January 09, 2004
Overblown Media Circus
I waited to post my personal thoughts about the media (over)coverage of Steve Irwin's croc demo with his son. I wanted to determine if my feelings were based on blind fan devotion or if I really felt, in my heart, that I was being objective.
As a pediatric nurse, my first thought is always for the welfare of the child.
That said, here's where I stand.
Five years ago, did the media jump on the Irwins when Bindi was taken into enclosures? No. Is the hoopla over this incident a wee bit gender related? Possibly. I mean, they take a little girl in there...no big deal. But, a baby boy? Gasp! Could it be that people are still placing higher value on boys?
I think there's more to this. I think it's all about lack of perspective and - more importantly - money.
- Steve's up for Aussie of the Year.
- Increasing popularity of the show in Australia has made some people - think Graham Webb and other croc farmers - very unhappy and very uncomfortable. Rising popularity means a larger platform for Steve's anti-croc farm stance. Steve gets more airtime, these croc farms are then under intense scrutiny and pressure. Webb and his friends would love to see the Croc Hunter out of business.
- The Irwins have plans to keep expanding the zoo...and there are plenty of people who don't want them to be able to do so.
I can't say as I'm surprised that this has happened at this point. I'm just surprised that the press from this has continued on so long. And, that people are buying into the hype. You don't have to be a fan of the man to think reasonably.
The first article published about this bore the title "Croc Hunter's Baby Makes Debut." Numerous republishing of the same article led to titles such as "Crikey! Steve Irwin Takes Baby To Crocodile Feeding," "Stunt Embroils Irwin in Political Row," and "Croc Hunter's Latest Stunt." Uh...what was the last one? He's a high energy person. He wrangles wildlife. Those aren't stunts. That's his life.
It makes me very sad to think that Steve and Terri might have to start living their lives differently because public opinion (swayed by increasingly inflammatory headlines) may impact their ability to raise their family, spread the word of conservation, and work with wildlife as they've always done. They are continually in the presence of wildlife. That is their world. Exposing their children to this world from the earliest opportunity builds familiarity, comfort, and respect - for the animals and the inherent risks.
I think, too, that people have taken this out of context. Their perception is skewed in terms of what the Irwin family's life is like. The Irwins live in a zoo, surrounded by crocodiles and a variety of other animals. This is their life. They weren't behaving like some Australians or tourists who've decided to go for a swim in a river or stream, ignoring croc warning signs, and end up in danger. They were in a controlled environment. A place they call home.
Steve also knows his crocs well. Did he pick Agro? No. He picked a less aggressive croc, one he knew would be placcid enough to handle while his son was in his arms. The fact is, crocodiles are slowest on land.
Looking at the photo, the angle of the camera did not effectively show the distance between Steve and the croc. Nor did any of the shots show the other people in the enclosure, watching Steve and Murray (the croc.) There are ALWAYS others present in the enclosure during a feeding demo.
I'd have been shocked if he'd been holding Baby Bob while handling venomous snakes. Much more dangerous and volatile. But, he wasn't. He was working with a more docile croc, in a controlled environment, surrounded by many people, securely cradling his child into his side.
Trying to put the event into context, I thought about things people do in their every day lives.
How often do you see people loading their kids onto the back of a bicycle. Babies don't wear helmets. No. They're strapped into a special car seat for the bike. More people do that more often than Steve taking his baby into the croc enclosure. How many times do you see people loading their kids into their cars, closing the doors, hopping in themselves, and then lighting a cigarette? It happens every day.
What about people who have snakes, dogs, and other animals in their homes? Or people who own horses? How often do they put the baby in the Snugli and run out to feed the horses or dogs? One swift kick from the horse or a lunge from an angry dog and that baby gets hurt. Do kids play in the yard while their parents are mowing or using a weed whacker? Oh yeah. And, you should see some of the injuries and deaths I've seen from accidents involving mowers and weed whackers. You don't want to know.
I also thought of this in terms of me and my kids, too. Would I take my kids in to a croc enclosure? Of course not! I don't work with crocs. Would I bring my kids to the hospital with me if I could? You betcha! I want them to understand that hospitals aren't big scary places where people only go when they are dying or hurting. People go to the hospital to feel better. Some people would call that crazy. "There are sick people there. There are needles!" Do kids go to work with parents who own metal and machine shops? Yeah. What about the machines and slivers of metal? The noise?
Then there was the comparison to Michael Jackson. The difference here is that NOBODY dangles a baby over a balcony unless they're handing the child to a fireman or other rescue worker. Steve didn't dangle his child above the croc as potential bait. His baby was tucked in the crook of his arm, close to his body - not held with one arm, face covered by the other hand holding a scarf, with a railing between them. One baby was small enough to be cradled, the other was larger and wiggly. One was held by a twig....the other held by a tree trunk. That comparison to Jackson just doesn't wash, folks. Apples and.....well, a vanilla bean.
The reason this story is big news is because there's big money involved. The zoo expansion, the anti-croc farming message, and the conservation movement all stand to gain momentum as Steve and Terri grow in popularity. To many groups, this spells disaster for their interests.
It's news because people, without thinking for themselves or without placing the people and events into context, are led by another overblown media circus.
And, because people want Steve out of business.
Posted by DaGoddess at January 9, 2004 11:41 AMI agree that the media coverage has been overblown, that Irwin is a skilled handler, and that Irwin's livelihood shouldn't be adversely impacted. I like Steve Irwin.
But I also think that this was an incredibly stupid stunt that Irwin shouldn't repeat.
A 5-week old baby isn't learning any lessons from this. Irwin used the baby as a prop for his showmanship. These are valuable lessons for a child living in a zoo and near such animals. But a 5-week old? I don't think so.
It was interesting to listen Jack Hanna recently reccount the equally adept animal handlers that he has known personally who are without life or limb because the animal did the unexpected.
Posted by: DaveS at January 9, 2004 12:36 PMMy main concern about this stunt wasn't so much the croc being there, as the way that baby is just dangling there. His head is unsupported, and I don't think that's a very secure hold he has on him. That was just the first thing that came to my mind when I saw the pic. Accidents do happen. I didn't post about it, but I thought the stunt itself was not that big a deal all things considered, just not too bright.
Posted by: JaxVenus at January 9, 2004 12:58 PMI can't speak for Australian news outlets, but this making the rounds in America has very little to do with politics/zookeeping/croc farming in America.
A wild animal is a wild animal is a wild animal. Siggy and Roy learned that the hard way. No one, no matter how skilled a handler they are, knows when a primal predatory urge might kick in. A dog is a domestic animal, as is a horse. Either of those animals would need something out of the ordinary to set it off. And while zoo animals aren't exactly the same as their brethren in the wild, they're still a good deal more unpredictable than a household pet.
And while you may be right about children living in a zoo (I mean, hell, how many people decided to go for a quick drive down the block with baby wedged between themselves and the steering wheel), I'd have to agree with Dave S on this one. There's nothing a 5 month old can learn from this experience.
Posted by: ken at January 9, 2004 01:04 PMi've worked with both common and uncommon exotics since i was a kid...can you get hurt? yup. and the great majority of the time it is because you get cocky...i don't think steve was being cocky - he is very aware of what he is doing.
i let my kids play with "dangerous" critters...and you shoud hear the screams...it is always supervised, always with understanding that "you can get hurt"...a few nips and stings later, they UNDERSTAND the danger - not unrealistic "its a snake or whatever other critter, kill it" but rational understanding of the risk...guess i'm a bad guy, 'cause i ddn't see it as a big deal.
funny, some of the people that hollered when i let my daughter handle a slightly venomous octopus at two let their kid ride quads and dirt bikes (without helmets at that)...crazy.
Thanks for reminding me that there are two sides to every story.
Posted by: TW at January 9, 2004 01:45 PMI love ya' Joanie, but you're wrong. I agree with DaveS and ken. I would never knowingly expose my kids to a threat even a fraction as bad what Steve did. That includes smoking in a car, putting them on the back of a bike without a helmet, etc. Just because there are stupid parents out there who do worse, it's not an excuse for Irwin to do what he did.
Posted by: Mike at January 9, 2004 02:59 PMFinally a voice of reason! I totally agree with you on this whole situation. I too noticed the way the headlines went from a positive slant (Croc Hunter's Son Debuts!) to a negative slant (Croc Hunter Dangles Son Over Hungry Croc!).
I'd only add one more thought to yours: My kids got me hooked on Steve. He annoyed the heck out of me for a long time but he grows on ya I guess. Anyways, after watching him over the years there's one thing that I've learned about the croc demos. If the croc in question isn't TOTALLY focused on what's in Steve's hand for food, he wastes no time getting out of the way. He knows that once that croc is focused on the food, the danger to himself and those around him is greatly diminished. He knows his animals and he knows how to read their body language.
As far as how the baby is being held without neck support, I've seen nurses handle babies in much the same way. I'll never forget being a brand new mother and being appalled at the way the nurses handled my son. Fortunately, I learned quickly that babies aren't the fragile little beings we often treat them as. Think of it this way...that baby is safer in his father's arms in a croc enclosure than many children are in their beds in their own homes. I wish the public would become this outraged at parents who TRULY abuse their children.
Like you, I'm devastated that this fiasco may very well affect their conservation work and the way they deal with the public. I've always felt that there's some special karma in the world reserved for someone who is so passionate about such fearsome creatures. I sure hope Steve starts receiving some of that good karma...especially now.
Posted by: Chablis at January 9, 2004 03:31 PMJoanie- I agree with you 110%. It's all context. Even if I knew nothing about the conflicts between the Irwins and the croc farm folk, I know Steve Irwin is a professional who would not endanger anyone, let alone his child.
Who are those pitching the biggest fit? Those who stand to gain from any problems that come to the Irwins and their zoo because of it, and those who have the self-righteous stick up their ass for the scandal du jour.
Can you tell I have strong feelings about this?
I watched a video clip of this, and I gotta disagree with you on this one. I didn't have a problem with him holding the baby while feeding the croc. Like you say, the baby wasn't in any real danger that I could see.
I did have a problem with him placing the baby on the ground and "walking" him around in front of the croc while the croc was eating. Now granted, the angle of the camera made it difficult to tell the distance between the baby & the croc, but still. That was going a bit too far.
Posted by: rita at January 10, 2004 07:18 AM"A dog is a domestic animal, as is a horse. Either of those animals would need something out of the ordinary to set it off."
domestic or wild, an animal doesn't need ANYTHING to set it off. just adopt a cat, and then try to tell me why it runs from room to room. no reason whatsoever.
Posted by: samkit at January 10, 2004 06:31 PMI too like Steve, and in general terms agree with you. However, as a parent I was dismayed that an infant, the age of baby Irwin, was being handled in the manner that Steve was handling his son. I would be upset if I saw a parent carry an infant in that manner at any time. Things you care about you usually handle with more care. Or at least I do.
Posted by: Cinders at January 14, 2004 09:20 AMYou raise some excellent points. I also believe that Steve's son was not in life-threatening danger. My main concern with Steve's behavior is the monkey-see monkey-do effect. How many ignorant folk might see what Steve did and imitate it? Steve is a leader and people try to emulate his behaviors, good and bad. Does that mean he shouldn't run around in croc enclosures? No. But it does mean that he needs to be constantly aware of his public actions.
Posted by: Becky at January 14, 2004 10:08 AM