In this paper, we explore the news messaging surrounding the introduction and expansion of Blue Catfish Ictalurus furcatus in mid‐Atlantic tidal waters. In the early news reports surrounding the non‐native catfish controversy, the species was described with hyperboles and terms that evoked threats, danger, and the need for caution, all of which make science‐based debate difficult. Three evidence‐based models of invasion effects refer to introduced species as passengers, back‐seat drivers, and drivers of ecosystem degradation. Like other non‐native species introduced and supported by humans, the Blue Catfish story should shift from the invasiveness metaphor to one of collaborative problem solving to conserve elements of our natural heritage in the face of growing pressures from urbanizing watersheds. We recommend that scientists and managers, in all their communications, avoid value‐laden language and focus on exploration of evidence to support alternative management interventions, rather than promoting automatic management positions without considering all aspects of the problem.

中文翻译：

---

夸张，明喻，隐喻和侵入：关于非本地蓝Cat鱼扩张的信息

在本文中，我们探索了有关蓝Cat鱼Ictalurus furcatus的引进和扩展的新闻消息。在大西洋中部潮汐水域中。在有关非本地cat鱼之争的早期新闻报道中，该物种被描述为带有夸张的词和引起威胁，危险和需要谨慎的术语，所有这些使基于科学的辩论变得困难。三种基于证据的入侵效应模型将引入的物种称为旅客，后座驱动因素和生态系统退化的驱动因素。像其他人类引入和支持的非本地物种一样，面对流域城市化带来的越来越大的压力，蓝Cat鱼的故事应该从入侵性隐喻转向协作解决问题之一，以保护我们的自然遗产。我们建议科学家和管理人员在所有交流中，