What the what? He's only about the most cherubic little child we've ever seen, which is why it seems so odd that there is speculation that Prince George was airbrushed for the cover of Us Weekly -- though it's kind of tough to argue with after seeing the picture.
The photo that was supposedly altered is the one at left. It was taken while little George visited Taronga Zoo in Sydney, Australia with Kate Middleton and Prince William as part of their Royal Tour.
Take a look at the picture side-by-side with the cover and see if you think it's been spruced up just a tad.
Yeah ... there's a difference here for sure. Georgie's coloring is much warmer on the magazine cover, and his eyes appear greener, while his hair has more of a ginger tone going on.
And understandably, Twitter users are all up in arms over the cover, because there's absolutely no need to airbrush a baby. Check out what a few fans had to say.
But while I get why they are upset, is this really that big of a deal?
Think about it for a second -- have you ever seen an Us Weekly cover that wasn't all sorts of bold? Um, something has to catch your eye in the grocery store checkout aisle. If they'd kept the pic the way it was, it would've looked a bit too washed out among all of the other mags screaming, "Buy me! Buy me!"
A rep for Us Weekly told Page Six, "The original image used for the Prince George cover was dark and bluish in tone and needed to be given an overall color shift for printing purposes. By no means did we go in and alter the color of his eyes or cheeks in this process."
Huh. But his eyes do look lighter? (Odd.)
Still, I'm just not convinced the alteration really had anything to do with his appearance, per se -- but the hope of selling as many copies as possible.
Come on, people -- shouldn't we all know by now that it's all about the money?
Does the cover photo of George make you mad?
Images via Chris Jackson/Getty; Us Weekly