Sergent’s message was conservation-oriented and focused on how sharks have more to fear from humans, than we have to fear from them, based on the number of sharks killed annually by humans. However, that didn’t stop reporter, Bob Schaper, from interjecting an utterly ignorant statement into his interview with Sergent, which basically undermined the very message Sergent was trying to convey…

“Let’s face it. There are some sharks that like to gnaw on you, and, you know, just like drag you down and eat you, and chomp on you.”

There really isn’t any excuse for statements like this in what is supposed to be an objective news report. Not only does the statement reflect a sense of bad reporting, it is counterproductive to the intended message that Sergent was trying to communicate. The sheer lack of common sense of the statement makes me wonder if Schaper was playing “devil’s advocate” and began the statement with something to the effect of, “What do you say to people who think…” and that part was edited out. That scenario would at least make some sense.

The No Shark Fin Pledge discourages the serving and consumption of shark fin products

In a press release from The Humane Society of the United States, it is being reported that renowned chef and author, Alice Waters, has signed The International Humane Society’s No Shark Fin Pledge, which reads…

I pledge to help protect the world’s oceans by committing never to consume or serve shark fin or any product containing shark fin.

This move is an about-face for Waters, who earlier this year was quoted as saying, “I’d have Cecilia Chang make me shark fin soup,” at a Q&A session in Connecticut, during a “Food for Thought” forum, in which she was asked what her last meal would be. What prompted this change of heart? Well, Waters is quoted in the Humane Society Press Release as saying,

“Not long ago I learned that every year tens of millions of sharks, their fins brutally sliced off, are thrown back into the ocean to die, and that many shark species are now seriously threatened. I support Humane Society International’s efforts to end this unsustainable practice, and I encourage other chefs and culinary industry leaders to do the same.”

While Waters has come under fire from some for her “not long ago” revelation, I think it’s only fair to give Ms. Waters the benefit of the doubt here. While certainly she realized that shark fins do not grow on trees, not everybody out there is aware of the practice of finning. I have come across plenty of people who are shocked to find out that sharks are hauled up only to have their fins removed and then have the rest of their body dumped back in the sea. If nothing else, it’s nice to see that Waters has had a change of heart and is encouraging others to steer away from shark fin dishes. Another bit of encouraging news, from the press release, is that “a number of chefs have developed faux shark fin dishes to satisfy consumer demand without the attending ecological devastation.”

News of Alice Waters’ No Shark Fin Pledge also appeared in the New York Times’ Diner’s Journal blog.

The video above is one of the shark conservation Public Service Announcements (PSA) that will be run during Discovery Channel’s Shark Week. If you’ve witnessed any of Discovery Channel’s promotional media for Shark Week, you’ll notice a stark contrast between the above message and the fear-based ad campaign. The PSA showed up today on The Ocean Conservancy’s YouTube Channel and is listed as being presented by The Discovery Channel and The Ocean Conservancy. While I fully support The Ocean Conservancy’s efforts, I find it hard to buy into Discovery’s commitment to shark conservancy, when they continue to exploit and misrepresent sharks for their own personal gains.

In light of Discovery Channel’s recent fear-based ad campaign, I thought I’d revisit Save Our Seas Foundation‘s “Rethink The Shark” ad campaign from 2007. The award-winning ads (based on a well-known scene from Jaws, no less) are proof-positive that an audience-gripping ad campaign can be created, while still maintaining a conservationist-minded theme. The ads were created by advertising agency, Saatchi & Saatchi Capetown. Three ads were created, all of them with the same lead-in as the ad posted above. The other two ads ended with a kite and a toaster.

I love how the ads take the fear and familiarity of Jaws and turn it around to increase awareness about just how rare fatal shark attacks are.

Juvenile Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias)

It’s refreshing to see a news article about a white shark without any references to Jaws, monsters, killers, etc. It’s also refreshing to read about responsible fishermen respecting the sharks that they’ve caught and safely releasing them back to their environment. In fact, upon visiting Bowman Bluewater’s website, I was pleasantly surprised to see that they are sponsoring a catch and release mako tournament in which the proceeds of the tournament will go to the Pfleger Institute of Environmental Research, St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, and Casting for Recovery. The proceeds donated to the Pfleger Institute of Environmental Research will be used for research on Southern California mako sharks.

The pie is available at Mitchell’s Fish Market restaurants. It consists of butter fudge ripple ice cream, peanut butter, Oreo cookie crumbs and fudge. Shark Fin Pie stands so tall that a slice of it resembles the appearance of a shark’s dorsal fin, hence the name.

Now, all we have to do is convince shark fin soup consumers to switch over to Shark Fin Pie.

Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus)

A whale shark that has been frequently observed over the past month in an area under the Vaca Cut Bridge in Marathon, Florida, recently received some help from local veterinarian Doug Mader, according to the Florida Keys Keynoter.

Mader, who had never seen a whale shark in the wild, jumped in the water with the 7.5 meter (25′) animal and cut loose monofilament fishing line that the shark’s caudal fin had become entangled in. According to Mader, fishing line entanglement can lead to loss of limbs in marine animals due to cutting off blood supply. According to the article, Mader was able to free the shark of the fishing line within “15-20 seconds.” Mader was unable to remove the fish hook from the shark’s caudal fin, which will eventually rust and fall out. Mader also noted that the shark’s caudal fin also had propeller damage, but that he believed the shark would heal just fine.

While whale sharks are typically found in deeper water than that under the Vaca Cut Bridge, Mader suspected that the strong currents and thick plankton are providing the whale shark with a steady food source. While Mader encouraged people to view the shark from the Vaca Cut Bridge, he recommends that people not to enter the water to approach the animal.

Creativity-Online’s recent article about the promotional website, Frenzied Waters, for the Discovery Channel’s upcoming Shark Week is filled with references to instilling fear into Shark Week’s potential audience. I don’t consider Creativity-Online’s article to be irresponsible journalism, as they are merely reporting on what the Discovery Channel and Campfire have cooked up to promote the upcoming Shark Week. In fact, while Campfire’s promotional website does nothing but perpetuate negative stereotypes about sharks being man-eaters (and apparently, dog-eaters), they are in the business of creating media campaigns that capture attention and were hired to create a fear-based horror-themed campaign. In that respect, Campfire’s campaign for Shark Week sets out to do exactly what they were hired to do. To Campfire’s credit, from a design and technical standpoint, their site is impressively put together, regardless of the content.

That leaves us with the Discovery Channel. According to the article, Campfire Co-Founder/ECD Mike Monello said that the Discovery Channel wanted to, “tap into people’s fear of sharks and bring back the fear of Shark Week.”

Now, why would I give a free-pass to Campfire for creating a horror-based entertainment vehicle, but then turn-around and call out Discovery Channel over it? It’s simple, I expect more/better from Discovery Channel, because it is the worldwide leader in non-fiction programming. Discovery Channel is marketed as a learning/educational themed channel, while Campfire’s philosophy is quite a bit different. According to Discovery’s corporate site, “John Hendricks launched Discovery Channel in 1985 with a mission to satisfy curiosity and make a difference in people’s lives by providing the highest-quality, nonfiction content, services and products that entertain, engage and enlighten.” Is creating an unnecessary sense of fear towards sharks really “enlightening” the audience? People who watch programs on Discovery Channel do so under the assumption that they are watching an educational work of non-fiction. Focusing a marketing campaign around sharks attacking humans for programming that is expected to be educational is just plain irresponsible and seems to go against their Corporate Social Responsibility statement, in my opinion.

While I won’t be see ignorant as to not understand the fascination of people with the predatory aspect of sharks, I still do not understand why Discovery Channel feels the need to perpetuate fear rather than respect of this aspect of sharks. At the end of the day, I guess the marketing experts at the Discovery Channel concluded that tapping into fear could earn them more advertising dollars than educating viewers would. At the rate that worldwide shark populations are decreasing, I would think that Discovery Channel would see that their “cash cow” is at risk of running dry. Perhaps, it might be a good idea to focus on conservation rather than fear. Apparently, that wasn’t in the marketing plan for Shark Week this year.

The Orlando Sentinel also featured a brief opinion piece on “Getting over Jaws.” The article mentions possible tougher restrictions on killing certain shark species in Florida and also mentions the shark attack survivors lobbying for a ban on finning.