Big Plover (1 Viewer)

[CornishExile]

Sorry, the thread title is a gratuitous and misleading one, but couldn't leave it alone.

Endemol, the reality TV producers, are going to produce a show for ITV this winter in which viewers can vote for which endangered species they want monies raised by the show to go towards.

A good or a bad thing? Reducing conservation to an ego-massaging pick'n'mix? Raising the profile of threatened species? etc

Full story >>here<<

ce

 

[Tyke]

It's a good question.
Endemol have a very profitable formula-all those phone calls rake it in. But they do create a mass audience for their programmes.
WWF , who seem to be the vehicle for delivering the conservation-are big into corporate sponsorship..and not short of criticism for the conflict of interest that produces from time to time:-

http://www.savingiceland.org/node/242?PHPSESSID=ec2a7e79

On balance I suppose I would have to say more money for conservation of threatened species is a good thing ( this competitive bid & vote formula has saved some beautiful old buildings in Griff Reece Jones TV programme)

I would like to know if WWF actually get most of it's funds into real conservation, rather than comfortable lifestyles for it's staff-and whether their programmes are successful though.

Colin

 

[bitterntwisted]

Very good question, this, CE. I can see both sides of both sides and may have to come down firmly on the fence.

Watching "Restoration", I kept wishing all the buildings could be saved, which I guess is the point. Hopefully this programme will promote similar sentiment and hence will be a good thing - people will want no species to become extinct as a result of human action or inaction. But if it even slightly suggests that some species must inevitably be allowed to demise at our hands, then no, it would be a bad thing.

Such a shame that we can't vote for Big Brother contestants to be fed to endangered species.

Graham

 

[colonelboris]

Ah, but after the last BB snafu, if one of the other two species doesn't go extinct, then surely Endemol would be sued as people didn't pay their money for that ugly duck to be saved when they voted for the cute fluffy thing...
And what happens if they give all the money to one species and the other two croak it, only to find they'd miscounted the votes? Do they then support the cloning program to make it extant again?
It's a difficult world out there...

 

[CornishExile]

Something else I'd forgotten to flag up at the start as an issue; the species to feature in "Extinct" are all flagship species - the showy, colourful, readily identifiable species the TV-watching public can easily relate to. I'm not surprised at that, of course - but what a shame they haven't got an amphibian in the list. Or a fish. Or a cetacean. Or a mollusc. Or a mammal that isn't big and well-known (any of the long list of small, critically endangered marsupials, anyone?), or a bird species that isn't a big colourful pretty polly - let's hear it for the untelegenic species. Let's hear it for the molluscs!

I wish there was a wildcard entry that wasn't determined by Endemol or WWF.

ce

From Times article : "The animals featured in the programme are the Bengal tiger, mountain gorilla, giant panda, Asian elephant, polar bear, orang-utan, leatherback turtle and hyacinth macaw."

 

[CornishExile]

Come to think of it, I've just twigged Polar Bear is on the list. If the programme makers are planning on conserving that, there's the small issue of stopping the global warming that's completely bollixing their ecosystem. Otherwise, what exactly do they plan on doing to conserve it?

I vote for the Polar Bear. :t:

ce

 

[bitterntwisted]

Let's hear it for the molluscs!

Tenner for the first person to stand outside the BB house with that on a placard.