Solve the murder mystery wins Pioneer Press Peeps contest - Bring Me The News

Solve the murder mystery wins Pioneer Press Peeps contest


The Pioneer Press has announced the winners of its 11th annual Peeps contest.

Begun as a way to fill newspaper space in 2004, the contest has become a hugely popular feature as pun fans vie for the most clever diorama starring the marshmallow Easter staple.

The newspaper notes that some entrants buy and cache Peeps all year, just in case they need a Halloween or Christmas Peep when it comes time to make the diorama. The paper also says that some people created Twitter accounts, websites and even short stories for the projects "giving them a life beyond the contest."

The Pioneer Press received over 200 entries this year all competing for the coveted toothbrush trophy.

Here's a look at the winners:

The winner for the diorama was "The Adventures of the Speckled Cand(y)" by Candace Okeson of St. Paul and Seth Johnson of Bellevue, Washington. The diorama was based off the Sherlock Holmes story, "The Adventures of the Speckled Band." To top it off, the entrants wrote an original Sherlock Holmes short story that can be solved by visual clues in the diorama.

Read the story and try to connect the clues here.

The winner for the video category was "Marriage Equality Waits in 33 States" by Jim Hesley of Woodbury and Peggy Walker of River Falls, Wisconsin. The video is a Peeps version of the Supreme Court singing the Supreme's version of "You Can't Hurry Love" to those awaiting a national legalization of gay marriage, the paper says.

The winner of the video category is based off online voting.

View all the entries here.

Next Up


Pioneer Press tries to clarify editorial on marriage amendment

The St. Paul Pioneer Press is still under fire from readers for a Saturday editorial in which the newspaper seemed to lay out an argument for the marriage amendment, although the piece said it was not an official "endorsement." The newspaper has written a follow-up piece in an effort to clarify, and it acknowledges that many found the piece disingenuous. "We should have been more direct about the premise, and we should have made our respect for the anti-amendment arguments more evident," the newspaper writes.