Today’s the big day! For the first time since August 2017, parts of North America are getting a total solar eclipse. Depending on where you are on the continent, you’ll get to see the sun, moon, and Earth line up to varying degrees, with the luckiest people seeing it at its totality along a path that runs from Dallas, TX to Little Rock, AR to Cleveland, OH, Buffalo, NY, and Caribou, ME. The total path stretches about 115 miles across the continent. Here are the major cities and the local time for total eclipse:

Dallas, Texas: 1:40-1:44 p.m. CDT
Idabel, Oklahoma: 1:45-1:49 p.m. CDT
Little Rock, Arkansas: 1:51-1:54 p.m. CDT
Poplar Bluff, Missouri: 1:56-2:00 p.m. CDT
Paducah, Kentucky: 2-2:02 p.m. CDT
Carbondale, Illinois: 1:59-2:03 p.m. CDT
Evansville, Indiana: 2:02-2:05 p.m. CDT
Cleveland, Ohio: 3:13-3:17 p.m. EDT
Erie, Pennsylvania: 3:16-3:20 p.m. EDT
Buffalo, New York: 3:18-3:22 p.m. EDT
Burlington, Vermont: 3:26-3:29 p.m. EDT
Lancaster, New Hampshire: 3:27-3:30 p.m. EDT
Caribou, Maine: 3:32-3:34 p.m. EDT

I am so jealous if you are in or close to the line of totality! Regardless of whether or not you’re in that direct line, you may be planning on checking the eclipse out anyway. I know I am! If you are planning to watch any part of it, you probably bought the specialized glasses for safe viewing. And that’s great! One of my most vivid memories of the 2017 eclipse was the former President of the United States looking up at it without glasses. Don’t be like that guy. Here’s some ways to safely view the eclipse, courtesy of USA Today:

Unlike partial solar eclipses, a total eclipse offers spectators a unique opportunity to gaze upon it with the naked eye, but only when the moon completely blocks out the sun and darkness falls – referred to as totality.

While you’re unlikely to go blind, gazing directly at the sun’s rays can do some serious damage to your retinas. So until the moment that totality occurs, proper safety eyewear is still a must, according to NASA.

While some welding goggles may work, the best option for eclipse viewing remains certified eyewear, which is held to an international safety standard and is 100,000 times darker than most sunglasses to block nearly all visible, infrared and ultraviolet light.

Solar eclipse glasses are readily available from plenty of vendors across the internet, but if you want to save some cash, there’s a good chance your local library or another public institution is giving them away for free. Just watch out for cheap imitations. To make it easy while you’re shopping online, the American Astronomical Society maintains a curated list of approved vendors. Another simple method is to create your own pinhole projector to project the sun onto a nearby surface. The American Astronomical Society offers helpful instructions to set them up as well.

[From USA Today]

Also, one more thing to note is to not drive during the eclipse. People may get behind the wheel thinking that they don’t care or they’re only going to glance at it, but that feels like one of those cases of the best laid plans and all that. While my area is not in the path of totality, we are expected to get within 70-86%, so I bought the special eclipse glasses for me and my family to use to watch them. Just to be on the safe side, People has a great guide to test whether or not you have real solar eclipse glasses. If you’re planning on watching the eclipse today, make sure you’re doing it safely!

My area also didn’t get the eclipse at 100% back in 2017, but it still went pretty dark. I actually do remember the eerie, yet very full silence of the moment. It was really powerful. There won’t be another total solar eclipse until August 2044, and that one will start in Greenland and go through Canada before finishing up in just three US States: Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Things like this feel pretty humbling, like they’re forcing us to sit up, take in, and recognize the bigger picture of the world around us.

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos credit: Yorick Jansens/Anthony Dehez/Belga Press/Avalon, Egmont Strigl/ImageBroker/Avalon, and Getty

On March 22nd, Kensington Palace released the Princess of Wales’s video, where she announced that doctors had found cancer after her abdominal surgery and she was undergoing chemotherapy. The video was carried everywhere, on television and online. Several American channels carried the video live as it was released, and obviously it was major news across the board in the UK. Apparently, people took issue with the BBC coverage of Kate’s announcement and the BBC’s seemingly wall-to-wall coverage thereafter. Similar to the deaths of QEII and Prince Philip, the BBC went way overboard and there were complaints. The Daily Mail says that the Beeb received “more than 100 complaints,” which honestly sounds like a pretty low number? In any case, the BBC issued a statement:

The BBC has received more than 100 complaints over its ‘excessive and insensitive’ coverage of Kate’s cancer diagnosis, it has emerged. The Princess of Wales announced she was undergoing treatment for cancer in an emotional video on March 22. The BBC aired the full video and has hit back at criticism saying it was ‘mindful’ of its reporting approach, and did not speculate on details that had not been made public.

In a statement responding to the complaints, the corporation said: ‘We broadcast in full the highly personal video message from the Princess of Wales, in which she spoke directly to the public about her cancer diagnosis. Our coverage reflected the significance of this story and the outpouring of support for the princess from around the globe. We explained to our audience what was known about Catherine’s condition, but did not speculate on details that had not been made public.’

The corporation detailed its reporting approach and said it always gives ‘careful consideration’ to the editorial decisions made.

The statement continued: ‘Our reporting made clear that this is a difficult time for the princess and the rest of the Royal Family; we have been mindful at all times to approach our coverage with sensitivity.’

‘As part of our analysis, we examined the intense speculation there had been in the preceding weeks about the princess’s health. We also reported on Catherine’s request for privacy and detailed the statement from Kensington Palace regarding the princess having the right to privacy in relation to her medical issues. We always give careful consideration to the editorial decisions we make. While we have a responsibility to report on stories that are of interest to our audience, we appreciate that not everyone would have approved of the approach we took.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“As part of our analysis, we examined the intense speculation there had been in the preceding weeks about the princess’s health.” Ah, I guess that was the reason for the complaints. Honestly, though, I’m on the BBC’s side in this limited issue – they were contextualizing the reason why Kate’s video was so significant and why it was such a global headline. It’s because Kate had been missing for months and Kensington Palace had been caught lying and manipulating photos as proof-of-life for a missing princess. The “where is Kate” controversy was WHY Kensington Palace had to release the cancer-announcement video. Of course, that doesn’t explain why KP had been lying for weeks beforehand, even promising that Kate would be resurrected for Easter Sunday. If anything, the BBC needs to investigate more and call out the lies even further. They won’t though. Especially since they’re still being so squirrelly about how the cancer-announcement video was made.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Kensington Palace.

Embed from Getty Images
About a year or so ago, my girlfriends and I had a random debate about the use of the phrase “sexy time” as a substitute for saying you’re getting it on. I’m not even sure how it came up, but one of my friends mentioned that she absolutely hated it because she felt it was infantilizing. I believe the exact words in her conclusion were, “sexy time is not sexy” lol. I disagreed and said that it’s simple, self-descriptive, and way better than saying “bumping uglies” or any other outdated reference.

I think Zoe Saldana would be on my side of the debate. In fact, she uses the phrase herself! Zoe and her husband Marco Perego-Saldana recently appeared on The Drew Barrymore Show. Drew asked them about their feelings on nude bowling (actual bowling while naked). Marco responded by saying that they prefer to “play Legos naked” instead. “Playing Legos naked,” is of course, their go-time code phrase for getting busy whenever their three boys, twins Cy and Bowie, nine, and Zen, seven, are around.

Zoe Saldaña thinks she found a marvelous way to talk about sex around her kids.

In fact, the Guardians of the Galaxy star and her husband Marco Perego-Saldaña developed a code word to use whenever their kids—twin boys Cy Aridio and Bowie Ezio, 9, and son Zen Anton Hilario, 7—are within earshot to let each other know that they’re in the mood.

“We ‘play Legos naked,’” Marco revealed during the couple’s joint appearance on The Drew Barrymore Show April 3, prompting Zoe to clarify that the term means “sexy time.”

However, as the Avatar actress noted, their older boys have seemed to caught onto the lingo.

“They were like, ‘Are you guys kissing? Are you guys gonna go play naked with your Legos?’” Zoe recounted. “And we’re like, ‘No, we’re not going to do that.’”

[From E News]

All this talk about playing naked Legos inspired me to look up other euphemisms. The worst two I found were “slamming the clam” and “taking the hot dog bus to taco town,” while “tickle the pickle” made me snort-laugh. Mr. Rosie, some friends, and I used to jokingly call it “cleaning the gutters,” which was inspired by Justin Therox’s character in The Leftovers saying that he was cleaning the gutters when everyone disappeared while flashbacks revealed that he was actually busy playing Legos naked. Oh, and I will never not associate “afternoon delight” with Arrested Development.

But yeah, LMAO, it’s definitely time for Zoe and Marco to come up with a new code word or phrase, probably one that doesn’t involve the word naked. Or Legos. If you really want to go undetected, it’s always best to pick something mundane. Anyone have any fun code word suggestions? They could also use the ole tried-and-true method in my house which is to ask if it’s “TV time” for the kids and then take advantage of them zoning out and not paying a bit of attention to where mommy and daddy disappeared to. Kids will never question being allowed to watch TV.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Zoe Saldaña (@zoesaldana)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Zoe Saldaña (@zoesaldana)

photos credit: Xavier Collin / Image Press Agency / Avalon, Getty and via Instagram

I’m here for celebrity women being open and honest about menopause symptoms. I’m 51 and it does hit you fast and hard and make you question reality. So many celebrity women have been open and honest about what they’re going through in menopause and I’m grateful for that. Most recently Halle Berry described a common and less-talked-about symptom that affects our sex lives. Props to her for that.

Niecy Nash, 54, is representing a company called Versalie, which offers menopause-related supplements and nutrients. In a new interview with People Magazine, she said that she only recently learned that irritability, dry skin and thinning hair can be attributed to menopause.

“I got hot and then I kept getting hot and I was like, ‘Sound the alarm. This is it’,” says Nash, 54, of experiencing hot flashes for the first time, which led her to realize she’d entered menopause. “It’s that heat you can’t control, no matter how cold it is in the room.”
Indeed, one night “I fell asleep with a wig on,” she says. “I guess I got hot in the middle of the night and took it off. I woke up the next morning and screamed to the top of my throat because I thought it was a dead body in the bed…

“When you don’t know what you don’t know, then you don’t know what it’s related to,” she says. “I thought, ‘Oh, I’m having menopausal hot flashes’ and that was the extent of it. I did not relate the fatigue, because every woman I know is tired. Your scalp being dry, hair thinning, you don’t relate it to menopause. Those were some of the things I just didn’t catch.”

Another tricky symptom she’s dealt with: mood swings. “I always have something to say, but when it happens I get very quiet and want to go off by myself because everything that you say or do irritates me,” she says of trying to cope during those moments. “It’s like, I’m going to go over here and sit down and shut the door and please don’t knock.”

[From People]

I’m definitely more tired and achy than I was a couple of years ago. So far anxiety is the most troubling thing I’ve noticed. I was getting so much anxiety with my regular three cup a day morning coffee habit that I had to cut down to one. That has helped somewhat. I also wake up warm in the middle of the night sometimes. It’s not flow blown night sweats yet, although that might be coming.

I looked through Versalie’s vitamins and supplements and one of the first results is for ashwagandha. My more holistic-based doctor recommended that to me for menopause, and she also mentioned Estroven. (I can’t take Estroven as I am allergic to some of the ingredients.) Ashwagandha made me feel so weird and zombie-like, which I’ve since learned is a common side effect. I’ve been taking low THC/CBD gummies lately and that does seem to help, although maybe I’m just getting a little high. The prescription Estradiol can help with vaginal dryness and I’ve been recommended that as well. There’s no pill or treatment that works for everyone, but at least we’re talking about it and at least there are options.

Photos credit: IMAGO/Dave Starbuck/Faye Sadou/Avalon, Getty Images for Netflix. This is not a sponsored post although there are affiliate links above. If you make any purchases through these links we get a small percentage and appreciate it.

Have you guys watched Scoop yet? It’s the Netflix movie based on Sam McAlister’s book of the same name, all about how BBC’s Newsnight scored their big Prince Andrew interview in 2019. Rufus Sewell plays Prince Andrew, Gillian Anderson plays Emily Maitlis and Billie Piper plays Sam McAlister. It also featured some fine supporting performances by Keeley Hawes and Romola Garai (I didn’t expect to see them and they are both so underrated). I thought Sewell was good as Andrew, especially in the interview scenes. You could tell that Sewell had really studied the interview and he really did mimic Andrew’s mannerisms and behaviors, although Sewell probably could have done a bit more to get Andrew’s voice. Gillian didn’t really bother to mimic Emily Maitlis’s voice either – it’s like Gillian was still doing Margaret Thatcher at various points in the movie.

So, obviously, Scoop has brought up the fact that the real Prince Andrew is still lingering around the royal family. Scoop tried to convince everyone in the postscript that Andrew had “given up his titles,” but that’s not true. He’s still His Royal Highness Prince Andrew, Duke of York, etc. Nothing has been removed or put into abeyance, he just doesn’t “use” the HRH anymore. But for all intents and purposes, Andrew is still very much an accepted part of the family. He’s been to more family events in the past year than Prince William, from Easter Sunday to King Constantine’s memorial service to the coronation to Christmas at Sandringham. Now the royal expert fusspots are crying because King Charles won’t simply put Andrew on an ice floe and set him out to sea:

Royal author Richard Fitzwilliams said the Netflix show was yet another very embarrassing situation for the Palace, while biographer and investigative journalist Tom Bower thinks it shows it is high time for Charles to act and remove the Duke from ‘public view’.

Mr Bower said: ‘To save the Royal Family from more horrendous damage, King Charles will finally need to order Prince Andrew to permanently stay out of public view. Senior officials also need to tell Andrew the truth. He is a serious liability and cannot be trusted or rescued. Unless King Charles firmly grasps this nettle it can only get worse’.

Mr Fitzwilliam said: ‘The film conveys the extraordinary sense of entitlement that Andrew had. He is told by his aide Amanda Thirsk to ‘just be himself’ and he is – that’s the most damning thing. It is very embarrassing for the Palace and simply another indication that Andrew is completely unfit for the Royal Family he was born into. The public’s view of him is already ghastly and couldn’t be worse so this will confirm people’s opinions. The film also adds a new dimension by portraying his childlike side – such as the scene featuring his teddy bears.’

‘The person we see in the film doesn’t seem to have any idea of reality. It shows how people in a privileged position can become completely out of touch.’

[From The Daily Mail]

I was a bit astonished that they actually put Andrew’s teddy bears in there. There’s so much cognitive dissonance within the film too – you have these serious BBC reporters treating the Windsors as practically untouchable and ungovernable, and then there’s Andrew, fussing over his stupid teddy bears and making idiotic decisions constantly. It also highlighted the incompetence around the Windsors too, from Amanda Thirsk (who fell on her sword after the interview aired, and she was cut a big severance check) to the nameless representative of QEII, who actually recorded the interview on his phone… and still cleared the BBC to air the whole thing. So, I agree that Andrew should be put on an ice floe and set out to sea, but here’s the thing: Charles keeps inviting Andrew to events. Charles has repeatedly telegraphed that he’s totally fine with Andrew.

Meanwhile, the Times also had a story about how Andrew is “feeling bullish” despite Scoop. He was seen recently out at Harry’s Bar in Mayfair, having lunch with Johan Eliasch, a Swede who is chairman of Head (a sporting goods manufacturer). They’ve been friends since the 1990s and there’s some speculation that they might be doing some business together. The rest of this Times piece is basically like “here are all the reasons why Andrew could never come back.” They’re missing the point – Andrew never left.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

One of the first big gossip stories to come out of Rebel Wilson’s memoir and promotion was that she accused Sacha Baron Cohen of being rude, unpleasant and perhaps even abusive to her. She said that he had spent years trying to intimidate her into staying silent, but she was now naming him as a massive a–hole. Cohen suddenly got his lawyers involved and they’ve been threatening Rebel and issuing statements and more. I actually believed Rebel’s story about Cohen and I found it interesting that she seemingly no longer fears him. I don’t think many people fear him anymore. Speaking of, less than two weeks after Rebel named him, Sacha Baron Cohen and Isla Fisher announced their divorce. It feels related, even though they state that they jointly filed for divorce in 2023.

Sacha Baron Cohen and Isla Fisher have called it quits.

“After a long tennis match lasting over twenty years, we are finally putting our racquets down. In 2023 we jointly filed to end our marriage,” they said in statements shared on their Instagram Stories on April 5.

“We have always prioritized our privacy, and have been quietly working through this change,” they added. “We forever share in our devotion and love for our children. We sincerely appreciate your respecting our family’s wish for privacy.”

Fisher, 48, and Baron Cohen, 52, married on March 15, 2010, and they share three children.

Baron Cohen and Fisher first met back in 2001 at a party in Sydney, Australia, well before they gained fame for their hit movies, 2006’s Borat and 2005’s Wedding Crashers, respectively.

“She was hilarious. We were at a very pretentious party, and me and her bonded over taking the mick out of the other people in the party,” Baron Cohen recalled of their first meeting in a 2020 interview with The New York Times. “I knew instantly. I don’t know if she did.”

The pair went on to get engaged in 2004, and welcomed their first child three years later.

[From People]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen any of their children, and I didn’t realize they have three kids (I thought they maybe had two). They apparently have two daughters and a son, between the ages of eight and sixteen, I think. According to People Magazine’s sources, they’ve been working out their divorce since last summer, although this was not the first time they consulted with divorce lawyers and they’ve had problems for years. Which I believe – it feels like SBC is probably a very difficult man to live with or be married to, to put it mildly. Anyway, they were clearly having big problems for a while, so why announce the divorce right after Rebel’s thing? Hm.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Isla’s IG Stories.

Dakota Fanning is the female lead in Netflix’s Ripley, a miniseries adaptation of Patricia Highsmith’s The Talented Mr. Ripley. Of course, that was already adapted in a 1999 film starring Matt Damon, Jude Law, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Gwyneth Paltrow. Dakota plays the Gwyneth role, Marge, and Andrew Scott plays Tom Ripley in what appears to be a captivating performance. If I’m being honest, it sometimes feels like Dakota’s little sister Elle sort of eclipsed her at some point and nowadays, Elle is getting all of the big scripts and important roles. But Dakota works consistently and I’m interested in seeing what she does in this series. Dakota covers the latest issue of Porter, and here are some highlights:

Her big, blowout 30th-birthday party. “I’ve never had a party like it. I’ve had dinners, but this was… a party,” laughs Fanning, who took over the whole of hip Beverly Hills restaurant La Dolce Vita, hired an ice sculpture of legs “for fun”, and wore a red satin corseted Dolce&Gabbana dress. “I was destroyed on Saturday – from the biggest hangover I’ve had in years. But I was icing my head with a huge smile. The past few days, I have felt so light.”

Her 20s were not great: “I wouldn’t say I’m not a happy person, but I do think the late twenties f–k with you. I feel happier and more conscious of what I have, rather than what I don’t have. I know who I am, and the people who know me know who I am, and that’s really all that matters. But there is something about saying that at 30 that feels different to saying it at 28.”

Her 20-year-plus career: “I still have these check-ins with myself to make sure I’m enjoying it. If you can still find the light in moments that are tough, then you’re still enjoying it!”

Filming in Italy for nearly a year at the tailend of the pandemic: “I like being alone and I don’t mind getting acclimated to a place, but I felt really lonely in a specific way. I felt like I was trapped. I’m sure other people can relate… It wasn’t a unique experience, but I definitely went through a rollercoaster on this.” Having seen the results – the finished eight-part, black-and-white series – she has no regrets now. “I feel very rewarded and satisfied having seen the show; it all feels worth it. It’s so different to anything I’ve ever been in.”

On Andrew Scott: “I always hoped our paths would cross. He is so wickedly funny, warm and kind. He’s just a good person. And stunning, obviously. I worship him after working with him.”

She avoided the book & avoided talking to the 1999 film actors: Fanning deliberately steered clear of the 1955 book (“what you’re trying to achieve is what you’ve been given, which is, ultimately, the script”), and she, Scott and Johnny Flynn (who plays her partner Dickie) made a pact to have no contact with anyone who had played versions of their characters. “I was blissfully trying to not think about Gwyneth and her extraordinary beauty and grace!” laughs Fanning of the original, which became known as a stylish cinematic moment. “I’m a huge fan of the film, but it’s so different, I hesitate to even talk about it.”

On wanting children: “Being an actor is a huge part of my identity. I don’t really know who I would be without it. But I also have a desire to set up my life and career so that I always have a choice. Having kids is probably more important to me than anything, even being an actor. If somebody said I had to choose, I would choose having kids. I’m one of those people who has always felt that pull. I don’t know how I’ll feel when that time in my life comes – and how much I’ll want to work. But, because I don’t have that at the moment, I’m trying to take advantage of the adventures now. I’m trying to push myself to keep saying yes to things that make me uncomfortable, to keep going to places for long periods of time that maybe I’m scared to do because – God willing – one day, it won’t be as easy.”

[From Porter]

I love that she threw herself a huge birthday party and really got ripped and started her 30s with a bang. Good for her. Over the years, I’ve noticed that trend among Millennial and older Gen Z women – their 20s always f–king suck. Like, they’re just weighed down with emotional baggage, sh-tty relationships, self-doubt and neuroses, and then they enter their 30s and it’s like they leave all of it behind. It’s a weird little sub-phenomenon, and I’m not saying it’s universal, but a lot of women (famous and unfamous) have described it that way.

As for the film versus the series… my first thought, months ago, was “why does this need another adaptation?” But Andrew Scott is the reason why it needed to be adapted again, because we need to see him as Tom Ripley. But I can’t imagine trying to “redo” one of Gwyneth’s most iconic roles, frankly. Like, I think Gwyneth is an a–hole, but she killed it in Ripley, it was one of her best roles.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, cover courtesy of Porter/net-a-porter.

Dev Patel attended the premiere of Monkey Man (which he directed & stars in) with his longtime girlfriend Tilda Cobham-Hervey. I hope they’re happy, sob. [RCFA]
This week’s Cardi B situation was super-complicated but this is very good coverage of what went down & how Cardi de-escalated. [LaineyGossip]
Kate Beckinsale has been hospitalized for three weeks?!? [Just Jared]
God, TLC’s “No Scrubs” is such an iconic song. [OMG Blog]
This male model’s big expression is “confusion.” [Socialite Life]
Donald Trump accused Pres. Biden of… doing cocaine?? [Pajiba]
Can anyone fix this Constance Wu look? I have my doubts. [Go Fug Yourself]
Conan O’Brien will be a guest on the Tonight Show. [Seriously OMG]
I did not know about American Pickers’ Danielle Colby’s side job. [Starcasm]
Cassie is reportedly cooperating with the feds. [Hollywood Life]
I don’t see this as a big deal? Sometimes parents like to give their adult children Easter baskets, although I agree that your parents’ 20s were wildly different than the current 20-somethings. [Buzzfeed]

Carole Middleton has only been seen in public twice since Party Pieces went bankrupt and got sold for £180K. Following the Middletons’ appearance at the coronation – which was just a few weeks before PP was sold – Carole skipped every social event last summer, even Wimbledon. She wasn’t seen until December, when she scurried into Kate’s Together at Christmas event. The only time Carole has been seen this year is in that grainy-as-hell photo in February, with Kate (or “Kate”) riding shotgun in a car near Windsor.

While there’s been some chatter about the Middletons helping out while Kate was recovering from abdominal surgery and going through chemotherapy, there has been a very spooky silence coming from Middleton Manor. Carole usually runs her own PR operation out of Bucklebury, but the whole thing went silent as the grave last year. Perhaps Carole doesn’t have the money to do much of anything – this week’s news is that the Middletons are too broke to pay the insolvency firm which restructured the debt-ridden Party Pieces and sold it, fleecing the business’s creditors for millions of dollars. That was the start of something else… something vaguely resembling a pivot from Middleton HQ. Suddenly, sources were saying that Carole does not want poor Kate to worry about the Middleton finances, Kate must simply focus on her own recovery. And now this – a reminder that Carole seems to be doing a lot with the Wales kids while Prince William is… in the wind?

Carole Middleton has been a “driving force” for Princess Kate and Prince William amid the Princess of Wales’s cancer diagnosis, sources have claimed. Kate’s mother has been praised for playing a vital role behind the scenes for the Prince and Princess of Wales.

A source close to the Middletons said: “Carole has been the driving force keeping the family together with minimum fuss and maximum modesty. She’s ferried and fetched George, Louis and Charlotte, taken them to school sports matches and given them endless support. She’s been a real Mary Poppins-like figure.”

Carole, 69, has provided the young family with the “three R’s”, according to the source. They said: “She’s come to the rescue, provided reassurance, and has been a rock to Catherine and William as they come to terms with the news.”

Carole is thought to have stepped up by taking her grandchildren, Prince George, 10, Princess Charlotte, eight, and Prince Louis, five, to school. Alongside her husband Michael, Carole is free to provide support wherever required.

The source continued to tell The Independent: “Her actions are in huge contrast to those mouthing support from afar.”

Carole is understood to have been among the first to learn of Kate’s diagnosis.

[From GB News]

“Her actions are in huge contrast to those mouthing support from afar.” Can’t believe Carole would talk about Pippa and James Middleton this way, since both of Kate’s siblings were on luxury holidays when Kate was recovering from surgery and being diagnosed with cancer. No, I jest, I know that was an oh-so-subtle dig at the Sussexes. Pretty rich from broke-ass Carole, especially considering that I’ve always been convinced that Carole was the “source” for the whole “Meghan made Kate cry” saga.

As for this brand new information that Carole has been a tireless Mary Poppins, juggling the school runs AND taking care of Kate AND taking care of poor William, it once again begs the question… what exactly is William doing in this scenario? He only visited his wife once in the hospital, no one can prove that they’ve been living together whatsoever, and now Carole is claiming the fakakta school run? Interesting.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Avalon Red.

Last week, the Washington Post did a pretty even-handed piece about the conspiracies and confusion around the Princess of Wales’s cancer-announcement video, which was released on March 22. WaPo spoke to AI experts, most of whom said that the video was likely legitimate, although WaPo did speak to one Pentagon-contracted firm which said that the video had a “high likelihood” of being “manipulated with AI.” WaPo also got Kensington Palace on the record to say that accusations of AI tampering are “factually inaccurate.” WaPo’s larger point – and one which I strenuously agree with – is that Kensington Palace’s credibility is in the toilet after lying for months and manipulating multiple photos, so the palace and the BBC should do more to validate the video and ease concerns. It feels notable that no one has done anything like that – instead, BBC Studios has gone radio silent and no one has heard anything from KP in almost two weeks.

In the credibility vacuum, it was curious this week that Getty added an editor’s note to the palace-handout screencap photo from Kate’s video. It was basically a disclaimer saying: “This Handout image was provided by a third-party organization and may not adhere to Getty Images’ editorial policy.” “May not” is doing some heavy lifting. Well, now the NY Times has a piece called “How an Editors’ Note Fueled Another Kate Conspiracy Theory.” Some highlights:

Why did Getty add the disclaimer? With disinformation spreading fast online, at times amplified by hostile states, some social media users were primed for skepticism. A note from Getty Images beside the video announcement, released on March 22, said it “may not adhere” to its editorial policy and fanned more conspiracy theories over the video’s authenticity. There is no evidence, according to researchers, that the video is a deepfake, and agencies routinely attach such notes to content given to them by third parties. With images easy to manipulate, researchers say that news agencies are being transparent about the source of their content.

A standard editors’ note which only appears on a handful of photos: That disclaimer is not unique to this video. A spokeswoman for Getty Images said on Wednesday that it added a “standard editors’ note” to any content provided by third-party organizations. Other agencies also use such notes routinely for clarity. It was not clear when that policy came into practice, and the spokeswoman declined to comment further. Online sleuths, however, pointed out that the same note was added to a clip provided by a government agency of the bridge that collapsed last week in Baltimore.

Was the video a deepfake? “I don’t see any compelling evidence that it’s a deepfake,” said V.S. Subrahmanian, a professor of computer science at Northwestern University who has researched deepfakes. Professor Subrahmanian ran a copy of the video through a system of 15 algorithms his team has been developing to detect manipulated videos, and he also manually examined it with another analyst. Components such as the video’s audio and Kate’s movements appeared to be natural, and technical evidence suggested it was unlikely to be fake. “Context is a very big part of it,” he added. “The bigger context is that it was a video shot by the BBC, who is a highly reliable source.”

The problem with photo handouts: “[Photo agencies] are very keen not to take handouts and have their own photographers where possible,” said Nic Newman, a senior research associate at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. News agencies, however, have concerns about the way public figures, including politicians and celebrities, are increasingly using handouts to try to “control the narrative,” he said. The note was an example of agencies’ efforts to be more transparent with their clients who used those photos, he said, but there was the risk that they could fuel conspiracy theories. “People often take those labels and then blow them up out of all proportion.”

The Mother’s Day photo fiasco: The episode prompted news agencies to look again at their policies, Mr. Newman said, and re-evaluate which sources were trustworthy. “The whole question of whether you can believe what you see is certainly not as clear as it used to be. There is a trust deficit in society, at least in the United States,” Professor Subrahmanian said. “Deepfakes have the potential to widen that trust deficit.”

[From The NY Times]

“The bigger context is that it was a video shot by the BBC, who is a highly reliable source.” One would think, but again, it wasn’t filmed by BBC News, meaning there wasn’t an actual news crew around Kate. This was filmed by BBC Studios, and they still refuse to come out and talk about the filming or even confirm really basic facts about the video (when and where it was shot, what kind of camera was used, how many takes were done). Again, I felt a certain amount of relief two weeks ago when we learned that the BBC had been brought in to film the video – finally, the Kensington Palace clowns brought in mature professionals to manage their messaging. But everything since then has only raised more questions.

Photos courtesy of Kensington Palace, Getty, Avalon Red, Cover Images.