A photo that Kensington Palace issued on Sunday to commemorate Mother’s Day in the United Kingdom shows Kate, Princess of Wales, smiling with her arms around the three children that she shares with Prince William. It seemed benign enough, but soon after the photo was issued, photo agencies spread the word that the picture provided should no longer be used, as it appeared “the source has manipulated the image,” as The Associated Press said in its notification.
If it were any other family, this would be a nonstory. But there are few things in this world as tightly controlled as the British royal family’s public image. Over the last century, the Windsors have fostered a symbiotic, though often times toxic, relationship with the media. This latest tempest in a teapot — which only heightens previously swirling rumors about the family — illustrates how the tight flow of information that the royals cultivate could potentially stoke the very suspicion and mistrust that could help hasten the monarchy’s fall from grace with the British public.
It’s worth saying up front that an NBC News analysis of the photo that received a “kill notice” doesn’t seem to imply any sort of nefarious cover-up. Instead, photography experts said that the changes that could be discerned may simply have been “to circumvent the challenge of getting three kids to sit still and smile all at the same time.” In a post from the official X account for the Prince and Princess of Wales, the royal household seemed to obliquely back that theory, apologizing for “any confusion” the picture may have caused:
Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing. I wanted to express my apologies for any confusion the family photograph we shared yesterday caused. I hope everyone celebrating had a very happy Mother’s Day. C
— The Prince and Princess of Wales (@KensingtonRoyal) March 11, 2024
But there’s a reason why Kate, whose full name is Catherine (and who was formerly known as Kate Middleton), would even feel the need to try to issue such a clarification — and why a written post on X is unlikely to end any speculation. The princess has been out of the public eye since Christmas Eve, when she attended mass with her family. Weeks later, the palace issued a surprise announcement that she’d undergone abdominal surgery. Few details were given in the Jan. 17 statement, only that the procedure had been previously scheduled and a success. No official photos of her had been previously released since she reportedly left the hospital almost two weeks later.
But Kate is not the only royal unable to perform her duties. Her surgery was disclosed days before Buckingham Palace announced that King Charles III had been admitted to a private hospital to be treated for a benign prostate enlargement. After both the king and princess had been discharged, the family announced that the doctors treating Charles had discovered an unrelated — and so far, unnamed — form of cancer in the process. Charles has since stepped aside from duties during his treatment, leaving William and Queen Camilla to fill the void.
It is only with the active interest and support of the masses that the monarchy survives It feels almost too obvious a point to note that Charles, 75, will likely not reign nearly as long as his late mother, Queen Elizabeth II, under whose lengthy tenure much of the current dynamic between the royal household and the media was developed. Elizabeth’s enduring influence means the palace provides crumbs of information to chosen outlets when it suits them and attempts to crush any unapproved gossip. Likewise, the British media is alternately slavishly compliant with royal wishes to retain access and deeply prying into the Windsors’ personal lives in the hopes of unearthing new scandals. It’s clear that the family intends to keep a tight wrap on any details about Charles and Kate’s health, giving almost nothing to the media. But into the information void has poured a plethora of conspiracy theories about the meaning of Kate’s absence, in particular. These range from speculation about her health to a resurgence of rumors about potential infidelity from William. (Kensington Palace has not publicly acknowledged the rumors to confirm or deny them.) The photo on Sunday was likely a botched effort to quell some of the myriad whispers, but between the manipulation issue and the fact that they chose to post a written apology — rather than posting a proof-of-life video, for example — that seems to have been for naught. As I argued when Elizabeth died in 2022, it will likely fall to William, 41, the duty to bolster the crown’s popularity and thereby its place in British society. It is only with the active interest and support of the masses that the monarchy survives, as the last vestiges of authority over the elected government linger after centuries of democratic reforms. As of last year, William is the second-most popular royal in YouGov’s rankings, still behind his late grandmother but ahead of both Charles and Kate. The careful stage managing of the Prince and Princess of Wales’ lives is meant to keep that popularity high. The problem that the monarchy faces, though, is that tension between a desire to keep some of the mystery of the crown alive while also providing the transparency that a modern society demands of its leaders. The reasons behind Kate’s withdrawal from the limelight could be as simple as the reasons why any mother of three would want to tweak a picture of her kids before sharing it with her friends. But if the royal family is to be held up as extraordinary, justifying their continued splendor and regalia, then the mundane becomes inaccessible to them. Every edit becomes international news — and any alternative would be akin to breaking the spell that keeps them aloft in the first place.
Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW Daily. 
