NB: This was the first assessment I completed on my MSci Science Communication Course.
Autumnwatch is a natural history programme that aims to engage the viewer in British nature. The show is unique: it uses a mixture of live presentation with well-known faces intercut with magnificent pre-recorded cinematography, livestreams from remote cameras in a range of different habitats alongside viewer generated content. This eclectic mix alongside the genuine enthusiasm of the presenters is used to spark engagement in British natural history, forging a sense of stakeholdership in local wildlife. In turn, this ownership provides the viewer with reasons why nature in the UK is valuable and worth protecting. However, Autumnwatch fails to engage a wide audience, missing in particular the younger viewer. Therefore its effects on the wider public are limited.
At face-value, the aim of Autumnwatch is to educate the viewer about wildlife in the UK. Autumnwatch makes for easy watching: incredible shots of magnificent landscapes are followed by close-ups of Britain’s rarest birds followed by views of baby seals – there will be few natural history enthusiasts who aren’t rewarded in some way. The show also makes the viewer aware of threats to British wildlife, though not overtly. As Autumnwatch is ultimately a ‘feel-good’ show, the threats are exhibited using success stories: pine marten reintroduction after near extinction; storks breeding in Sussex after 600 years; polluted coal mines transformed into bird-rich wetlands. The threats are explained, but so are the solutions: the show is hopeful. Finally, the show demonstrates to the viewer why they should feel invested in British wildlife. “Nature can shine a light in the dark”, intones presenter Chris Packham, demonstrating the personal benefits of nature. The programme shows people why they should care.
There are several key ways in which Autumnwatch engages the viewer. Firstly, it uses familiar presenters strongly associated with other popular natural history programmes such as Blue Planet Live and The Really Wild Show. Though perhaps not all ‘experts’, the presenters are trusted and familiar science communicators which provides credibility. The live portions are unscripted and draw in the viewer as they observe real-time reactions, mistakes and fumbles. Rather than turning the viewer off, this increases empathy to, and therefore engagement with, the presenters.
Another key component of Autumnwatch is the viewer-generated content. Members of the public send in their own wildlife media which is shared and explained with as much awe and enthusiasm as the professional content. Episode 1 had the public contribute to the opening sequence by explaining what they enjoy about autumn. “I love being surrounded by the autumn colours … listening to the sound of crisp crunchy leaves!” one viewer exclaims. This lends to the feeling of collaboration between the producers and the viewers who therefore feel as important as the presenters: a vital cog in the production of the programme. The viewer has a stake in the programme, and therefore a stake in nature, another step towards understanding its importance.
Despite using a variety of techniques to engage the British public in the importance of British wildlife, it isn’t entirely successful as the viewership is limited. Autumnwatch is aimed at all ages and demographics, yet YouGov data shows that Autumnwatch is most popular with those aged 55 to 75, of which 52% have a positive opinion of the show. In contrast, only 29% and 24% of 39- to 55-year-olds and 21- to 38-year-olds respectively have a positive opinion of Autumnwatch (YouGov, 2020). This may be due to younger people in the UK watching less television and streaming more (Ofcom, 2019. Pg. 4, Statista, 2019). It could be that Autumnwatch is not well suited to young adults: in Episode 1 there are multiple occasions that could be labelled ‘cringey’, for example when Strachan started her “good-to-be-back” dancing. Instances like this could drive the younger audience to search for something ‘cooler’. Furthermore, the programme might only be watched by those already engaged with natural history. The show is predictive in format and therefore unlikely to attract people who haven’t already seen a season of Autumnwatch. The show does not succeed in drawing in new viewers and therefore perceptions are not being changed about the natural world: the show preaching to the converted.
No-one can doubt the genuine enthusiasm the presenters of Autumnwatch have for British natural history. The excitement of the presenters is infectious and in turn enthuses the viewer. Autumnwatch provides unique insight into British nature, revealing fascinating stories which demonstrate the importance of British nature to the viewer, however, more could be done to attempt to reach a wider audience.
References:
Ofcom (2019). Media nations, UK 2019. Available at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/160714/media-nations-2019-uk-report.pdf (Accessed: 5 November 2020).
Statista (2019). Weekly TV and video streaming in the UK 2018, by age group. Available at: https://www.statista.com/statistics/899011/weekly-tv-and-video-streaming-by-age-in-the-uk/ (Accessed: 2 November 2020).
YouGov (2020). Autumnwatch Popularity and Fame. Available at: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/media/explore/tv_programme/Autumnwatch (Accessed: 2 November 2020).
Flora's Science Digest 