Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Full Version: There Is No Impending Bird Apocalypse
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
https://slate.com/technology/2019/09/bir...earch.html

EXCERPT: When a major new study on North American bird populations appeared in the journal Science last week, it included all the trappings of a typical scientific paper, along with one, less conventional addition: The study also came with its own hashtag, #BringBirdsBack.

Certainly, the central finding of the research team, led by Ken Rosenberg, a conservation scientist at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, seemed likely to trigger strong public reaction, on and off social media. Since 1970, the researchers estimated, the North American bird population had declined by roughly 2.9 billion birds, a 29 percent drop. It was, the researchers wrote, “an overlooked biodiversity crisis.”

The finding received widespread media coverage. “Where Have All the Birds Gone?” a headline in the Seattle Times asked. A piece in Vox wondered whether the trend would end in a “bird apocalypse.” (Not necessarily, the piece conceded.) And the headline on a front-page story in the New York Times declared “Birds Are Vanishing From North America.” The dramatic opening line of the piece: “The skies are emptying out.”

Researchers affiliated with the Cornell team even managed to land an accompanying op-ed in the Times the very same day. “The Crisis for Birds,” the headline opined, “Is a Crisis for Us All.”

The declines were certainly notable, but some ecologists have begun to question whether the calculus undertaken in the paper truly warranted this sort of language and the ominous future it seemed to suggest. And those concerns have raised further questions among some scientists—and even some reflection among authors of the paper themselves—about how high-stakes research, the constraints of high-profile journal publishing, and sophisticated publicity can sometimes combine to drive a story into the news cycle while eclipsing important uncertainties, and perhaps even delivering an incomplete message to the public.

[...] To some, these kinds of images may represent a clear, internet-friendly way to communicate a serious conservation issue. To others, they may run the risk of appearing sensationalist—or of helping to feed coverage that takes on apocalyptic overtones. Brian McGill said the reception of the avifauna paper reminded him of “insectageddon”—a series of high-profile studies on insect population decline that sparked headlines worldwide but also came under scrutiny from biologists who argued that the findings had been dramatically overstated.

Manu Saunders, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of New England in Australia who studies ecology and insect populations, and a prominent critic of the insect Armageddon narrative, made a similar point. “I think that the bird apocalypse wouldn’t have been such a big deal in the media if the insect apocalypse hadn’t happened,” she said. (MORE - details)