Summary
This study analyzes the effects of the social media outcry that followed the killing of Cecil the lion in Zimbabwe by an American tourist in 2015. The author conducted interviews with 19 hunting practitioners and 45 residents in the area near Cecil’s death. Online data concerning Cecil’s death were gathered, including social media discussions and videos, news articles, and press statements. Thematic analysis found that the incident sparked lots of discussion and education around trophy hunting on social media, with many judging the act as being on par with killing humans for fun. Several airlines such as Virgin and Delta pledged to no longer carry hunted trophy animals on flights; however, enough airlines continued to transport hunted animals to enable such hunting to continue. The United States and the United Kingdom made statements suggesting there would be stricter regulations on importing hunted trophy animals based on whether or not the hunting satisfies conservation needs. However, the author finds these criteria questionable and difficult to enforce across borders. Funding for conservation efforts increased after the incident, though many African countries are still severely underfunded. The author argues the Cecil movement failed to realize a lasting change in trophy hunting because it did not have a unified goal and more effort is needed to find alternative funding sources for African conservation. Furthermore, interviews revealed that most locals do not share the sympathy for wildlife found in Western media, as many know people who have been attacked by lions or other predators.
When Cecil the Lion was shot in 2015 by the American tourist, Walter Palmer, the story sparked a global “cybermovement” against trophy hunting, questioning its sustainability from a moral-ethical standpoint. Indeed the incident was hailed as a possible turning point for the wildlife tourism industry. It remains unclear however whether a movement of this nature could have any meaningful impact. Thus, 2 years on from Cecil, what has (not) changed, and why? Findings reveal interventions aimed at deterring hunters, tightening international legislation, and furthering research on African wildlife conservation. However, trophy hunting still persists in much of Southern Africa, pointing to the limitations of digital movements. In explaining the limits of these movements, the article applies Social Movement Impact Theory and juxtaposes the divergent, competing moral criteria operating in the international “Cecilgate” context.