I was watching Media Watch last night, to discover that something I’d been paying attention to in the news was completely off. I had heard from various places that some kind of animal activist had said the polar bear in a German Zoo, named Knut, should be executed because its mother had rejected it. I thought this was weird, coming from an activist, but I accepted it just as truth – who would doubt it when it was being reported by so many organisations?
“A baby polar bear that won hearts around the world has made a very public debut at a German Zoo. Knut hit the headlines last week when animal rights activists called for his execution and that sparked international outrage.” (Channel Ten, News, 24th March, 2007) –> From Media Watch website
Media Watch however said differently. Frank Albrecht, the “activist” was simply drawing a comparison between Knut’s case, and another earlier on.
“Frank Albrecht had taken legal action against Leipzig Zoo for putting down another motherless cub.He lost, when the court accepted the zoo’s argument that raising the cub by human hand would be against the law of nature.
So Frank Albrecht raised the obvious parallels between the Leipzig cub and Knut. Frank Albrecht was saying that to be consistent with the court decision, the Berlin Zoo would have to kill Knut.
He wasn’t actually suggesting that Knut be put down.
“I never did. I am an animal welfarist. I believe that a bear has a right to life, from the moment that it is in the care of humans, is healthy and able to survive,” – Frank Albrecht” (Media Watch: Look Out Knut…It’s A Zoo Out There, 2 April 2007)
I found it very interesting how Media Watch had picked up on it. It shows that a simple human interest story (which would probably usually just stay in the local area) was blown out of proportion. Also, there’s the issue of translation. Albrecht did not speak English, hence the majority of newspapers would have obtained a secondary quote – made by someone other than the man himself.
