It isn’t until the end that The Times reveals that Tilly could be protected by SeaWorld from fair punishment for his crime because he is the aquarium/amusement park’s “largest, oldest male and he has sired 14 calves — making him the park’s top stud.”
So in biological and economic terms Tilly is essentially one of the animal kingdom’s most valuable defendants.
This is going to be the trial of the century. I cannot wait!
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
This is the best moment to be in journalism (25)
The WSJ editorial page hits rock bottom (19)
A backgrounder for understanding the storm that hit Moore, Oklahoma
Is the ‘chilling effect’ real?
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113219/doj-seizure-ap-records-raises-question-chilling-effect-real
One year ago four journalists were brutally murdered in the bloodiest attack on the press in Mexico’s drug war. For those left behind the pain — and the threats — continue
50 years of foreign reporting from the NYRB
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Yeah, or Jack Webb:
This is the city, Orlando, Florida. Amid the bustling tourism industry, hard-working stiffs like Tilly the Whale are just trying to get by. Performing tricks in an undersized pool for sunburned Midwestern tourists can make a guy snap. When they do, I go to work, I carry a badge.
#1 Posted by Chris Preovolos, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 01:57 PM
This is a great--and hilarious--analysis of what happens when the language of human behaviour is applied to animals--wild or domesticated.
Indeed, it is not even appropriate to use the word "attack" to describe an animal encounter with a human being. This, too, anthropomorphizes the animal's behaviour. It would be more biologically accurate to say that the whale "moved against" his trainer. Of course, the headline would be less spectacular, but it would avoid perpetuating myths about the behaviour of such animals--myths which terms such as "killer whale" only further entrench.
The article, however, does pose one question worth asking: was the whale in distress? Of course, this would require some admission on the part of theme park officials--not to mention the paying public--that wild animals, unless at great risk of harm, belong in their natural habitat.
-Anthony Banks
Toronto, Ontario
#2 Posted by Anthony, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 03:25 PM
I'm having a hard time finding the hilarity in any aspect of this story.
#3 Posted by John Callender, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 04:04 PM
While the NY Times deserves criticism, the underlying premise of the story -- that an intelligent mammal may or may not have acted with malice against another mammal (that happened to be a human). Whether or not one is anthropomorphizing or using politically correct terminology is beside the point.
I'm not sure, in fact, what the point of CJR's critique is at all, besides pointing out a somewhat inept attempt at covering a complex and tragic story.
I guess what annoys me most of all is that all it appears to do is criticize, and doesn't provide remedies. How DO we cover that kind of story?
The intelligence and intent of a large, carnivorous marine mammal kept captive for years in a small pool is at issue. The practices of the are at issue. The nature of zoos and captive animals is at issue.
And all you have provided in response to the NYT's dorky article is a heap of snark.
You have wasted my time. Blogging at its worst. Further evidence of the uselessness of the chattering class.
#4 Posted by Fred Frounfelter, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 04:11 PM
Two correx:
"While the NY Times deserves criticism, the underlying premise of the story -- that an intelligent mammal may or may not have acted with malice against another mammal (that happened to be a human) -- is compelling."
"The intelligence and intent of a large, carnivorous marine mammal kept captive for years in a small pool is at issue. The practices of the amusement park are at issue. The nature of zoos and captive animals is at issue."
#5 Posted by Fred Frounfelter, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 04:14 PM
Not clear whether this post is criticizing the Times' piece or not, but in its defense...
The quote from Richard Ellis was in reference to the whale's pulling Brancheau into the pool, not the whale's killing of her, (as in, he meant to pull her in, but not necessarily to drown her) which seems to be implied here. On a much more general point, though, this was a story someone had to write, whether its premise is tired or its language too anthropomorphic (all language is) or not. Anyone reading stories about the whale yesterday had to wonder about its motives or lack thereof - or at least I did - and I'm glad someone (Damien Cave) took the time to ask experts about it. And I'm willing to give Cave the benefit of the doubt and say he must have been well aware of the most of the funny aspects of the piece as he wrote it.
#6 Posted by Matthew Berger, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 04:36 PM
I was in town when Tilly killed the homeless guy. Think I wrote something about it. I remember the orca got a pass on that one 'cause the dude wasn't a trainer; he snuck in after dark. The experts explained that Tilly probably thought of the man as a "toy" and held him under without realizing he would drown.
I never bought that story. No evidence to offer, but something tells me these creatures, whose brains are four times the size of ours and who display pretty complex social interaction, play and feeding strategies in the wild, are not very much like giant, misunderstood (human) children.
#7 Posted by Edward Ericson, CJR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 04:42 PM
I feel very sad about Dawn and Tilly, both of them are victims. I believe Dawn love them with great passion but I just don't understand why we human keep such intelligent animals behind bars, what they need is freedom, they can swim 160 miles a day in the sea and we keep them for our amusement. I dare to say that we human are the most terrifying virus distroying the earth, no other creatures will do!
#8 Posted by thomas fung, CJR on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 01:45 PM
Try out Alexander Cockburn for size:
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/60217,news-comment,news-politics,alexander-cockburn-tillikum-the-slave-killer-whale-seaworld-chose-to-fight-back-tilikum
"Call him, just for now, Spartacus. He was two years when the slavers captured him in 1982 and hauled him off to the little town of Victoria, on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, in the far Canadian west. And there he met his fellow slaves, Nootka and Haida. Day after day in slave school they learned their tricks. Day after day, they did their act for the paying customers. And then, on February 20, 1991, in the tank operated by Sealand of the Pacific, the three struck back at their captors. "
*rolls eyes*
#9 Posted by murph, CJR on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 02:50 PM