Hands up, who thinks…


Christopher Spivey



There I was, just casually scrolling down the Chimpanzee On-line page looking for news when I came upon an article with the following headline:

Through nature’s looking glass: Stunning image of polar bear under icy water wins 2013 National Geographic contest

The header photo that you see above is a screenshot of the Chimps link to the article.

Now at first, I just continued to scroll without giving the article a second glance even though my inbuilt alert button had been triggered.

And, without wishing to blow my own whatsaname – Its looking increasingly like I may have to have a bash since my female readers apparently can’t be arsed.

Thanks for fuck all ladies.

This fame malarkey really isn’t all that its cracked up to be, don’t cha know.

But I digress.

Anyway, what with this sense of unease springing to life, I scrolled back up and clicked on the article link… Incidentally, you will have to click on the headline above to access the article because it was too big to put on here without major fucking about.

You see, it was the photo of the child on the bed which was the source of my unease and having clicked on the link I found that this particular photo was a fair ways down the article  – which is in fact made up mostly of photographs.

This fact in turn, makes the photo of the girl somewhat of a strange choice to advertise the article in my opinion.

Even more so when you consider that; not only withstanding the fact that the Polar Bear under the ice photo won the competition, the Chimp also states:

Besides Mr Souders’ captivating ursine subject floating in icy waters, which earned top honors, three other outstaning prints got honorable mentions from the panel of judges, including an otherwordly image of egrets in a fog, a close-up of a rhino, and a stark image of a crow’s nest in Tokyo built entirely out of clothes hangers.  

Now, all three of those photos along with the winner appear in the article yet along with the winning photo the Chimp chose to advertise the link by using the photo of the girl.

Moreover, under the child’s photograph is the caption: Ida, age 7, moved with her mother from Greenland to Denmark in search of a better life, but in their new country Greenlanders are seen as second-class citizens, drunks and socially challenged – which is pretty innocuous I suppose

Now, without wishing to come over all Mary Whitehouse style, given the current climate I feel that the photo is in bad taste and is somewhat at odds with the photo caption.

In fact, no matter how you look at it, a topless little girl, with highlighted nail polish on the fingers of her carefully positioned hands and a somewhat apprehensive look on her face, sat on a 4 poster double bed behind a net curtain screams at me: A rich paedophiles next victim –  not an immigrant child living in poverty, as the caption suggests.

Moreover, the first half dozen photos are mainly landscapes pictures which is more in keeping with National Geographic, whereby afterwards the photos change theme and run in this order:

  • Two male model like twins in a somewhat homo-erotic pose
  • The little girl on the bed
  • A concerned looking woman’s face
  • A silhouette of a boy holding a bunch of balloons (which are in colour and could be described as having a subliminal message pertaining to sex)
  • A well dressed boy holding a Dove (which I believe is not the symbol of peace that we are led to believe) stood next to a TV, and which carry’s the caption  “Laurentiu and his family live in shacks next to the railway near the Ghent Dampoort in Romania, dealing with unemployment and poverty”



So with all the above in mind, my question to you lot is: Do you agree that there is a more sinister agenda behind the photo and its place in the running order of the photos, or have I just been at this job too long and see conspiracy everywhere?

Just askin’.