"A-ha! I knew it!" was the chorus sung in the minds of many this weekend as the news broke, "It WAS those dirty Chinese after all." Many recounted to themselves urban legends of their Oriental neighbours roasting cute and cuddly household pets rotisserie, while simultaneously feeling a little better because they finally had someone to blame. Or perhaps I should re-phrase that, since many already blamed the Chinese people to begin with, but Toronto's multi-culturally sensitive public was quick to outrage, and most kept their thoughts to themselves. Some out of shame, and some simply saving face. But I fear that Friday's news has rekindled the old stereotypes and the old feelings. After reading headlines like the one above, how quickly some have jumped to the old conclusions. Not only do they have someone to blame, but now they feel justified. Are they?
In the end, I'll leave you to be the judge, but it's clear that media reports, and particularly media headlines have contributed greatly to redistributing the sparks of ignorance. The unfortunate thing is that many will simply read the headlines, and their judgement will be made there and then. This is irresponsible of the media. But what else is news?
When the story broke in Friday's papers, many headlines merely stated that "SARS came from eaten cat". For those who bothered to delve into the details, they learned that some Hong Kong researchers had announced that the disease originated from Civet cats, and ALWAYS remembering to point out that they are a delicacy eaten by some Chinese.
This is enough to stir the memories of every "Chinese cat-eating" story a person has ever heard, most of which in reality are baseless and unfounded.
"Careful, make sure you don't accidentally order the dog!"
and
"You know how the Jones' cat went missing last week? Don't tell anyone, but I have it on very good authority that it wandered onto the Chang's property... and then wandered onto their BBQ!!!"
Only some of the articles managed to reveal (but still gloss over), is the fact that 'civet cats' are not actually part of the cat family, but rather a cat-sized relative of the mongoose. Most articles published over the weekend however, did contain this information.
Perhaps headlines mentioning "Civet", and not just "cat" would have been the more appropriate selection. Perhaps a little research before publishing would have been the right thing to do, and in the true spirit of journalism. Yet, the Canadian news media seemed all too happy to print irresponsible headlines, and articles that lacked any real detail, leaving the readers to fill in the gaps with stereotypes instead of facts.
Since then, things have improved, and most reports published since Saturday refer to Civet cats and the fact that they are not part of the cat family and/or that they are cousins of the mongoose. Most even correctly identify the species as Masked Palm Civets. Even so, clarity is sometimes lacking and is not always clear that these are not actually cats.
Masked Palm Civet
In fact, the species implicated in SARS are not even "Civet cats". After conducting some further research I have learned that Palm Civets and Civet cats are very different species. The Palm Civet, or Paguma larvata, is found throughout Asia (primarily in the Himalayans) and the sub-continent. Civet cats on the other hand either belong to Bassariscus astutus, native to North America, or to Felis libyca which are found in Africa and Asia. Only the Felis libyca is a member of the cat family. While some civets are indeed cat-like in their behaviour, the Masked Palm civets live in trees and survive on fruit. Pictures also reveal that they are clearly more akin to a mongoose, or even a raccoon, than the domestic cat.
Paguma larvata
The scary thing is that essentially none of this information can be found in news media reporting on the SARS discovery. To their credit at least, reports over the weekend have finally begun to mention the fact that the virus was also found in a Chinese ferret badger, and a raccoon dog.
Also not clear is whether the virus originated from the animals, or whether they were exposed to it in the community (like the Chinese humans) as they sat unprotected in the live marketplace. This fact is also not getting much play.
All in all, the media is guilty by omission of allowing stereotypes to flourish and encouraging the anti-Chinese sentiment that has palpably risen since the SARS outbreaks. Hopefully, more accurate and fully informed information will be disseminated in the near future. Hopefully, those that purport to deliver the news will actually do just that for once, rather than play on the fears of the public for ratings.
Yeah, right.
But wait, didn't you just say "raccoon dog"?
Why yes, it's a small canine sold for human consumption.
But that's not the point,
- The Madd Monk
Source Material:
Canadian Press, "Hong Kong researchers say SARS virus came from civet cat eaten by Chinese", 05/23/03
Canadian Press, "WHO links SARS to eaten cat", 05/23/003
World Chelonian Trust, "Palm Civets (Paguma larvata) and SARS"
San Francisco Chronicle, "Experts find animal-SARS link", 05/24/03
San Francisco Chronicle, "Animal link to SARS found", 05/24/03
San Francisco Chronicle, "Researchers test mammals from Chinese markets", 05/24/03
Associated Press, "Info on Civet cat, Found to Have SARS", 05/23/03
