‘The Hungrier the Better’? – A commentary on Save the Children’s Poster

Like many other fundraising campaigns, Save the Children uses images of people suffering from humanitarian crises to elicit financial support from the general population. On the surface, this practice seems practical and effective due to its appeal to emotions combined with easy-to-follow instructions. Yet, upon deeper analysis, issues regarding consent, privacy, consolidation of stereotypes and lack of transparency arise. 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Source: Save the Children US [@SavetheChildren]. Twitter, 3 May 2017, https://twitter.com/SavetheChildren/status/859577177934884864

​

Using images of people who are suffering is a common practice among NGOs. Inherently, humans are emotional beings. Studies have shown that altruism is ‘hardwired’ into our brains, making it pleasurable when we help others [1]. Save the Children exploits this psychological fact by showing images of malnourished children against a damp and ‘sad’ background, invoking a strong empathetic response, driving people to donate out of pity, sympathy, and guilt. One could argue that this is highly beneficial from a utilitarian perspective, as it harnesses the power of emotions to garner more money for the NGO, benefitting a larger population in the future. However, the approach of relying on pity, sympathy, and guilt runs the risk of undermining the dignity and autonomy of individuals being depicted. It also perpetuates a cycle of dependency on foreign aid rather than fostering local sufficiency. As such, is there a better way to raise funds while respecting the inherent worth and capabilities of the needy?  

            

Although done in good faith, Save the Children’s campaign is not perfect. First, there may be a problem of consent and infringement of privacy. The humanitarian sector has grown to respect individuals more by using photography consent forms to ensure those, or at least their family members, captured on camera understand and agree to what the pictures are used for. Yet, even if photographers did so, there is no recognition or appreciation of the children and their families mentioned in the campaign. Moreover, consent forms may not be sufficient to ensure that people know exactly what will be done with the photographs. For example, in areas with a lack of internet, even if they say yes to you posting on social media, do they really know what that entails? Do they know external parties may potentially screenshot, share and comment on the pictures? Do they know their pictures may stay on the internet forever? If people from developed countries are so conscious about uploading pictures of themselves onto the web, then under-resourced populations should be owed the same respect. Unfortunately, the pictured children are shown in full, with their entire face exposed to everyone. Methods such as pixelation or blacking out the eyes would be more responsible and respectful.

            

There is also an issue of transparency in the campaign. As mentioned previously, the instructions are concise and simple. Yet, this comes at the cost of detailed explanations of how the collected fund would be used. Does Save the Children have a robust, ethical, and feasible plan to help malnourished people? Are the funds even going to benefit the specific children captured in the campaign advertisement? These are some important questions that are not addressed, suggesting an exploitative use of the images to appeal to conscience rather than thorough thought and understanding of the humanitarian work.

            

A final criticism of the campaign lies in its potential to reinforce stereotypes. A key aim of humanitarian work is supporting local capacity building and self-sufficiency through community-led efforts to identify health priorities and implement sustainable improvements tailored to the local context. Recipient communities should be actively involved in all stages of interventions, from needs assessments to resource allocation to aid delivery to evaluations. Rather than imposing external aid plans, humanitarian organizations would better serve communities by engaging in respectful, participatory processes that bring local expertise and priorities to the forefront. This approach recognizes the strengths communities possess in deeply understanding population needs and sociocultural factors. It is important for all stakeholders to see each other as equal partners, demonstrating true collaboration and cultural humility. However, the images used in Save the Children's campaign could perpetuate the stereotype of passive victimhood in the Global South rather than portray an equitable partnership between aid providers and recipients. By focusing only on individual suffering, the campaign risks conveying the notion that communities lack agency and progress in achieving self-sufficiency, which contradicts the aim of empowering communities to determine and address their own needs sustainably over the long run.

 

In the future, NGOs could consider shifting the images used in campaigns from focusing on 'needs' to highlighting 'solutions.' The imagery should seek to emphasize human resilience and community capacity by featuring success stories of impactful programs led by national partners that have driven positive change. A balanced portfolio of images showing health workers, educators, and others collaborating alongside community members would help promote solutions over suffering. For example, instead of displaying malnourished children, images of the NGO working cooperatively with locals to provide food for communities could be utilized. Upon viewing such images, the general public would still feel emotional inspiration to lend helping hands while gaining a deeper understanding of how the NGO operates. Overall, while leveraging empathy can increase donations in the short term, maintaining human dignity and agency in communications would represent a more meaningful and ethical approach to fundraising.

 

References 

1. Christov‐Moore L, Iacoboni M. Self‐other resonance, its control and prosocial inclinations: Brain–behavior relationships. Human Brain Mapping. 2016;37(4):1544–58. doi:10.1002/hbm.23119