Of course people are more likely to share the best iamges – or in this case, the one most illustrative of their concern (about watermarks).
Also: my sense is that getting the best results often requires a lot of extra coaching with style/detail words. As we can't see the prompt here, we don't know what sort of style/details were requested. GIGO.
Also, a construction like 'but' that tries to override another expectation may be suboptimal. I gave the same concept a few tries, with more 'sweeteners'. First batch, for prompt "news photo of the King of Belgium giving a speech to an audience that is entirely cucumbers, award-winning, well-composed, detailed surroundings" – & it's a bit better:
A few more tries didn't manage to create any photorealistic shots with actual cucumbers-in-seats – perhaps due to the absurd contrasts required – but shifting to a 'cartoon' style with the prompt "editorial cartoon of the King of Belgium giving a speech to many cheering cucumbers, professional illustrator" got a lot closer:
I've often seen people show off their autogenerated images and report only approximate paraphrases of their actual prompts.
There's one screenshot showing the prompt – but in $CURRENT_YEAR, I view all screenshots with at least a little suspicion, especially when there was a way to highlight the pseuod-watermarked image – OpenAI's native 'Share' – that would've provided stronger proof, direct from OpenAI, of exactly the prompt associated with an image. Hoaxes are everywhere! I've added DALL-E bottom-right color-squares to non-DALL-E images, & seen others do the same, as a subtle joke.
So I generally believe the OP, but don't rule-out the possibility there's been tampering to make some point.
Also: my sense is that getting the best results often requires a lot of extra coaching with style/detail words. As we can't see the prompt here, we don't know what sort of style/details were requested. GIGO.