A magic trick in which an illusionist commanded six goldfish to swim synchronized patterns in a shallow pool won much applause at CCTV's annual Spring Festival Gala a few weeks back.

The performance made magician Fu Yandong an overnight star. Yet, it also attracted the attention of several animal rights activists, who immediately suspected the showman of mistreating the creatures involved in his act.

I actually watched the gala on the night and didn't at any point get the feeling that these lovely fish were being tortured. On the contrary, I thought it was a wonderful show, one full of surprises. I'd bet the majority of the studio audience felt the same way, otherwise why else would they have given it such a response at the end?

When I heard days later about how angry the animal rights groups are, I felt they were just making an unnecessary fuss. How can they be so sure Fu has abused these goldfish? It's not like they can feel vicariously for the fish. Apparently, the campaigners are not so sure either, given the lack of evidence, and have been trying to compel the magician to vindicate himself by revealing the secret behind the trick. Fu has so far stood firm, however, and in the end the protestors ganged up and successfully pressured CCTV executives to cancel his scheduled appearance on the Lantern Festival on Feb 17.

Shouldn't these people at least give the magician the benefit of the doubt before they know for sure how the trick is done?

Reading up on the story online, I discovered that what lit the fuse was some lousy imitators who posted their macabre experiments with goldfish online. Of course, all of their attempts flopped like a lead balloon.

OK, this somewhat justifies the concerns of animal protection groups. I can understand that they fear that the trick might encourage reckless behavior that results in the abuse of fish. But that still doesn't justify the way they dealt with the issue.

They played hardball, yet was it really wise to demand the Lantern Festival show be cancelled? If the fish are not harmed during the act, as the magician has repeatedly stated on his blog and in the press, is it fair to cut the show just over the fear of inspiring copycats? After all, cases of people experimenting with fish have been few and far between.

Canceling things to avoid such problems is simply papering over the cracks. Should they also ban animal shows at circuses, where no doubt tougher and more inhumane taming techniques are used?

For those who conduct gross behavior and post it online, is keeping them from watching the show going to rectify their disregard toward animals? Even if they miss the goldfish trick, who knows what other animals may die in their hands next time they get "inspired" by another innocent show.

I've seen magicians cut people in half, but I never heard of people rushing to do similar experiments or calls from human rights organizations to cancel the shows because of human abuse.

It's not the show that's at fault but the general lack of awareness over animal rights. My suggestion would be to use the show's huge success to popularize the concept of animal protection. Activists can ask the magician to call his audience during the show not to hurt animals, not just goldfish.

I believe that once people see these cute performances and then see the horrible aftermath of animal abuse, they will get the idea pretty quickly. It would be the ultimate approach to raising awareness of animal protection.

After all, forcing a magician to violate the magical code and taking away his means of making a living is not the best way to go. He needs to be protected, too.

The author works for Chinadaily.com.cn.

China Daily