I think it has been made very clear what was doctored in the photo ... And all power to her, she had a perfect right to do with it as she wanted! The argument is about the use of Ai to alter images to be published as factual records. The ancillary question is about the intention of her press corp to have failed to spot the anomalies or put it out with full knowledge that it isn't factual... then the arrogance of social media a . To make it public ... The press as you know have generally decided not to use it ...b. to turn it into a conspiracy, even claiming Kate was dead... No attack on Kate from the trad media
It is about integrity and trust ... And was there an intention to mislead? ... Almost certainly Kate had no intention but certainly the Palace press team did! Pictures never lie, says the old adage, but now they do. It also happened as Ai was really being born as an everyday tool... Nothing wrong with manipulating a picture to enhance your public image but don't let your PR people be dishonest on your behalf ....
Absolutely they have! The point is it was used as an official photograph giving an image of comfort and confidence... And it is a fake. It wasn't hard to spot and the news agencies were right to 'spike' it ... But the story is also the beginning of the investigating of Ai and its ability to re-present the truth, ultimately in a frightening way ...
Hey! How can you possibly say what she did wasn't bad when nobody knows what she did to the photo? She might have edited someone out, or inserted her own younger face (with minor contrast and hairstyle changes) from a 2019 Hello magazine photo, which has her face in precisely the same angle and lighting/shadows, and precisely the same smile and teeth array on show, by "coincidence" (as suggested by Google photo search tool, if her face on the 10 March 2024 photo is submitted).
Once you start defending an establishment which can't face the truth, you might as well be living in Stalin's Russia. Stalin was another one for the use of the airbrush, removing Comrade Trotsky from all photos of Lenin's speeches after Trotsky - in exile - wrote "Revolution Betrayed", criticising Stalin! Did Stalin do something wrong in manipulating the historical record like this? Surely there are genuine trust issues raised. Once they start fiddling press releases, how can you be sure of what they claim?
Can Andrew airbrush young girls out of photos to "prove" his innocence? Can Mr Biden employ an AI "actor" to replace his bumbling garbled answers to reporters questions? Can Trump do the same to filter out his mistakes and improve his fake tan look more like Kennedy and attract Democratic voters?
I think it has been made very clear what was doctored in the photo ... And all power to her, she had a perfect right to do with it as she wanted! The argument is about the use of Ai to alter images to be published as factual records. The ancillary question is about the intention of her press corp to have failed to spot the anomalies or put it out with full knowledge that it isn't factual... then the arrogance of social media a . To make it public ... The press as you know have generally decided not to use it ...b. to turn it into a conspiracy, even claiming Kate was dead... No attack on Kate from the trad media
It is about integrity and trust ... And was there an intention to mislead? ... Almost certainly Kate had no intention but certainly the Palace press team did! Pictures never lie, says the old adage, but now they do. It also happened as Ai was really being born as an everyday tool... Nothing wrong with manipulating a picture to enhance your public image but don't let your PR people be dishonest on your behalf ....
Absolutely they have! The point is it was used as an official photograph giving an image of comfort and confidence... And it is a fake. It wasn't hard to spot and the news agencies were right to 'spike' it ... But the story is also the beginning of the investigating of Ai and its ability to re-present the truth, ultimately in a frightening way ...
Hey! How can you possibly say what she did wasn't bad when nobody knows what she did to the photo? She might have edited someone out, or inserted her own younger face (with minor contrast and hairstyle changes) from a 2019 Hello magazine photo, which has her face in precisely the same angle and lighting/shadows, and precisely the same smile and teeth array on show, by "coincidence" (as suggested by Google photo search tool, if her face on the 10 March 2024 photo is submitted).
Once you start defending an establishment which can't face the truth, you might as well be living in Stalin's Russia. Stalin was another one for the use of the airbrush, removing Comrade Trotsky from all photos of Lenin's speeches after Trotsky - in exile - wrote "Revolution Betrayed", criticising Stalin! Did Stalin do something wrong in manipulating the historical record like this? Surely there are genuine trust issues raised. Once they start fiddling press releases, how can you be sure of what they claim?
Can Andrew airbrush young girls out of photos to "prove" his innocence? Can Mr Biden employ an AI "actor" to replace his bumbling garbled answers to reporters questions? Can Trump do the same to filter out his mistakes and improve his fake tan look more like Kennedy and attract Democratic voters?