Duchess Kate’s photos of her kids ensure that there’s no market for pap pics?!

Peter Phillips and his wife Autumn Phillips arrive for Gold Cup day, The Festival  at Cheltenham Racecourse  2019, Cheltenham Glos

I forget that this happens every dang time, but here we go again: every time Kensington Palace releases a new photo (taken by the Duchess of Cambridge) of one of the Cambridge children, we have to hear stories about how Kate is the most amazing Future Future Queen ever. Because she’s a keen amateur photographer. But it’s not just “Kate takes cute pics of her kids.” It’s “Kate is a brilliant PR mastermind for dedicating herself to taking photos of her children!” This is what happens when a duchess is lazy as hell and a huge media operation has little material with which to embiggen her.

The Duchess of Cambridge has ‘taken ownership of Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis’ public image’, a royal expert has claimed. Kate Middleton, 39, is a keen amateur photographer and has become known for releasing candid snaps of her children for special events, including their birthdays each year. Royal expert Camilla Tominey said the model is ‘unique’ for the Duke, 39, and Duchess of Cambridge and helps the family maintain a level of privacy for Prince George, eight, Princess Charlotte, six, and Prince Louis, three.

Speaking to The Telegraph, she said: ‘The paparazzi – there’s no market anymore because the Duchess comes out with her own family photos and they’re far more valuable to the press than images taken at a long lens. That’s how The Cambridges are going to strike the balance, they’re going to give in order to receive a degree of privacy back.’

Speaking as the Duchess released a beaming snap of her eldest son George on his eighth birthday, Camilla said: ‘George’s childhood will be very different from the royals who have gone before him. His generation is the digital generation and the challenges for the Cambridges as time goes on is how to manage public interest in their son with their own privacy.’

She said she thought Prince George’s recent appearance at Wembley was because the little royal is ‘genuinely’ a football fan, but added: ‘Equally the Cambridges do want the public to see their children and have some degree of access to them. You’ve got [to] balance the private and the public of their lives and there’s an expectation of seeing George grow up because he will one day be King.’

She added that parenting through the royal generations has become ‘more hands on’, revealing: ‘We’re told the Cambridges very much plan their diary around the fact someone needs to be there in the morning and for bedtime. We know the Duchess does the school run herself and drives the children in – that they’re there for the key events in the school term. They want to be parents first and foremost. There’s a sense for both of them that they know what their destiny is…but before then, they want to try to preserve as much family life as they can. Prince George is a child of the new digital generation – unlike when Prince William and Harry got into trouble. I think Prince George will have to be quite careful to preserve his own privacy as he becomes a teenager and his parents will be acutely aware he’s vulnerable.’

However she added that Kate had ‘taken ownership’ of her children’s image in the press by releasing photographs of them each year, adding: ‘The interesting thing about the Cambridge’s model, and it’s kind of unique for the royals, is that the Duchess in particular has almost taken ownership of the children’s image. We had a situation when the children were first born when the couple were worried about pap shots…Kate now saturates the market with her own imagery of the children. And I think we’ll see that continue.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Kate does not “saturate the market.” She used to only release one or two images of her children a year, although in recent years, she has been posting more photos. It’s still not “saturating the market” though. Besides, some of the most popular photos are the ones shot when the kids attend an event, or when the kids are in public in some way. When George was a baby, the photos of him on the Australia tour went all over the world in a way that Kate’s sanctioned portraits just don’t. When the kids go to polo games, those photos are much more popular than Kate’s photos of her kids. People were more interested in seeing George at the Euro football matches than seeing his birthday portrait. So I have no idea what Tominey is talking about. I do think it’s notable that Tominey basically makes it sound like the photos are all Kate. William doesn’t have a say, I guess. I actually think William wanted to skip releasing a portrait of George this year and Kate was like “I do what I want.”

charlotte sixth birthday

george eight bday

prince louis 1

Photos courtesy of Kensington Palace, Backgrid.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

100 Responses to “Duchess Kate’s photos of her kids ensure that there’s no market for pap pics?!”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. UnionSnack says:

    I don’t see anything special in her photos. She is copying it everywhere. There is no special photo technique, but maybe it’s just me.

    Oh, I remember that story about Mario Testino lessons for Kate. She and her family are just pathetic wannabes.

    • Jen says:

      Her photography gets praise because everything she does gets praise. Her photography is fine, but the fawning over it makes it sound like she’s an uber talented visionary, and that’s just not true.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        She takes pics of her kids. With a camera, and maybe a phone. She also COPYRIGHTS the photos making sure she is paid each and every time it’s used (and her father did that for that first shot of George at 6 mos, too).

        I’D like to know HOW MUCH is she paid for the use of all these photos of the kids: Does she POCKET it in her private account(s), is it DONATED to charity/ the Foundation, and if so, where/how is it dispersed??

        They are all SO CONCERNED about Harry’s book advance, and what Meghan did with her book money, the Netflix/Spotify deals, ALL the HUGE BUCKETS of money they think the Sussexes are squirreling away. SO I WANT TO KNOW, WHERE IS KATE’S FEE FOR PRINT GOING??

      • GraceB says:

        I think her photos of her kids are good. They’re not amazing but she’s not bad. However there will always be a market for paparazzi photos of the kids. Even if they’re blurring and from some crazy distance, the press can and will still use them for a story.

      • Margles says:

        @(TheOG) Jan90067 Copyright automatically attaches to art/photos/original writing that you produce. There is no specific act of copyright something. Enforcing the copyright is what she does, which, given her position, makes sense.

      • Amanda says:

        Copyright ensures no one else can use the photo without your permission. It doesn’t necessarily mean Kate is collecting a fee (she certainly could). It just means she owns the photo and controls most of how it is used and who can publish it.

        Sideline, at one point in my life about four years ago, a conservative blog decided to go after me for writing a local newspaper column about reproductive rights. They used a digital copy of one of my selfies (!) for their post castigating me, without any kind of notification. I found out and responded by emailing them to notify them of my copyright claim and requested they not use my photo. (It was just a headshot from my graduation, nothing scandalous.) They took it down, though they never emailed me back or anything. So I’m all for copyright.

      • Christine says:

        I 100% agree, and my eyeballs have rolled out of my head and across the room at this point.

      • Tessa says:

        I don’t think her photographs are all that.

    • Sofia says:

      She’s fine for mommy blogger/hobbyist standards but yeah she’s not some brilliant photographer (which is okay. not everyone has to be great at everything but everything she does is overhyped so here we are)

      • Eurydice says:

        Yeah, she’s a mom who likes to take photos of her kids, but it’s all in the marketing. When I worked in a fast food joint in high school, one of the guys there put on his resume “Night Inventory Control Manager” – that meant he took the leftovers home from work.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      Her photos are as basic as she is. She has no sense of proper framing or lighting of her subjects. Many, many amateur photographers can do better than she does, and they do.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        She’s not even taking all the photos. A shot of a young George on the KP steps photo shoot was seen and shot. Kate was not behind the camera or messing with all the equipment.

        Kate only takes credit and copyrights to her name for legal and monitory reasons.

        This is all part of that RR/Cambridge meeting to negotiate better PR in exchange for the kids images.

      • Nic919 says:

        She does the same thing in every photo. Crazy blurry background with an extreme sharp focus on the child. A zoom screencap contains as much technique as she does in these photos.

        Well I guess this time she added obvious merching in the photo as well. So that’s different.

      • windyriver says:

        It’s an extreme sharp focus – on the child’s face. You can see clearly in the photo of Louis, and to some extent George, outside of the face, the body starts to blur. I’m thinking, she’s got a nice camera, and uses the eye autofocus. Not particularly creative, relying mostly on the cute subjects (and it is nice to see the kids looking so happy). Presses the shutter – then what? Does she load them all on her computer, picks out the best ones, then post processes (which can include cropping)? Or is it more likely, someone else loads them on their machine, Kate picks what she likes, and that person does the work. That seems more likely, though the processing isn’t great, so who knows, maybe Kate does it.

        Also questioned previously whether that’s really her camera in the top shot. Fujifilm is a niche product, and there are some unusual considerations re: post processing. I’d expect her own camera to be a Nikon, or Canon, or possibly an expensive Leica. IIRC, the photographer taking the picture of her is connected in some way to Fuji, possibly a brand ambassador – so did he recommend that camera to her, or did he give her one of his to hold for the picture?

        Could be either. The only thing we know for sure it, it’s all smoke and mirrors with this crew.

      • Nic919 says:

        There was reference to her having a Nikon years ago when she took really sad photos during one of their tours prior to the kids being born.

        I wonder if she even knows what an aperture is or if she knows how to develop film. She’s old enough that this is what a real photographer would know how to do and use digital photos only on occasion. And a real photographer would list the type of film used for the photos. None of that information is ever provided from this alleged top photographer.

      • AMJ says:

        @WINDYRIVER – she’s using a Fujifilm XT-3, a good, APS-C format mirrorless digital camera. It’s got inner film simulation filters to choose from in-camera to produce color-corrected .JPGs on the spot, which she’s probs using. Fujifilm isn’t just film, it actually has plenty of popular digital cameras in the lineup. The world of digital photography has moved on from bi-partisan “only Canon and Nikon” thing years ago, with Sony and Fuji becoming big players.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Didn’t Testino debunk the idea he knew Kate, around the time he did the engagement photos.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        Yes he did.

      • UnionSnack says:

        It was PR push of Midds camp that Testino was about to teach kate. It was so pathetic of them. He said he had no plan for tutoring Khate, lol.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Typical PR stunt – drop a story hinting about something they want, hoping they will get it and when it get shut down drop another story about ‘didn’t want it anyway’.

    • Chaine says:

      She’s a proud graduate of Brooklyn Beckham School of Picture Photo Taking.

  2. lalisa says:

    It’s sad when Kate’s only hobby is the only thing these insects can talk about. Talk about disappointment honestly.

    • swirlmamad says:

      “Insects” is the perfect word for those rota vultures. The especially annoying, gnat-like kind.

  3. Amelia says:

    You know the rat rota is dead when they start churning out random and repetitive embittering stories of Duchess Keen. What happened to demanding privacy and a “normal life” for their kids?

    “Saturate the market” does Tominey even know how the market works? And she’s supposed to be an “award-winning journalist”. That’s the third best Joke of the century, after William’s desperate prize thing and Kate’s keenwell centre.

    Speaking of, we haven’t heard a single thing about the keenwell centre and their YouTube channel is practically dead. I thought these two were the social media revolutionaries. At least Harry and Meghan don’t claim to be “super ambitious” they do what they say and even do what they don’t boast about.

  4. OriginalLala says:

    Mom takes pictures of her kids – something that happens in most families, and yet here it’s somehow groundbreaking, brilliant, and something only a shrewd keen CEO would think of.

    The bar is so low it’s under the underground basement,

    • The Truth Piper says:

      Mom takes photos of her kids — except this mom is the Duchess of Cambridge married to Prince William (eldest son of Charles the Prince of Wales and the late Princess Diana) who’s second in line for the British throne taking photos of her and William’s issue: two royal princes and one princess.

      People and the media are obsessed with royalty.

      Perhaps Duchess Kate takes all photos of her and Prince William’s children and releases them to the media as a means of protecting the privacy of their minor children?

      By regularly releasing photos of the royal children, the paparazzi will be less aggressive. Duchess Kate’s photo skills are adequate. The children look adorable, beautiful and healthy.

      • Maria says:

        The kids are adorable. But their parents are not interested in protecting their privacy as they have shown time and again.
        You know why the paps aren’t as aggressive? Because they have an agreement to feed them material.

  5. Ariel says:

    The kids are adorable.
    But yeah the best pics ever were baby George stealing other kids toys and being a little bruiser on the Australia tour. I had totally forgotten about that.

    • Harper says:

      I seem to remember some very valuable, long-lens pap photos of the Cambridge children exiting the Flybe jet like the von Trapp family a few summers ago. Those pics were all over the market. Funny how there was no worry or uproar from Will about his family’s privacy being violated by those pap shots.

      Will and Kate are happy to use a pap shot of the kids when they benefit from it.

      • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

        People STILL think it was Ma, taking that shot. NO PAP would be able to get close enough to the air field, even with a long lens, to get that clear of a shot at that exact time, with the exact placement of those kids.

      • Nic919 says:

        Yes I recall now so many defenders pretending that it was a mere coincidence that the photos (and video) were published with nary a threat of removal from the Cambridges.

  6. Lizzie says:

    The pic’s are always cute and the kids don’t seem posed. However the way Cain and Unable take credit for other peoples work I kind of side-eye that no professionals were involved whatsoever.

  7. Nomegusta says:

    …didn’t they let the fail sell a calendar with nothing but their children?

    • Ashley says:

      That calendar also included photos of Archie, and Zara’s kids. I think it’s more that those photos are in public domain rather than the family cooperating.

      • Nomegusta says:

        Ahh, thanks for clarifying!

      • Nic919 says:

        The Cambridge kid photos in the calendar included the copyrighted photos, confirming Kate had to consent to them being used. It was only the photos of Archie and the Tindall kids that were strictly public domain.

      • AnonyCat says:

        The family didn’t collaborate. The photos of Archie and the Tindall child were all public domain. That’s why for Archie’s first birthday, the Sussexes put all that copyright info saying that that picture would not be available for merching etc. It was clearly included in the calendar without the Sussexes approval.

  8. Chica1971 says:

    In this story, Kate is cosplaying Diana. This is HM playbook. Know whose pictures we haven’t seen? Just saying the quiet part aloud.

    Kids were kept out of spotlight in early years because Keens were hardly working ( well Will was a pilot) and Kate was Queening-to-be

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Chica1971, what I thought when I read this article, is that someone has been hanging around this site. I recall posters talking about the fact that George’s b-day picture didn’t get a lot of attention, because he has been seen recently. There were comments about the fact that the Lamebridges has used the children a lot in the last year to cover for them not working. So, I suspect that might be where the comments in the article came from.

      I really wonder if this isn’t aimed at the Sussexes? “See just give us pictures of the children and we’ll write nice things about you, too!” RIGHT! Does anyone believe that?

      I’m as stumped as anyone else why the BM are giving Duchess Keen McButtons a pass when it comes to her making money off of those pictures. I think that’s the only reason she uses a camera. It’s still my opinion that she doesn’t spend as much time with the 3 little Cams as the BM, Keen and Ma Mids wants us to believe. I just think this is a money maker.

  9. Merricat says:

    Every mother is a photographer.

  10. BayTampaBay says:

    The Daily Mail comments on this story were absolutely hilarious. I was actually impressed because for once the comments were not 90% pro-Cambridge.

    • Lori says:

      The tide has been rapidly changing in the comments section this last couple weeks. Especially since the football mess. Mind you people are becoming pro Sussex, now they want the whole institution abolished. Wills statement against the racist social media didnt go over well. Not only because he’s a hypocrite but because racists dont want to be called racists by the future King.

      • Nivz says:

        That’s illuminating and also hilarious. They’re really stuck between a rock (racist Maga Brexit crowd) and a hard place (normal people not filled with hate, or drunk on privilege- aka what they would call “woke”) and they can’t go all in on either thing. I have concluded that their preferred target audience is, of course, Tory Aristos, but really, they’re getting the maga rocks.

  11. Britt says:

    Sometimes I feel like Kate and William secretly want out of this contract but they can’t and they’re finding ways to try and get out of it by giving the press what they want but are subtely trying to move back. Or they’re trying to be like Harry and Meghan who don’t show there kids but once in a while. This also reeks of rebranding. Harry and Meghan sell and the BM/palace in my opinion are trying to turn them the Cambridge’s into carbon copies because the real ones left and cut them off. Whatever it is, desperation seems to be a factor.

  12. SarahCS says:

    “they’re going to give in order to receive a degree of privacy back”

    Well yes, just not in the way you mean! They have sold their souls in order to keep certain things quiet and now they can’t ‘give’ the Sussexes in the same way their backs are against the wall.

    • Merricat says:

      The Wessexes better watch their backs. Lol.

    • Britt says:

      Yep. The desperation is palpable. I think the blackmail is getting more intense behind the scenes. Harry and Meghan aren’t cooperating with neither the RF or BM and dipped. the others are boring. This all seems like a ticking time bomb ready to go off. Someone is going to cave in and I doubt it’s Harry and Meghan. I think it will be the media because of their bottom dollar. There are no leaks worth anything. They tried to make Sophie/Charles/Edward duke story a thing and it didn’t work.

  13. Cathy says:

    When I was younger and used to read the royal coverage about Kate, it really did a number on my self-esteem. I couldn’t understand why she was so special that she got such praise for her ‘poise’ and ‘friendliness’, when she was just acting like a normal person. I thought maybe white, skinny women were just better. When Meghan came on the scene, I could see the clear difference in media attitude. I searched and searched for any coverage that acknowledged it, and this site was the only one! I read it every day now, and it has been so enlightening to understand more about what goes on beyond the scenes with media and PR.

    • Jane Smith says:

      @Cathy, thank you for sharing your heart and experiences. I’m really sorry that you went through all that pain. When I’ve experienced similar things, I too have found comfort in eventually finding out that I was right all along about my feelings. So glad you found this website. It’s refreshing isn’t it?

    • Purple cupcakes says:

      @cathy – I had the same experience as you when I was younger. I was a teenager when she got married and it really messed up my self esteem seeing how she got praise for doing NOTHING.

      Sometimes I feel like I have to overcompensate and do everything so that I can get an ounce of recognition that this woman gets.

    • Demi says:

      The thing is she doesn’t really come across as being that warm or show genuine kindness both Diana & Meghan have this warmth about them but Kate? she seems like a cold, distant& rigid figure we don’t really know who she is or what she stands for.. at least during her party& clubbing days around London she had some kind of personality.
      Oh and her sister Pipa got sooo much praise during that time even she wasn’t that special then I saw Karl Lagerfeld’s comments and thought finally someone telling the truth Hehe.

    • Nivz says:

      Cathy, this is an important conversation. I was early mid twenties, and lived in London when they got married. My friend and I (both anglophone, somewhat privileged Indians) obsessed over her clothes and her hair and her slimness and her basic existence. Ten years on, hindsight tells me we too were sucked in by an upbringing/culture/society/media infrastructure that deifies white women as the ideal, especially one on top of the global social pecking order of whiteness. How this ties into the colourism that is endemic in Indian society at large (and predates the earliest 17th-18th century encounters with white colonisers) is a whole different essay.

      I have been on a long, educational, and ongoing journey to become the ride or die Meghan supporter I am today. And it isn’t just about Meghan, of course, it’s been a whole spectrum of learning more about race, power structures and various other, hard to break man-made constructs.

      If anyone is wondering, my friend stayed on the path of Kate worship, and thus, Meghan hate, and for this, among other reasons, we are no longer close.

    • Nic919 says:

      When they got engaged I didn’t know much about her and so that was probably the high point of my thoughts about her. She had gone to school with him and so I thought not much more about that. It was only over the years when I learned how little she did prior to the engagement and how little she did after that I realized that she was an empty shell. I am a bit older than she is so I had a good point of comparison in terms of what women could do at her age, and she wasn’t even close to accomplished to so many women I personally and professionally knew. Just chasing a man for a decade seems so antiquated to me and I just don’t know anyone who spent their 20s doing that and nothing else. And had she changed it around post marriage to do a lot of charity then that would have been fine, but it hasn’t happened and by 40 she will never have that work ethic. Mostly because the press protects her. And that became even more obvious when Meghan came in actually ready to do things and got blasted for it by the UK media. And really once it was confirmed that Kate let a false story about Meghan go on for years to help vilify her, that’s when I stopped caring about all the karma coming her way. Because she didn’t need to actively attack Meghan for her own issues. But she is a willing participant in the smear and she has chosen this life. There are consequences for those choices.

    • Demi says:

      Nivz I’ll never forget how Jacintha Saldanha was driven to suicide just because she worked in the hospital where Kate was admitted& was tricked by those radios hosts.. years later Meghan gets vilified & driven to suicide & kate not only leaked the story but she refused to correct that Meghan didn’t make her cry..

      • notasugarhere says:

        She was tricked by those hosts because W&K refused to follow protocols because they were being cagy. That’s why the hosts were able to get through directly to Jacintha.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Cathy, I was in my 50s when W&K got married. Since I was around for Princess Di, I tuned in long enough to see all of the hype for the wedding and to watch the wedding highlights. I then just tuned out. What became apparent to me after Meghan married Harry is that I was waiting for Keen to do something to catch my attention. It didn’t happen. Meghan caught my attention immediately. I knew her from Suits, so I was invested from that standpoint. Then I read what she had already accomplished before she married, and the projects she took on after her marriage and I was all in. She had so many of the positive traits that Di had, but she wasn’t young and naive. She’s accomplished and compassionate, and I’ve paid attention since then. It’s really unfortunate that anyone looked to Keen as any kind of role model. If I might offer a suggestion for anyone who thinks they don’t match up to some ideal? Be your own cheerleader. If you’re anything like me, you are your own worst critic. So, make sure you are your own loudest cheerleader.

  14. Harper says:

    I’m so bored with Kate’s mommy photographer embiggening. CarolE must have had nothing for Tominey when she made her weekly check-in phone call for Royal Tea.

    The only good thing about it is it reminds me of those Annie Leibovitz photos of the Queen, so then I google them and marvel at their beauty–especially the one of Her Majesty outside on the steps of Windsor with her corgis, which is breathtaking. There is also the portrait with the grandchildren with the one holding the Queen’s purse. Beautiful.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Kate angered Annie L when she ran around snapping pics of the kids, the lighting, the setting during that QEII and greatgrandkids photo shoot. Stealing Annie’s work and lighting design for her own amateur pics.

    • TaraBest says:

      I just went to look at the Annie Leibovitz photos and they’re really fantastic. They certainly convey a feeling of royalty and power while also capturing the “humanness” of QEII. I don’t always love Leibovitz’s style, but she’s an amazing photographer.

  15. Amy Bee says:

    What Tominey leaves out is that under the media’s agreement with KP, Kate takes the pictures. Another thing is she talks about privacy for George and the others, there was no consideration of privacy for Harry and Meghan’s children from the press.

  16. NCDancer says:

    They are cute kids, and the photos are nice. But George is never going to king. I have serious doubts on William making it to the throne.

  17. ChattyCath says:

    Just a couple of things : why are Charlotte’s arms ‘cut off ‘ in that pic? And how does one qualify as a ‘Royal Expert’? Are there Uni courses? Lol

  18. Kviby says:

    well of course it’s going to be unique among the royals, the other royals aren’t too popular and the last time there were royal children which were heavily reported on was the 80 s and early 90s (William Harry and the York princesses.) obviously the world has changed enough in 30 years that a unique approach was/is necessary for Kate’s children.

  19. Emily says:

    Find somebody who loves you as much as Camilla Tominey loves Kate.

  20. Feebee says:

    As soon as Tominey’s name came up… eye roll/stop reading.

  21. Belli says:

    By shouting “Kate’s photos of the kids is preserving the kids’ privacy!” no one is asking what ELSE W&K are trading for that privacy.

    Namely leaks about H&M.

    2 photos a year ain’t gonna cut it, chief.

  22. notasugarhere says:

    Of course her pics of the kids aren’t saturating the market or removing interest for pap pics. The tabloids were right there, taking pics at Houghton Horse Trials, at the footie match, because that’s where they make their money. Kate’s bad amateur photos won’t change that.

  23. Over it says:

    You know why this is poetic justice for the keenbridges. They fought dirty for the spotlight. Now they have it and withholding pictures of their children isn’t an option for them. Meanwhile baby lili is almost 2 months old and we may never see a picture of her. And that is perfectly alright because her and her parents and brother are private citizens, so Harry and Meghan get to make all the decisions on what they decide to show or not show. The keenbridges are screwed. But hey you wanted that spotlight at all cost. So go enjoy it.

  24. Abena Asantewaa says:

    Charlotte will be queen, that is my prediction

    • notasugarhere says:

      My prediction. The monarchy will be down to England/Wales/Cornwall by the time Charles dies. The monarchy will end completely with William the Petulant.

      • Merricat says:

        Agreed.

      • yinyang says:

        What people don’t understand is the Me Generation are the parents now. Everyone’s kid is a prince or princess. Prior to now kids were mostly to be “seen and not heard” corporal punishment or some form of child abuse was normal for most children except the royal/most wealthy elite children. We know better now so kids today are treated better than ever and loved on, people are not so hung up on other people’s kids. The loyalty to royalty is slowly depleting because people don’t care.

    • Demi says:

      IDK why but I feel like either William or George someone will abdicate in the future I don’t see them being able to be like the queen or live like a monarch so they will abdicate..

      • notasugarhere says:

        They won’t abdicate, because if they do they lose all the private funds. Or they lose the ability to pass it on tax-free. William will be the death of the monarchy, either willingly or unwillingly.

    • Fawsia says:

      Not in this lifetime!

  25. taris says:

    not to threadjack, but the daily beast has a story out about how george’s bday picture is a “rebuke to all things harry and meghan” (lol).
    like, what???

    taken with this daily mail puff piece, i guess the subtext coming from camp middleton/cambridge is that unlike the sussexes, who “refuse to show a picture of lilibet” (sykes’ words) and who do continue to do their own thing, kate and will are sooo amazing because they’re “sticking to tradition” (that is, *doing what’s expected of them*).
    *eye roll*

    if kate has found a workaround and can spare her kids from having to actually pose for pictures in front of the rota, good for her.
    but, honestly, at some point we’ll have to have a conversation about how truly creepy it is that the royal/british media industrial complex essentially treats royal children like commodities. it’s one thing to coo at cute kids of famous people occasionally, quite another to effectively demand childrens’ pictures on cue so you can print bizarre ‘cuties calendars’ (looking at you daily mail).

    • ABritGuest says:

      I saw that. Eye roll. The Cambridges are publicly funded & George is a future king so that’s why it may be expected to release pics of them. let’s face it the cute family images are all part of royal PR to keep their grift going. The Sussexes aren’t publicly funded so have no more obligation to release a pic of Lili then Zara does of Lucas- I don’t see the press demanding pics of him on basis he’s monarch great grandchild, in the line of succession etc.

      I prefer Michael Middleton’s early pictures of the Cambridges. I wonder what Kate does with the money from her pics

  26. MerlinsMom1018 says:

    That Louis is sooooo dang CUTE!!!
    That all are but there’s something about Louis!!
    I’m no professional photographer, but I think the pictures Kate takes are good. They’re your basic “Mom takes a picture of her adorable kids” so I won’t hate on that (because Lord knows I took about several zillion of my girls)

    • Fawsia says:

      Maybe it is that much money because those pictures are only used in the UK!

    • Nivz says:

      Merlinsmom- agree about Louis. The older cambridge kids are fine, but that little guy is extra sweet. Fwiw, I don’t agree that he is being sidelined by his awful dad, his nap schedule etc probably doesn’t allow him to be out and about like G and C. Speaking as someone with two little fellows right around his age. Anyway, hope I’m right.

  27. Jay says:

    I thought the idea of “allowing” the press a chance for a photo (for example, on the first day of school) started with Diana? Somebody will fill me in if I’ve got it wrong, but I thought that was part of the whole invisible contract?

    The heavy handed compliments for Kate releasing a photo of George, coupled with the warning tone of the earlier rumours that she might not post one, all read to me like positive reinforcement from the royal rota for giving up what they asked for.

  28. Ainsley7 says:

    There is no market for pap pictures because their is an agreement that the paps aren’t allowed to follow the royals around anymore. Whenever we see the Royals out and about privately, it’s because they called the paps or it’s someone’s cell phone. Also, if a few pictures a year is “saturating the market” then it would seem people aren’t even all that interested in their kids. That’s good for the kids, but not so good for the monarchy.

    • Nic919 says:

      Tabloids in Europe will print pap pictures of the kids, just not the UK because the Windsors control the media way too much there.
      Right now since people aren’t out as much due to the pandemic there aren’t a lot of photos in general, but European tabloids have printed photos of Kate bringing the kids to school pre pandemic and likely will pick that up once things reopen and school starts later in the year.

  29. Sunday says:

    This is just the media’s way of begging for a photo of Lili and Archie. They’re saying that the reason Kate’s kids are left alone is because they get to see photos of them, which in media speak translates to: Meghan and Harry give us new photos of your kids or the paparazzi will find you due to the “unsaturated market.” It’s as creepy and pathetic as it is obvious.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Sunday, ITA. And, let’s be honest, even if they put out a picture of their children the paps would still be looking for them. I think the BM have gone past the title media to stalkers. Why don’t they just own the fact that they are (along with brf) responsible for being left in the cold when it comes to the DDoS. What losers.

  30. pottymouth pup says:

    last night, I saw a story (on Daily Beast?) about – I shit you not – how sharing the picture of George was somehow sticking it to Harry & Meghan. I’m seriously amazed at the ability of some people to contort themselves into pretzels to make points like that

  31. MarqueeMoon says:

    I don’t see anything better than the average Mum and Dad who bought a good camera from her shots, definitely no talent for composition, just the basic point and shoot

    With the header pic from this post, I wonder that there is barely any discussion of the sad fact that Kate has an obvious and ongoing eating disorder
    It’s a horrible illness

  32. Zen says:

    It was interesting the article says Kate does the school runs. I distinctly remember when the Sussexes left royal life, “sources” moaned Kate would have to take on more work and “so much for the school runs”. Obviously Kate is still doing the school run and she didn’t take on more work. It was a just yet another way to bash the Sussexes.

  33. EveV says:

    I know a lot of people here have commented on her shit photography, but, seriously?! It’s the same.in.every.pictire. The child is in the front of the camera and we can see them vividly and then the background is blurry. Every.single.time. I’m over it.
    And now that other commenters have pointed out Charlotte’s arms in that picture, it’s all I can see and it drives me crazy!

  34. Tessa says:

    Kate’s photographs did not protect George from intrusive photos of him by the media at that game.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Because his parents chose to drag him out as a prop in the face of their frosty marriage.

  35. Layla says:

    “Mother takes her own children’s pictures” why is this a headline?
    All this proves is that these so called “journalists” literally have nothing now. And the fact that they used to us evident from the myriad of smearing articles that came out in the droves against Meghan.

  36. Sunnyvale says:

    lol the house of keen is DESPERATE to make this happen😂just like when we were told that KeenKueen Kate’s wardrobes outsell Meghan’s when in reality it’s the opposite. In all honesty, I don’t mean to be cruel but the cambridge kids are as dull as their parents😬I honestly don’t pay attention to them & last read about them when baby Louis was pouting in the balcony during the last trooping ceremony. The keenbridges overused their kids and thus no longer make headlines

  37. Sunnyvale says:

    Charles much like prince charles hasn’t been close to his children. Even in the royal wedding they seemed so distant from each other. I’m guessing he used the tiara to bargain for acess or something & she blocked him completely. Likewise, willy (unlike Harry) never close to his relatives. We mostly heard about his aristo friends growing up