The Rise of Shark “Attack” Discourse

Pepin‐Neff, Christopher L.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-10976-9_2

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The word may evoke a primal fear of being attacked, bitten, or eaten, and has been associated with negative connotations in other studies (e.g. [ 14 , 21 , 69 ]). Titles that include the word “Jaws” may indirectly suggest that the subject is dangerous or fear-inducing, without having to use words that are explicitly negative.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Copley’s Watson and the Shark (1778) or Hemingway’s The Old Man and The Sea (1952)), the movie Jaws (1975) marked a shift towards modern presentations of sharks with visceral visual immediacy. These negative portrayals have been reinforced over decades by media reporting focused overwhelmingly on shark bite incidents and by “attack” focused movies and television programs [ 11 , 14 – 17 ]. This media landscape contributes to a collective public conceptualization of sharks as bad, dangerous man-eaters [ 18 – 23 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite evidence of their importance to marine ecosystems, at least 32% of all chondrichthyan species are estimated or assessed as threatened with extinction. In addition to the logistical difficulties of effectively conserving wide-ranging marine species, shark conservation is believed to have been hindered in the past by public perceptions of sharks as dangerous to humans. Shark Week is a high-profile, international programming event that has potentially enormous influence on public perceptions of sharks, shark research, shark researchers, and shark conservation. However, Shark Week has received regular criticism for poor factual accuracy, fearmongering, bias, and inaccurate representations of science and scientists. This research analyzes the content and titles of Shark Week episodes across its entire 32 years of programming to determine if there are trends in species covered, research techniques featured, expert identity, conservation messaging, type of programming, and portrayal of sharks. We analyzed titles from 272 episodes (100%) of Shark Week programming and the content of all available (201; 73.9%) episodes. Our data demonstrate that the majority of episodes are not focused on shark bites, although such shows are common and many Shark Week programs frame sharks around fear, risk, and adrenaline. While criticisms of disproportionate attention to particular charismatic species (e.g. great whites, bull sharks, and tiger sharks) are accurate and supported by data, 79 shark species have been featured briefly at least once. Shark Week’s depictions of research and of experts are biased towards a small set of (typically visual and expensive) research methodologies and (mostly white, mostly male) experts, including presentation of many white male non-scientists as scientific experts. While sharks are more often portrayed negatively than positively, limited conservation messaging does appear in 53% of episodes analyzed. Results suggest that as a whole, while Shark Week is likely contributing to the collective public perception of sharks as bad, even relatively small alterations to programming decisions could substantially improve the presentation of sharks and shark science and conservation issues.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…“Shark attack” represents one of the most emotive two-word phrases in the English vocabulary. This language utilizes a very specific wording to describe human–shark interactions in ways that have a profound impact on the public’s relationship with sharks [ 2 ]. Studies have shown that when people believe in intent-based narratives, such as shark “attack”, they are less likely to support shark conservation policies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study addresses several underlying tensions. First, the debate over the proper terminology to use when reporting on events involving sharks is difficult because there are real tragedies for individuals that occur and emotionally difficult periods for communities [ 2 ]. Several fatal incidents have occurred over the past decade, namely in Recife Brazil, Cape Cod, Reunion Island, and Western Australia where “attack” is appropriate because the motivation of the shark appears scientifically determinant [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shark Bite Reporting and The New York Times

Pepin‐Neff

2022

Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social and political dynamics around human–shark interactions are a growing area of interest in marine social science. The question motivating this article asks to what extent media reporting by The New York Times has engaged beyond the lexicon of “shark attack” discourse to describe human–shark interactions. It is important because different styles of reporting on human–shark interactions can influence the public’s perceptions about sharks and support for shark conservation. This media outlet is also a paper of record whose editorial style choices may influence the broader media landscape. I review reporting language from The New York Times for 10 years between 2012 and 2021 (n = 36). I present three findings: first, I argue that The New York Times has had an increased frequency in use of the term “shark bite” to describe human–shark interactions. Secondly, I find that shark “attack” is still used consistently with other narratives. Third, there appears to be an increased use of “sightings; encounter; and incident” descriptors since 2020. The implication of this is a layered approach to reporting on human–shark interactions that diversifies away from a one-dimensional shark “attack” discourse.

show abstract

“…This occurs even with the knowledge that about 15% of all incidents worldwide result in a human fatality [ 4 ], although it is considerably higher (46%) in Réunion [ 7 ]. While the disconnect has interesting psychological origins [ 8 ], the repercussions for the conservation of shark species are potentially serious. Globally, many mitigation measures are used, including lethal control measures like large-mesh nets and drum lines [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting potential future reduction in shark bites on people

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the low chance of a person being bitten by a shark, there are serious associated costs. Electronic deterrents are currently the only types of personal deterrent with empirical evidence of a substantial reduction in the probability of being bitten by a shark. We aimed to predict the number of people who could potentially avoid being bitten by sharks in Australia if they wear personal electronic deterrents. We used the Australian Shark Attack File from 1900 to 2020 to develop sinusoidal time-series models of per capita incidents, and then stochastically projected these to 2066. We predicted that up to 1063 people (range: 185–2118) could potentially avoid being bitten across Australia by 2066 if all people used the devices. Avoiding death and injury of people over the next half-century is of course highly desirable, especially when considering the additional costs associated with the loss of recreational, commercial and tourism revenue potentially in the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars following clusters of shark-bite events.

show abstract

The Rise of Shark “Attack” Discourse

Cited by 6 publications

References 47 publications

A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries

A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries

Shark Bite Reporting and The New York Times

Predicting potential future reduction in shark bites on people

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About