In early 2025, a social media influencer sparked widespread outrage after posting a video online in which she picked up a young bare‐nosed wombat ( Vombatus ursinus ) from the side of a road, separating it from another wombat, presumed to be its mother. This act ignited public and professional discussions regarding the welfare of wildlife, the responsibility of content creators and the need for stricter guidelines on human‐wildlife interactions within and outside digital media. An ethical analysis of the incident was undertaken through the lens of four moral principles: nonmaleficence, beneficence, autonomy and justice. The analysis validated the concerns raised by the public regarding potential harms to the young animal, maternal distress and the risks associated with viewers of the video imitating the experience with other wild animals. Although the video footage caused much upset, it provided an opportunity to critically evaluate depictions of wildlife, including handling, and their potential impact on animal welfare. It underscores an acknowledgement that other, less sensationalised, depictions of wildlife could be created in circumstances that compromise animals and could have unintended adverse impacts beyond the posting of a single photo or video. Animal professionals must consider carefully the impact of their digital presence on audiences and ensure featured wild animals are not handled unnecessarily or used as props. Suggested guidelines for online imagery and other content have been developed for a university‐based wildlife teaching hospital and other clinical settings in light of this analysis. Other organisations are encouraged to consider doing the same.
Campbell-Ward et al. (2025) studied this question.