Who Decides What is Communicated at a Zoo?

[HalfEarther]

With 175 million people passing through zoo gates every year (by some estimates), it seems to me that zoos are in a rather unique position when it comes to educating the public about the need to protect our planet’s biodiversity.

But when I think back on the zoos I’ve visited, or when I wander around my beloved local zoo—the AZA accredited Detroit Zoo—I’m always struck by how little information I see about the big picture issues that impact our planet's wildlife, such as climate change, the 6th extinction, overpopulation, over-development, etc. These should be ongoing narratives that run throughout the park, but they’re typically not, and I’m curious to know why that is. (To be fair, climate change is mentioned in the Detroit Zoo’s Arctic Ring of Life exhibit, but I’d expect such a potentially devastating phenomenon to be addressed in multiple different ways throughout the park. Yes, polar bears will be one of the hardest hit species as the effects of global warming worsen, but they’ll hardly be the only victims.)

Evolution, too. This one’s a real head scratcher. You can’t fully understand any life form without understanding its evolution, the story of its origin, how it came to be the thing it is. This is also crucial information in the planning of how best to keep it being the thing it is, of protecting it from the many threats it no doubt faces in the wild. And yet, these fascinating stories of origin remain mostly untold within zoo walls.

I understand that zoos must strike a balance between education and entertainment. But they also can’t call themselves conservationists if they don’t address the greatest threats to wildlife conservation in a serious, meaningful, and effective way.

I'm rambling. Let me get to my question:

Can anybody tell me who ultimately decides what gets communicated in a given zoological park? Who has the authority to say “Tell this story but not that one” or "Don't use the word Evolution because it's too controversial"? To what degree do internal and external politics come into play when communicating issues like global warming and evolution? Who ultimately decides these things and what criteria are at play in the decision making? Does the executive director have ultimate say? Do big donors have a say? If there’s a zoological society, does the society have a say?

Okay, that wasn't a question, it was multiple questions. Apologies. But if anybody has any insight into these things, I'd love to hear from you.

Regards,

HalfEarther

 

[Zooplantman]

I'm rambling. Let me get to my question:

Can anybody tell me who ultimately decides what gets communicated in a given zoological park? Who has the authority to say “Tell this story but not that one” or "Don't use the word Evolution because it's too controversial"? To what degree do internal and external politics come into play when communicating issues like global warming and evolution? Who ultimately decides these things and what criteria are at play in the decision making? Does the executive director have ultimate say? Do big donors have a say? If there’s a zoological society, does the society have a say?

The Education Department and often the zoo Director. If the topic appears very controversial, in some cases Board members may get involved (they ought not to - that is not their role). The zoological society ought not to be involved, but of course might anyway. Big donors are rarely involved, although some would not choose to donate to an exhibit whose message they disagreed with.
So the norm would be the Director and the Education Department.

 

[HalfEarther]

The Education Department and often the zoo Director. If the topic appears very controversial, in some cases Board members may get involved (they ought not to - that is not their role). The zoological society ought not to be involved, but of course might anyway. Big donors are rarely involved, although some would not choose to donate to an exhibit whose message they disagreed with.
So the norm would be the Director and the Education Department.

Thank you, Zooplantman, for your response. It was very helpful.

 

[HalfEarther]

The Education Department and often the zoo Director. If the topic appears very controversial, in some cases Board members may get involved (they ought not to - that is not their role). The zoological society ought not to be involved, but of course might anyway. Big donors are rarely involved, although some would not choose to donate to an exhibit whose message they disagreed with.
So the norm would be the Director and the Education Department.

My interest in this subject stems from both personal curiosity and a writing project I'm working on, a fictional piece in which the main character is a Communications Manager at a zoo. I see from your profile that you work in zoo exhibit design. Would you mind if I contact you in the near future should I have additional questions on this subject?

 

[Hix]

The Education Department and often the zoo Director. If the topic appears very controversial, in some cases Board members may get involved (they ought not to - that is not their role).

Interesting.

At the zoo where I used to work there is a large Education Department, who only looked after the school groups.

The Public Relations department looked after theming, signs and labels, etc. The Graphics Department was in the same building and the two worked hand-in-hand. Although I'm sure the CEO, and probably the senior executives, had final approval.



Hix

 

[HalfEarther]

Interesting.

At the zoo where I used to work there is a large Education Department, who only looked after the school groups.

The Public Relations department looked after theming, signs and labels, etc. The Graphics Department was in the same building and the two worked hand-in-hand. Although I'm sure the CEO, and probably the senior executives, had final approval.



Hix

That's how I assume it works at my home zoo, the Detroit Zoo, but I haven't been able to confirm that. They have a large education department, but it seems to have that same "school group" focus. Although their animal welfare program works out that department also.

Thanks for your thoughts.

HalfEarther

 

[elefante]

With 175 million people passing through zoo gates every year (by some estimates), it seems to me that zoos are in a rather unique position when it comes to educating the public about the need to protect our planet’s biodiversity.

But when I think back on the zoos I’ve visited, or when I wander around my beloved local zoo—the AZA accredited Detroit Zoo—I’m always struck by how little information I see about the big picture issues that impact our planet's wildlife, such as climate change, the 6th extinction, overpopulation, over-development, etc. These should be ongoing narratives that run throughout the park, but they’re typically not, and I’m curious to know why that is. (To be fair, climate change is mentioned in the Detroit Zoo’s Arctic Ring of Life exhibit, but I’d expect such a potentially devastating phenomenon to be addressed in multiple different ways throughout the park. Yes, polar bears will be one of the hardest hit species as the effects of global warming worsen, but they’ll hardly be the only victims.)

Evolution, too. This one’s a real head scratcher. You can’t fully understand any life form without understanding its evolution, the story of its origin, how it came to be the thing it is. This is also crucial information in the planning of how best to keep it being the thing it is, of protecting it from the many threats it no doubt faces in the wild. And yet, these fascinating stories of origin remain mostly untold within zoo walls.

I understand that zoos must strike a balance between education and entertainment. But they also can’t call themselves conservationists if they don’t address the greatest threats to wildlife conservation in a serious, meaningful, and effective way.

I'm rambling. Let me get to my question:

Can anybody tell me who ultimately decides what gets communicated in a given zoological park? Who has the authority to say “Tell this story but not that one” or "Don't use the word Evolution because it's too controversial"? To what degree do internal and external politics come into play when communicating issues like global warming and evolution? Who ultimately decides these things and what criteria are at play in the decision making? Does the executive director have ultimate say? Do big donors have a say? If there’s a zoological society, does the society have a say?

Okay, that wasn't a question, it was multiple questions. Apologies. But if anybody has any insight into these things, I'd love to hear from you.

Regards,

HalfEarther

Yes, I agree, this is lacking in zoos at times. Detroit could say a lot about global war,in with the Arctic Ring of Life exhibit.