Environmental documentary Seaspiracy took the world by storm earlier this year. A huge number of viewers tuned in to learn more about the detrimental effects of modern fishing.
The eye-opening documentary by British filmmaker Ali Tabrizi explores the plight of the modern fishing industry by exposing issues such as overfishing, fish farming, and modern slavery in the fishing industry.
Shortly after its release in March, the documentary received widespread media attention across several countries. The initial social media surge saw the documentary being plastered all over Twitter and Instagram stories and was shared by celebrities such as Kourtney Kardashian, Tom Brady, and Paul McCartney. However, the positive attention given to the documentary seems to have been somewhat fleeting.
At first, the main issue that viewers had with the documentary was the title, with many social media users were frustrated at the missed opportunity of the title ‘Conspirasea’. Since then, however, the documentary has been torn apart by critics for oversimplifying a very complex issue.
Critics have debunked several of the claims that Seaspiracy made such as that “oceans will be 'virtually empty' by 2048”. The data used to make this claim is 20 years old and does not portray an accurate depiction of the current situation. There are several instances such as this throughout the documentary which mislead viewers. Furthermore, interviewees in the documentary claim that a lot of their quotes have been taken out of context, most likely for dramatic effect.
The documentary seems to villainise the organisation responsible for the ‘Dolphin Safe’ tuna label by claiming that it is a facade that exists purely to trick buyers into believing that they are purchasing ethically sourced tuna. A statement on the International Marine Mammal Project’s website says: “The recent film Seaspiracy falsely claims that the dolphin-safe tuna program is a conspiracy to benefit the global fisheries industries. Nothing could be further from the truth. The dolphin-safe tuna program has provided and continues to provide massive benefits to dolphin populations around the world. Despite our efforts to provide documentation of this to the filmmakers, they chose instead to grossly distort and mischaracterize the program.”
Further criticisms have been made which condemn the documentary for being too Eurocentric. Critics claim the documentary focuses purely on the Western world and should have included a more diverse range of interviewees.
Despite its flaws, the documentary did start a conversation that exposed the lesser-known issues in the fishing industry. Perhaps the main takeaway we should be focusing on is that films such as Seaspiracy are surely an effective way of projecting an issue to the public. The dramatisation of some aspects of the documentary could perhaps have further engaged viewers to think more deeply about the issue.
Edited by Jemma Snowdon
Comments