Exploitation of Children, or 'Social Photography'?

Just in case any of you have missed the photos of the poor waifs in the Philippines which have been entered in a number of challenges recently, here are a FEW of the entries. I've probably missed some, but you might come to the conclusion as I have, that these children have been slightly over-exposed to the DPR world, and, IMO, exploited by photographers who have taken advantage of them, in the name of Social Photography, to let the world know of their plight. Almost all of these shots were taken on January 23rd 2011, by a number of photographers. An organised "See The Poverty" bus tour??

Gibo Gantioqui.






larryconcepcion.


MarkG07 aka Mark Gonzales








emokit, aka Kit Tabuso:



Royginald


Royginald has photographs of these same little children taken in 2010, yet has returned subsequently, to take more shots.

But wait there's more:





I wonder how much money these poor souls are given to assist them in their difficult, poverty-stricken life, or are the photographers happy to exploit them, knowing they have a rich and ready source of 'Social Photography' shots available to them at any time?

It's a sad world we live in, and made sadder, IMO, by this exploitation of such vulnerable children.

Ruth

I'm not convinced that some of these photos aren't staged:

http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/Entry.aspx?ID=822134&View=Results&Rows=25

These kids all have clean hair, and their clothes would look fine (no holes in the T shirt) if put through a washing machine. The little boy looks like he has had 'facepaint' applied to his face. They all look fairly healthy.

I have also never seen children with skin that has so much caked dirt on it, but am prepared to accept that there may be places where this is the case (although I have been to some pretty poor countries).

Hi Ruth

Royginald has a website: http://royginald.lens.ph/online-photo-contest-awards. Here he shows off his dpreview success http://royginald.lens.ph/online-photo-contest-awards/

But I caution against forgetting the context of these photos. They are taken at a specific slum in Manila called Ulingan, colloquially known as the place where children make coal.

The reason for the filthy looking kids is that they are employed to mine coal.

The slum is also a target of charity organisations, http://www.projectpearls.org/2014/0...se-who-believe-in-the-beauty-of-their-dreams/,

A Guardian Newspaper feature: http://www.theguardian.com/global-d...charcoal-ulingan-slum-philippines-in-pictures

and even a National Geographic Feature: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...tures/120125-charcoal-fuel-scavengers-manila/

I suspect that these photographers have seen an opportunity to do their trade and provide images that may be used in high profile anti-poverty campaigns.

I don't think they are simply amateurs going on voyeuristic bus tours of the slums.

Adam A

'Photography is nothing else than a writing of light' - Eduardo Cadava (and a whole lot of other stuff!)

I just found out that these guys (Royginald and emokit plus others) organised a 'photowalk with a cause'. That means they organised a photography tour of the slum and brought charity gifts. Translated from the website I found (http://www.pinoyphotography.org/forum/index.php?topic=81501.0)

"Thanks to 10 (from DPP, Pipho GSMSandwich photographers and respond confusing and 3,000 pesos for Ulingan Outreach Program,

Please caused us almost 50 sandwiches, 100 pairs of slippers, 2 boxes of sardines, 3 boxes of noodles, almost 50 plastic bags with toothpaste, toothbrush, cotton buds and slightly used clothes .. a medical treatment for the wounded and. .. vitamins for children ... and of course Birthday cake for Bong and pambirthday to pampanood projector hehehe! repeat until my beloved fellow photographers!

. . . around @ Team Nikon Bullies! SUCCESS!"

So basically, you can do a photo tour of Manila slums as long as you pay 3000 pesos (230 US $) to the Outreach program, and bring sandwiches + meds for the poor, though there is possibly a lot more that they gave. Who knows?

Adam

Thank you, Adam for your very enlightening explanation of the 'photowalk' in Manila by the various photographers I cited.

I was aware that this was a charcoal-making area, and the cause of the blackened and gritty faces on the children.

However, none of the twenty or so shots entered in any of the DPR challenges made any reference at all to the plight of these children, the reason they were there, and the stories behind the faces.

If the photographers had taken the time to tell us about them when they entered their photos in the DPR challenges, I am fairly sure that it would have encouraged financial donations from around the world to assist the families. Instead, the photographers sought all the kudos, and the losers were the children, at least in my opinion.

Ruth

I think I (respectfully) disagree with you guys. If you're gonna shoot street photography or documentary/social photography, I think the first obligation is to shoot the truth. It sounds like these photographers did photograph what they saw.

As such, I am reluctant to look into their hearts to determine their motives. While I, and you, might handle things differently, might use the photographs as a way of raising awareness or fundraising, I don't think that is the only "right" approach.

At least here in America, we live very insular lives (most people have never been out of the USA), and people are far more likely to watch the latest sitcom on TV than to explore other cultures. So, any photograph that shows a slice of life from other cultures can be a good thing. Highlighting that children live in poverty and/or really difficult situations all over the world can be a valuable lesson, and it's possible that these types of photographs aid in that awareness.

I tend to look at photographs to evoke an emotion. For landscapes, it might be an aesthetic one (appreciating the beauty of our planet). For sports, the excitement of seeing a decisive moment captured. (Or envy at the athletic abilities of others). And for environmental portraits, maybe some combination of empathy, sympathy, outrage, hope, optimism, and so on. Seeing images of children who are living tough lives pushes several of those buttons. Ideally, it's great if those emotions prompt me to donate to a charity, or prompt me to live a better life. But I'm a big believer as well in "art for art's sake." I would argue that if an image makes us think, or feel, then it has accomplished a valuable purpose.

Only my opinion, of course, and I totally respect someone who has a different take on the issue.

p.s. Like many people, I am uncomfortable with the concept of staged events like a photowalk. But I think that may be a separate issue from the more general one of "Is taking photos of poor children exploitative or not?"

--
http://www.pbase.com/santamonica

RuthC said:

Thank you, Adam for your very enlightening explanation of the 'photowalk' in Manila by the various photographers I cited.

I was aware that this was a charcoal-making area, and the cause of the blackened and gritty faces on the children.

However, none of the twenty or so shots entered in any of the DPR challenges made any reference at all to the plight of these children, the reason they were there, and the stories behind the faces.

If the photographers had taken the time to tell us about them when they entered their photos in the DPR challenges, I am fairly sure that it would have encouraged financial donations from around the world to assist the families. Instead, the photographers sought all the kudos, and the losers were the children, at least in my opinion.

Ruth

Click to expand...

You had brought to light a very interesting and controversial point. Certainly, it is an invitation to reevaluate the motives, means, intension, contribution and impact that as a photographer someone has in his/her immediate environment and society.