Knut and star animal ‘brands’ for zoos: good or bad?
I suppose this kind of follows on from the post on zoos and children’s literature ( http://zoofunding.wordpress.com/2007/04/11/zoos-and-childrens-literature/)
I guess it has been a long time since any other zoo animal has become as famous as Knut (maybe Goldie the escaped eagle at London in the 70′s…?). On the one hand, a celebrity animal must boost a zoo’s gate and, carefully managed as in this case ( see story link below) could bring massive revenue from merchandising. It really is a little like Paddington or Pooh ( …why is it always bears??), although Knut will of course grow up, grow old and eventually die, whilst Yogi Bear won’t.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/03/europe/bear.php
But do we want the public to romanticise and anthromorphosise a species way beyond the reality of its wild nature? Do we want conservation driven zoos to become brand managers? Do we want to be accused of manipulating an animal as a cash generating media star?
Perhaps there is a subtle way to get the best of all possible worlds? If Knut’s celebrity were used very explicitly to constantly and specifically convey his species or a wider conservation message, and if the funds generated were largely or entirely dedicated to relevant conservation programmes, would that not complete the circle?
Zoos and aquariums do after all raise money through the public display of fascinating animals. That is why they are able to exist.
The only outstanding questions can be how they display those animals, and what the money raised is used for.
Got something to say?
