Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2012 17:53:16 GMT -4
Today I found this (very old but still) brilliant article written by The Unknown Trainer of @unknowntrainer and TheUnknownTrainer.com. TUT is a positive reinforcement training advocate and blogger/Tweeter of zoological and animal related politics and issues. This particular article addresses the tendency of people in the animal world to fall COMPLETELY on one side or the other - whether it's captivity of marine mammals, training of animals, or any issue, really. I thought this article was very well written and hit on a lot of points I think it's important to address.
__________________________________________________
No sheep, please
Posted on Monday, 2, January, 2012
One of the recurrent themes here will be that each of us must assume responsibility for our own opinions. Being ill-informed or misled is a passive decision we make and too many people are really sheeple when it comes to animal issues.
This is true on all sides, whether you vote straight party-lines with PETA or AZA, for example. Neither of the aforementioned will give you a balanced and informed opinion sufficient to allow you to take a stand or even to say something relevant. Both of them can contribute to an understanding of the issues, but both of them have specific self interests, not to mention their own lobbying presence.
Hopefully you have a trusted friend who can help keep you on the clear path of lucidity as you navigate the shadowy world of zoological politics. … Or maybe I can be that friend. But please don’t take my word for it now. Come back often and evaluate what you read and learn here against what you know to be true and what makes sense. Don’t allow nonprofits, institutions, associations, government entities, or corporations to set your mental parameters.
Remember that you can love animals and still think clearly. AR groups know that your wallet-bone is connected to your heart-bone. Zoos know that adorable, big-eyed babies are the best way to get you through the turnstiles. Circuses want you to be ooohed and aahhed so that you don’t think about what it took to make you oooh and aahhh.
Those are basic concepts you must always keep in mind when any of those constituents speak and you evaluate what they’re saying. But the manifestations can become pretty complex and it can be difficult for a layperson (or an insider, for that matter) to remain focused and retain clarity of thought.
The news media can make it even more difficult. Wouldn’t it be nice to have an intellectual proxy paid to investigate, analyze, digest, and summarize these complex issues for us? Sure it would, but that certainly doesn’t describe mass media. We have to evaluate anything that comes from or comes through the news media with a critical, informed filter. Never assume that a writer or reporter knows more than you do just because they get paid and they are allegedly objective and they are supposed to have editors and publishers who are accountable for the things they report.
They’re human, too, and may be working against a deadline. Many of them are content to regurgitate press releases from the zoo or the protest-group. In a fortunate case, a writer or reporter might interview one or two individuals from either side of a dispute, but guess who recommended the interviewees? You win if you said, “the zoo and the protest group.”
Also, you can bet that any zoo director or AR fundraiser who survives more than a few years on the job is adept at button-holing a media-type and charming them into trusting them by plying them with access to cute animals and personal insight or appealing to their inner anarchist.
And then of course, there are writers and reporters who have strong personal agendas, who have already written the story before they read anything or interview anybody. There are people like this at every level of the media from casual bloggers up through network news anchors.
I don’t want to pick on media people here. Again, they’re human and most of them are earnestly doing the best they can. The shallow coverage of animal issues is probably more a reflection of our short- attention- span culture and society. Shoot, how many people do you think have read this far down the page with you?! BTW, thank you for sticking with me — obviously you DO care!
__________________________________________________
No sheep, please
Posted on Monday, 2, January, 2012
One of the recurrent themes here will be that each of us must assume responsibility for our own opinions. Being ill-informed or misled is a passive decision we make and too many people are really sheeple when it comes to animal issues.
This is true on all sides, whether you vote straight party-lines with PETA or AZA, for example. Neither of the aforementioned will give you a balanced and informed opinion sufficient to allow you to take a stand or even to say something relevant. Both of them can contribute to an understanding of the issues, but both of them have specific self interests, not to mention their own lobbying presence.
Hopefully you have a trusted friend who can help keep you on the clear path of lucidity as you navigate the shadowy world of zoological politics. … Or maybe I can be that friend. But please don’t take my word for it now. Come back often and evaluate what you read and learn here against what you know to be true and what makes sense. Don’t allow nonprofits, institutions, associations, government entities, or corporations to set your mental parameters.
Remember that you can love animals and still think clearly. AR groups know that your wallet-bone is connected to your heart-bone. Zoos know that adorable, big-eyed babies are the best way to get you through the turnstiles. Circuses want you to be ooohed and aahhed so that you don’t think about what it took to make you oooh and aahhh.
Those are basic concepts you must always keep in mind when any of those constituents speak and you evaluate what they’re saying. But the manifestations can become pretty complex and it can be difficult for a layperson (or an insider, for that matter) to remain focused and retain clarity of thought.
The news media can make it even more difficult. Wouldn’t it be nice to have an intellectual proxy paid to investigate, analyze, digest, and summarize these complex issues for us? Sure it would, but that certainly doesn’t describe mass media. We have to evaluate anything that comes from or comes through the news media with a critical, informed filter. Never assume that a writer or reporter knows more than you do just because they get paid and they are allegedly objective and they are supposed to have editors and publishers who are accountable for the things they report.
They’re human, too, and may be working against a deadline. Many of them are content to regurgitate press releases from the zoo or the protest-group. In a fortunate case, a writer or reporter might interview one or two individuals from either side of a dispute, but guess who recommended the interviewees? You win if you said, “the zoo and the protest group.”
Also, you can bet that any zoo director or AR fundraiser who survives more than a few years on the job is adept at button-holing a media-type and charming them into trusting them by plying them with access to cute animals and personal insight or appealing to their inner anarchist.
And then of course, there are writers and reporters who have strong personal agendas, who have already written the story before they read anything or interview anybody. There are people like this at every level of the media from casual bloggers up through network news anchors.
I don’t want to pick on media people here. Again, they’re human and most of them are earnestly doing the best they can. The shallow coverage of animal issues is probably more a reflection of our short- attention- span culture and society. Shoot, how many people do you think have read this far down the page with you?! BTW, thank you for sticking with me — obviously you DO care!
