--- Gautam Majumdar > wrote: >Does it really matter for the lay press and its target the general public ? > >Since this discussion started I asked several of my friends who are well educated, interested in science, but not specifically in palaeontology. >Their reaction is - if it looked like a crocodile and behaved like a crocodile then it is OK to call it a crocodile. +++++++++++++++++++++ I think that this *is* one of the main points being argued in this thread. Just because it might look like a crocodile and behave like one, doesn't mean it should be called one. Why, because doing so is just plain wrong. If we do it with this, then bats really should be considered flying rodents (cause it looks like a rat with wings and even behaves somewhat like other rats) and hyenas, nothing more than large dogs. ______________________________ Calling it a Crocodyliform or Crocodylimorph is fine for palaeontologists, but it is superfluous for lay public. They all looked at the story in various >newspapers and told me that they would not have bothered if the headline was "Super Pholidosaur" or "Super Mesosuchian". Such unfamiliar names >would not generated enough interest to read the whole story. To call attention of general public (not the palaeontologists, professional or amateur, - they are supposed to assess the Science article, not the >story in the Guardian) a familiar creature with unusual features is better than using unfamiliar names, even if it is incorrect in the strict scientific sense. +++++++++++++++++++++++ Stating: "Supercroc" in the title is fine as long as it is used in the same vein as: "SEX!! Now that I've got your attention...., but to continuously refer to a non-crocodilian animal as a crocodile after the public has generated enough interest to read through the entire story (like the pretty pictures wouldn't be enough) is blatantly misleading and purposely dumbing something down. Furthermore, in this case, it continues the annoying trend of making Reptilia appear less diverse than it actually is. It really ticks me off to hear people throw crocodile and alligator around like they are interchangable, even though crocs and gators are more different from one another than humans and chimps. It's just as annoying as seeing 30 orders of birds being strained through Aves on the basis of behavioural differences more than anatomical ones while Squamata, which shows just as much diversity as Mammalia, gets relegated to a mere order status on the shear basis that "A lizard is a lizard." The article should have read: Giant Supercroc found: [place cool shot of _S.imperator_ skull next to Sereno, here] _Sarcosuchus imperator_ is *not actually a crocodile,* but a near relative. It is a member of a group of crocodile relatives known as pholidosaurs. [place picture of skull comparison with an extant croc, here] Is that really so hard? __________________________________ > >Interestingly, one of them asked me - had this creature been alive today, would it not have a common name something like Saharan Crocodile ? +++++++++++++++++++++++ Probably; and much like the sea cow, flying lemur, American chameleon, tree crocodile and a host of other common names, it would be misleading, incorrect, or just plain wrong. _________________________ > >Lay media is in the business of drawing public attention to itself by producing interesting stories and increasing circulation - not in the business of teaching strictly correct science. Palaeontologists may take issue with Sereno's statement to lay press about "hyper giant crocodile" but he has succeeded in generating public interest in his work and in >palaeontology. That is what is important. More scientists should do so if they wish to flourish in a competitive world. > >Gautam Majumdar gautam@majumdar.demon.co.uk +++++++++++++++++++++++++ While I can respect the capitalistic side of all of this, I do not agree that a story with "shock value" should be dumbed down to accomodate the rest of the public. Put a glossary of terms on a sidebar or do what I do on my site and just give a quick definition of the term in quotation marks. The last thing we need to do is dumb down these stories to make it more readable. Frankly the public is dumb enough as it is. Jura == The Reptipage at: http://reptilis.net Because reptiles are just cooler. _____________________________________________________________ Visit http://freeservers.com to get a FREE Web site with a personalized domain and FREE Web-based e-mail. |