Humans and Animals in the Media (1)

Over the last decade social media has rapidly expanded, making it one of the most vital and prevalent sources people can turn to not only learn new information but also connect with those that are not in reach. Throughout the growth of social media there have been many hardships when dealing with human/animal interactions. Social media posts are one-sided. The author can live the life they dream on the web, as they are only showing a brief second or snapshot of their life. While social media posts only show the publishers aspects these posts can be both beneficial and detrimental to the ideas and treatment of a non-human animal. There are three main human/animal posts that are common those that glorify and those that degrade.

Social media can glorify human-animal interactions including Steve Irwin. Steve Irwin was amazing at captivating his audience however most do not know the untold truth of the treatment and handling his animals were put through to provide those clips for the public. While Steve Irwin was able to get the correct perception off, at what cost, the animals well-being.

Social Media can also degrade the interactions between humans and animals as Mark the Shark does. Throughout Mark the Sharks posts he tells the story of how evil sharks are along with how they deserve to be killed off. This provides false information to those that come across it. This allows the audience to “see into” Mark the Sharks life and how great of a ‘king’ he is.

There is a dilemma with social media and the perceptions it provides for human/animal interactions. Media gives the public an opportunity to form opinions on an animal and that specific interaction. Determining if the good that posts do on human/animal interactions outweighs the bad is still questionable.