Seaspiracy

Seaspiracy
Official poster
Directed by	Ali Tabrizi
Produced by	Kip Andersen
Cinematography	Ali Tabrizi Lucy Tabrizi
Edited by	Ali Tabrizi Lucy Tabrizi
Music by	Benjamin Sturley
Production companies	A.U.M. Films Disrupt Studios
Distributed by	Netflix
Release date	March 24, 2021 (2021-03-24) (Netflix)
Running time	89 minutes
Language	English

Seaspiracy is a 2021 documentary film about the environmental impact of fishing directed by and starring Ali Tabrizi, a British filmmaker. The film is produced by Kip Anderson, director of plant-based diet documentaries Cowspiracy and What the Health.

The film premiered on Netflix globally in March 2021 and garnered immediate attention in several countries. The film received praise for bringing attention to its subject matter and has controversy over its scientific accuracy and neutrality. Some organisations and individuals interviewed or negatively portrayed in the film have disputed its assertions and have accused the film of misrepresenting them.

Synopsis

The film features human impacts on marine life such as plastic marine debris, ghost nets and overfishing around the world. It argues that commercial fisheries are the main driver of marine ecosystem destruction. Seaspiracy rejects the concept of sustainable fishing and criticises several marine conservation organisations, including the Earth Island Institute and its dolphin safe label and the sustainable seafood certifications of the Marine Stewardship Council. It also criticises efforts by organisations to reduce household plastic given the impact of ghost nets. It accuses these initiatives of being a cover-up for the environmental impact of fishing and corruption in the fishing industry. The film advocates for marine reserves and the elimination of fish consumption. The documentary also covers the Taiji dolphin drive hunt, whaling in the Faroe Islands, and modern slavery within the fishing industry in Thailand.

Release

The film was released on March 24, 2021, on Netflix.

Responses from those featured

Several individuals and organisations featured in the movie have criticised it or disputed claims made by the filmmakers. The Marine Stewardship Council disputed the characterisation of the organisation and suggested the film had several inaccuracies in its framing of sustainable fishing. The Plastic Pollution Coalition accused filmmakers of "cherry-[picking] seconds of our comments to support their own narrative". Oceana also criticised the film, arguing that abstaining from seafood as the film recommends is not feasible for many people, particularly vulnerable coastal communities. The International Marine Mammal Project, a project of the Earth Island Institute, has disputed the film's depiction of dolphin safe labels.

Christina Hicks, an academic at James Cook University who appeared in the film, also did not endorse it. She said she committed her career to the fishing industry in which "there are issues but also progress and fish remain critical to food and nutrition security in many vulnerable geographies".

However, The Guardian columnist George Monbiot and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society both expressed support for the film. Marine conservation biologist Callum Roberts defended the film from its critics, saying "It’s not been made for its scientific rigour. It has used the techniques of film storytelling to make its case."

Reception

The documentary was one of the top ten most watched films on Netflix in several countries on the week of its release and generated significant traction on social media.

Critical response

On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 83% based on 6 critic reviews, and an average rating of 7.5/10.

Natalia Winkelman of The New York Times gave a mixed-to-negative review, concluding that the film "does present some pieces of reporting — including an inquiry into dolphin-safe tuna can labels — that are surprising and memorable. But even the film’s notable points seem to emerge only briefly before sinking beneath the surface, lost in a sea of murky conspiratorial thinking." Unfortunately, she does not explain what kind of conspiratorial thinking she actually means.

John Serba of Decider said, "Seaspiracy isn’t the purest form of documentary journalism, but Tabrizi makes his point with enough principled persuasion to make it worth your time.". The Independent called it a "shocking indictment of the commercial fishing industry".

Emma Stefanski of Thrillist said, "If shock and awe are what it takes to get the message across, then Seaspiracy is effective, if not particularly multifaceted."

Common Sense Media gave the film a 4 out of 5 star and 15+ rating, calling it "tough but necessary viewing" and "backed with evidence from journalists, authors, marine biologists, oceanographers, frontline activists, and industry insiders". It questions the use of director Ali Tabrizi as protagonist to be followed around.

Responses from others

PETA wrote the movie "is not to be missed" and encouraged readers to host watch parties. Greenpeace Aotearoa New Zealand commended the film for promoting various marine issues, but challenged the conclusion of abstaining from fish consumption, distinguishing between industrial fishing and traditional harvesting. Greenpeace instead suggested alternate solutions.

A spokesperson for Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation (SSPO) said the film's coverage of Scottish salmon aquaculture was "wrong, misleading and inaccurate". The Global Aquaculture Alliance also criticised the film, saying "reputable NGOs have worked tirelessly with industry over the past 20-plus years to continually improve the lives of the people working in aquaculture and fisheries as well as the ecosystems in which aquaculture and fisheries are practiced", and suggested abandoning fisheries and aquaculture would "abandon the approximately 250 million people employed by the industry and rob billions of people of a healthful source of protein".

Charles Clover of Blue Marine Foundation and author of the book The End of the Line criticised the film's scientific accuracy, saying "there are a few jaw-dropping factual errors", and accused it of deriving its narrative from previous documentaries, such as the film adaptation of his book. Nonetheless, he praised its communication of marine fisheries and conservation issues to a new audience, stating "[t]he problem of overfishing is immense, global, remote, horrifying and it is really hard to get people to focus on. Until now, Tabrizi’s generation thought banning plastic straws was more important. But it isn’t. Overfishing is."

Ray Hilborn, Professor at the School of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences at the University of Washington called the film "propaganda" and "so full of misinformation, it’s astounding". Bryce Stewart, a University of York marine ecologist and fisheries biologist also criticised the film's scientific accuracy and neutrality, calling it “the worst kind of journalism".

Internal documents leaked before the film's release authored by the National Fisheries Institute, a trade group representing the US seafood industry, revealed a new media strategy to protect the fishing industry and to characterize the then-unreleased documentary as a "dishonest attack." The National Fisheries Institute appealed to Netflix ahead of the film's release to "distinguish between legitimate documentaries and propaganda", stating "audiences will not recognize the film’s true agenda [as] a vegan indoctrination movie".

Scientific accuracy

Empty oceans by 2048 statement

The film said that a leading fisheries expert found "that if current fishing trends continue, we will see virtually empty oceans by the year 2048."

This prediction originates from a 2006 study by a team of marine ecologists led by Dr. Boris Worm published in Science, where it appears as a sidenote. In the final paragraphs of the study, the authors extrapolated from the percentage of fisheries that have already collapsed and predicted that in 32 years no more fish would be caught in the ocean. This received backlash from the fisheries scientists, notably Dr. Ray Hilborn, as they claimed that the study ignores fisheries that are doing well. However, the authors defended their analyses.

In 2007, Dr. Worm and Dr. Hilborn decided to collaborate, along with a team of 20 other scientists, to compare their respective projections and create better databases that will be respected by both marine ecologists and fisheries scientists. The resulting study was published in 2009, in Science. The study recognised that in intensively managed fisheries in developed countries, ecosystems showed recovery following fisheries management and conservation actions, caveating that the paper's scope encompassed "less than a quarter of world fisheries area and catch". Concluding that "effective controls on exploitation rates are still lacking in vast areas of the ocean", the study expressed hope that "ecosystems can still recover if exploitation are reduced substantially". It suggested "combined fisheries and conservation objectives can be achieved by merging diverse management actions" but that this would be a major challenge in poorer regions where alternatives to fisheries are lacking.

In a press conference following the 2009 study, Dr. Worm said, "this paper shows that our oceans are not a lost cause". When pressed about the 2048 claim, he is quoted to have jokingly said, "I very much hope I will be alive in 2048 and I have given some thought to whether I will have a seafood party or not".

Dolphin-safe tuna

Further information: Dolphin safe label

The film criticises dolphin safe labels on tuna and says that "the internationally recognized seafood label was a complete fabrication since it guaranteed nothing".This is in response to Mark Palmer, associate director of the International Marine Mammal Project of the Earth Island Institute, who says that "dolphin safe" tuna cannot be guaranteed and that observers can be bribed. Palmer has accused the documentary of taking him out of context.

Senior fisheries scientist Sarah McDonald of Monterey Bay Aquarium told Newsweek: "The U.S. dolphin-safe program has been very effective. Dolphin mortality in the 1980s was 130,000. In 2018, there were 819 documented deaths. If your product has a dolphin-safe label, you are legally obligated not to sell tuna where dolphins were injured, killed, or set upon. It doesn't mean dolphins aren't interacting with the tuna fisheries; it means that tuna can't be sold in this country."

A representative of the Natural Resources Defense Council however acknowledged that although "the U.S. laws are good if everyone is being honest, that doesn't mean nothing ever gets in. [Law enforcement] can't catch it all."

A Newsweek fact check concluded that dolphin safe labels cannot guarantee that no dolphins are harmed during fishing.

Other statements

The film says that fishing nets make up 46% of the Great Pacific garbage patch. This statement derives from a 2018 study, which examines floating marine debris by weight.

Charles Clover, author of The End of the Line, criticised Seaspiracy's framing of whale strandings. He said: "we were expected to believe that all these whales had died because of plastic in the ocean" and highlighted the phenomenon occurs has a variety of causes, including disorientation and noise pollution.

People featured

• Ric O'Barry
• Jonathan Balcombe
• Sylvia Earle
• George Monbiot
• Callum Roberts
• Chris Langdon
• Cyrill Gutsch
• Richard Oppenlander
• Paul de Gelder
• Lori Marino
• Karmenu Vella (former European Commissioner for Fishing and Maritime Affairs)
• Dominique Barnes (Co-founder of New Wave Foods & Marine Biologist)
• Gary Stokes
• from Sea Shepherd Conservation Society:
  • Paul Watson
  • Lamya Essemlali
  • Peter Hammarstedt

See also

• Human impact on marine life
• Marine conservation
• Sustainable fishery
• The Cove, a film about dolphin fishing
• The End of the Line, a book and film about overfishing and the effect of climate change on wild fish

External links

• Seaspiracy at Rotten Tomatoes
• Seaspiracy at IMDb