The Lion, the Web and the WildCRU 2
Part 2: A new top line
Generally speaking, a news story gets picked up and dropped relatively quickly. If it’s of immediate interest it will make its way onto broadcast and online news channels. Then it may run in the following day’s papers. From there, if it is sufficiently engaging, it may make it back onto TV and radio as production teams read those papers. Many times the papers break the story and broadcast follows. Either way, if the story can last twenty-four hours, it has done well.
To keep a story going, you need something new (hence ‘news’…). As one reporter put it: ‘We’re looking for a new top line.’
The Cecil story just kept generating new lines for media. First there was the death, then the hunt for the allegedly-Spanish killer, then the unmasking of that killer as a US dentist.
That seemed to trigger something. If the initial rumours had been true, even had a name been revealed, without a US citizen the reaction would not have been quite the same.
When Walter Palmer was named, that drew America fully into the story and so began the on- and off-line rage against the dentist. The availability of pictures of a topless Dr Palmer hugging a dead leopard helped stoke the fire.
Then there was the intervention of Jimmy Kimmel, whose decision to suggest people donated to WildCRU drove the start of what it now called the Cecil Appeal. In reality, this is not an appeal in the usual sense of a campaign created by an organisation to raise funds for a particular purpose. The ‘Cecil Appeal’ is a label thousands of people worldwide have applied to something that had already been created. Rather than seeking to get money, we have been overwhelmed by people seeking to offer it.
After Jimmy’s appeal, there followed the rapid passing of several fundraising milestones, along with the arrest and committal of a Zimbabwean professional hunter. On the Thursday evening of the first week, philanthropists Tom and Daphne Kaplan pledged to match the next $100,000 of public donations.
These developments got us to the weekend, where we predicted that there would be some in-depth commentary and perhaps some continued interest in the fundraising total. But we didn’t expect a very busy weekend compared to the week that had just passed.
More fool us.
On the Saturday evening, rumours began that Jericho, Cecil’s ally in running the pride, also tracked by WildCRU, had been killed as well. Fortunately for Jericho, rumours of his death were much exaggerated. As soon as WildCRU could correct the story, they did. Team members actually went out into the field at dawn on Sunday to get visual confirmation that Jericho was still alive. Thousands of miles away, the press officer on weekend duty waited anxiously for word from Zimbabwe so she could let the world know Jericho was OK. That added drama helped propel the story into the following week.
Is Jericho really dead????
One line email from a US journalist
New top lines continued to emerge through the following week too. Toy firm TY announced a Cecil the Lion Beanie Baby. Model Cara Delevingne auctioned her watch on eBay. Animator Aaron Blaise, who worked on The Lion King, created a Cecil print.
There was also a wider debate about the rights and wrongs of trophy hunting and how animal conservation research should be funded. WildCRU’s role is to provide evidence based on research to policy makers and conservationists. For the Hwange project they engage with anyone who has a lawful interest in big cat numbers, which includes groups and organisations on both sides of the hunting debate. For that reason, WildCRU itself does not take a position, but simply continues to gather data, analyse it and disseminate the information.
That neutral position was misconstrued as supporting trophy hunting and a backlash developed. Professor David Macdonald was quick to explain the position, and many of those who had contacted us directly to express concern were reassured once the misunderstanding had been explained.
The next weekend saw another rumour — that one of Cecil’s cubs had been killed by another male lion. Again, the rumour proved false but was sufficient to drive another wave of media queries.
We seem now to be into a quieter period, but most specialist queries are emerging. Fundraising publications ask about the appeal. The Hollywood Reporter wants to talk about how we coped with the surge of interest driven by Jimmy Kimmel. Even publications for the satellite industry have questions about the GPS tracking. We’ll do our best to respond — that’s what we’re here for.
We will also prepare for those points, in a month, in six months, in a year, when people come back to us to ask ‘what has changed?’ Such can be the endurance of these heart-grabbing stories.
What lesson do we take from all this?
While this has been an exceptional story in many ways, there is no new revelation for media-watchers. It has confirmed what we already knew: There is no scientific formula for obtaining media coverage or public engagement. We do our best to create these things but sometimes they create themselves — or are created by others.
Often it’s just about managing the circumstances we’re in, whatever those are. Cecil’s death was tragic; the public response to it has been magnificent. Professor David Macdonald has made the point that these nearly 13,000 people have placed great faith in the WildCRU. That faith must be repaid. Now, we will work with WildCRU to explain how the donations are being put to good use.
There’s more to come…
