Tag: misrepresentation
NBC’s Today Show joins in on ridiculous reporting of “Monster Shark” story
by TheDorsalFin on Nov.01, 2009, under Shark Misrepresentation, Shark News Stories
NBC Today has thrown their hat into the ring in what appears to be an attempt to outdo the level of sensationalism found in some of the other reports of Queensland’s supposed “Monster Shark.”
The Today Show segment goes all-out with unrelenting Jaws references, the Jaws soundtrack, and some of the more ridiculous interview clips from other reports (including my favorite, “If they’re going to grab something as big as another shark, they’re definitely going to grab my daughter.”. The Today Show on-air personalities even join in on the Jaws-based hysteria, at the end of the segment. To the Today Show’s credit they do mention that the shark in Jaws is “mythical.” I’m glad they are at least aware that it’s just a movie.
One would think that a reputable network news program like NBC today would have at least taken the time to research the story before running wild with it, but apparently that wouldn’t have put a damper on the whole 20′ great white shark angle.
Fortunately, the good folks over Underwater Thrills: Swimming with Sharks decided to take the time to contact various agencies in Australia about the story and were told by Tony Ham, The Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries manager, that the shark in photo was “a confirmed 3.3 meter (10′) white shark, caught by our contractor, he measured the primary bite mark at 50 centimeters.” However, Ham went on to say that his team estimated that based on the bite marks, the feeding shark was in the 5-5.2 meter (16-17′) range. Even the Courier Mail who first ran the image of the mauled shark on October 24, have marveled at how the feeding shark seems to have magically grown since the story first broke.
Now, I’m only speculating here, but I think that NBC’s Today show probably has a larger operating budget than the Underwater Thrills: Swimming with Sharks blog. So, why is it that a shark blog was able to track down some legitimate information about this story, while a media giant seemed to be incapable of looking past a overly-sensational depiction of the story? My opinion is that NBC’s Today show was simply looking for a shock and awe story, so journalistic responsibility was cast aside for some good old fashioned fear, which really seems to draw in an audience, for some reason.
“Monster” media spreads (unnecessary) fear off Queensland coast
by TheDorsalFin on Oct.24, 2009, under Shark Misrepresentation
The Courier-Mail recently posted a story titled, Monster shark spreads fear off Queensland coast, focusing on a supposed "monster" white shark, which is so large that it was able to nearly bite a 3m (approximately 10′) white shark "in half" (with two bites on alternating sides, that is). The 3m shark was bitten after it was "snared on a baited drumline." The Courier-Mail posted this picture of the 3m white shark with the bite marks from the larger shark. The article goes on to estimate the size of this "monster" to be 5m (approximately 16.5′) or more. The article also refers to the shark as a "giant" great white, when not repeatedly referring to it as a "monster shark."
Let’s take a step back into reality, shall we? 5m is not outside of the range of what would generally be considered a normal length for an adult white shark. It is hardly a "giant," relatively speaking, when it comes to white sharks. So, who is spreading the fear about a monster off the coast of Queensland? Is it the actual shark or the over-the-top sensationalized reporting about the shark?

Believe it or not, this is just a wild animal. It's not actually a monster.
The article goes on to discuss the controversial topic of shark nets. Aside from the unnecessary sensationalism, one thing about the article that did strike me as interesting was that it mentioned that Vic Hislop (great white shark "hunter") does not support the use of shark nets due to the overall damage they cause to the marine environment, and that he supports methods to "scare away sharks rather than capture and kill them." This comes as a bit of surprise considering some of Hislop’s statements about sharks, which were featured in a recent Edit International article.
National Geographic joining in on unnecessary sensationalism on YouTube?
by TheDorsalFin on Oct.09, 2009, under Shark Misrepresentation
The official National Geographic YouTube Channel posted a video today documenting a rescue effort to help an injured sand tiger shark. The approximately 10′ (3m) female sand tiger had a fishing gaff embedded in her throat.
While the video itself plays on the drama and danger of the situation, it still manages to do a fairly good job of avoiding portraying the shark in a negative manner. Unfortunately, it seems that whoever wrote the description of this (otherwise shark-conscious) video simply could not resist the urge to add some negative hype. The video description currently reads…
A rescue team performs emergency surgery on a MAN-EATING Sand Tiger Shark – but they have to catch it first.
Is it really necessary (or even accurate) to refer to a sand tiger shark as “man-eating?” Sand tigers are generally regarded as being non-aggressive around humans and simply do not have a history of being “man-eaters.” While this kind of over-the-top hype seems commonplace among The Discovery Channel’s recent shark-related programming, I still expect better from National Geographic.
The Daily Star really outdoes itself with this one
by TheDorsalFin on Sep.29, 2009, under Shark Misrepresentation

The Daily Star deserves an award!
Congratulations, The Daily Star, you are truly special!
Note: It is generally accepted that the common thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus) is not considered to be aggressive toward or dangerous to humans, although divers are cautioned to treat thresher sharks with respect (this is a general rule with all aquatic life). Injuries (non-decapitating ones) to divers have been documented as a result of being struck by the thresher’s whip-like tail, which can occur if the shark is provoked.
Sensationlism and misrepresentation at its worst
by TheDorsalFin on Sep.07, 2009, under Opinions in the media, Shark Misrepresentation
And the winner (or is it loser?) is…ContactMusic." Why is Contact Music reporting a story about sharks in the first place?" you might ask. Well, it’s Steven Spielberg related news, of course. He directed that shark movie back in ’75. What was it called again? Oh yes, “Jaws.” That’s the one. Hence, any story regarding great white sharks should automatically be associated with Spielberg (in the eyes of some media outlets, at least).

Real-life great white sharks, like this one and the ones recently spotted near Chatham, are often times confused with the large, fake, mechanical shark featured in the movie, Jaws, by some media outlets.
ContactMusic’s article, “Jaws sightings close Massachusetts Beaches,” is about as utterly ridiculous as they come. Just to clarify the headline, multiple sightings of great white sharks near the coastline are what prompted the closing of several Chatham beaches, not sightings of the movie Jaws. The article goes so far as to say that the recent white shark sightings near Chatham, Massachusetts are "terrifying residents of nearby Martha’s Vineyard" (where Jaws was filmed). Say what? Was there any reporting done to substantiate the terror has fallen upon the residents of Martha’s Vineyard? It seems that the good people of Martha’s Vineyard wouldn’t be too fazed by white shark sightings, considering that there have been white sharks reported around the Vineyard repeatedly in recent years. I guess the white sharks around Chatham are more fear-inducing than the ones that were in closer proximity to Martha’s Vineyard in the past.
Thanks for spreading unnecessary fear, ContactMusic. Now, back to reality.