Comments
Geoff_with_a_J t1_iyea0xo wrote
based on my anecdotal survey on people i know who still watch Shark Week, most of them are white dudes named Mike
[deleted] t1_iydqe96 wrote
[removed]
SynthD t1_iydibs9 wrote
It’s a phrasing I’ve seen before, where past articles also cleared it up for anyone confused.
CatFoodBeerAndGlue t1_iydhttt wrote
Maybe read the article before commenting.
>Nor does Shark Week accurately represent experts in this field. One issue is ethnicity: Three of the five most-featured locations on Shark Week are Mexico, South Africa and the Bahamas, but we could count on one hand the number of non-white scientists who we saw featured in shows about their own countries. It was far more common for Discovery to fly a white male halfway around the world than to feature a local scientist.
>Moreover, while more than half of U.S. shark scientists are female, you wouldn’t know this from watching Shark Week. Among people who we saw featured in more than one episode, there were more white male non-scientists named Mike than women of any profession or name.
RecommendsMalazan t1_iydmjuf wrote
I mean, that doesn't make the headline any less nonsensical.
Kinda feels to me like they're throwing that in there as a play on gender politics to try to get more people to read.
HortonHearsTheWho t1_iydrfl4 wrote
You don’t actually have to be of the local ethnicity to be a zoological expert in local fauna. Just like you don’t have to be of a certain race to be an expert in virology, astronomy, etc. Seems weird to insist your scientists fill certain race quotas.
CatFoodBeerAndGlue t1_iyedu6a wrote
Read it again. The white guys named Mike aren't scientists.
Discovery hired more white non-scientists specifically named Mike than they hired female and ethnic actual shark scientists despite their abundance.
Lifesaboxofgardens t1_iydia1z wrote
I was quite literally just pointing out that it is funny to me that white guys named Mike are catching strays in this headline. It was pretty obviously meant to be inflammatory clickbait so it's doing its job, not everything has to be so serious.
MulciberTenebras t1_iydnzo2 wrote
Discovery has been accused in the past of racism/sexism on their shows (in some cases far worse than this).
After the WB merger, plenty of POC and women in high positions at the company were being forced out. And it doesn't take much to see a pattern of what shows they decided to cancel/erase from existence to save money.
Valiantheart t1_iyfe9cr wrote
So we should discount the knowledge of these experts because of a lack of melanin? Is the entire article just ironically racist?
[deleted] t1_iydloz1 wrote
[deleted]
KumagawaUshio t1_iydra49 wrote
What so the issue is they flew in English speakers for a documentary targeted to English speakers rather than use subtitles? how is that a problem.
The Bahamas is a country with a smaller population than a mid size town in some countries so considering how that even in the USA shark specialist scientists aren't that common even in a country with over 80,000 times its population.
alanpardewchristmas t1_iye4z4m wrote
They speak English officially in SA and Bahamas lol
Jackattack736 t1_iydyxol wrote
Lol your point about languages is a bit moot seeing that the official language of The Bahamas is English. Subtitles wouldn't be needed.
As to if there are any Bahamian shark scientists, that I have no idea about
JohnCavil01 t1_iyeteun wrote
You could at least pretend you read the article though.
WalkerSunset t1_iydnvvk wrote
Only reason I watched any of Shark Week was Kari Byron in a bikini on the Mythbusters Shark Week episodes.
Liesthroughisteeth t1_iydh03w wrote
Most of these shows also help spread myths about the danger of sharks, making them out to be much more dangerous than statistics show. In effect these junk shows help demonize an animal where things like catching them and killing them for entertainment and killing them just for their fins has become acceptable.
People are the real danger and the blight on this planet....not the animals.
CorporateSympathizer t1_iydrl99 wrote
>People are the real danger and the blight on this planet....not the animals.
Assigning traits of "innocence" to animals is also flawed though.
Animals can and will exploit their surroundings to the point of exhaustion when given the chance - for example when they're introduced to an environment that hasn't adapted to accomodate them.
gleaming-the-cubicle t1_iyds1w9 wrote
But animals don't actually have the ability to say "wow, we're eating too many of our prey, we better conserve some so they can repopulate"
Valiantheart t1_iyfdxe3 wrote
Animals that depopulate an area move to a new one
RedditRuleViolator t1_iydqbgz wrote
I'm confused about why white and male is spelled out?
EcstatMec t1_iyduzea wrote
Because attacking a demographic is always a good way to get people all riled up (like how nazis constantly claim the world is run by nefarious jews), and "white males" is the one demographic that is universally accepted as okay to attack.
JohnCavil01 t1_iyetpo7 wrote
Or you could instead try reading the article.
I agree the headline is exploiting clickbait tactics - but it makes some valid points if you could be bothered to take a few minutes to read it before getting up on your internet soapbox.
EcstatMec t1_iyeufny wrote
>I agree the headline is exploiting clickbait tactics
Ok, so I'm right? Or are you saying I should not be allowed to judge them for their very deliberate title? Joke
JohnCavil01 t1_iyex3q1 wrote
The article isn’t attacking a particular race like your comment and defensive irritation are implying.
EcstatMec t1_iyexw3u wrote
Is the title doing that? Is the title not part of the article? Give up mate.
LarryPer123 t1_iye3oit wrote
Problem Solved :
The race and Hispanic origin distribution of the people with the name MIKE is 78.3% White, 6.2% Hispanic origin, 10.6% Black, 2.8% Asian or Pacific Islander, 1.5% Two or More Races, and 0.6% American Indian or Alaskan Native. These figures should be considered only as a rough estimate. The purpose of this graph is to compare the name's specific race and Hispanic origin distribution to the distribution in the general population of the US.
On this basis, the people with the name MIKE have a higher likelyhood of being White and a lower likelyhood of being Hispanic origin.
RedditRuleViolator t1_iye7k72 wrote
Is it ok to make those assumptions, though, still? Statistically speaking violent crime is committed at a higher rate by African Americans, but it's wrong to assume every African American is a criminal.
dashrendar t1_iyel5ks wrote
No you can't. Kanye got in trouble for pointing out statistical facts as he did it in a horrible way. Chappelle pointed out those same facts and the facts about the demographics of people in said groups, but that it is wrong to make judgements about those groups that the facts fit. Like, you can think that this country has been ran by essentially all white males who are protestants, but it would be wrong to say that white males that are protestants run the country.
gleaming-the-cubicle t1_iydr9pc wrote
From the text:
>Nor does Shark Week accurately represent experts in this field. One issue is ethnicity: Three of the five most-featured locations on Shark Week are Mexico, South Africa and the Bahamas, but we could count on one hand the number of non-white scientists who we saw featured in shows about their own countries. It was far more common for Discovery to fly a white male halfway around the world than to feature a local scientist.
>Moreover, while more than half of U.S. shark scientists are female, you wouldn’t know this from watching Shark Week. Among people who we saw featured in more than one episode, there were more white male non-scientists named Mike than women of any profession or name.
RedditRuleViolator t1_iydtnt1 wrote
It's still racist.
gleaming-the-cubicle t1_iydufxa wrote
RedditRuleViolator t1_iye7o9x wrote
It's horrifically wrong. That was my point.
HardlineMike t1_iyegxmm wrote
How are you going to point out racism or a lack of diversity without mentioning race?
JohnCavil01 t1_iyetkrg wrote
You could try reading the article to dispel some of that mystery.
anasui1 t1_iyec4pj wrote
they could have added "straight" while they were at it, so the trifecta of all the evil in society is completed
[deleted] t1_iyf9gff wrote
[deleted]
Panicbrewer t1_iydknmc wrote
Fucking, Mike, man….
Wyatt821 t1_iydyh0g wrote
Goddammit Mike...
orr250mph t1_iydjwex wrote
Sharknado is the goto shark documentary.
lego_office_worker t1_iyeyb21 wrote
oh no not white males
jogoso2014 t1_iydirn6 wrote
Yeah but they got sharks in it.
Redsox19681968 t1_iydudjz wrote
“Human Week” would be a lot scarier to watch
JohnCavil01 t1_iyetutm wrote
You can’t hug your children with nuclear arms!
[deleted] t1_iydiuyv wrote
[deleted]
LiveFromNewYork95 t1_iydtnam wrote
Ok. Honestly, I will always contend that Shark Week is really only popular because people like to reference that one line from Step Borthers. But like, is it a secret that it's kind of whatever on the educational factor? I've never once heard someone reference something learned from Shark Week. Most years it's just like "Gronk was supposed to catch a touchdown while be defened by an actual great white shark but it turns out they just did a bunch of simulations"
downonthesecond t1_iyeafty wrote
It's TV, what did they expect?
Surely hey can do a better job at informing the public.
pushthestartbutton t1_iyf8u8l wrote
r/captainobvious
OperativeIvory t1_iydoo24 wrote
Shark Week was an actual show? What? I just thought it was just a euphemism.
Lifesaboxofgardens t1_iydgds7 wrote
White guys named Mike can't be shark experts? This headline is something else lol.