So Cal Shark Encounter: Reasonable Media Coverage

Living in Southern California has its advantages   And one of them is that when the rare shark-human interaction occurs, it is usually put into relatively fair perspective by the media with a modicum of hysterical hype.

Such was the case for a recent encounter off of Catalina Island involving a paddleboarder and possibly a juvenile great white shark.  ABC News covered the event with interviews with my friend, Luke Tipple, and it was a fairly balanced piece of reporting; balanced in the sense that they didn't treat the shark as a roving man-eater, nor did they treat it as a cute but embarrassed little fish who made a silly little mistake.

SharkDiver.com covered it in its blog, Ultimate Thrills: Swimming With Sharks and added the ABC News video segment.  This network has repeatedly provided fair coverage of shark-related events.  I have supplied shark footage for them in the past and have yet to be disappointed in how it was used.  CBS News also does a fairly good job; I provided some on-camera color and a reasonable voice when there was a rare fatality that occurred in San Diego.  NBC News, on the other hand, has been a bit more prone to stirring up fear and excitement.  Here's SharkDiver's post:

Catalina Shark Nibbles and Good Media 

Monday, May 7, 2012

Fortunately when occasional shark attacks occur in Southern California there's a few solid voices out there with ready quotes for the media.

This week was no exception and the quotes given were without the typical "re-branding effort" of top order predators that we are beginning to see in the conservation space.

Sharks are sharks, occasionally they attack things and sometimes those things happen to have a human element to them.

Sharks are not misunderstood, they are not soft and cuddly, and they are toothy.

Accepting the basic tenants of sharks does not make them less viable for conservation, but it does allow people to make "informed decisions" about where they should be when sharks are present.

Phasers On Stun: media zeroes in on laser test with lemon shark

Sharks with lasers - my, oh my.  My friend, Luke Tipple, is gaining a lot of media attention with a recent experiment - actually two experiments really: testing a safe but secure attachment device and testing a low-power laser which can be used for various studies of shark movements.

So, no, the sharks won't be seeking revenge just yet, but that hasn't stop the media from taking notice.  Simply Google "laser sharks" and you'll find a long list of news outlets all running the story.

Here's a recent post from Underwater Thrills: Swimming with Sharks that includes some video.  It's a nutty world.

Sharks with Frickin' Lasers - The Video

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Wait, there's a video?

Of course there's a video, what you don't think a new fin clip innovation that will revolutionize shark research as we know it would rely on a few images and about three thousand print media outlets to make that case did you?
Never.

Oh, and by the way enjoy. No sharks were harmed, inconvenienced, delayed, disrespected, and or annoyed in the making of this video. As it turns out Mr.Biggelsworth has a bit of a thing for our buddy Luke Tipple:

Read more...

Deepsea Challenger: a milestone event shortchanged by the media?

If you are a lover of all things oceanic, unless you have been at sea without any communication to the outside world, you have probably heard of James Cameron's successful dive to Challenger Deep, the lowest point on the seafloor in the Marianas Trench.

But perhaps not. It was a bit surprising and disappointing to see the low level of media coverage the event received. To recap, in a bit of a race with several other submersible operators, James Cameron and his crew, with the support of the National Geographic Society and Rolex, made a successful attempt on March 25th to reach of the bottom of the Marinas Trench at nearly seven miles down. Surrounded by over 8 tons of water pressure per square inch, renown filmmaker and amateur cum serious explorer spent 6 hours on the bottom in the vertical cylinder-shaped, one-man submersible Deepsea Challenger.

Rather than recite the details one more time, you can learn much more from National Geographic's own in-depth coverage on their website.

Man has not reached this depth in over 50 years, since the bathyscaphe Trieste first did it in 1960, and yet the accomplishment garnered minimal reporting in the press. The NBC Evening News made mention of it in the last few minutes of its broadcast and the latest issue of TIME magazine relegated it to a brief column in their Milestones page along with the obituaries. What were they thinking? Is the media perception that of a technological stunt that doesn't really advance the boundaries of science? Did they look at the event as simply Cameron spending some of his millions from successful films like Titanic and Avatar on something that will end up in his next film production?

TIME started their coverage with "Scorcese and Spielberg may never go to Saturn, but on March 25, director James Cameron...took a whole other kind of crazy ride..."

Or was the dive just not sexy enough compared to, say, a five-day journey to the moon funded directly by taxpayer's dollars? Perhaps it's an indication of the times we live in. We're living in somewhat more inward-oriented times, thanks to a struggling economy and daily pressing issues like mortgage payments and the next foreboding trip to the gas pump. Maybe Cameron should have worn a hoodie or recorded the entire dive on an Etch A Sketch. At the very least, it was an opportunity for the media to grasp something beyond the mundane, to stimulate the imagination and say there is something inspiring out there in regions yet to explore - not on some distant planet, but right here beneath the waves of planet Earth.

However, the media perhaps is not totally to blame. The dive itself defused some of its own media hype potential. With the exception of some issues with the hydraulic arms that prevented some rock samples from being taken, the well-planned and executed technology that went into the submersible made the dive seem, dare I say, almost routine. Given that the slightest technical malfunction could have resulted in Cameron being squished like a bug under your shoe, that predictability is by no means a criticism but a compliment to everyone involved. But it does expose the expedition to some of the same attitudes expressed by the public with the last few trips to the moon. The race to the moon was over, the flights were becoming routine and, it seemed, America was moving on.

Add to that the fact that the Marianas Trench is a desolate place, as Cameron described it, reminiscent of Buzz Aldrin's description of the lunar surface as "magnificent desolation." No thriving species, no sea monsters - only, perhaps, the possibility that locations this deep are beyond the limitations of any kind of life. Now, that may not turn out to be the case; bacteria and other small life forms may exist down there. But there initially appear to be no surprises like those found around deep sea thermal vents.

Returning to the Marianas Trench was pitched as an event that would turn our attention to the importance and value of ocean exploration, rather than spending money on moon colonies and trips to Mars. But for some reason it did not catch the attention of the media the way I would have liked to have seen it. The general public was not paying attention like it should. There are benefits to deep sea exploration: benefits in technology and in a greater understanding of the oceans which are now being bombarded with new influences ranging from climate change to pollution to overfishing - all of which will have a profound impact on our lives long before the first man steps on the surface of some far away planet.

Perhaps when James Cameron and National Geographic come out with their planned 3-D documentary of the dives (there are more dives planned), people will be mesmerized by a new aquatic world totally unknown to them. Perhaps, over a tub of popcorn and an overpriced soft drink, they will see there are frontiers that need to be explored not simply "because it's there." Perhaps they will see that our future depends on it.

Source: Nat Geo's DeepseaChallenge.com