[Abishai100]

When a celebrity such as Jennifer Connelly (star of Requiem for a Dream) makes an appearance at SeaWorld (iconic chain of water-life parks), people notice that a cross-section of society is involved in environment-focused 'imagination.'

Sure, Aquaman (DC Comics) is 'environment-oriented' too but he doesn't necessarily inspire eco-activism, so SeaWorld *technically* would not inspire 'eco-consciousness' in visitors/spectators. Nevertheless, media exposure of society icons/celebrities making appearances at zoos or national parks or at SeaWorld reminds everyone of the basic global interest in exhilarating/refreshing natural environments (for praise, contemplation, fun, etc.).

Is this the impact of modern-media --- e.g., National Geographic TV, Smithsonian Channel, Discovery Channel, Science Channel, etc., etc.?

If so, how should corporations look to capitalize and how should eco-monitors supervise? This is a question that I think President Trump can and should address!



====




TRUMP: I'd like to see more magazine ads about SeaWorld.
CARTER: Magazines are being outmoded by Web-surfing interests.
TRUMP: Not necessarily true; people still appreciate newspapers.
CARTER: Convenience is the new hallmark...
TRUMP: Sure, and that's why we like seeing celebrities as SeaWorld.
CARTER: Sure, if you see Jennifer Connelly at SeaWorld, you feel inspired.
TRUMP: Media icons (celebrities) are 'society-customs' diplomats now.
CARTER: Weren't they always that?
TRUMP: No, that developed seriously after MTV/Facebook.
CARTER: How can the government benefit from media groupies?
TRUMP: Photos/videos of SeaWorld remind people of Mother Nature.
CARTER: We need a legal-team assessing media-impact on folk-politics.
TRUMP: That will be the challenge of the modern journalist...




====