITORIAL – What’s the big deal about Princess Kate’s ‘manipulated’ photo?

An editorial by Mel Rothenburger.

YOU’D THINK Princess Kate had just done something horrible by editing the photo of herself and her three children that was released to media a couple of days ago on the occasion of Mother’s Day in the U.K.

Several major news agencies quickly discovered some inconsistencies and withdrew the photo from circulation to their member news outlets. But, of course, now they’re using it to illustrate what all the fuss is about.

I’m not saying doctoring photos shouldn’t have limits. For example, removing an object from a photo, or adding something such as, say, a body in a war photo that wasn’t actually there, is unethical.

But the media have been editing photos for decades. Routinely, they alter lighting and colour, for example, to make the picture look better when it’s published.

Princess Kate has apologized and admitted she edited the photo, saying “like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing.”

If the family photo of the Princess of Wales and her kids was created by combining individual images of each other into a group shot, a scene that never existed, that would be improper. While there’s some suspicion that Kate’s photo was an amalgamation of several different frames shot in the same session, that’s not the same thing.

And, if the actual contents of what was present during the shoot had been changed, that would be wrong. But enhancing a sleeve or two? A zipper? A blurry hand? Come on.

The media have jumped on the manufactured suspicion that the photo might be part of some conspiracy to reassure the public that the princess, who has been recovering from abdominal surgery, is feeling fine when she isn’t.

That’s an implausible exaggeration not founded on any fact but the rumour mongering grows.

The use of AI in this case is generally being ruled out. While there should be boundaries in the manipulation of photos, the most Kate is guilty of is a very minor mistake. It was an example of what one analyst has called “an acceptable editorial adjustment.”

So, tut-tut, please don’t do it again. But the self-righteous bombast of detractors is just another excuse to imagine a scandal involving the Royals.

Mel Rothenburger is a regular contributor to CFJC Today, publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, and is a recipient of the Jack Webster Foundation Lifetime Achievement Award. He has served as mayor of Kamloops, school board chair and TNRD director, and is a retired daily newspaper editor.  He can be reached at mrothenburger@armchairmayor.ca.