Suppr超能文献

对 32 年鲨鱼周纪录片的内容分析。

A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries.

机构信息

Departments of Biology & Geology, Allegheny College, Meadville, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

Department of Environmental Science, Allegheny College, Meadville, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2022 Nov 3;17(11):e0256842. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256842. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

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.

摘要

尽管软骨鱼类对海洋生态系统的重要性已得到证实,但据估计,至少有 32%的软骨鱼类物种面临灭绝威胁。除了有效保护广泛分布的海洋物种的后勤困难外,过去鲨鱼保护工作还因公众认为鲨鱼对人类有危险而受到阻碍。鲨鱼周是一个备受瞩目的国际节目,对公众对鲨鱼、鲨鱼研究、鲨鱼研究人员和鲨鱼保护的看法具有潜在的巨大影响。然而,鲨鱼周因其事实准确性差、制造恐慌、偏见和对科学和科学家的不准确描述而经常受到批评。本研究分析了鲨鱼周整个 32 年的节目内容和标题,以确定在涵盖的物种、特色研究技术、专家身份、保护信息传递、节目类型以及鲨鱼的描绘方面是否存在趋势。我们分析了 272 集鲨鱼周节目的标题(100%)和所有可用节目的内容(201 集;73.9%)。我们的数据表明,大多数节目都没有集中在鲨鱼咬伤上,尽管这样的节目很常见,许多鲨鱼周节目都围绕着恐惧、风险和肾上腺素来描绘鲨鱼。虽然对特别有魅力的物种(如大白鲨、牛鲨和虎鲨)关注度过高的批评是准确的,并得到了数据的支持,但 79 种鲨鱼至少曾被简要提及过一次。鲨鱼周对研究和专家的描述偏向于一小部分(通常是视觉和昂贵的)研究方法和(大多是白人,大多是男性)专家,包括将许多白人男性非科学家作为科学专家进行介绍。虽然鲨鱼的负面形象多于正面形象,但在分析的 53%的节目中确实出现了有限的保护信息。结果表明,总的来说,尽管鲨鱼周可能会影响公众对鲨鱼的整体看法,认为鲨鱼很糟糕,但即使对节目决策进行相对较小的调整,也可以大大改善鲨鱼、鲨鱼科学和保护问题的呈现。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7e03/9632781/64df18af34ba/pone.0256842.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验