National Geographic

STrRedWolf's picture
"Comic Genesis BFOFH"

Website: [Link]

Anyone know where National Geographic has posted their report on Anthrocon? People are interested.

Average rating
(0 votes)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Warfang's picture
"If life gives you lemons, blow them up :D"

Location: Yamrouth, Nova Scotia

NG did a special on Anthrocon? LOL i really wish to see this too Laughing out loud

MacroKaiju's picture
"Anthrocon's (un)official brewmaster and beer delivery reptile"

Location: Hyde Park NY

Website: [Link]

rar...
National geographic was there too? I heard Guniess was there as well as Kent State whith thier survey. And unless Natioanl Geographic is staffed by ninjas hiding in the bushes out front of the Westin I never heard or saw them.

Unclekage's picture
Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]

This user is a Board Member. This user is a Staff Member.

National Geographic is not doing a report on Anthrocon. They sent some representatives on an exploratory mission to gather data for a proposed study on "fandoms." When and if they decide to pursue that project, and if indeed they decide to include Furry Fandom (in the form of Anthrocon), we will let everyone know.

Vulpes Rex's picture
"Vulpine fortunes are precarious; folk either want to build monuments to us, or hang us."

Location: Roseville, CA, USA

Um - If the objects of observation are aware that they are being observed, and are generally aware of the observers themselves - won't that affect the behaviour of the subjects and queer the observations, and any conclusions made from them?

Of course, we wish for an enthusiastic and affirming conclusion, or at least, a benign one.

I wonder if they are going to study Railfans (Train spotters), or Airshow enthusiasts, or NASCAR groupies; I somehow imagine that Biker and Surfer cultures would be more of a "lifestyle" thing, like "Ski Bums and Ski Bunnies" are, and not true Fandoms.

I grew up reading National Geographics - they are the sort of thing which don't become obsolete, even though they may recount a history which has passed since publication. But I was saddened to discover during a CBS "Sunday Morning" segment recounting the making of one particular issue, that the priority seems to be on getting good PICTURES of a subject, and only after obtaining a visual "feel" for the subject did they bother with recruiting a writer to add a background text to the topic. That immediately limits the scope of subjects - and the Points-of-View - that the National Geographic will present.

Giza's picture
"100% usynlig - som en ninja!"

Location: Ardmore, PA

Website: [Link]
Blog: [Link]

This user is a Board Member. This user is a Staff Member.

Um - If the objects of observation are aware that they are being observed, and are generally aware of the observers themselves - won't that affect the behaviour of the subjects and queer the observations, and any conclusions made from them?

Since the objects of the study are sentient, I think NOT informing them would be unethical, no?

 
--
My LiveJournal - My Website - See what I'm doing on Twitter

Vulpes Rex's picture
"Vulpine fortunes are precarious; folk either want to build monuments to us, or hang us."

Location: Roseville, CA, USA

Quote:
Since the objects of the study are sentient, I think NOT informing them would be unethical, no?

*shakes head, sadly* You will never advance very far in the CIA with an attitude like that.

Rassbury

fenrislorsrai's picture
Location: Bethel, CT

Website: [Link]

To some extent it will affect their behavior. That applies to observing or measuring ANYTHING. Catching that wolf and sticking a radio collar on it will produce a slight change in behavior by in the animal itself or those around it... for awhile. (ie, what's that smell on the pack leader!?) This is why studies are usually long term affairs so that people (or animals) get used to the observer and either ignore them, or consider them a participant, and therefore got back to normal behavior.

Anthropologists are well aware of the fact that a quick drop in may skew their results. Thus why studies are often so long. And if they aren't, a scholarly paper will usually have a section dedicated to the disruption caused by the observation and whether or not what they're observing is normal behavior.

When those studies are then summarized for non-anthropologists, they usually cut out that part (and many of the other technical details) to make it comprehensible to lay people.

Ditto with any technical field. You get a two page article summary released to the public, all the technical details only show up in scholarly and technical sources. General public wants an article that says "cancer drug discovered" and two pages explaining what it does, not 200 pages of technical details on every aspect of it.

(why yes, my degree IS in anthropology. Not what I'm currently doing, but I did have to write up those papers)

Dalamin Aubis's picture
"To close your eyes will make you blind, so what does it mean to close your mind?"

Location: Parma Ohio. (South Clevleand)

Well I'm sure that if they ever did do an actual report on Anthrocon they would be pleased with the photo opportunities most of us represent.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.