Comments on: Baby Whale – time to get real, not reality tv

By: Rob

Rob — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 05:36:58 +0000

I agree with that the overattention on the whale was bordering on the ridiculus.

However, misinformation given to the public to facilitate selfish gains such as those nicky hammond has a habit of doing are even more destructive.

By: Ross

Ross — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:38:49 +0000

Anthropomorphisation of any animal creates good news, especially an animal as Disney-cute and cuddly as a juvenile Cetacean. Look at what old Walt did for the Deer, Squirrel and Lion species.
Sadly, most people either don’t want to know or understand that the real world for the likes of Colin or Colette (I really hate this animal naming thing) is inevitably to become part of the food chain. In other words, getting torn to bits by predators, which happens every minute of every day. Imagine if that had happened in Pittwater, with the cameras rolling. I suppose the poor old national parks people would have also been torn to bits by our commercial media and its dumbed-down audience…..again!.

By: fiona

fiona — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:17:58 +0000

I agree….and I think the anthropomorphisation of the whale was extreme, and also a pretty irresponsible move by the media. I note though, that for all the media are being pilloried for naming the whale to engage people in its plight, they gave themselves plausible deniability by naming it Colin.

By: Gelligo

Gelligo — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:02:04 +0000

Nicky & Mitchell’s points are all valid. Here are two more:
1. Media coverage of the ‘Colin the female whale’ fiasco was typically emotive and stupid. I doubt most people – especially anyone who has any experience working with animals – would have believed all the crap peddled, hushed tones, melodramatic faces and sombre strings in the background. The standard of current ‘current affairs’ shows, especially on the commercial networks, is so woeful it beggars belief.
2. NPWS (or whatever they are currently called) have a habit of mismanaging left-field issues – who can forget Guy Fawkes? Same with this – they faffed around for far too long and made a saga out of a simple, unfortunate issue.

By: mitchell

mitchell — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 10:30:23 +0000

This is a really profound issue; we are incredibly anthropomorphic in our view of the world: our main way of understanding living things seems to be to treat them like people. A related problem is how we deal with scale: relating to or sympathising with one suffering person is easy; but a million suffering people is too much. These two shifts seem related and both equally necessary – to treat all living things as intrinsically valuable, and to feel for the many, as much as the one. I think I’m talking about “deep ecology”? Some would argue that these tendencies are evolutionarily hardwired or “human nature”, but people working in conversation, like Nicky Hammond here, demonstrate the alternative.