WaPo: Kensington Palace says the deepfake-Kate allegations are ‘factually inaccurate’

After Reuters, Associated Press, AFP and Getty “killed” Kensington Palace’s “Mother’s Day photo” of the Princess of Wales, everyone said we were in a brave new world when it comes to the lack of credibility and trust in palace-issued photos, videos and information. One week later, Kensington Palace once again tried to pass off questionable “proof of life” media, in the form of a very strange bystander video published by The Sun and TMZ, of “Kate and William” leaving the Windsor Farm Shop. That blew up and created even more conspiracies and chatter.

Then, last Friday, KP released Kate’s bench video, where she spoke to camera about having cancer and starting a round of chemotherapy. Shockingly, perhaps, the video was taken at face value by mainstream media, as if the previous weeks of shenanigans were all washed clean. That being said, social media was a different story. Last weekend, people studied the cancer-announcement video like it was the latest Zupruder film. Theories abound about whether it was an AI deepfake, or whether a greenscreen was involved, or whether the audio was edited. The video was apparently filmed by a crew from BBC Studios (not BBC News), and the BBC will only confirm that they filmed it. Beyond that, the BBC hasn’t answered any questions on the record about whether there were edits or whether other manipulations (green screen, filters) were also employed. Well, the Washington Post had a pretty evenly-reported story about the social media conversations and conspiracies: “Princess Catherine cancer video spawns fresh round of AI conspiracies.” Some highlights:

Social media investigators: When Catherine, Princess of Wales, released a video statement last week sharing that she had been diagnosed with cancer, some users on social media said they regretted engaging in wild speculation about her prolonged public absence. But others jumped immediately to a new conspiracy: The video was generated by artificial intelligence. Users on TikTok, X and Facebook shared videos pointing out alleged AI breadcrumbs, such as a ring disappearing and reappearing on Catherine’s hand. Others said her hair moves unnaturally, or that the bed of daffodils in the background is suspiciously still.

WaPo got KP on the record: BBC Studios, a TV production arm of the BBC, has confirmed that it filmed the video of Catherine’s message last week at Windsor Castle, and Kensington Palace told The Washington Post that accusations of AI tampering are “factually inaccurate.” Multiple deepfake forensics experts agreed, saying they examined the video and found no signs of AI manipulation. “All of these armchair forensic analysts out there that are claiming that they find evidence of AI manipulation, it’s a spectacular combination of ignorance and arrogance,” said Hany Farid, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley who specializes in analyzing digital images. Farid said he reviewed the video and found “absolutely zero evidence” that AI was involved.

TikTok is discouraging the conspiracies: Earlier this week, TikTok appeared to be funneling users away from searches related to such allegations. A search for “Kate Middleton cancer ai” instead showed results for “Kate Middleton cancer.” The user then had the option to proceed to results for the original search. TikTok declined to comment.

The deepfake theory: Wael Abd-Almageed, a professor of AI at Clemson University who develops deepfake detection software, said he and a student ran the video through their detector and found no indications of AI content. Abd-Almageed slowed the video down to examine it manually, again finding no evidence of AI tampering. If details such as her ring appear fuzzy, he said, it’s because of motion blur and the video’s compression. Another expert, Hao Li, CEO and co-founder of generative AI video-effects company Pinscreen, agreed that the video appears to be authentic, noting the bugs that fly in front of Catherine’s face and the subtle swaying of yellow flowers in the background.

Another AI expert: Only one AI expert contacted by The Post offered support for the suspicions: Deepfake detection start-up Deep Media, which has contracts with the Pentagon, said it found a “high likelihood” that Catherine’s voice and face were manipulated with AI. But other experts — including Farid, Abd-Almageed and Claire Wardle, co-founder and co-director of the Information Futures Lab at Brown University — reviewed Deep Media’s findings at The Post’s request and said they found the results unconvincing.

A suggestion for shutting down conspiracists: Given that even disinformation experts now find it challenging to assess the authenticity of online content, Brown’s Wardle urged institutions such as Kensington Palace and the BBC to do more to publicly validate the images they share before online conspiracies gain traction. The continuing conjecture around Catherine underscores the difficulty of assessing what’s real in an AI-enabled media landscape, she said — as well as the risks of relying on deepfake detectors to separate fact from fiction. “Most people don’t have access to tools that do this kind of analysis,” Wardle said. “And even people who are saying they have these tools, they’re absolutely not 100 percent certain by any means.”

[From WaPo]

“Brown’s Wardle urged institutions such as Kensington Palace and the BBC to do more to publicly validate the images they share before online conspiracies gain traction.” This is what I said days ago – it was a good sign that the BBC was brought in to film Kate’s message and the hope was that the BBC would do more to lend THEIR credibility to a credibility-challenged palace which had just been involved in multiple faked/questionable photos/videos, not to mention the weeks of lies from palace sources. Instead, the BBC is being squirrelly about what was done to the video and only unnamed “BBC sources” will say that the footage hasn’t been tampered with. We’re way past the moment when we could take the palace’s word that everything we’re seeing is legitimate and above-board (although I appreciate the fact that WaPo got the palace to say, lol, that the deepfake allegations are “factually inaccurate”). There should have been – and there still should be – more of an effort to validate the videos and photos released by all of the palaces from here on out.

Screencaps from KP video.

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

146 Responses to “WaPo: Kensington Palace says the deepfake-Kate allegations are ‘factually inaccurate’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Dee(2) says:

    This was a good even handed article, the British media should take note. But the fact of the matter is, they have to say things like it isn’t ” factually accurate ” to say that they manipulated anything because they’ve done so much manipulation in the past. When you’re caught in a lie, that means you have to be above board and offering more than you normally would until trust is rebuilt. But Kensington Palace seems to believe that they’re above reproach, and above being questioned and I don’t get it. No one has to take your word for it. Especially not when you’ve been proven to be liars.

    • Christine says:

      Agreed, Dee. They refuse to accept that they have lost all credibility, and instead of doing anything to attempt to rebuild it, they are arrogantly acting as if there’s nothing to see here. We know that, that is the problem. This isn’t the middle ages, we owe you no deferrence.

      • AlpineWitch says:

        Fact is, Christina, W and K do think the BRF and their ‘subjects’ are still in the Middle Ages (throwing gold coins at peasants, right?) and they feel they’re owed deference and not constant scrutiny.

        Having said that, I believe the video is genuine (she’s wearing a wig, so it might move ‘unnaturally; weather is nuts in England, too windy or 0 wind, so that’s why daffodils are still).

      • BeanieBean says:

        My work is in the great outdoors, and even on still days there’s movement. A bird alights on a branch, there’s sway; a critter moves across the leaves slowly, sniffing for food; there’s more than one bug in the air. If you sit in stillness you can see these things. And NOTHING is happening behind Kate, absolutely nothing. I don’t think she was outside.

    • seaflower says:

      It’s all in the wording: ‘accusations of AI tampering are “factually inaccurate.” ‘ means that they didn’t fix bits and pieces with AI, the whole video is AI (I don’t know if it is or not, just using that as an example). It’s all very “Yes Prime Minister”, an old Brit comedy where the play on words to cover what the public service wants to hide is hysterically funny.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Seaflower, it is all in the wording; even with “Kate’s” official apology:

        “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.”

        NOWHERE does it say that she herself actually had anything to do with manipulating the particular photo that was released for Mother’s Day.

      • Square2 says:

        “NOWHERE does it say that she herself actually had anything to do with manipulating the particular photo that was released for Mother’s Day.”

        And no apology for doing it & promise that we won’t release fake items in the futur. That apology was basic, “I am sorry YOU FEEL that way.”

      • Sobiewski says:

        I’m with you and in complete agreement. That video was a 100 percent a.i. deepfake. I don’t give a flip what wapo says. I never trusted or relied upon msm news to stay informed on anything because I know they will lie, cover up and jump the propaganda bandwagon when it suits them. So wapo hasn’t surprised anyone with this news story. It is expected for them to support the lie that the video is authentic. What really would have been surprising is if a mainstream media source had come out and been honest and admitted that the video was a deepfake.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        As of Sunday, Getty images is now giving this vid major side eye. They now include a notation on it (just shy of a kill notice, yet it begs the question: why not a kill notice?)

        BBC is about to get caught with its pants down, supporting palace liars… again…

    • WiththeAmerican says:

      It’s absurd that we are to take Kensington Palace at their word just DAYS after they got busted with a collage presented as a photo that actually happened. A fake photo.

      No, they don’t get to say whether something is factual or not. Even their apology was a lie, Kate certainly didn’t edit that while getting chemo.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        I will never believe a damn thing from KP again – and I always side-eyed it before this.

        Let’s see actual proof, actual corroboration from Legitimate Media – aka ANYTHING OUTSIDE the UK (Byline Times exempt).

        At this point if any of them in the BRF shuffle off the royal coil they’re gonna need open casket funerals otherwise there will be more sightings of Kate than of Elvis

    • Bad Janet says:

      Nailed it. They’re so offended that anybody would think they’re liars. They SHOULD be using this time to rebuild trust, but they are going to double down on how they should not have to do that instead.

      It’s all one great metaphor for a controlling relationship. They use their privilege and unearned power to lord status and a control over other people they see as “less than.” And when they get caught in a lie, someone gets scapegoated into taking the blame, but there is still very much an air of “how DARE you!”

      Well, cause it’s in everyone’s face that your pants are on fire. But they will continue to argue through the rota mouthpieces that this is so unfair. Classic narcissistic tactics.

      Coming next: how can Kate recover when everyone is being so awful? She can’t do anything right! She needs a year of rest after this!

    • swaz says:

      But my question is, why is TikTok trying to change the trending narrative??? Did the Palace get to them ??? or is that something they’ve done in the past ???

      • BeanieBean says:

        That was an interesting factoid.

      • Jais says:

        Yeah, I also wondered about that. I’m sure they are doing everything they can to control SM. It’s one of the few places that actually challenges their lies.

    • kirk says:

      Dr Joy Buolamwini, recipient of 2024 NAACP – Archewell Foundation Digital Civil Rights Award, delivered 3/13/24 keynote address at 2024 SXSW. Very interesting. After illustrating her poem AI: Ain’t I a Woman, she was interviewed by CNBC journalist MacKenzie Sigalos. Great discussion that delved into ‘cheapfakes’ vs ‘deepfakes’ and other topics such as the need for image data provenance. You can find the video on her ‘poetofcode’ substack, or here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YI7_EdbEtY

    • bisynaptic says:

      “Factually inaccurate” is a whole lotta syllables to say “false”.

      • BeanieBean says:

        It makes it sound as though they’re parsing terms to carefully avoid telling the whole truth, sort of like Clinton’s ‘depends upon what the meaning of ‘is’ is’.

    • ales says:

      We can all tear Charles and William to shreds and blame them for everything. The one common factor in everything has always been Khate and her very destructive family. They have done nothing other than manipulate and annihilate anyone who could expose them. Always assuming that Khate is a victim because women are never violent or abusive, is dangerous and has been a very manipulative way to elicit empathy. What if all the aggression and all vile happenngs have been instigated by her and her family and not by William.

      • kirk says:

        Re: blaming Chuck and Willy for everything – I’m astounded at the number of comments that assume the palaces are “throwing K under the bus.” What? Think of all the articles in the past few years that talk about K’s photography skills, print royal family pix taken by K, the Country Life spread on Cam with pix by K, and grumbling about losing photo income to K (who keeps her copyright). It’s pretty easy for me to visualize the princess propped up on her pillows in bed, while fiddling around with PhotoShop on her computer. Especially when you think of all the pix in years past attributed to K’s photos; thinking in particular of one that that looks like a cardboard cutout of Betty and Phil in front of a castle à la ‘American Gothic’ style.

    • NikkiK says:

      It’s interesting she speaks of her medical team in past tense. Is that a British thing? She said I had instead of I have a fantastic medical team.

      And I say again, they would have know within a few days if cancer was present. She says “I had major surgery and at the time they thought my condition was non cancerous”.

      That implies a mass of some sort, which they assumed was non cancerous and upon biopsy it was. She’s way sicker than they are letting on.

  2. sevenblue says:

    This is so stupid. The lies of H&M editing their photos didn’t gain traction because the photographers are professionals with credibility and they spoke up themselves. If the Palace wanted the public to trust them, they would make sure a trusted BBC person to be present during the recording or to be the responsible person communicating the message. Instead we have unnamed people speaking to untrusted mainstream media. I started to think that they are doing it intentionally to cause confusion, maybe to make people less curios about the King’s condition. Otherwise, I don’t understand why they are consistently creating credibility issues about the future Queen. Wasn’t she supposed to be protected from the gossips?

    • SussexWatcher says:

      It’s also the continual lies about the video they did release – William was taking the video, no he wasn’t but he was there, oh no actually wasn’t even there.

      I think by this point Pegs is so high on his own supply that he is literally incapable of not being a paranoid liar. I think he’s been a secretive, squirrelly, paranoid, spoiled person for so long he cannot tell the truth or act like a normal human being would do in this situation (or in regard to Harry, etc). He’s been lying to everyone under the sun and going against professional advice (just because he wants to show he’s the boss and smarter than everyone in the room) – and/or has some personality disorder? Or has a TBI from the childhood injury? – for his entire life, there’s no way he will start being more forthright and honest now.

      He reminds me of T*ump in a lot of ways because I’ll bet that William honestly thinks he’s “winning” right now against everyone who wants to know the truth. And that’s the most important thing – winning. And the more we want him to be honest, the more of a squirrelly liar he’ll be.

      • sevenblue says:

        I certainly agree that this is all the brilliant work of Will. But, there is no way he feels like a winner. He built an entire bots empire to spread lies about H&M and to embiggen him and his wife. He has a team closely monitoring social media. This Kategate is now spread to the people creating conspiracies as a full time hobby. Anti-vac, Qanon, all of them are now part of the discussion. Once a topic goes to that side, there is no way to turn the ship back. I am sure he knows he stepped on a beehive.

      • SussexWatcher says:

        I don’t know if he cares about any of that though because he exists in such an isolated bubble of yes-men who stroke his ego, follow his orders (even when ridiculous or the opposite of what he said/did the week prior), and have the papers in their pockets. And to some extent, the bots are winning because look how much abuse Harry and Meghan receive, even moving into mainstream American outlets.

        I definitely agree that the truth will be known eventually – and I do believe he’ll divorce his wife – but William will still be PoW and probably king, and will still live in a lavish bubble protected by courtiers, media, and monarchists. And his daily rages against his brother will still be published in the UK papers while the rota rats line up to service him.

        I also don’t think his work is brilliant in any way, it’s only that HE thinks it is. And he has enough people around him – and an entire system of governance – to support and prop up his lies and unstable behavior.

      • Becks1 says:

        they never said William took the video. He has credit for the frankenphoto, but they never said he took the video.

        @sevenblue I think if you consider the sheer arrogance of KP/William, it will answer a lot of your questions. They don’t think they are “consistently creating credibility issues.” They think they are telling you this is a video of Kate and you need to accept it as such and people need to stop questioning KP because this is Kensington Palace and WILLIAM and he should never ever be questioned.

        A lot of people think they are being squirrely because they are hiding something – and I’m sure they are still hiding things. but I also think there is a level of arrogance here and a sense of “we don’t owe anyone anything” that cannot go unmentioned.

      • Caribbean says:

        @SussexWatcher – great take, but I have a different take on it…
        Based on everything we have seen, show that not only do William and Kate care VERY MUCH, but they are also watching closely what is been said and what is happening on Social Media and doing everything to influence what is being said in their favor…very few examples —
        …the quickness of making up the bullying story from the palace
        …the coming out for engagements when H & M do anything
        …the increase in attacks against H & M whenever they get good press or having a new venture.
        …the copying of Meghan by Kate
        …the coordinating of ‘colorful outfits’ to discredit Meghan’s take.
        …the LOUD way they speak using their comm team and Tabloid (I can NEVER understand where the ‘no complaining, no explaining’ made sense – you have a whole comm team and Tabloid that print what THE PALACE APPROVES) to sow hate against H & M – especially Meghan.

    • Snaggletooth says:

      Claims of “ai tampering are factually inaccurate”…that’s also a very far cry from saying this video is exactly what it appears to be and there’s about it that would raise any eyebrows. Between the BBC hedging and disclaiming the video and thsi extremely narrow denial, it is beyond obvious there’s something going on.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        Statement analysis gets a bad rap because it is often misused to analyze the statements of people going through a tough situation. When they flubbed their words or speak in a certain way it can be misconstrued as a sign of guilt when really, it’s a sign of being a human under severe pressure/pain.

        However, when reporters write their articles they know how important every word is. Saying “we did not use AI in the making or editing of this video” is crisp, clear, and a definitive statement of fact. Saying a claim of AI use is “factually inaccurate” is designed to hide something. They aren’t willing to issue a clear denial so they try to deflect with a microscopic word salad.

        So before this statement I thought the video was made with multiple takes edited together along with being indoors with the background so they could control lighting and sound but now I think there is something hinky about the video (aside from “filmed at Windsor” because where is Kate?).

        The royals are really getting their money’s worth from the Streisand Effect.

      • Sunday says:

        This is it, in a nutshell. Claims of “ai tampering are factually inaccurate” does not mean “this video has not been edited”. It doesn’t even mean “this video is not ai” because they could be indicating that “tampering” is the inaccuracy because it wasn’t tampering, it was intentional. And all the “experts” responding know that. They’re taking advantage of the media’s (and generally everyone’s) inexpertise on AI to fudge the question they want to answer, and they still couldn’t even get all their experts to agree it wasn’t manipulated.

        ETA @BlueNailsBetty just saw your comment and agree completely.

      • Mrs. Smith says:

        @BlueNailsBetty — I also agree with your take. Wondering if there was a statement or announcement from KP or BBC sent to media before the video aired? Wasn’t it shown on BBC? Anyway, I’d like to see what was said officially prior to the video release.

      • Agnes says:

        Is CGI considered AI? Because the background is probably computer-generated, that doesn’t make it “intelligent.” I still have a hard time believing she gave that speech without it being heavily edited, because of past instances of her mumbly public speaking.

  3. SussexWatcher says:

    Oh okay, Kensington Palace, I’ll take your word for it. Suuuure. You only lie about leaking to the press to attack Harry and Meghan, how much and when your principal royals will be working, where they are at any given time, who they hire, what they spend, whether Huevo and Keen even live together anymore, who edits pictures and when they were taken and by whom, trips to the farm store by “William” and “Kate,” the legitimacy of cardboard cutouts in a car staring at a brick wall, and about a million other things. But okay, Jan, I’ll take your word that this BBC FILM productions video (not the news arm) is completely on the up and up.

  4. Brassy Rebel says:

    Kensington Palace is still being squirrelly. Saying the deep fake allegations are “factually inaccurate” is what is called a non-denial denial in the political world which I actually know something about, unlike photography and videography, of which I am totally ignorant.

    • SussexWatcher says:

      Right?! It reminds me of Rose’s denial of having an affair with “The Prince of Wales” – oh okay, but how about the Duke of Cambridge? Or Kate never actually saying she edited THAT photo, just that she enjoys playing with photoshop.

      Again, it’s all about parsing words with these people. Which makes me think everything they say is a lie.

      • Liz says:

        💯🎯 Sussexwatcher

      • Sunday says:

        “it’s all about parsing words with these people.” 1000000%

        Peter Souza tried to bring this up re: the term photoshop. It wasn’t an accurate way to refer to the frankenphoto, but using it allowed KP to manipulate public discourse from “an official state office just created a fake image to mislead the public” to “Kate’s an amateur photographer who likes photoshop! Don’t we all like to look pretty in our photos? It’s totally normal!!”

        They’re doing the same with AI. “not AI” doesn’t mean not edited. And the dumbest part is, it being edited could still mean Kate was in the video. It’s exactly this parsing of the “issue” and the oily way they’re issuing the denial that is raising my hackles here. It’s comms pr doublespeak, and they’re deploying it to relay the most sympathetic story the non-Sussex windsors have had since the queen passed. IMHO questions are warranted.

      • Jais says:

        Not AI doesn’t mean not edited. I’ve always assumed the vid was messed around with. As in they’ll use every editing trick possible to make Kate look and sound her best in the vid. I’d want the same if I was in the public eye. Good lighting etc. editing the best takes. Piecing together the best parts? I guess the question again is whether those things went beyond just cosmetic and into manipulation. Until a professional entity calls it out the way they did for the frankenphoto, I’m not gonna assume it’s AI. Maybe I’m naive and will be made a fool of at some point.

    • Anna says:

      Exactly. They are providing those word salats that can mean anything but “the video was not manipulated, it is legitimate”.

    • CherHorowitz says:

      That is what struck me – ‘factually inaccurate’ seems a bizarre way to respond wording wise, if the whole video was legit and not tampered with. Ridiculous, false, unfounded… there lots of ways to deny that and this seems like very intentional wording to me.

      I just have a nagging feeling that they knew the C word was the only way to silence criticism… and its working!

      • ML says:

        CherHorowitz, I’m not sure “cancer” is shutting down the noise? If there’s a continuous flow of “conspiracy theorists don’t believe K has cancer,” then there’s a constant sort of back-handed advertising for photo manipulation, AI videos, focus on why there are conspiracy theories. You can believe that K is ill, and talk about everything that KP has done wrong.

    • Cessily says:

      I believe this video was manipulated. I may not know AI when I spot it but I do know when something is just off and everything about that video is off, especially the fact that she was there alone. It is much harder to manipulate photos or video when there are multiple subjects, that is the only reason I can see for someone to put her on a bench alone to discuss the diagnosis of cancer. Which I will always point out that KP had denied several times that her surgery and diagnosis had anything whatsoever to do with cancer. So along with the loss of credibility over the manipulation of historical images no one can believe there official offices or the rota who are the palace pr team.

      • Tara says:

        I found this part most interesting, as the whole world agrees that this was her best speech ever: “Deepfake detection start-up Deep Media, which has contracts with the Pentagon, said it found a “high likelihood” that Catherine’s voice and face were manipulated with AI.” So they had someone sitting in a real scenario, BBC Studio filmed it and then voice and face was altered – ?

      • Julianna says:

        @Cessily I completely agree with you everything you said. I also believe the video is AI. The entire video is just off.

      • Just me 2 says:

        @Tara regarding her’ best speech ever’ – People have mentioned Kate’s cadence and manner of speaking and how this video differs from her norm. I must admit that I am not very observant of these type things (didn’t give much thought to the frankenphoto until legitimate news agencies pulled the plug on the photo) but I did notice that the manner of speech is very, very similar to K. Charles. Right down to occasionally pausing and looking down. I am not saying it points to AI fakery as I don’t know much about that, but at the very least I wonder if Charles coached her on speaking.

    • Harper says:

      Factually inaccurate sounds like the proof social media has already put forth is not the whole story. Such as focusing on the striped sweater being from seven years ago when it’s clearly a different sweater, but that error doesn’t negate the other weird bits. It just makes me want to take an even deeper dive. What is wrong with an absolute denial such as Kate was filmed outside Adelaide cottage on Wed at noon by our roving camera crew headed by BBC Studios’ Sir Twit Twitterson and post production handled by Pansy Flowerpot, head of AI (haha).

      • AMB says:

        All the tons of road salt saved in the nonwinter here in Minne could be usefully applied to this whole discussion.

        “Works with the Pentagon” could be as tangential as “somebody with an @pengtagon.biz email filled out a form once” – in my business life I get these all the time, “we work with your company” when I know darn well they don’t because I MANAGE THOSE CONTRACTS.

        ETA – Ooooops – misposted, should be in response to Sunday below.

    • ML says:

      Brassy Rebel, ITA. It’s giving Bill Clinton denying Monica Lewinsky from the 1990s level of believability. Liars tend to use more words to justify their lies.

      This is a problem, too: “Deepfake detection start-up Deep Media, which has contracts with the Pentagon, said it found a “high likelihood” that Catherine’s voice and face were manipulated with AI.” You can have a bunch of companies out there saying nothing is wrong with the video, but if one, especially one that works with the Pentagon, says differently, you’re credibility is trashed.

      Victoria Newton of the Sun said that KP approved the Farm Store video, where Kate doesn’t resemble BBC Kate, and said it was real. I have difficulty reconciling those two views.

      I believe Kate is ill and needs to recover. I’m also concerned about why the messaging isn’t clear. They must be hiding something.

      • Sunday says:

        “It’s giving Bill Clinton denying Monica Lewinsky from the 1990s”

        YES! It’s exactly this tactic. See also the ridiculous discourse we had after the media used the term “Collusion” to describe Trump’s crimes and then the defense became “but collusion isn’t a legal term, collusion isn’t a crime!”

        This is what tech has done with AI, they’ve taken advantage of people generally equating “AI technology” to SkyNet when in actuality marketing teams are using AI to refer to basic old programs like the chat function on a website. Now, some of this is actually SkyNet level stuff that should worry us, but in general they’re applying the umbrella AI term to such a wide range of functionality specifically so that they can impress naive investors while they avoid questions like the ones here.

        imho it’s also notable that they directly quote Kensington Palace without any caveat that notes KP lied about the veracity of another image. They only mention the k*ll order in passing towards the end of the article, and with nowhere near the level of importance it demands.

        It’s just like the endless stories quoting “random diner patrons” who are sharing their honest, real American opinions about the state of democracy and then we find out that the “random patron” is literally a GOP strategist.

      • WiththeAmerican says:

        Yeah, the one that works with the Pentagon is the one that says it’s AI? Um… that’s a problem.

      • Becks1 says:

        A lot of people are emphasizing the Pentagon connection but as someone with family members who do a lot of work with the pentagon and other alphabet agencies – they are not infallible and it doesn’t mean what they say needs to be treated as gospel. There are a lot of government contractors, my guess is you could easily find others that work with the pentagon or NSA etc that would say this video is not AI.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        “ Liars tend to use more words to justify their lies.”

        So true. My old boss once told me the best way to see if someone was lying was to ask a question and then not say a word. Just let them talk. People who are being honest/mostly honest generally just answer the question. Liars talk around the question and sometimes flat out ramble without ever answering the question.

        It has been a pretty useful tool.

      • WiththeAmerican says:

        That’s true, @Becks1. I was just thinking given the governments recent heavy push on AI safety, a media contractor for the Pentagon would have gotten the many memos on the dangers of AI since the Biden admin is has been pushing for AI wariness and even making rules about its usage.

        Plus they identified them as an “AI expert,” but of course you’re right they’re not infallible, no one is!

        This is actually global, was the topic of a recent talk I think in London, with allies a big focus on AI. I suspect this is exactly why the Mother’s Day picture got called out so harshly, because awareness of AI used for nefarious purposes/deception had been raised at think tanks universities and governments in the last 6 months esp.

        I still think it’s notable that any AI expert says this cancer video was AI. I believed that video, so I do find that troubling.

  5. Chloe says:

    I mean the video didn’t look fake to me either but maybe KP should be more honest and open in general and then people wouldn’t be questioning your word?

  6. So it’s back to believe what we tell you no questions asked. I will not believe them because they lit so very much.

    • Angelica+Schuyler says:

      This exactly. And they’ve tried to shame people from asking “Where is Kate?” As if that bench video is totally believable and how dare we ask about a woman who has cancer. But the bottom line is that no one has really seen Kate publicly since Christmas. Until we see her do a widely public event, in the flesh, I will have doubts about the authenticity of anything coming from KP and/or the British press.

      They continue to try to change the narrative and shame people from asking for ‘proof of life’, but if people really care about Kate’s safety and wellbeing they would want to know for sure that she is really ok.

      I don’t care what anyone says. That bench video looks like AI to me, and all the whining from KP and the press that we’re just trolls and conspiracy theorists will NOT dissuade me from my opinion.

      In the meantime, I’m waiting for Beyonce’s album to drop, and getting my credit card ready to buy all of Meghan’s jams…… (Whispers: Hmm…..where IS Kate? )

      • Iolanthe says:

        Whether it’s really the woman or some AI generated dummy with a posh accent is irrelevant . Considering she is parked on a bench in a garden, does anyone recall Meghan reading her childrens story sitting on a garden bench ..and the book was called..The Bench . So it’s probably Kate still cos playing to the bitter end

      • Anna says:

        Do you remember how Bree van de Kamp said that to stop people asking questions you have say something that will make them really uncomfortable, eg something sad and deeply personal.

        I am not sure if Kate has cancer, it seems wildly coincidental with Chuck’s diagnosis, but we already see how they use this to shame people and squash any valid questions.

        I still suspect something very bad happened due to Wills and K either cannot show her face or refuses to cooperate – otherwise why is W not jumping at an obvious PR goldmine of perfect supportive husband and father? Why has he not said a word directly to rota rats or the public? Still, so many questions! Easter walk will be interesting.

  7. equality says:

    All (supposedly) credible media outlets should be demanding originals from KP and analyzing everything sent. I wonder how many of those consulted here were given an original or just working from what was put out. That info would be helpful in assessing their results. So WaPo is doing better but still not putting in a much greater effort than others. How nice that TikTok will deflect negative Kate stuff. No SM sites have done that for H&M. As a matter of fact, I got the negative rammed down my throat with them.

  8. Avonan says:

    “Only one AI expert contacted by The Post offered support for the suspicions [that the bench video was AI generated]….”

    I’m here to point out that the tentacles of the co-conspiring British media and palaces stretch far:

    The Washington Post’s new chief executive, Will Lewis, is named in Prince Harry’s (et. al.) lawsuit. Specifically, Lewis is accused of “actively plotting to cover up senior executives’ role in the [phone hacking] scandal when he worked for the Murdoch publishing empire in London.”

    (Source: “Rupert Murdoch and new ‘Washington Post’ CEO accused of cover-up in hacking scandal,” by David Folkenflik, NPR, March 21, 2024.)

    • Cessily says:

      I would believe that one company over any rag .. the Fail and Sun owners own far too many news outlets here to just blindly trust what they print.

    • ML says:

      Avonan, Thank for the information on WaPo’s Will Lewis hire. The likelihood that he is anti monarchy and neutral is low.
      Cessily, I agree. If a company working for the Pentagon finds this suspicious, then I’m inclined to believe them.

      • Becks1 says:

        But that’s sort of bias confirmation, isn’t it? You think the video was AI so you believe the company that confirms that, not the numerous other forensic experts listed in the article who say that it was NOT AI.

      • Kit says:

        @Becks1, it might be confirmation bias, but the BBB’s “factually inaccurate” comment and the lack of deep dive into the other video are odd. If the Post took so much effort to analyze the cancer announcement video, why not analyze the car market video was well or comment with context about the doctored Mother’s Day photo?

        People are skeptical because of the lies and behaviors of the Royal family and the press. It takes much more to convince people now. For me, this is what I find tragic . Truths are subsumed by lies and technology has made it more difficult to distinguish between the two. So phrases like “factually accurate” and “factually inaccurate” only compound the problem. This is where the legitimate press needs to be very careful.

        I think Sunday’s comments are pretty insightful and explain why people have so many questions (and it’s not because they are conspiracy theorists — anymore than when people doubt the Kremlin’s attempt to associate (blame) Ukraine for its recent terrorist bombing).

      • ML says:

        Becks1, This is true. When I moved to Europe, I believed that the US could never have fallen for a fascist dictator like Hitler. Then Trump came along, and I’ve had to listen to some of the wildest conspiracy theories from formerly intelligent individuals. I am perhaps in danger of being brainwashed.
        I do not know if AI was used in that video or not, however, I have started to believe that something is wrong with it.
        Conspiracy-wise, I don’t know how to judge WaPo’s sources, I don’t know how many they asked (other than those in this article), and from the outside looking in, my gut (as opposed to my brain?) is telling me that someone who vets AI for the Pentagon has to be good at what they do.
        I think K is ill/ recovering, but not dead. I don’t like the lies, the inconsistencies, and the total lack of transparency. KP could easily shut this down and stop it from happening in the future. And yet, we have weird language and no one going on the record to talk about this video.

      • Becks1 says:

        We dont know that the company vets AI for the Pentagon. It just says they have “contracts” with the pentagon. And the article indicates that the other sources cited looked at that company’s findings and were not convinced.

        I get that KP has damaged its own credibility, but over the last week I’ve seen a lot of “moving the goalposts” with regards to this video – first it had to be fake because of her sweater and it had to be a copy of a video from 2016, then it had to be fake because of the daffodils, then it was the reflection on the bench, then it was Kate’s hair, etc. We trust X person to say it was AI but not Y person to say it wasn’t. We trust this account that says its AI btu not these other dozen accounts that say it wasn’t. And so on.

        I think if anyone had proof this was AI then it would have come out by now – and I don’t just mean a random account on TikTok.

        Honestly I think a large part of the problem is the farm video, because I think that Kate looks so different from this Kate that people can’t reconcile the two and so are just starting from the assumption that both videos are fake. But I think if we mentally take that video out of the equation, this video looks more authentic.

        I do think a filter was used, and there may have been multiple takes, and I think that’s why KP won’t come out and say the video wasn’t edited, because it was. But it wasn’t edited like some people are claiming.

        I just think some on here are starting to veer into deranger-esque moonbump theory territory. I get the questioning of the video but what, are we going to be insisting this is fake for years to come?

      • ML says:

        Becks1, True, I don’t know if they’re vetting stuff for the Pentagon, but doesn’t it seem highly likely given what’s on their website and articles published in Medium? I (really I do!) understand the craziness of it all. I just, given the past few weeks, am not going to cross off this one company saying that they believe the video was manipulated.

        I do think K’s not healthy—why I believe that has everything to do with BP. If she were trying to get away with a long vacation, they would have destroyed her. They are letting KP and W twist in the wind, but they clearly are onside with K not being able to work. They are also onboard with the cancer announcement, though they are continuing to show her effective communication when it comes to the public.

        If W wants to divorce her, it will happen (I know that this is something many people here believe—she can’t fight that). If they were heading towards one (I think both of them benefit more from staying married while apart), then even portraying K as healthy while both of them weren’t showing up to work because she was recovering is insanely stupid. How do you explain all that when the truth comes out?

        I also think that KP needs to come out and say which pix are/not real. Use concise language as opposed to “factually incorrect,” and be more transparent. KP is creating excess stress for K at the moment.

      • Becks1 says:

        @ML that is something I keep coming back to as well – BP. I agree with Kaiser’s comments that she thinks BP didn’t know about the cancer until last week or the week before. I think that tracks – remember we said it seemed like Camilla was trolling W&K with her hospital visits, Charles with his videos and being seen walking to church, Camilla taking that vacation, etc – and now I feel like that trolling has stopped. Charles put out a statement in support of Kate. Camilla has made comments about her publicly. I don’t think they would be doing that if Kate were lying or if this was a big coverup on Kate’s part to prevent a divorce or whatever.

        I think its clear that Charles is on Kate’s side here (the whole “private lunch” to which William was not invited….) – I’m not saying that BP wouldn’t hide or release false information etc. But I do not think Charles would let a fake cancer diagnosis be put out there. That would be way too damaging for the monarchy if it was ever discovered (and these things are always discovered.)

        I think here if KP came out and said “we dont want to feed into social media frenzy that appears to be unending, but we do want to clarify that the video was shot in front of a green screen with the background added in for Daffodil Day” or something…..it might help. But then again, it might not bc then people would ask “well what else did you edit?!?!!?!?”

        So as I’ve said, I think the video is authentic – everything people have pointed out about it as proof of AI just doesn’t hold up to me – but KP has put themselves in this position where everything they put out is going to be presumed to be fake, and they might not be able to dig themselves out of that hole, ever.

      • Sunday says:

        Yea, trying to debunk or even discuss specific artifacts in that video was a mistake.*

        Whether it’s AI, edited, filtered, or 100% real has zero bearing on the truth. Any of those could be true and Kate could be ill; any of those could be true and Kate could be healthy. And none of it would be an excuse to lie to the public as KP did with their doctored image.

        We know for a fact that KP uses bots and trolls, staged the Flybe stunt, and leaked Meghan’s letter. They’re tech savvy and not above deploying extreme measures to protect their principal. Does that include AI deep fakes? Not sure, but it absolutely includes derangers with squad accounts posting doctored images of Meghan, Richard Eden aka “Maureen”, and all sorts of underhanded techniques. It’s not about one thing damaging their credibility, it’s about the latest, aggregious offense (k*ll order) in a long history of using technology to deceive the public.

        And as Bouzy is attacked and individual squaddies (majority woc) are now being harrassed by the tabloids themselves, I think we have to remind ourselves of the many types of DARVO in media, and the tactics I’ve mentioned above that KP and their minions have been caught redhanded doing. How do we know an editor at the sun didn’t create a squad account so she could quote herself in her article? That’s literally what they do. So if the only reason why we’re not questioning this now is because it’s deemed taboo to ‘question a cancer patient’ then I have to immediately push back on being boxed into that framing. I’m questioning a taxpayer funded office getting caught lying to the public and then oopsie-woopsie stepping into a tornado of speculation entirely of their own making.

        *For clarity, pointing to the sweater/hair/setting combo of Kate’s old video was referring to the technique of feeding an old video back and forth through multiple AI models to more narrowly control the parameters being fed to the AI. This was a roundabout way of pointing out technical circumstantial evidence, sort of like seeing a bunch of ingredients and speculating on the dish being cooked. “This old video could have been used to train an AI to create the new one” is valid and possible but ultimately doesn’t prove anything. And honestly I think that’s part of the point, KP wants us examining pixels of flies and sounding insane and I’m going to stop making their job easier.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Becks1, the first (and only) time I viewed the video I was taken aback. First, because I didn’t think it looked a lot like Bone Idle. Certainly, a weight loss could account for that. Her speech was a deal breaker for me. She has made speeches over the years, but not one of them was fluid. None. Could she have practiced this speech to become fluid? Well, it would have taken lots of time, IMO, for her to do so.

        If we ASSUME this video is real then I think someone did something to her face and her speech. What that entailed, I don’t know. Frankly, I’ve pretty lost interest in her. She can continue to hide away and do the school run for the next 20 years. My tax dollars don’t pay for her to work, so I don’t have a horse in this race. I do care about any organization or media using anything to spread mis/disinformation.

        The BBC is hedging their bets with their response. They said before that they had no hand in distributing the video–they evidently have no hand in any (or if any) editing, etc., occurred with the video.

      • Just me 2 says:

        Saucy & Sassy, with regard to her speech, it has a remarkable similarity to the manner of speech of King Charles as I mentioned in another comment. Her speech has the same rhythm as his and she pauses and looks down on occasion as he does. At the very least they have the same speech coach. As far as AI, I haven’t any expertise even noting some ‘oddities’ as a casual observer.

  9. Carmen says:

    I don’t know if the video is real or fake, I am totally ignorant of how AI works, but I’m not believing anything on KP’s say-so.

    On a lighter note, “ Baldilocks” seems to have officially entered the Twitter lexicon, thanks to the evil machinations of the Sussex Squad, and Willy and his handlers are having a collective hissy-fit. They are fuming. They seem quite threatened by the Squad for some reason.

    • Midnight@theOasis says:

      They’re scared and upset with the Sussex Squad because the Squad challenges them on the lies and BS they spread about H&M. The Squad takes the fight to them.

      • Sid says:

        Imagine if social media during the mid to late 90s had been what it is now. Back then you were limited to mostly messageboards and newsgroups. If the Diana fans back then would have had the social media access of today, things would be very, very different.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Midnight@the Oasis, I agree that they are afraid of the Squad. When they put out disinformation the Sussex Squad immediately fires back with receipts. They want to be able to get out the information they CHOOSE to be out in the world. The Squad should be very proud–they’re effective and they make a difference.

  10. Becks1 says:

    I think the video is authentic and I’ve said that from the beginning (despite people on here acting like its ignorance on my part to think that because something something tiktok) – but it is absolutely mindblowing that we have a WaPo article about this at all – that the video from KP is still under such suspicion that WaPo is devoting an article to the fact that it is NOT AI. KP has lost all credibility and like I’ve also said repeatedly – they only have themselves to blame.

    • ML says:

      Becks1, I’m not on social media, so I don’t get information directly from there. I did think that the BBC video was a straight-up filming of K.

      However, while I believe that she’s ill, and probably is in treatment for cancer, I am no longer 100% confident.

      I don’t like that both the Farm Store and BBC videos are supposedly Kate, and have both been approved by KP. Those K’s look and act like two different women. I don’t understand their messaging prior to the cancer announcement, and I don’t understand why they refuse to offer the easiest option when it comes to proof. Release the original version. Name sources. Better yet, go with the news instead of the studio or briefly appear in person. Instead they denigrate people who have shown them to have been lying.

      Edit: So now I think something is wrong with this video.

      • Becks1 says:

        I said in another post that I think William and Kate are on different sides of this mess and I think that explains some of the weirdness. Like we have said on here over the last few weeks – who benefits from a healthy Kate? William. So I think William was okay with the farm video (whether its Kate, a body double, an old video, whatever) because he wanted the image of a healthy Kate out there.

        And we had another article this week that said William didn’t think Kate should do the cancer video because “she didn’t need to explain herself.” But I also think Wililam didn’t want the word “cancer” out there regarding Kate.

        so I think if we approach this whole mess of the last two weeks (not the entire mess since January) from that perspective it can explain some of the weirdness.

      • K-Peace says:

        ML, Something IS very wrong with the video. If they had been filming a real video of Kate just sitting on a bench talking, after all the lies & fakery they’ve recently been busted for, they would’ve made sure they filmed a crystal-clear straightforward video with NO fakery. But instead we get a fake background, fake background noises added in, her face all blurry with unnatural-looking eyes and an oddly moving mouth, and weird glitches. This just wouldn’t be the case if it were real. It just wouldn’t. It’s just yet another piece of fakery from KP. I believe it’s A.I. i don’t even believe Kate has cancer. I think KP/Prince William was backed into a corner and desperate, and he/they needed something MAJOR to get him out of it. Announcing “cancer” was about the only thing that would explain all the weirdness & fakery and also get them some sympathy. And it worked, on most people. But i don’t buy it for one second. And yes i absolutely think they’re evil enough to fake cancer. Seriously, where is Kate?!?

      • Becks1 says:

        @K-peace the video isn’t actually that blurry. After about 20 seconds it clears up. There may still be a filter on the camera or something, but the blurriness really definitely clears up and goes away. Her eyes look “unnatural” to people because we are so used to seeing her with super heavy eyeliner and eye makeup and here she is barely wearing anything.

    • Pittie Mom says:

      I agree with you on everything you wrote, Becks1. I believe it’s all real (the video the cancer, the chemo) but they truly only have themselves to blame for the suspicion and doubt.

      I think the farm store video was set up by someone who wanted to make some tabloid money (hey, I’d take a couple hundred thousand) but that’s another discussion.

      • Julianna says:

        In regards to the Farm Store video – the Sun editor went on the record swearing it was Kate (which it’s CLEARLY NOT) and that they were in communication with KP the entire time and approved them running the photos and video. So it wasn’t just about people making money.

      • Underhill says:

        Pittie Mom, I agree with you. That farm video was too fake, it was not Kate. I found a Kate impersonator on Instagram (not the one who denied that it was her), who was exactly the woman in that video. Someone wanted to make a quick buck. KP didn’t say anything just to see if people would bite. I think the video of Kate on the bench was real, but that there are more hidden elements to the whole story that they don’t want to come to light.

      • Becks1 says:

        I think KP let that video come out of the farm stand and thought it would quiet the social media storm and when it didn’t and people started doubting it (almost immediately), KP was kind of backed into a corner because they couldn’t come out at that point and say it wasn’t Kate because they had essentially approved it. And by saying it wasn’t Kate, they would be saying the Sun was lying, and we know that KP is wary about going up against the tabloid press. They’ll do it sometimes, but I think if they had done it here, AFTER approving the Sun posting the video, it would have gotten very messy for them, press-wise.

        I don’t know. This whole situation has just gotten insane.

    • Kit says:

      The Washington Post went to town with Kategate. One weekend the paper carried 10 articles about it. Not quite the Daily Mail number, but certainly regular readers took note and said so. It was unusual for the Post to devote so much space to this story given so many other, more impactful stories happening. The tone of the many articles was sympathetic to defensive of Kate, even before her cancer announcement. After the announcement, the Post had columns, much liked NYT, excoriating the public for the craziness that ensued, but didn’t stop to admit the press itself was just as guilty for fanning the flame.

      I believe it was Kate in the cancer announcement video BTW.

      • Becks1 says:

        oh completely agree, the press has completely exonerated itself from this whole mess. I meant more that its gotten to the point where WaPo has an article discussing whether this video was fake or not. That says a lot about how much KP’s credibility has been damaged.

      • Underhill says:

        I am getting tired of the press, mostly British gutter press but some others, running around and mawkishly demanding apologies from all and sundry, for what, it is not quite apparent. “She has CANCER!”… so? That’s sad for her and her kids, she’ll get treatment, hope she does well. The public did not cause this. Harry and Meghan did not cause this. Stephen Colbert did not cause this. This demanding of apologies is tiresome now.

    • Renae says:

      I agree with KPEACE.
      I think the farm store video is definitely NOT Kate.
      The bench video is questionable as is the whole cancer story. Don’t know if its fake/AI or not and at this point, its irrelevant.
      Frankly, I can’t believe anything out of the royals these days.
      The behaviour of Charles at least gives credence to his cancer diagnosis. WandK? Not so much.
      Does Kate have cancer? Without further info, its highly questionable so I will grant her no grace.

    • Jais says:

      AI is a new enough industry that I don’t have any experts I trust to tell me the truth. The new ceo of the WP being from the UK tabloids doesn’t make it any easier. Basically, I hate it here. As in this whole new reality where we’re questioning every video we see. It sucks. Either way, there’s a few home truths for me:
      -KP and BP lie.
      -Repeat. KP and BP lie at N. Korean levels
      -Saying claims are factually inaccurate is weird wording.
      -Wish there were bts outtakes or people from bbc studios actually named as part of the filming.
      -Wish health and healing to anyone sick.
      -I’m not equipped to say whether it’s AI or not. Some experts says it’s not. One says it inconsistent. Okay. Noted.

  11. MsIam says:

    There was a post on here a few weeks ago about some old school royal journalist and he felt the BBC had ceded too much control to the royal family. He felt that allowing to have a say in the video images the BBC put out covering royal events, letting them edit programs about the royals, etc was going to erode public trust that the BBC could provide a reliable factual record of the royal family. I believe the BBC edited the hell out of that video but of course I’m no AI expert so I can’t speak to that. I think its weird that in the day of HD cameras that show every pore, you have Kate’s face looking all fuzzy and grainy. But this whole incident will do nothing to restore the credibility of that institution imo.

  12. Dee says:

    Release one behind the scenes shot and you could clear this up. But no, they can’t.

    • Harper says:

      How about a glimpse of Kate in the car on a public street or a brief five minute update filmed with someone trusted like Emily Maitlis? At this point, Kate seems able to withstand that. If not, why?

      • Becks1 says:

        So, to be fair, there have been three videos/pictures of Kate seen in public since January and people have accused all three of being fake – the car pic with her mom (with people insisting that its Pippa or its in Switzerland etc), the car pic with William (with people insisting its a picture of her from years ago edited into the pic), and the farm video (with people insisting its a body double.) And then we have the cancer video itself and people are still insisting that’s AI, even though multiple sources have said its not.

        i’m not saying there’s not reason to doubt KP or that every one of those sightings was credible (bc I thnk at least one was…..manipulated, let’s say.)

        But there could be a video of Kate walking through Hyde Park waving a newspaper from today and people would still insist it was AI or a body double etc.

        And don’t get me wrong – that’s on KP. They mismanaged this and let it get out of hand and put out the frankenphoto etc – they destroyed their own credibility in real time and it was a train wreck.

        But because of that destroyed credibility, I can’t think of what would convince people that X sighting IS Kate and it’s not a body double or AI etc.

      • Harper says:

        @Becks1 I believe there is a greater measure of credibility in the proof of life appearances Charles has made vs those offered up by KP for Kate. We’ve seen him move about in public places and meet with those outside his immediate circle since his diagnosis. Kate, however, is always in a stationary position and her proofs of life do not include anyone other than those invested in hiding her true condition–Will and CarolE.

      • Dee says:

        There had to be test shots and outtakes. Someone set up the shot. Or do what Charles has done. In the old days, there would’ve been a press conference with people present. They made this Kate video in this way so they could hide something.

      • Angelica+Schuyler says:

        @Harper I agree that Kate needs to be seen, publicly with people other than her immediate circle. Until then it’s all just hearsay as to whether or not she is ok and Kensington palace is telling the truth. They expect us to all show them deference and not ‘question’ the veracity of their statements, but they have proven themselves to be liars. Maybe British subjects feel they deserve such deferential treatment, but the rest of the world doesn’t owe this to them.

        How will the world feel if something horrible has happened to Kate, but everyone just dropped the topic because KP shamed them into it?

        I just have this feeling that everything is not as it seems. It’s not okay, and people are too quick to just move on. Wonky videos of perfectly poised, well articulated Kate are just not convincing.

        I’m perfectly happy to dismiss this once Kate is back to cosplaying Meghan in public and mumbling her way through meaningless appearances with her fake posh accent and her jazz hands. Until then, I’ll believe that KP is hiding something.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Angelica I said on another post that I think what they’re hiding is that Kate is a lot sicker than they’re letting on. That explains why we’re not seeing her outside her immediate circle, why they hid the diagnosis (who wants to tell the world they may be dying??), why William seems so out of sorts. It’s a dark tinfoil theory but I think it explains a lot.

      • Angelica+Schuyler says:

        @Becks1 You could be right. I just know they’re lying. And, the more they try to shift the blame, i.e. the Russians, the Chinese, the Sussex Squad, the more it makes me know that the situation is really bad. She may possibly be in the coma that the Spanish journalist spoke about. It would be too easy to dispel all the rumors by just dolling her up in good hair and makeup and having her appear publicly (as she did post childbirth) even if it’s brief. But they most likely can not. And they want us, the public, to just roll over like good little serfs and not question our ‘betters’. Those days are over. They can’t control the narrative anymore now that communication is instant and global. And people aren’t stupid.

        I’m onboard for dark tinfoil theories that lead to the truth coming to light.

  13. Kitten says:

    I honestly don’t understand how there can be a loss of trust and credibility from an institution that was founded on lies, secrecy and manipulation. There is literally ZERO motivation for the monarchy to be transparent or open with the public and a million reasons why they need to close ranks and protect their image.
    I guess that’s why I continue to be surprised at how people are reacting to this situation but I guess some people actually thought the monarchy was a force for good? I mean, even Diana for all the good she did would tell y’all otherwise if she could. But if people are finally waking up to the fact that KP is self-serving, greedy, shallow and dishonest then that’s a plus I guess…..

  14. WiththeAmerican says:

    Just yesterday on TikTok, I saw multiple accounts spreading q conspiracies about the cancer video. Every single one of them managed to work in an anti Covid vaccine comment, too, so this is who is on the Palace now about their lies.

    These people are absolutely bananas. Good luck, KP.

  15. SCAR❤️❤️❤️❤️ says:

    Sadly the cancer announcement video was blown out so much that it might be real. They attempted to hide the signs of her aging so much the video looks fake.

  16. Lau says:

    It looks way more real than her Christmas caroling video from last year (I think ?), that one was a deepfake for sure. The cancer announcement video might have been shot in a studio and have a filter over it to make it look smooth but it looks “real” at least.

  17. Elsa says:

    How can people even check this kind of thing going forward? It is really scary and weird.

    • Liz says:

      They won’t Elsa. It’ll be used to control and manipulate and is actually quite sinister

  18. sparrow says:

    I came round to thinking the frankenphoto was franken after people quickly pointed out how mashed up it was. The skippy video didn’t convince me from the get-go. But this AI stuff. What’s the idea behind the theories – that she’s not alive, never been ill, been hurt, has left him? This is bonkers: it boils down to accusing a woman with cancer of lying about having cancer. That seems really bad to me. As I say, though, they brought this on themselves with their childish crap for months on end.

    • Feeshalori says:

      This has been all over the place so much that I need one of those string wall maps to keep track of all these theories.

      • sparrow says:

        I know! Exactly, Feeshalori. I see me, standing in my utility room, a massive board up on one wall covered with photos and post it notes, red string everywhere. A desk lamp being the only light.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Oh, yes, the red strings, wonky post-it notes and photos of the major players, and all concealed in a secret room behind a closet so others won’t know how consumed we are when we disappear for several hours!

  19. BeanieBean says:

    Hmm, not sure I trust the work of an expert who claims they say the daffodils gently swaying in the background. Those flowers did not move! Nor did anything else in the background! I did spot that bug flitting in & out; but if they weren’t outside–which I’m doubting–wouldn’t that mean that was added in post? And the background is blurry. Was that a stylistic choice?

    I also agree with the person from Brown who said they need to add context when they release something, not just because of the prevalence of AI but also because of those kill orders. No one’s going to trust a doggone thing coming out of KP now.

    • Becks1 says:

      adding the bug would be a really weird choice if that was what they wanted to edit in to show she was outside. I did just watch the video again staring at all the flowers and I do think I see some move, but its very slight. Or it might have been my eyes lol. I guess if it was inside in a studio though in front of a green screen there could still have been a bug and they added the background in editing – so they can’t say it wasn’t edited, but its not AI.

      • WiththeAmerican says:

        I said from the beginning and still believe this was most likely shot outside with a lot of studio lighting and diffusion, maybe even an overhead tent to cut down on the harsh outside light.

        It could have been shot in a studio and yes they can add video in BG of a green screen, and even add a bug. But I don’t think they did that here.

        The only part where they lose me on this video is her speaking this well, even with a teleprompter. It’s exhausting for well people to shoot little pieces like this, it takes so much work and effort long before they even start shooting. I don’t see how a chemo patient got that much better at public speaking after a decade plus of bad public speaking. So for this reason, I think they edited a lot of takes together or they had AI help with her speech, which frankly I wouldn’t blame her for one bit.

        The issue is then why unnamed source from BBC studio says it wasn’t edited, when it was clearly edited and all footage is out through post production editing.

        All of that said, if this was all faked, I will be shocked and horrified. And of course I respect the right of anyone to question it. But overall I agree with you 100% that this is real. (With AI enhancement? Possibly!)

      • Feeshalori says:

        Heck, a fly landed on Mike Pence’s head during the 2020 VP debate so a bug is no proof the video was shot outside. Maybe it got into the studio and they left it in for verisimilitude or they added it in. And I would think because of the ease in which Kate spoke, there would have been multiple takes, but As with the American says it would have been exhausting for a chemo patient to do that. The only way they can convince people that Kate is still with us is too have her do an appearance like Charles does, just one. That will put everything to rest, but for some reason they want to keep her under wraps.

    • Julianna says:

      Came here to day the same. This so called “expert” tells us that the background actually moved which it certainly didn’t. And yes the bug was probably added in just like the faint background noise of the nature bird loop recording was.

  20. Glamarazzi says:

    These people couldn’t photoshop a pic of woman & kids without multiple telltale signs, but we believe they can deepfake this seamless video? Nahhhh, c’mon folks.

    • Becks1 says:

      Honestly, this is the real reason why I think this video is authentic, lol. KP is not capable enough to create an AI video of this quality.

    • sparrow says:

      Exactly. I’m not getting the doubt on this. She’s said what’s wrong – at long last – so surely this can be put to one side. Some of it – like she’s dead or a dv victim – is really disturbing. But hey KP have really shot themselves in the foot; the public will never trust their media again. My patience was fully tested with the garden centre jaunt.

  21. Julianna says:

    “and the subtle swaying of yellow flowers in the background”

    Sure, that’s a real credible “expert” right there. I literally had to go back and re-watch the video in slow motion and fast because of the gaslighting. NOTHING. Absolutely NOTHING moved on that background. So yea. No.

    This article barely mentions the Franken photo nor the other 3 ridiculous “proof of life” pics and videos sent out to the public to defraud.

    Also, after reviewing previous videos of Kate speaking they have already been experimenting with AI. Her mouth didn’t even match up to her speech in one of the videos.

    I don’t care what anybody says about being a conspiracy theorist. Never have I been one to be unreasonable but I completely believe this video is AI. People have questioned the previous photos and videos because there was OBVIOUS reason to question each and every one of them.

    They literally had a video of a body double skipping around a farmers market days before this video. The fact that the Sun ran the story of “Kate sighting” and then not until 24 hrs later (after nobody believed the article) did they release an impersonator to the public as “Kate” is absolutely INSANE. The Sun editor has already went on record still trying to convince us it’s “kate”, shaming people for not believing it and yet tells us they were in communication with the palace the entire time and was OK to print.

    And now they have “Kate” sitting on a bench, BLURRED, with a fake background and nature loop recorded background. Everything is completely off about the video. It is AI.

    I don’t know what is going on with Kate. And I certainly don’t know if I believe she has cancer or not. One thing I do believe is that the bench speech is a DEEPFAKE.

  22. Sum says:

    No one can be mad at the conspiracy theories. That video has a ton of filters and bluring going on.

    I just want to note that I watched the video in full a few days ago. That fake accent she does sound terrible. I had to pause atleast 8 times.
    Another reason why the masses may think the video is completely fake. They have never heard her speak or they remember her old old voice.

  23. QuiteContrary says:

    I believe this is Kate in the video (but not Kate in the farm show video).

    If it was AI, they should have added William to the bench … that would have been the only way to get him in the cancer video, because there’s no way he’s turning up to support Kate, even if she has cancer.

    • K-Peace says:

      QuiteContrary— It’s much harder to do A.I. videos that have more than one person in it. The fact that Kate is alone on the bench is yet another thing (of many) that points toward the video being A.I. If it was real, i can’t imagine why on earth they’d have this poor (supposedly) seriously ill woman announcing to the world that she has cancer ALL ALONE. It just wouldn’t happen, IMO. It looks so bad! The fact that she’s alone is because that’s how they were able to make the (fake) video look as real as possible. But it still doesn’t look real enough, because i and many other people can see it’s a fake A.I. video.

  24. Mary Pester says:

    Well their expert statements were factually inaccurate weren’t they, because the flowers and shrubs were NOT moving and the bug was easily imposed after the outcry!?
    Now I made the nurse on my ward jump out of her skin at 4 o’clock this morning, when I suddenly sat up in bed and say “the crafty BCH”. See something about bone sat on that bench was bugging me, and it hit me early this morning. Unhappy marriage, female sat alone on a bench
    She’s trying to be DIANA AT THE TAJ MAHALL

    • Dandelion2 says:

      You are right! It is coseplay of Diana alone on a bench!

      Hope you are well, Mary.

    • Sum says:

      ‘The bug was…” this wording made me laugh. The video looked funny to me. A lot of people online and here have said “greenscreen”. I gave kp grace and believed it was simply them airbrushing the scene to look serene. It probably was a greenscreen. Who knows at this point.

      You are the second person who wrote this is Kate’s Taj mahal moment. I thought the video was oddly positioned. It is her Taj Mahal moment. This wouldve went better if she just did something natural.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Mary Pester, good catch. I couldn’t understand why they used a bench that was that wide–it wasn’t necessary. But, there she sat just as lonely as could be.

      It sounds like your sub conscience is working overtime. I hope the nurse is recovered! I’m happy you’re keeping up with everything here.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Anybody here see the Caine Mutiny? With Humphrey Bogart? I’m starting to feel as if we’re all saying: “Ahh, but the strawberries! That’s – that’s where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes, but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with – geometric logic – that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist! …” Substitute what for that duplicate key? The bug? The smoothly delivered speech? The non-moving daffodils?

    • ChattyCath says:

      @MaryPester sending good vibes and hoping you’re out of there soon. You’re dead right about that Taj Mahal reference.

  25. Bellaluna McKenzie says:

    I am sorry. Kensington Palace has straight-out lied and covered up so much since the beginning of the Sickly-Kate fiasco that I just cannot believe them, period. Their attempts to gaslight and DARVO on everyone whose trust is them is entirely gone and debunkers is only making it worse.

    They reap what they sowed.

  26. VilleRose says:

    If anything, this whole debacle of doctored photos and the advent of AI make me worry for the future. As the technology becomes more advanced and sophisticated, will anyone be able to tell the difference between a deepfake video and a real one? Will digital forensic experts still be able to tell if a video or photo has been tampered with? I know it’s already been happening for awhile, people become easily duped with manipulated photos and video. But it could also be used in so many different circumstances, a jilted spouse, someone hellbent on revenge on a boss etc. People’s lives could be destroyed (I’m not talking about the monarchy, don’t care what happens to them) over these kinds of things. And now with everyone questioning everything they see, how are we supposed to know what’s real and what’s not?

    Hopefully Kate lays off the Photoshop forever. Maybe when she’s done with treatment, she can take a photography class and learn how to edit photos properly!

    • Liz says:

      It does have far reaching implications Villerose. Undoubtedly it’ll be used to make the world even more corrupt.

    • Kit says:

      Exactly. My worries too.

      Kategate is a symptom of media corruption when the press allows itself to be used as a propaganda tool. It’s really important for a free and independent press to maintain its credibility which is why the attempt to discredit the 4 major photo news agencies’ kill notification as an “overreaction” and “nothing burger” was so dangerous. That MSM lent its hand to minimize this fake reveals how the rot spreads.

      We already see a disturbing trend in liberal democracies where the rich and the powerful have special privileges that ordinary people don’t have. We may live in the same society, but rules and laws aren’t applied evenly. The way the British monarchy operates in liberal democracy shows there’s little safeguard or willingness to check its power or abuse of power.

      You can see as technology outpaces rules of law, it’s the monied, powerful class that benefits. Common people are left with few resources to fight on their own. Nor do we have special “invisible contract” press cartel to protect us or attack our enemies.

      • AC says:

        I think the older generation who isn’t as tech savvy believes Kate’s video is real compared to the more tech savvy younger generation (ie gen Z). I think majority of gen Z either thinks this video has some AI or other Gen Zers think it’s completely fake. This just shows the British monarchy again is in deep trouble with the younger generation.

  27. Dandelion2 says:

    The BBC studio can perfectly well film uncooperative animals in documentaries, but can’t film without glitch a cancer striken, weak, sitting princess?

    LOOK at her mouth at 1:23.
    I don’t know if it’s tampered with, AI or a bad job from the BBC studio, but David Attenborrough and jaguars don’t glitch or lag.

    • Sum says:

      I know the BBC owes William and Harry but I’m still shocked they agreed to this. Remember that awful BBC show called “Primeval”. It was about dinosaurs and a time rift. Well that awful cgi was better than Kate’s video.

      They sliced Kate’s video up. Youtubers do it when the trip over words. Yet Kate’s looks different. It’s not simply stop and go. A good example is an onisionspeaks channel videos. I don’t know if he is still around but he was one of the early people to splice his videos to make them perfect. Plus he would use filters. Kate’s is different. Could just be a software issue.

  28. AC says:

    This is actually a good article from Wapost which provides facts and cites real sources . It also shows the difference between having good journalistic integrity vs ones that have None. In summary, although most agree they think this video is real, there’s still some doubt from one of the AI experts. And this reflects what most people are thinking, there’s always going to be doubt as the BRF and BM lost credibility with the bullsh$&t They’ve created the past couple weeks. And it’s going to take a while, if ever, for people to get that trust back. But again they’re sooooo arrogant to want to understand – just like Trump and his MAGAs.
    Agree With the comments above re Tik Tok. But Elon isn’t having it. The fact that he used an example of Twitter/X community note attached to a misleading Page Six article was classic. In a way signaling them out for Misinformation and making them look like idiots lolz.

  29. kkat says:

    I work with AI and Photoshop every day.
    There is so much that can be done now there are many ways this could be edited.
    A couple of the new video platforms are amazing in what they can do.

    I think it’s someone sitting on the bench, it could be Kate, if her face is messed up they could have fixed that .

    I just stared at the video again and where it’s very obvious it’s edited is the hair on the right side of the screen (our right)
    She has fly away hairs that don’t move naturally then disappear.

    I will say this is to skilled for it to be some person at KP doing it.
    I’m betting bbc studios either did it directly or kp paid someone to freelance from there and did editing in post.
    Bbc does a lot of AI and manipulation in their shows and promos

    • BeanieBean says:

      I’m not an expert in digital imaging at all, but heaven knows I’ve participated in enough Teams calls (similar to Zoom) where most of us use backgrounds rather than show the interior of our homes so I’ve been able to observe what happens when somebody shifts slightly in their chair or leans back a bit or something. Watching this video, with the sound off & focused on Kate’s face, I think it’s pretty clear there’s a background behind her–I’m assuming this means it was filmed in front of a green screen. Pay attention to the top right of her head–our left in the image–when she slightly changes the direction of her head. It’s pretty danged obvious up there.

    • Harper says:

      @kkat that strand of hair on her right side that elevates, curls up and disappears behind her head is the strangest thing. Do you have any logical explanation for what type of AI glitch that represents? There is no way that happens naturally in real life. Hence, doubt.

  30. Beverley says:

    My very first thought was disbelief – “How does she speak so well?!?!!!” Mumbles has never sounded articulate or clear-spoken…ever.

    That’s why I feel so weird about the video. If she could deliver a speech like this, why hasn’t she before now?

    • swaz says:

      Exactly, and to speak that long 🙄🙄🙄 even when she’s reading of a paper it’s been 2 minutes max 😏😏😏 I always thought AI was involved.

  31. Lucky Charm says:

    “it’s a spectacular combination of ignorance and arrogance,”

    Ironically, that statement quite accurately describes Kensington Palace and the POW.

  32. Paula Ziegler says:

    Her neck bothers me. It’s too long and thick in the middle. It looks like a face was superimposed. The mouth and the neck don’t move together in a way that looks natural.

  33. Oxfordbitchy says:

    I may be going out on a limb here but I think that the deep fake is her cancer diagnosis. She is painfully thin in that video. Look at the width of her hips. I think that this is a cover for an ED crisis. All those finger bandages were not cancer related.