Misrepresentation of invasive species in the mass media with images of unrelated organisms

Public interest in invasive species and their impacts on ecosystems has grown in recent years, fueled not only by coordinated scientific efforts (Roy et al., 2023) but also by international media coverage (Cai, 2023; Chung, 2023; Greenfield, 2023; Regan, 2023). Communication theory underscores that the mass media plays a key role in setting agenda and shaping public opinion across diverse societies and cultures (McCombs & Valenzuela, 2021). Accordingly, accurate portrayals of invasive species and biological invasions in print and digital news, magazines, and social media are indispensable for promoting public understanding of these environmental problems as complex socioecological phenomena (Courchamp et al., 2017; Kueffer & Larson, 2014; Larson, 2005). Effective reporting can even boost public support and engagement with management efforts, such as citizen science initiatives for detecting invasive species (Haley et al., 2023; Koen & Newton, 2021). Yet, despite their potential to shape public awareness and opinion, portrayals of invasive species in the mass media remain understudied (but see Ballari & Barrios-García, 2022; Car et al., 2023; Woodworth et al., 2023).

Although some attention has been paid to the tone and language used in media reports on invasive species (Car et al., 2023), another fundamental challenge is ensuring that the images featured accurately portray the species discussed, instead of other unrelated organisms. This is a pertinent issue for reports on invasive species of lesser known and diverse groups, such as numerous invertebrates (Turner et al., 2021; Wong et al., 2023). Problems are especially likely to occur when journalists are only provided with common names and lack access to accurate images of the organisms. This tends to promote the undesirable sourcing of images from stock image repositories, which can contain vast inaccuracies.

Consider recent media coverage on the red imported fire ant (Solenopsis invicta), one of the world's most damaging and widespread invasive species (Lowe et al., 2000). International news reports from the past year discussing S. invicta infestations in Australia (Gillespie, 2023; Vidler, 2024), Asia (Khoo, 2024), and Europe (Heath, 2024; Knapton, 2023; Symons, 2023) featured images depicting a variety of other ant species (Figure 1), all of which were incorrectly identified as “fire ant” in the captions. The credits of many images suggested they were sourced from stock image repositories such as iStock (istockphoto.com) and Getty Images (gettyimages.com). When I performed an image search for “red imported fire ant” on these 2 platforms, only 3 out of the top 40 images depicted ants of the fire ant genus Solenopsis. All others displayed species from morphologically and taxonomically distinct genera (e.g., Atta, Formica, Iridomyrmex, Myrmica, Oecophylla, Pogonomyrmex, Tapinoma) (Figure 1).

The repercussions of inaccurate depictions of the wrong organisms as invasive species in the mass media are nontrivial. They risk perpetuating negative stereotypes about native species, misdirecting management efforts, or causing unwarranted public alarm. For instance, one article (Khoo, 2024) from a leading media outlet in Southeast Asia warned of the severe medical effects of venomous stings by S. invicta, but featured an image of Oecophylla smaragdina—a native ant species commonly found in forests and urban parks and gardens, which not only lacks a sting, but moreover plays key roles in multiple ecosystem functions regionally (Crozier et al., 2010).

At a fundamental level, scientific inaccuracies in media reports undermine scientific credibility. The persistence of taxonomic inaccuracies and confusion in media reports on invasive species risks eroding public trust in conservation and management actions, which can already be provocative and contentious (Crowley et al., 2017; Larson, 2005).

As scientists, we should take proactive measures to mitigate the spread of taxonomic inconsistencies in the media. Unfortunately, once an article is published in the rapid news cycle, identifying and rectifying errors becomes arduous. Therefore, it is crucial to establish effective communication with journalists from the outset.

As far as possible, we should provide journalists with accurate images that emphasize distinctive features that can aid in identifying invasive species and distinguishing these from other species. For example, a British news report on the invasive Vespa velutina by Sherratt (2024) features a diagram that contrasts the size and abdominal markings of this species with other common Hymenoptera found locally. If accurate images are not in our possession, we can point journalists to reliable taxon-specific image repositories (e.g., AntWeb, 2024) or photographers and illustrators with taxonomic expertise. At bare minimum, we should provide journalists with species’ scientific names, underscore the importance of using these consistently, and explain the pitfalls of exclusively using common names (Stevens et al., 2014).

Addressing inconsistencies and misrepresentations in the media ultimately requires concerted efforts from both scientists and journalists. By working together to promote accuracy and transparency in media portrayals, we can safeguard the integrity of ecological science and bolster effective conservation practices. This collaboration not only enhances public understanding, but also strengthens support for vital conservation efforts worldwide.