A South Korean TV personality has responded to criticism after sharing images of himself interacting with a white lion during a trip to Tanzania, Africa. The photos sparked a heated debate about whether the animals were drugged to enable close human contact.
The broadcaster defended his visit by releasing direct correspondence with the safari facility. According to the messages shared on social media, the business operator explained that tranquilizer medications for animals are strictly regulated in Tanzania and can only be obtained through government channels, even for surgical procedures.
The facility further clarified that lions naturally rest during afternoon hours, being active only in early morning and evening periods. They emphasized that the photographs were clearly taken during the animals’ natural rest time.
The controversy began when the celebrity posted pictures showing himself petting the lion’s belly and walking alongside the large cat on the Tanzanian plains. His caption mentioned “touching the fur of a sleeping lion.”
An Africa travel specialist company questioned the authenticity of the experience, suggesting the animal appeared sedated rather than naturally sleeping. The agency pointed to the lion’s eyes and behavior as evidence, claiming facilities sometimes use sedatives or tranquilizers to make the animals lethargic and docile for tourist interactions.
The travel company warned against romanticizing such encounters, expressing concern that these practices could expand into a harmful industry.
In his initial response, the celebrity shared promotional materials from the accommodation he visited, which emphasized “ethical wildlife interaction.” He noted that he chose the facility based on keywords like government oversight, treatment, recovery, and natural release programs.
He acknowledged the travel agency’s concerns and stated that if the allegations proved true, he would be willing to address the issue collaboratively.
The travel agency later softened its stance, acknowledging that the broadcaster likely believed the facility operated ethically and was understandably upset by the accusations. They clarified that any criticism should be directed at the business rather than tourists who were unaware of potential problems.
The agency issued an apology, stating that both the lions and deceived travelers are victims of this industry. They requested that public criticism of the celebrity cease, explaining their original intent was to raise awareness about questionable practices in lion tourism, not to harm an individual who visited the facility in good faith.