The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1361  
Old 12-24-2019, 11:27 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,998
Bravo Janina for pointing out a home truth and sticking up for your friend. It was a lovely photo of a cute baby and his proud parents. Who would want to cheapen that!
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1362  
Old 12-24-2019, 11:35 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Janina called out the press over her photograph.

https://twitter.com/Janina/status/1209648564751798283

It really is a shame they took something so sweet and made it into nonsense. Forever proving them right for going about their lawsuit.
I noticed on Omid Scobie's Twitter when he showed the Sussex card there is a copyright mark at the bottom of the picture

https://mobile.twitter.com/scobie/st...539201/photo/1

It says copyright symbol 2019 Sussex Royal. When have royal Christmas cards have copyright marks? Given the current lawsuit I can't believe DM would be this careless. The reporter who did the story and the editor who signed off on the publishing of it just gave a Christmas present to the lawyers representing Meghan in her lawsuit against DM.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1363  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:53 AM
W.Y.CII's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: 。, Hong Kong
Posts: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Home is where you hang your heart and a lot of Meghan's heart was hung in Canada over the years. What defines "family" is the relationships themselves and not the biological bloodline. We're allowed to make and structure our own families exactly how we want them to be.
If I remember correctly there is a couple of discussions in both this forum and other platforms which are about Meghan is an American but she spent so many times in Canada and it's her second home. And now when she celebrates the Christmas with her love one in her second home it becomes a problem.

Regarding the fake edited photo: Well, what can you expect from Daily Fail? With such reputation in the industry they are frankly not innocent.
__________________
Bad money drives out good.
Reply With Quote
  #1364  
Old 12-25-2019, 03:35 AM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 15,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
In the doctored photo Meghan's eyes are more open than in the original shot.

The question is, who and why.
I don’t know who exactly did it, but we know why. It was done to mess with Meghan. I keep telling y’all that there are people out there who’s out to ruin Meghan - especially that damn Daily Fail.
__________________
"WE CANNOT PRAY IN LOVE AND LIVE IN HATE AND STILL THINK WE ARE WORSHIPING GOD."

A.W. TOZER
Reply With Quote
  #1365  
Old 12-25-2019, 04:11 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
If H&M actually feel that spending a few days with HM and the rest of the family at Christmas will stop Archie being a baby, then perhaps H&M really need to evaluate their relationship with the royal family, and all things royal. Surely Archie is not the first baby to be born to the royal family, and not the last. The others seem to cope quite all right to my knowledge.
Since all of this is pure speculation I find myself shaking my head. The reason that the Sussexes would not be at Sandringham were quite clear and nothing was ever mentioned about how children are treated at Sandringham. The Sussexes were taking time out and it turns out that they are/were in Canada.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJudith View Post
I love the christmas feeling of this card :) finally a christmas tree in the BRF
Very cute Archie in a center stage position.
I noticed that too, the first actual Christmasy Card and a GIF no less. It is sweet and Harry and Meghan look the epitome of doting parents which is just as it should be.

I was thrilled when I woke up early this Christmas morning and decided to check out the Christmas news. Imagine my shock at what was such a sweet start to the day turning into an ugly and adversarial nightmare. I stopped reading and went down to have breakfast and watch a little Christmas music on YouTube.

It was wonderful to log back in this evening to find it gone and was lovely to see larger versions of the real deal, but I couldn't help but wonder what the DM was doing and how so many were sucked in. Some do some don't.

It has been a quiet but lovely Christmas Day and I hope yours all are as well.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1366  
Old 12-25-2019, 05:07 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
Cute picture of Archie and the family photo is fine on social media. It shows a baby allowed to be a baby. Sandringham is so formal and the kids are relegated to a room with a nanny. The Sussexes may have wanted Archie to experience his first Christmas in a less formal setting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
If H&M actually feel that spending a few days with HM and the rest of the family at Christmas will stop Archie being a baby, then perhaps H&M really need to evaluate their relationship with the royal family, and all things royal. Surely Archie is not the first baby to be born to the royal family, and not the last. The others seem to cope quite all right to my knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Since all of this is pure speculation I find myself shaking my head. The reason that the Sussexes would not be at Sandringham were quite clear and nothing was ever mentioned about how children are treated at Sandringham. The Sussexes were taking time out and it turns out that they are/were in Canada.
Just to get the context right, my post (#1329) was in response to the post by Madame Verseau in post 1327.

Happy Christmas!!
Reply With Quote
  #1367  
Old 12-25-2019, 09:06 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
In the doctored photo Meghan's eyes are more open than in the original shot.

The question is, who and why.
There was a young woman on Twitter who admitted to doctoring the photo to make it HD for fan sites. She said her program didn’t recognize Harry, leaving him blurry. The explanation didn’t make any sense, but she seemed sincere and very sorry to have contributed to the negativity.

The image was cute and shouldn’t have been altered. Archie was the center of attention and that’s how it should have remained.
Reply With Quote
  #1368  
Old 12-25-2019, 09:29 AM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuchessMia View Post
There was a young woman on Twitter who admitted to doctoring the photo to make it HD for fan sites. She said her program didn’t recognize Harry, leaving him blurry. The explanation didn’t make any sense, but she seemed sincere and very sorry to have contributed to the negativity.

The image was cute and shouldn’t have been altered. Archie was the center of attention and that’s how it should have remained.
Interesting that it was a fan, and done with no ill intention. However, she should have known better--you don't mess with stuff like this without the risk of huge blowback.
Reply With Quote
  #1369  
Old 12-25-2019, 10:58 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 479
It is a mountain over a mole hill. Not helped by the actual photographer accusing the Daily Mail. Absolutely ridiculous and who quite frankly cares.
Reply With Quote
  #1370  
Old 12-25-2019, 10:58 AM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuchessMia View Post
There was a young woman on Twitter who admitted to doctoring the photo to make it HD for fan sites. She said her program didn’t recognize Harry, leaving him blurry. The explanation didn’t make any sense, but she seemed sincere and very sorry to have contributed to the negativity.

The image was cute and shouldn’t have been altered. Archie was the center of attention and that’s how it should have remained.
Awwww, if that's true, I'm so sorry for her - she probably feels terrible causing this whole thing. Something innocent turning into a huge mess... Though it's hard for me to believe the tabloids picked the doctored photo on accident, really

What is a bit worrying, I really thought the Sussexes' group of friends finally stopped publicly jumping into their defence, but it's apparently still a thing. I don't understand how can they not see it's not helping at all. Not to mention causing more misery to an innocent girl, who probably feels bad enough without it.
Reply With Quote
  #1371  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:01 AM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dman View Post
I don’t know who exactly did it, but we know why. It was done to mess with Meghan. I keep telling y’all that there are people out there who’s out to ruin Meghan - especially that damn Daily Fail.
Apparently it was a fan, trying to make Meghan be in focus. Misguided but not with evil intent.
Reply With Quote
  #1372  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:10 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fem View Post
What is a bit worrying, I really thought the Sussexes' group of friends finally stopped publicly jumping into their defence, but it's apparently still a thing. I don't understand how can they not see it's not helping at all. Not to mention causing more misery to an innocent girl, who probably feels bad enough without it.
Well quite. It is adding to the general toxicity. I mean bless them this has nothing to do with Harry and Meghan but between the debate and the friends outburst I just felt like why does everything erupt in a drama. It is indicative of the general lay of the land.
Reply With Quote
  #1373  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:17 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,858
Well, honestly, when your work is claimed as fake and used as a nasty attack against a loved one... can you blame her? The Fail is trash. Nothing new. They ending 2019 like they started. 2020 will be no different.

Overall people mostly looked at a cute family picture.
Reply With Quote
  #1374  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:33 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Well, honestly, when your work is claimed as fake and used as a nasty attack against a loved one... can you blame her? The Fail is trash. Nothing new. They ending 2019 like they started. 2020 will be no different.

Overall people mostly looked at a cute family picture.
As Daniel Radcliffe but it. They are the Bastian of enlightenment. But they are who they are and actually this wasn't their fault. And yes I would expect anyone in the immediate circle of anyone hyper famous to keep quiet.
Reply With Quote
  #1375  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:47 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,679
I think Janina's standing up for her own photograph was warranted. Its not in defense of Meghan so much as its being peeved that someone doctored and published her photograph. Its why the copyright was added to it. Any royal photographer would have done exactly the same thing and to prevent it, they add watermarks to their photos to prevent it.

We even have rules here that prevents us from embedding photos in our posts that may be copyrighted. We just link to them and that gives the photographer his/her due.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1376  
Old 12-25-2019, 11:49 AM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,593
Why oh why absolutely everything is so complicated with the Sussexes, even the most random Christmas card ...
Sheesh.
Reply With Quote
  #1377  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:05 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
As Daniel Radcliffe but it. They are the Bastian of enlightenment. But they are who they are and actually this wasn't their fault. And yes I would expect anyone in the immediate circle of anyone hyper famous to keep quiet.
Janina is her own person and they were attacking HER in a way. Using her name in articles against her loved one. It is her right and to expect people to allows lies about them is silly. She was respectful against the nonsense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
Why oh why absolutely everything is so complicated with the Sussexes, even the most random Christmas card ...
Sheesh.
Mostly cause some always work overtime to spite them. This sweet Christmas card turned into silliness because of that. The usual.
Reply With Quote
  #1378  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:08 PM
christinacg's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 1,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
Why oh why absolutely everything is so complicated with the Sussexes, even the most random Christmas card ...
Sheesh.


Let’s see, because tabloid media and internet trolls are out to destroy them?
Reply With Quote
  #1379  
Old 12-25-2019, 12:12 PM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,614
Daily Mail just walked back their story on Photoshop-gate

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hotograph.html

My guess is once the lady came forward to the photoshop (with no ill intent) and the copyright mark on the original was noticed and Janina the photographer raised a stink, editors may have realized they stepped into a legal mess and went into damage control. This was fast for DM on a Meghan story. If DM just ran the original card only and not the doctored one to get clicks it wouldn't have egg on its face now. (Although it still tries to claim it was not suggested Harry or Meghan edited the photo.) Sometimes it is necessary to make a fuss to set things right.
Reply With Quote
  #1380  
Old 12-25-2019, 09:48 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Bravo Janina for pointing out a home truth and sticking up for your friend. It was a lovely photo of a cute baby and his proud parents. Who would want to cheapen that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
It is a mountain over a mole hill. Not helped by the actual photographer accusing the Daily Mail. Absolutely ridiculous and who quite frankly cares.
Certainly, Bravo Janina for taking a stand when her work is tampered with resulting in the subjects of said photo being attacked vociferously both by the DM and online. It was Janina's integrity along with Harry and Meghan's that were harmed by this act thoughtless act.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
Why oh why absolutely everything is so complicated with the Sussexes, even the most random Christmas card ...
Sheesh.
I feel your exasperation, but unfortunately, haters hate and are very creative with their attacks. For me, the question remains, how did the fake image end up being the one used by the DM et al. It is one hell of a serendipitous 'innocent action' for said haters.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
archie mountbatten-windsor, duchess of sussex, duke of sussex, meghan markle, prince harry


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 41 (9 members and 32 guests)
Countessmeout, GömdNatt, JessRulz, polyesco, Queen Claude, TLLK, Waika, _Heather_
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News 3: February - May 2019 JessRulz Current Events Archive 731 05-12-2019 05:13 PM
Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News 2: December 2018 - February 2019 soapstar Current Events Archive 675 02-20-2019 05:26 PM




Popular Tags
alqasimi archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy belgian royal family birthday celebration charles of wales chittagong cht clarence house countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria crusades danish history denmark duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch dutch history dutch royal family felipe vi future games germany henry v hill historical drama house of bourbon house of glucksburg house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha jerusalem jumma kent languages list of rulers lithuanian castles mail marriage mbs monarchism northern ireland norway norwegian royal family official visit palaces palestine popularity prince charles prince harry prince of wales romanov family royal tour shakespeare snowdon spain spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish history swedish royal family tracts trump united kingdom usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:08 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×