A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries.
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...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256842 |
| _version_ | 1828335662436188160 |
|---|---|
| author | Lisa B Whitenack Brady L Mickley Julia Saltzman Stephen M Kajiura Catherine C Macdonald David S Shiffman |
| author_facet | Lisa B Whitenack Brady L Mickley Julia Saltzman Stephen M Kajiura Catherine C Macdonald David S Shiffman |
| author_sort | Lisa B Whitenack |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | 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. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T21:50:34Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f3cfcfac1e58425fbaac2c405459266c |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T21:50:34Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-f3cfcfac1e58425fbaac2c405459266c2022-12-22T02:28:26ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032022-01-011711e025684210.1371/journal.pone.0256842A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries.Lisa B WhitenackBrady L MickleyJulia SaltzmanStephen M KajiuraCatherine C MacdonaldDavid S ShiffmanDespite 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.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256842 |
| spellingShingle | Lisa B Whitenack Brady L Mickley Julia Saltzman Stephen M Kajiura Catherine C Macdonald David S Shiffman A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries. PLoS ONE |
| title | A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries. |
| title_full | A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries. |
| title_fullStr | A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries. |
| title_full_unstemmed | A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries. |
| title_short | A content analysis of 32 years of Shark Week documentaries. |
| title_sort | content analysis of 32 years of shark week documentaries |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256842 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lisabwhitenack acontentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT bradylmickley acontentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT juliasaltzman acontentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT stephenmkajiura acontentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT catherinecmacdonald acontentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT davidsshiffman acontentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT lisabwhitenack contentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT bradylmickley contentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT juliasaltzman contentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT stephenmkajiura contentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT catherinecmacdonald contentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries AT davidsshiffman contentanalysisof32yearsofsharkweekdocumentaries |