I’ve been a royal watcher since the halcyon days of Princess Diana. Prince William is a year younger than me, and I always had a soft spot for him and Prince Harry, having experienced the dissolution of my own parents’ marriage when I was young. I remember the shock of Princess Diana’s death, cheered when William seemed to find his match in Kate, and woke up very early in the morning to watch their wedding, which happened to take place on my thirtieth birthday.
My feelings towards Will, in particular, took a turn for the worse after I witnessed how little the institution did to support Prince Harry and Meghan, and how often it seemed like stories about them were being fed to the British tabloids to get more favorable coverage for Prince William and Princess Kate. Prince Harry’s revelations about physical altercations with his brother in his memoir, Spare, didn’t help matters.
But, this isn’t about my thoughts about the heir to the throne. It’s about an arcane institution doing twentieth-century PR in the twenty-first century. And how the British monarchy’s adage of “never complain, never explain” isn’t sufficient in the current climate.
Here’s a timeline of what we know about Princess Kate’s condition and an analysis of how unusual it is to have such paltry information about her status. As with my issue on the importance of gossip, I think we need to consider the sources and the information being released. For example, media coverage of the British royal family is largely done by the royal rota, a collection of reporters from British media that have a symbiotic relationship with the royals as journalist Ellie Hall describes below in an excerpt from this article:
Think about how different coverage is of the US politicians, celebrities, etc. There are some preferred media (perhaps The Washington Post for President Biden or People Magazine for celebrities), but the royals give exclusively to a small number of journalists—and several of them work for British tabloids. This was one of Prince Harry and Meghan’s complaints about the royal rota. Why should they cooperate with the press that had written racist coverage of them?
For a long time following Kate’s absence, the British media (led by the royal rota), didn’t pry or speculate about Kate’s medical issues or when she might return. Other press began to raise questions only after a series of high-profile missteps (William backing out of attending his godfather’s funeral at the last minute and a strange grainy paparazzi photo of Kate and her mom). The fact that Kensington Palace pressured British media not to publish the photo was Exhibit A on how much the royals control their coverage.
And that was before the Mother’s Day photo debacle. Simply put, it was amateur hour to put out an image that was so badly altered and think that no one would notice. Yet, People Magazine (a very sympathetic outlet) and the British press released it without comment. It took well-respected outlets like Getty Images, AFP, Reuters, and Associated Press to issue a “kill notice” for it to become an international scandal and unleash a torrent of speculation. And no one, myself included, believed that Kate created that Frankenstein photo or that she wrote her apology. For many, it seemed to follow the long-standing tradition of throwing the women who married into the Windsor family under the bus.
Which brings us to the conspiracy theories. Would-be online sleuths started posting on social media about the “evidence” and speculated wildly about “the true story” of what was going on. They had all become Charlie on It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.
I’m not going to link to the Reddit threads and Instagram reels detailing the most out-there “reasons” for Kate’s disappearance. I think it’s more interesting to analyze why they have taken off. Simply put, the British royal’s old system of off-the-record briefing to the royal rota and the desire for privacy when it suits them doesn’t fly in our current climate. Coupled with the rise in deep fakes and generative AI, it’s more important than ever to show your receipts to instill trust. And yet, they refused to release the unaltered photo, creating a crisis moment for public trust in the British monarchy.
Just yesterday, “insiders close to Kate” (PR-speak for palace staff briefing the royal rota), said Kate will release details about her surgery and recovery when she’s ready to rejoin her royal duties, essentially putting a stop to the near-constant on-and-off record briefing on Kate’s condition that occurred in the past few weeks. I doubt this will put a stop to the conspiracy theories even if Kate reappears on or around April 17th as planned.
If I was advising the Royal Family, I think there are a couple of things they could do to rebound from this scandal.
Pay their staff better wages. Working for the palace is a surprisingly low-paying position, especially when you consider the amount of coverage. They can’t attract good people if they don’t pay competitive salaries.
Actually listen to their advice. I can’t help but wonder if the biggest issue with this whole charade is that those at the top thought the public would happily lap up any spin they offered. People aren’t stupid, and they understand when someone is trying to pull the wool over their eyes. Kensington Palace would be wise to learn from this experience, lest it repeat itself.