Sloppy Journalism or Crappy Headline?

July 1st, 2008

I was excited to view this slideshow from the Chicago Tribune, ostensibly about animals who were once thought extinct now reappearing in the wild.

The header for the slideshow reads:

“Reappearing in the Wild: Creatures once thought extinct now have a second chance.”

Which would lead one to believe that it was about… I dunno, presumed-extinct creatures reappearing in the wild? However of the animals listed:

South China Tigers – considered extinct, most recent photo proved to be a hoax (not reappearing in the wild)
Black Footed Ferrets - Have been reintroduced via breeding program
African Manatees (image shown is NOT of an African manatee) these are considered extinct, though “some scientists argue that this is not the case.” WTH? (not reappearing in the wild)
Ivory Billed Woodpecker – considered extinct, though someone claims to have spotted one, though scientists now think that spotting may have been a case of mistaken identity. Again – WTH? I think I saw Bigfoot, but maybe I didn’t, and some scientists think I was drunk on tequila shooters that night. This passes for reporting? (not reappearing in the wild)
Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly – has been reintroduced to the wild, and has a really pretty picture, to boot.
Attenborough’s long-beaked echidna – thought extinct, was rediscovered in 2007
Red Wolf - highly endangered, breeding programs are helping it to survive in the wild
Baiji Dolphin – A 6-week journey in their habitat failed to spot even one of these rare dolphins, leading them to be considered extinct. However “hope was rekindled a year later when scientists claimed they may have spotted one.” *sigh* (not reappearing in the wild)
Miss Waldron’s red colobus monkey – considered extinct, however photos “may prove the species still exists” (not reappearing in the wild)
Quagga mare – is extinct, and some guy is trying to breed “Quagga-like zebras” Someone trying to breed something similar is NOT the same as them reappearing in the wild. (not reappearing in the wild)
Tasmanian tiger – extinct. Someone replicated one of their genes in a mouse. “raising the long-term possibility of bringing the animal back to life.” Interesting, but NOT “reappearing” by a long shot. (not reappearing in the wild)

So… seven of the eleven animals discussed show absolutely no concrete evidence of reappearing in the wild. Was this the most badly researched slideshow feature of all time, or was this reporter the subject of some kind of crappy-headline malfeasance by an obtuse editor-person at the Tribune? Whichever, it’s sloppy as hell of the paper to publish this under that header.

Mood : 47 minutes to go

Filed under: crap headlines, media sucks | Comments (3)

3 Responses to “Sloppy Journalism or Crappy Headline?”

Heidi on July 1, 2008 4:32 pm
Maybe there was a Stretch This Headline competition? I would’ve gone with a picture of not-caged animals, I think.
SuperBadGirl on July 1, 2008 8:25 pm
Doesn’t that last one look like a joke/Photoshop animal anyway? But yeah, now that you mention it, several of the pictures were of animals in captivity (and those that weren’t may have been hoaxes…)
Heidi on July 2, 2008 2:02 am
Were there any of them that were actually alive and in the wild other than the butterflies? Even the ones that looked like they were in the wild seemed to be in some kind of nature park.