Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →The pictures of Kate Middleton’s dress flying up show a gust catching the hem of her yellow skirt after she and Prince William arrived at Calgary International Airport on July 7, 2011. Two days later, the Toronto Sun published a revealing frame; the Canadian Press chose not to distribute a similar image. The episode became a debate about the news value of a photograph and the boundary between documenting an event and embarrassing the person in it.
What the pictures show
The moment happened on the tarmac shortly after the couple arrived in Calgary during their 2011 Canadian tour. A gust of wind lifted Catherine’s skirt. Global News reported the windy conditions and identified her outfit as a bright yellow Jenny Packham dress, nude LK Bennett pumps, Kiki Citrine earrings and an LK Bennett straw clutch in its July 7, 2011 fashion report.
The phrase “Kate Middleton’s dress flying up pictures” refers to this historical incident, not a recent one. At the time, coverage often used the label “wardrobe malfunction,” but the cited reports describe a gust of wind; they do not establish any deliberate action or provide evidence about what she wore underneath.
Why some outlets published different frames
The Toronto Sun published a revealing version of the photograph on July 9. Global News and the Canadian Press reported that other outlets discussed the incident while using tamer pictures. The Canadian Press did not distribute a similar revealing image.
#1 Best Overall
- Used Book in Good Condition
The difference was an editorial choice about whether the more revealing frame added meaningful information. Canadian Press pictures editor Graeme Roy said: “We chose not to run the photo because it served no news purpose and its sole intent would be to embarrass the Duchess of Cambridge,” He added: “We need to be above that level as journalists. It was totally possible to use photos that showed that the Duchess’ dress was being blown about without stooping to that level.”
In the same contemporaneous report, Toronto Sun editor-in-chief James Wallace defended his publication’s approach to the Canadian Press: “We promised our readers news with edge and attitude they don’t get elsewhere, and that’s what we do every day.” Those statements explain the two outlets’ positions; they are not a universal rule for how every newsroom handles such images.
The photographer’s account and the media guide
Christopher Wahl, who photographed the royal tour for Vanity Fair, later recalled the Calgary moment in a July 13, 2011 photo essay: “You knew her dress was blowing around… I surely did not want to embarrass (no pun intended) the future queen. But I was there to record events, and it happened.” His account describes the tension between recording what occurred and considering the subject’s dignity.
Global News also quoted a line from the royal-visit media guide: “The Royal Couple must not be embarrassed or inconvenienced by photographers, including official photographers.” That was guidance quoted in the report, not a law, and it does not establish that every outlet followed it in the same way.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Rank #3
Why the incident remains a media-ethics example
The disagreement was not over whether wind had lifted the dress; it was over whether publishing the most exposing frame served a public purpose when less revealing pictures could show the same event. The Canadian Press described its decision in terms of news purpose and potential embarrassment, while the Toronto Sun cited its editorial identity. The episode is therefore best understood as a historical case study in photographic judgment, rather than as evidence of a current incident.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
