ENVS 1020
Newspapers and other articles written for the public is often biased and critical information is often left out. Newspaper companies only write what the public want to hear to sell more of their papers and other information that should have been presented is not. The focus from the actual interview or study is changed to please the reader. This isn’t necessarily wrong, but many times what is important is left out. And although it may not be something the reader wants to read, it is often something the reader needs to read and something that needs to be brought to our attention.
I read a newspaper article on The Vancouver Sun titled: B.C. wildlife needs more protection, study says by Gerry Bellett. It was based on a study titled: On the Edge, British Columbia’s Unprotected Transboundary Species by Michelle Connolly, Keith Ferguson, Susan Pinkus, And Faisal Moola. The study was about transboundary species at risk in British Columbia. 98% of the wildlife in British Columbia are transboundary (Bellett 2010). There are different laws to protect living organisms depending on where you are. Some places allow hunting animals, and in some areas the animals and wildlife are protected and hunting is illegal The problem is that animas do not understand political boundaries and they do not understand that they are protected in some areas and hunted in others (Bellett 2010).
The newspaper article did not change any information or tweak facts to make the article more interesting or appealing to the reader, but there were obvious differences between the article and the actual study itself. The study was obviously more detailed and more facts and statistics were included to prove that transboundary species were at risk. The study explained more clearly what it meant that wildlife was transboundary. Animals migrate across borders and sometimes even live inbetween them because these boundaries are unknown to them. Pollen and seeds are also spread everywhere by insects and animals as they move around from place to place (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). The article however did not explain what it meant to be transboundary and the focus was moved quickly to the main point.
The main point of the article learned towards the legal side of things. The article talked more about recommendations presented to the minister of the environment, and about laws that should be put down in British Columbia to protect the vast amount of species that moved across its borderline. This was also discussed in the study but many different reasons for why this should be done was explained. The study focused on maintaining the diverse ecosystem in British Columbia and talked a lot about the interactions between animals and the biodiversity in the area. The study pointed out that even if only one species of wildlife went extinct, it could effect all the other wildlife in the area because of how they all interacted with each other and needed each other for survival (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). The article did not touch upon the subject of ecosystems and biodiversity.
Reasons for why these species should be protected were also not discussed in the article. We humans benefit greatly from the many different ecosystems around us and the plants and animals do things for us that we could never do ourselves. For example, we could never clean the air and provide clean oxygen like plants do for us. Or clean the water and provide food for the 3 billion people on this planet (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). Without the help of the natural environment we would be left without any raw materials to work with and human kind could come to a fall. The article left out the reasons for why it was so important to protect these species and the focused was moved to the legislative side of things.
The article mentioned three endangered transboundary species in British Columbia. The grizzly bear, linx, and the wolverine. These three animals are very well known and loved, but they’re not the only species that are at risk. Vascular plants, non-vascular plants, birds, insects, molluscs, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles are also at risk (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). The most endangered are the amphibians and reptiles but they weren’t even mentioned in the article because the public holds more interest in the big bears and cute cats. The focus was moved from the most endangered species to other species that would be more of interest to the general public.
The study was a lot more informative and all the facts whether you wanted to hear them or not were presented. There were many more statistics on things and the focus was more towards the importance of preserving the ecosystems that we have. It focused on how we have to think of generations ahead of us and how healthy ecosystems were precious and would benefit us in many different ways. I found that the article skipped over that and talked more about the laws that should be put down and the steps the government was taking to try to protect the wildlife. The article did not change any information or deliberately hide anything from the public but rather just had a different focus to it.
Article: http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/wildlife+needs+more+protection+study+says/3559853/story.html
Primary source: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/2010/On-the-Edge-Sept-2010.pdf
I read a newspaper article on The Vancouver Sun titled: B.C. wildlife needs more protection, study says by Gerry Bellett. It was based on a study titled: On the Edge, British Columbia’s Unprotected Transboundary Species by Michelle Connolly, Keith Ferguson, Susan Pinkus, And Faisal Moola. The study was about transboundary species at risk in British Columbia. 98% of the wildlife in British Columbia are transboundary (Bellett 2010). There are different laws to protect living organisms depending on where you are. Some places allow hunting animals, and in some areas the animals and wildlife are protected and hunting is illegal The problem is that animas do not understand political boundaries and they do not understand that they are protected in some areas and hunted in others (Bellett 2010).
The newspaper article did not change any information or tweak facts to make the article more interesting or appealing to the reader, but there were obvious differences between the article and the actual study itself. The study was obviously more detailed and more facts and statistics were included to prove that transboundary species were at risk. The study explained more clearly what it meant that wildlife was transboundary. Animals migrate across borders and sometimes even live inbetween them because these boundaries are unknown to them. Pollen and seeds are also spread everywhere by insects and animals as they move around from place to place (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). The article however did not explain what it meant to be transboundary and the focus was moved quickly to the main point.
The main point of the article learned towards the legal side of things. The article talked more about recommendations presented to the minister of the environment, and about laws that should be put down in British Columbia to protect the vast amount of species that moved across its borderline. This was also discussed in the study but many different reasons for why this should be done was explained. The study focused on maintaining the diverse ecosystem in British Columbia and talked a lot about the interactions between animals and the biodiversity in the area. The study pointed out that even if only one species of wildlife went extinct, it could effect all the other wildlife in the area because of how they all interacted with each other and needed each other for survival (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). The article did not touch upon the subject of ecosystems and biodiversity.
Reasons for why these species should be protected were also not discussed in the article. We humans benefit greatly from the many different ecosystems around us and the plants and animals do things for us that we could never do ourselves. For example, we could never clean the air and provide clean oxygen like plants do for us. Or clean the water and provide food for the 3 billion people on this planet (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). Without the help of the natural environment we would be left without any raw materials to work with and human kind could come to a fall. The article left out the reasons for why it was so important to protect these species and the focused was moved to the legislative side of things.
The article mentioned three endangered transboundary species in British Columbia. The grizzly bear, linx, and the wolverine. These three animals are very well known and loved, but they’re not the only species that are at risk. Vascular plants, non-vascular plants, birds, insects, molluscs, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles are also at risk (Connolly, Ferguson, Pinkus, Moola 2010). The most endangered are the amphibians and reptiles but they weren’t even mentioned in the article because the public holds more interest in the big bears and cute cats. The focus was moved from the most endangered species to other species that would be more of interest to the general public.
The study was a lot more informative and all the facts whether you wanted to hear them or not were presented. There were many more statistics on things and the focus was more towards the importance of preserving the ecosystems that we have. It focused on how we have to think of generations ahead of us and how healthy ecosystems were precious and would benefit us in many different ways. I found that the article skipped over that and talked more about the laws that should be put down and the steps the government was taking to try to protect the wildlife. The article did not change any information or deliberately hide anything from the public but rather just had a different focus to it.
Article: http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/wildlife+needs+more+protection+study+says/3559853/story.html
Primary source: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/2010/On-the-Edge-Sept-2010.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment