29 April 2010

Wildlife documentaries infringe animals' privacy

I'm sorry but this really did make me inwardly say, 'he just cannot be serious': Wildlife documentaries infringe animals' privacy, says report | Environment | The Guardian: "'We can never really know if animals are giving consent, but they do often engage in forms of behaviour which suggest they'd rather not encounter humans,'"
I think that he should look up the word 'privacy' in a dictionary. I'm pretty certain it can't, by definition apply to natterjack toads, for example. There is a difference between 'privacy' and 'vulnerability'. Why would humans want privacy? Are those concerns that a squirrel could have?

No comments:

Review: It happened in Hell

 It seemed to me that this book set out to do two main things. One was to demonstrate that so many of our notions of what goes under the lab...