I do remember clearly viewing this young girls picture on the cover of the National Geographic. Her beautiful eyes is what caught the attention of the photographer. If National Geographic had shared some of the proceeds from the sale of her photograph it would have made a significant difference in her life and future. What a shame that the nameless young lady went unnoticed yet so noticed with out proper recognition or reimbursement for the sale of her face.
They made millions misrepresenting a girl who didn't want her picture taken.
At least BBC displayed journalistic integrity by including Sharbat Gula's name in the title of the article.
PS. Rabia, a typo in the last para. Its McCurry not Curry. Otherwise, a great piece to bring attention to voyeuristic street photography using the most well-recognized example.
I do remember clearly viewing this young girls picture on the cover of the National Geographic. Her beautiful eyes is what caught the attention of the photographer. If National Geographic had shared some of the proceeds from the sale of her photograph it would have made a significant difference in her life and future. What a shame that the nameless young lady went unnoticed yet so noticed with out proper recognition or reimbursement for the sale of her face.
Steve McCurry still repeats that Sharbat Gula, the Afghan girl was an orphan:
https://www.theedgesingapore.com/options/feature/visual-storyteller-photographer-steve-mccurry-his-new-exhibition-and-iconic-afghan
McCurry & @NatGeo refuse to acknowledge the error.
Src: https://bbc.com/news/world-asia-38640487
They made millions misrepresenting a girl who didn't want her picture taken.
At least BBC displayed journalistic integrity by including Sharbat Gula's name in the title of the article.
PS. Rabia, a typo in the last para. Its McCurry not Curry. Otherwise, a great piece to bring attention to voyeuristic street photography using the most well-recognized example.