IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v30y2008i2p194-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bring ‘Em back alive: Taming the Tasmanian tiger cloning project

Author

Listed:
  • Fletcher, Amy Lynn

Abstract

In September 1999, the Australian Museum in Sydney launched a high-profile research project to use ancient DNA in an attempt to clone the extinct thylacine (colloquially known as the Tasmanian tiger). This paper analyzes how Australian mass media—and the stakeholders who contributed to news coverage of the project—represented the notion of “bringing back” the thylacine. Specifically, it applies monster theory to an analysis of how stakeholders tried to domesticate the relatively new conservation tool of ancient DNA and thus bring it in line with cultural norms and conservation paradigms. The case study does not judge whether or not it will become possible to clone an extinct species. Instead, it focuses on public reaction to the idea of using the tools of ancient DNA to “resurrect” an extinct and iconic species, in order to evaluate one highly visible confrontation between society and biotechnology.

Suggested Citation

  • Fletcher, Amy Lynn, 2008. "Bring ‘Em back alive: Taming the Tasmanian tiger cloning project," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 194-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:30:y:2008:i:2:p:194-201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.12.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X07000930
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.12.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucy Odling-Smee, 2005. "Dollars and sense," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7059), pages 614-616, September.
    2. Smits, Martijntje, 2006. "Taming monsters: The cultural domestication of new technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 489-504.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manca, Terra, 2018. "Fear, rationality, and risky others: A qualitative analysis of physicians' and nurses' accounts of popular vaccine narratives," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 119-125.
    2. Iulie Aslaksen & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2006. ""The worth of a wildflower" Precautionary perspectives on the environmental risk of GMOs," Discussion Papers 476, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    3. Michael Morrison & Stevienna de Saille, 2019. "CRISPR in context: towards a socially responsible debate on embryo editing," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Preston, Christopher J. & Wickson, Fern, 2016. "Broadening the lens for the governance of emerging technologies: Care ethics and agricultural biotechnology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 48-57.
    5. Monaghan, Conal & Bizumic, Boris & Van Rooy, Dirk, 2020. "An analysis of public attitudes in Australia towards applications of biotechnology to humans: Kinds, causes, and effects," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. Aslaksen, Iulie & Ingeborg Myhr, Anne, 2007. ""The worth of a wildflower": Precautionary perspectives on the environmental risk of GMOs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 489-497, January.
    7. Josie Carwardine & Kerrie A Wilson & Matt Watts & Andres Etter & Carissa J Klein & Hugh P Possingham, 2008. "Avoiding Costly Conservation Mistakes: The Importance of Defining Actions and Costs in Spatial Priority Setting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(7), pages 1-6, July.
    8. Rice, James, 2022. "Recreancy and the social origins of radiophobia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:30:y:2008:i:2:p:194-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.