Ten days, and a silence that says too much: since the announcement of her hospitalization for an “abdominal surgery” operation, announced on January 16, we have had no news from Kate Middleton.
The press release issued by Kensington Palace was nevertheless intended to be reassuring: “The operation was successful and she is expected to remain in hospital for ten to fourteen days.”
However, the press has continued to speculate on the reasons for such an intervention, suggesting that, if the Princess of Wales must cease all public activity until Easter, as has been officially specified, she would be in a serious condition.
Quite the opposite, in short, of the “soothing” spirit of the message from Kensington Palace.
To discover
George Clooney: tormented childhood, great love and secret ambitions
Download the Le Figaro Cuisine app for tasty and authentic recipes
Leadership, balance, career, money... A business coaching program for women
Also read: Kate Middleton: a week of deafening silence
For Philippe Moreau Chevrolet, communications consultant and professor of communications at Sciences Po, the royal family may have made a mistake by opting for the strategy of silence.
Is the era of “
never explain, never complain
” so dear to Elizabeth II outdated?
Explanations.
Madame Figaro.- What are the virtues of silence in the context of crisis communication?
Philippe Moreau Chevrolet.-
The idea of silence is not to fuel rumors.
In general, we start by making a clear and relatively concise press release, then we say nothing more in the hope that the controversy will die down on its own, which sometimes happens.
We also hope, via a single statement, that it will be this version which will be retained by the public because the problems arise when we start to give a second, followed by one comment, another... This confuses the message.
But for the strategy of silence to work, the original message must have been well designed, which is not at all the case here.
For what?
Because he's too evasive.
The press, instead of possibly debating the real problem affecting Kate Middleton, has started to develop a whole bunch of imaginary scenarios, with excessive dramatization which leads to the belief that she is possibly on the verge of death.
It would have been better to be clear.
Furthermore, the price of notoriety is that when a problem arises, you live with it: it will always be part of your story.
We must therefore manage communication over the long term, which requires a coherent vision of a character.
Kate Middleton is consistent in transparency, simplicity, with a form of reserve and nobility which constitutes her trademark, and has been very well managed so far.
There, we fall into something that is quite far from these standards, and it is contrary to its image.
It's convoluted, very complicated.
It would have been better to be clear then to remain silent, accept the crisis and move on.
The price of notoriety is that when a problem arises, you live with it: it will always be part of your story
Philippe-Moreau Chevrolet
Why does silence suggest that something is necessarily being concealed?
Because when it comes to the health of leaders or stars, there is a tradition of lying.
Particularly in France: during his public appearances, it was clear that Georges Pompidou, bloated because of his cortisone injections, was ill, but it was said that he was in good health.
We also think of President François Mitterrand's cancer.
Abroad, there is total silence on the health of Vladimir Putin.
These lies are explained because these public figures are “deified”: they must be strong, above all these biological problems.
Which ties in with the storytelling of Kate Middleton, a personality in control of her destiny, which resembles a fairy tale without a hitch.
This is the first time she's been in trouble, and that's what's surprising about the sequence.
Of course, it is also possible that she suffers from a very intimate gynecological problem, that she is modest and does not want to talk about it at all.
But it will be difficult to repair afterwards.
Kate Middleton has always cultivated a certain simplicity: I think of her Zara dresses, of the clothes that she takes care to wear several times.
This is obviously not comparable to what Princess Diana did, a model in this area, but she also made an effort to be "the people's princess", to come a little closer.
Keeping your illness unclear goes against all of that, it's not good.
Read alsoBehind the worrying hospitalization of Kate Middleton, the unspeakable shadow of the disappearance of Lady Diana
Does this mean that the royal family's code of silence is outdated today?
Yes, it is an archaic way of communicating, which does not suit the need for transparency of the time.
We all want to “know”, either because we are worried, or because we are a bit of a voyeur, but today, it is the price of notoriety.
We have also changed times because of conspiracy: the notion of truth has become extremely relative and not immediately having a complete, rational explanation really fuels social networks and controversy.
Here, it's making Kate Middleton a target, which obviously was not desired at the start.
What is terrible and terrifying is that you can no longer have a private life when you reach this level of notoriety.
Sooner or later there will be a leak, a medical report, a tweet from someone in a good position.
Kate Middleton has an official role, she is not a private person.
She lives partly on the state budget, she has an official role within the British crown: this is why silence does not work either.
Sooner or later there will be a leak, a medical report, a tweet from someone in a good position
The day his operation was announced,
we learned that King Charles III himself would be hospitalized a week later
.
Concerning him, the press release was very transparent and reassuring, mentioning a benign prostate operation.
Why this treatment so different?
Because we are less interested in the king than in Kate Middleton, for three reasons.
The first is that the latter is a young, sick person, who will be hospitalized for a long time: this generates fear, a somewhat “sordid” but very real suspense.
It also recalls the tragic hours of the British monarchy, which has experienced many.
Then, Kate Middleton is a very popular iconic figure, which Charles is not for the moment: if he is king, we cannot say that he enjoys the same popularity.
The third reason why we are more interested in her is the mystery.
But two such different ways of communicating are not understandable.
Read alsoProstate, hernia, double fracture: the medical history of King Charles III
To what extent does this episode weaken the monarchy?
The monarchy has a divine ancestry which is not compatible with illness.
Sovereigns are supposed to be above illness and when their body overtakes them, deep down, it disturbs us.
When leaders are vulnerable, it is the people who, somewhere, become vulnerable too - this also applies to presidents, in France, where we are still in a fairly monarchical system.
Illness is not admissible because when you are weak, you lose a little of your legitimacy to be at the top.
In the case of the British monarchy, the question of legitimacy has already been raised.
It's as if the crown is gradually losing all its jewels.
She is no longer above scandal, she is no longer above suspicion, she is accused of costing too much and what's more, she is ill: that's a lot.