My whole thing is that they're definitely filling a niche.
I don't disagree!
1) to some degree most people have their pets for companionship and entertainment, building a business around that isn't the end of the world.
2) a successful business has to aggressively market or they go out of business and fail.
Sure. It worked for P.T. Barnum! Not to get too anti-capitalist, profit is great, but when you are profiting off of
appearing to have expertise, the buyer gets to criticize your expertise. I reserve the right, personally, to be skeptical towards anyone who repackages food, toys, or information and sells it for a higher price than it is available elsewhere. Skeptical, not hating. Actually, if BT marketed themselves as performers trying to bring contemporary, humane behavioral science into the training of performing animals (instead of promoting themselves as behaviorists first and foremost), I think you'd see less negativity! All it would take would be framing themselves consistently as learners, not experts with consultation fees.
in the present as we see with the labor crisis for example, real world experience can compete with book knowledge.
Most of the behaviorists Monica listed in the link I included
do have more hands on experience than academic clout, in fact. The
extent and nature of that experience is exactly why I ultimately find them more compelling.
if I were moderating a lot of the lack of source work by those alleging things would not fly - you need links and pictures to back those up.
I don't want to pass my place as a relative newcomer, but this ain't Wikipedia. This is a forum for community discussion. There is no burden of proof that anyone here is obligated to meet in order to criticize some YouTubers. Forum rules are the only standard users need adhere to-- how much opinion and anecdote shared here you choose to believe is up to you.
Honestly, though, speaking as both a librarian and educator, the implied "I can't be bothered to Google Barbara Heidenreich" is a pretty weak objection. If you really care to know why some folks are saying "I find these animal behaviorists more authoritative that these self-marketed behaviorists",
read their work, full stop. What do they have to say? How long have they been working in the field? What is their academic background? Who have they worked with? How long? Are they mentioned in peer-reviewed publications, or do they themselves reference peer-reviewed publications? Are they familiar with contemporary theories and methods, or do they reference stereotypical and outdated theories and methods?
You'll notice for plenty of users here, all it took was one recommendation of "flooding" techniques for them to check out and put BT in the "marketing savvy amateurs" bin. A biologist hearing someone speak confidently of "alpha" wolves would have the same reaction. There is some bad science that, if you have done just the
baseline of self-education, you will recognize.
With internet access, you have the entire world (information and misinformation) at your fingertips. Information literacy is fraught these days, but reading and learning to evaluate resources yourself is well worth it.