Nature documentaries as catalysts for change: Mapping out the ‘Blackfish Effect’

Boissat, Laure; Thomas‐Walters, Laura; Veríssimo, Diogo

doi:10.1002/pan3.10221

Cited by 27 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we must also consider what respondents believe “natural behaviour” is, and how these beliefs may guide responses. Research has shown that humans tend to misinterpret animal behaviour as we may base our understanding of animal behaviour on popular media, which often shows wild animal behaviour as active and free [ 58 , 59 , 60 ], and captive animal behaviour as stressed and stereotypic, such as in Blackfish [ 61 ]. This highlights that natural behaviour may likely be seen as the active behaviours of hunting, mating, and playing, as shown in wildlife documentaries, and that the behaviour shown by zoo animals is unnatural and a result of their “limited welfare”.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Positioning in Close-Encounter Photographs and the Effect on Public Perceptions of Zoo Animals

Shaw

McLeod

Borrie

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the rising popularity of social media, conservation organisations and zoos need to understand its impact on public perceptions of the animals they house and their role in conservation. In addition, many zoos offer close-encounter experiences, and visitors frequently share images from these experiences online. This study measured the effects that viewing such encounter images had on public perceptions of both the zoo and the animals they saw. One of sixteen images was randomly presented to participants in two samples: one of Zoo Community followers and members of Zoos Victoria (n = 963), and a representative sample of the Australian public (n = 1619). Each image featured one of four animals (Eclectus parrot, Kangaroo Island kangaroo, Monteith’s leaf insect, Centralian carpet python) and one of four human positions (human and animal touching, human and animal ~30 cm apart, human and animal ~1 m apart, animal alone). Results indicated that viewing different animals and the different human positions within these human–animal encounter images can affect public perceptions of zoo animals. In particular, the closer the proximity of a human to an animal in an image, the more likely respondents were to think that the animal was not displaying a natural behaviour and the more likely it was for General Public respondents to think that the animal would make a good pet. These findings can be used by zoos, wildlife tourism, and media organisations to ensure that they are sending clear, positive, and intended messages about zoo facilities and animals, as well as providing insights into animal encounter images in wider settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Positioning in Close-Encounter Photographs and the Effect on Public Perceptions of Zoo Animals

Shaw

McLeod

Borrie

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this context, technology‐mediated portrayals of the natural world form an increasingly important component of people's experience of nature (Truong & Clayton, 2020). Popular media plays a key role in shaping public values and awareness (Boissat et al, 2021; Östman, 2014), and documentaries in particular have become an increasingly effective tool for social change (Whiteman, 2004), with potential to shape public perceptions of the environment (Jones et al, 2019; van Eeden et al, 2017). For example, watching nature documentaries is positively correlated with donating to pro‐environmental organisations (Arendt & Matthes, 2016; Martín‐López et al, 2007; Zaradic et al, 2009; Zhang et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildlife documentaries present a diverse, but biased, portrayal of the natural world

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Wildlife-documentary production has expanded over recent decades, while studies report reduced direct contact with nature. The role of documentaries and other electronic content in educating people about biodiversity is therefore likely to be growing increasingly important. This study investigated whether the content of wildlife documentaries is an accurate reflection of the natural world and whether conservation messaging in documentaries has changed over time.2. We sampled an online film database (n = 105) to quantify the representation of taxa and habitats over time, and compared this with actual taxonomic diversity in the natural world. We assessed whether the precision with which an organism could be identified from the way it was mentioned varied between taxa or across time, and whether mentions of conservation and anthropogenic impacts on the natural world changed over time.3. Mentions of organisms (n = 374) were very biased towards vertebrates (81.1% of mentions) relative to invertebrates (17.9% of mentions), despite vertebrates representing only 3.4% of described species, compared to 74.9% for invertebrates.Mentions were highly variable across groups and between time periods, particularly for insects, fish and reptiles. Plants had a consistently low representation across time periods. 4. A range of habitats was represented, the most common being tropical forest and the least common being deep ocean, but there was no change over time.5. Mentions identifiable to species were significantly different between taxa, with 41.8% of mentions of vertebrates identifiable to species compared with just 7.5% of invertebrate mentions and 10% of plant mentions. This did not change over time.6. Conservation was mentioned in 16.2% of documentaries overall, but in almost 50% of documentaries in the current decade. Anthropogenic impacts were mentioned in 22.1% of documentaries and never before the 1970s. 7. Our results show that documentaries provide a diverse picture of nature with an increasing focus on conservation, with likely benefits for public awareness. However, they overrepresent vertebrate species, potentially directing public

show abstract

“…1 and Supplementary Material 6, e.g., incorporation of socio-psychological models like TPB as detailed sub-models) or wildlife populations using Bayesian belief networks (Marcot et al 2006), structural equation models (Grace et al 2010), results chains (Margoluis et al 2013), or controlled experiments (e.g., using counterfactuals or empirical evaluation; Ferraro and Pattanayak, 2006;Ferraro 2009). Additionally, theory-based qualitative approaches to impact evaluation, like General Elimination Methodology (GEM), can offer insights into cause-and-effect relationships by systematically ruling out alternative explanations for the outcome of interest (Scriven 2008) and have been useful in conservation contexts (e.g., Salazar et al 2019;Boissat et al 2021). Many of our examples focus on "output" indicators related to social media engagement (e.g., number of viewers or likes), and while output can provide evidence of reach, it does not always tell us if or how change specifically occurred (i.e., "outcome").…”

Section: Recommendations and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the benefits and risks of social media for wildlife conservation

Bergman

Buxton

Lin

et al. 2022

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given its extensive volume and reach, social media has the potential to widely spread conservation messaging and be a powerful tool to mobilize social change for conserving biodiversity. We synthesized gray and primary academic literature to investigate the effects of social media on wildlife conservation, revealing several overarching benefits and risks. We found that social media can increase pro-conservation behaviours among the public, increase conservation funding, and incite policy changes. Conversely, social media can contribute to species exploitation and illegal trade, cause unprecedented increases in tourism in protected areas, and perpetuate anti-conservation behaviours via misinformation. In most cases, we found that content sharing on social media did not result in a detectable impact on conservation; in this paper, however, we focus on providing examples where conservation impact was achieved. We relate these positive and negative outcomes of social media to psychological phenomena that may influence conservation efforts and discuss limitations of our findings. We conclude with recommendations of best practices to social media administrators, public social media users, nongovernmental organizations, and governing agencies to minimize conservation risks while maximizing beneficial outcomes. By improving messaging, policing online misconduct, and providing guidance for action, social media can help achieve wildlife conservation goals.

show abstract

Nature documentaries as catalysts for change: Mapping out the ‘Blackfish Effect’

Abstract: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Cited by 27 publications

References 60 publications

Human Positioning in Close-Encounter Photographs and the Effect on Public Perceptions of Zoo Animals

Human Positioning in Close-Encounter Photographs and the Effect on Public Perceptions of Zoo Animals

Wildlife documentaries present a diverse, but biased, portrayal of the natural world

Evaluating the benefits and risks of social media for wildlife conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About