Boycott SeaWorld …?
I’ll tell you the problem I have with people that instantly yell “Boycott SeaWorld” at you whenever you mention Orlando, Florida.
It seems to me that they are completely incapable of taking in information from all angles of a story and forming their own opinion.
For those that aren’t familiar with the story in question, a Killer Whale at the SeaWorld resort in Orlando killed one of it’s handlers in 2010. The story was covered in the way you’d expect. “Shocked onlookers“, “Tragic death“, “Grieving family“, “Investigation launched” … etc
But what didn’t happen was an instant backlash from animal rights groups, cancellation of planned celebrity appearances and concerts, drops in park attendance or the appearance of this knee-jerk “boycott” response whenever the subject is broached.
What triggered these events was the 2013 release of “Blackfish” – a documentary about the treatment of Orcas in captivity.
Now, I’m not going to claim that water park resorts don’t mistreat their animals. I’m wildly uninformed and under qualified to make any such judgement. But the point I do want to make is that this is another example of the general public being so easily led, and being so naive when it comes to the authenticity of information presented to them.
“Blackfish” may be a classed as a documentary on IMDB. But that doesn’t mean that everything in it is unbiased – or even factual. It CERTAINLY doesn’t mean that the entire thing is presented to the viewer in an unemotional and honest manner, allowing them to come to their own conclusions. The movie reminds me of the dozens of 9/11 conspiracy theory videos you can pull up on YouTube. Faux journalism, unnamed “sources“, out of context images, heavily edited interviews … all presented as straight “fact“.
To me, this is a great shame because the actual argument against keeping Orcas in captivity is easily strong enough to make the point without having to create these Hollywood style arch villains, evil empires and their supposed innocent, blameless victims. While her death was tragic, surely it should be pointed out that the Orca handler in question was part of the organization that keeps the animals in captivity. Surely I’m not the only one to see that making her the victim of some fictional evil company is massively inaccurate and misleading? I wonder what she would have made of the press using her as a figurehead for it’s campaign against the company that gave her what she most likely viewed as her “dream job”, working with the animals that she loved?
Allow me to be Devil’s Advocate for a minute more.
“Blackfish” targets SeaWorld, portraying it as the villain. It fails to bring balance to it’s argument by mentioning the work that the company does every day for animal welfare both inside and outside of it’s resorts. It doesn’t bother to inform the viewer of the resort’s many animals that have been rescued from injury in the wild and rehabilitated, but now are unable to survive outside of captivity. It portrays SeaWorld as the responsible party for acts that they outright state were carried out by “organizations LIKE SeaWorld” – so, not actually SeaWorld – or at least, not as far as any empirical evidence can show.
As someone that studied several of the sciences in school and college, this reporting style strikes me as being the same as someone presenting the findings of an experiment having conveniently removed all results that do not support their predetermined outcome.
My biggest problem with the movie though, is that the majority of the finger pointing is at this one organization. This is extremely manipulative at best. Yes, the incident in question took place at SeaWorld. But many incidents like it have taken place at other resorts, including one with the very same whale – why focus so much attention on this one? Is your particular soapbox of choice against Orcas in captivity, or is it actually just against the large corporation that runs these resorts? You claim the former, but every second of your “reporting” screams the latter.
“Blackfish” takes ONE example of ONE animal being kept in captivity and tells the viewer that this is somehow different to, and worse than all of the others in zoos and parks all over the world. The main arguments for SeaWorld being this evil empire are that they capture wild Orcas, breed from them, separate the offspring from their mother and then train them to do tricks in an environment smaller than their wild habitat.
Isn’t this the very definition of almost every animal, in every park and zoo, everywhere? Isn’t this what they all have done with lions, tigers, elephants, zebras, apes, monkeys, dogs, eagles, dolphins, seals … you name it. Hell, it’s what YOU do when you buy a cat or a dog!
As I’ve mentioned, by no means is this Killer Whale the only animal responsible for the deaths of handlers in parks and zoos. Not to mention the recurring news stories of members of the public being mauled and killed by lions, gorillas and elephants in these places. But of course, they are always reported as the fault of the attacked person, aren’t they?
“Look at this idiot, climbing into the gorilla enclosure and getting his face eaten!”
Absolutely no mention there of the gorilla only being aggressive because it’s locked in a 20×20 foot cage to be gawped at by thousands of people for 15 hours every day.
Singling out this SeaWorld incident as an EXAMPLE is fine. But using it as a key piece of evidence against one specific company is just nonsense.
You either believe zoos are inhumane, or you don’t. You either agree with animals being in captivity, or you don’t. In my view, there is no tangible moral difference between keeping Orcas – generally viewed as cruel, at least until the press change the public’s mind for it – and keeping lions – generally viewed as being adorable and perfectly fine – in captivity.
None of these animals are given the living space they naturally need. All of them are paraded out for thousands to stare at all day, every day. What actual piece of logic can be employed to describe any significant difference between them?
I don’t believe for one second that SeaWorld are in any way worse than any other resort. In fact, they’re probably better than most when it comes to the welfare of their animals, as they are so often being scrutinised by investigations and independent reviews based on overblown “stories” cooked up by the press on slow news days.
The occasional legitimate story, like the death of a handler or a park visitor is usually just rattled off as another throw away report amongst the other deaths in the news on any given day. Perhaps THIS is the thing we should be getting angry about.
This has probably come across as a pro-Seaworld rant, but that’s not really the point. My issue is with the dishonesty with which this alleged documentary is filled and the general public’s unquestioning belief of everything it states. We all need to remember that, if you get your information from only one source, it is, without exception, biased.
News sources and documentaries are far more concerned with providing entertainment and shock value, generating ratings and viewing figures than actually transmitting fact. That goes for ALL news sources.
Yes, even the one you use.
Yes, ESPECIALLY ones like CNN, FOX, Sky and the BBC.
Not one of them is without an agenda. Just try to remember that when you’re getting your “facts” from them.
MisterShouty 