The ethics of natural history documentaries

Human beings have morally sound interests in recording and viewing animal behaviour. On the other hand, animals have interests in not being harmed in the making of reportage and documentaries. At first sight, it seems that avoiding harm could be enough to guarantee a morally acceptable balance of interests of humans and animals. Humans get the satisfaction of their interests in knowledge and entertainment, while animals keep their lives and welfare untouched. Animals can also benefit, but in a different way from humans. Natural history documentaries are important for promoting sensibility and awareness of conservation issues. However, it seems unlikely that the animals involved in the production of a documentary would themselves benefit. Also, the changes in perception that are likely to result from documentaries may happen over long periods of time and changes in personal habits will not necessarily be translated into public policies in favour of animals. Therefore it seems that, by themselves, they cannot constitute a fair reward for animals. Animals could also benefit by some form of compensation. For example, some kind of taxation on the making of documentaries could be established to be spent for conservation projects. Means to put this taxation in practice could be various. For example, it could be imposed on the royalties derived from the exercise of film-makers' rights in the selling and licensing of documentaries. At present, measures such as taxation would be very difficult to achieve in the short term. A more realistic goal would be to start a process of elaboration of international guidelines shared among the different professionals involved in the making of documentaries. To start this process, public debate and discussion of ideas are essential.