Well, there's always room for improvement. Personally I'm all for shifting more zoo focus to education, and entertainment value can still remain intact. Zoos are basically animal museums, and there are plenty of museums that work to be fun AND educational. Though I think if we want zoos to be more educational, and do more conservation stuff, public image might have to be changed. In the mainstream, zoos are treated more as fun places to take kids and look at the pretty animals. Lots of people aren't going to zoos with intent to learn, and often mostly have interest in just seeing a few select animals. Maybe have advertisements and awareness campaigns to get people interested in the rarer, obscure species. There's no such thing as a boring animal.
I think most zoos are also scared to make that first step, getting that animal no one else has, and then as is said in the article the support from other zoos is not always there... sadly... It's true though when you go to the zoo nowdays you expect to see giraffes, tigers, lions and other impressive (appearance wise as zoos are mainly visual) animals you wouldn't be able to get that close to in other circumstances... some of the more (may I say) "plainer" species such as the hawaiian crow (exctinct in the wild now I believe) doesn't have that wow effect that zoos want to give and there comes the question of what the right balance needs to be between entertainment and visitors coming in on one side and conservation on the other...
