Kate Middleton released a photo on Mother's day of her family
She claimed (via the Twitter account) that the photo was lightly edited.
The more drastic theories say that the photo heavily forged.
This question will resolve to YES if there is an official statement by the British Royal Family that says the original photo was heavily forged (colors of clothing changed, compositing beyond amateur photo editing, etc.) rather than just minor edits like erasing blemishes or changing hue & saturation.
The question will also resolve to YES if multiple major press outlets agree that the photo was heavily doctors rather than edited by Kate herself.
Related questions
How will this resolve if it becomes clear that the photo is months out of date, but only lightly edited? In that case the "2024" in the original tweet was a lie. I imagine this market resolves "no" anyway?
@PeterF Correct. That would be a NO since the photo itself wasn't forged. Though, if the colors of clothing were changed (sweater going from white to black or the center child's shirt going from white to blue), that aspect would count as YES.
@PeterF If there is strong evidence that the original photo is very similar to the published photo and all the edits were minor. E.g, a set RAW files of the photoshoot are sent to the newspapers and they're very similar to the published photo.
Or if no strong evidence is provided, but the general conclusion of major newspapers is that no major edits were done.
This question is a "conspiracy theory" situation so there is no completely conclusive proof for NO (e.g, a British intelligence could probably forge RAW images or stage the photoshoot with body doubles) but I'm going to stick to more normal levels of evidence.
@SxP Cool. So from your description, it sounds like if no more evidence emerges either way, and the media cycle moves on, that won't be enough for a "no" resolution? (I think an "NA" would be the right resolution in that case, but want to see how you think about it.)
@PeterF Correct. Right now, it appears to me that there is the same strength of evidence on both sides between the official statement + press reports saying that there were minor edits (the NO case) and the circumstantial evidence showing that the photo was heavily manipulated (the YES case). I'm not going to bet on this market, but if I did, I would say that the press will find evidence supporting the conspiracy theories. If they don't find such evidence (and they don't find evidence in the other direction toward NO), then this market with resolve as NA.