World

espondents became involved emotionally with theanimals, and concerned for their welfare. As such anumber of people gave money regularly to animalcharities (a few even stating that they would give moneyto animal charities before human ones).Discussions also centred on the need to see animalsin their natural environment because respondents hadno other access to them. A number of respondents hadvisited zoos to see for themselves how animals lived, and‘what they actually looked like in the flesh’ (Retired,London). It was interesting though that respondents didnot comprehend certain aspects of animal life,particularly eating habits in this environment (eventhough it was completely acceptable on the televisionprogrammes):1st: I went to New York and the second day we were thereand we had a free afternoon and I said I wanted to go tothe zoo in Brooklyn.2nd: She went to Jersey and went to the zoo.3rd: I couldn’t do that and I love animals.1st: But they are both very wild life, they are not like zooshere. Jersey zoo is acres and acres and so is Brooklyn zoo.You’d go in and see the owls and you look at the owl’sground and there is all wee yellow dead chicks. That iswhat they feed the owls on. Do you know what I did, I sawthat. I can’t remember if it was Jersey zoo, I went on theway out and I said that there was something wrong withthe chicks and they said that was how they fed the owlsand that was how I knew. (Middle class, London)Wildlife programmes were also seen as an importantvehicle for ensuring that animals were being protected,particularly from humans:We have to know how these animals are living, we haveto be shown how they exist, how they have families andrules and habits, just like us. I think we need to see that sowe can care what happens to them. If they stopped theseprogrammes for all we know they could be killingeverything in sight, and we wouldn’t know anythingabout it. When you do see them and then hear aboutpeople killing them for fur or tusks or whatever, then Ithink something can be done about it. (Ethnic minority,Afro-Caribbean, London)Like the Cookery format, this type of programme wasseen as offering a positive image of the developing world.Some respondents also stated that they would like to seemore programmes such as Land of the Tiger whichshowed the interactions between animals and humans.COMIC RELIEFGroups were shown sections of the Comic Reliefprogramme from 1999. They then discussed the materialin relation to possible changes in attitudes or beliefs. Wealso asked specifically whether the act of donating gavethe audience a stake in the programme i.e. were audiencemembers more interested in the programme and theissues which it raised because they were involved or hadgiven money. All of the groups were asked the samequestions on Comic Relief and this section will examinethe responses of those who viewed the Comic Relief videoas well as those who did not.POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE RESPONSES TO THEPROGRAMMEThere were a number of different responses to viewingComic Relief and to other programmes like it (i.e. charityappeals). Some of the respondents enjoyed theprogramme, particularly the younger groups. Therespondents who actually watched it were mainly the 15year-olds and a group of 26-8 year-olds. These groups hadbeen involved in Comic Relief at some level – the childrenwithin the school context, and the 26-8 year-olds all hadgiven money (via credit cards) on the night the show wason. Most of this age group had ceased to watch theprogramme itself (although continued to give moneyannually) because they felt that while they were growingup and moving on the programme format wasn’t. Theserespondents all watched Comic Relief’s debt campaignprogrammes and saw these as more relevant to them atthis time.The main reasons given for viewing were for comicentertainment and for watching people collecting moneyfor ‘good causes’:1st: Comic Relief has to appeal to 90 years olds and 9year-olds. I think the format works because it is so muchvariety. They do Boyzone and was it last year or the yearbefore they has The Spice Girls when they were really big.They seem to be able to attract the big names …2nd: I think it is quite good because you get all thecountries and people from all over. You know of all thereally big names coming in for charity and all the snippetsof people doing their own charity thing.3rd: I tend to watch it just for the comedy aspect.1st: I always find it quite emotional actually. You getcaught up in the atmosphere. (Middle class, Glasgow)128 DFID – July 2000