Comments on: What media bias?

By: E T John

E T John — Fri, 08 Sep 2006 04:36:22 +0000

You ALWAYS know it’s a Pit Bull or mix simply by the title of the story. Here in lovely Norfolk, VA we had an Animal Control officer encounter two of them. The story title? “Animal Control Officer Attacked By Two Pit Bulls!!” For the record, the dogs ran up to and jumped up on the ACO, “placing their paws on his chest”, but the man was NOT bitten – not even a little bit. All three local stations breathlessly covered this so-called-event.

Not soon after we had a “Three Year-Old Boy Mauled By Dog!” (See, D-o-g!) Turns out the dog belonged to his fathers’ roommate, and was a Golden Retriever/Yellow Lab mix. Dog tore off half the kids’ face, and he had to be airlifted to the local childrens’ hospital. 300 stitches, and future surgery needed to repair muscle and nerve damage. The dog was quarantined IN THE HOME, deemed not dangerous, and released back to his owner.

Now just try to guess which story got more coverage? And what do you suppose would have happened to the Lab/Retriever mix had he been, oh let’s say, a Pit Bull, or a Doberman, or a Rottweiler? Quarantined at home and released to owner? I hardly think so.

Media bias is not only alive and well, it also quite blatant.

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 03:45:44 +0000

The more I think on this, the more I think the news organization should adopt a consistent policy. Either always identify the breed of the dog, or never do so. In the past, this particular organization has identified the breed when the breed was "pit bull." Still, if it was a pit in this case, this is how it ought to be covered.

By: Austin Mike

Austin Mike — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 16:48:42 +0000

Rather than focus on the lack of species identification, I’d like to commend the author of the news article for pointing out that “the attack was stopped” by three shots, as opposed to the many other more negative ways of reporting that. Examples would be, “the dog was killed, shot three times,” “multiple shots were fired at the dog,” or “even after the dog was shot once the officer continued shooting.”

So kudos for more than just the lack of sensationalism.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 16:15:19 +0000

tom, i concur.

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 16:14:51 +0000

Actually, it’d be worth finding out if it was a pit bull; because if it was, and this is the story they ran, then the news bureau should be commended.

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 10:25:13 +0000

’cause if it was, the title would have been something like ‘Pit bull shot after rampage’

By: M. Neal

M. Neal — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 09:56:24 +0000

How do you know it wasn’t a pit bull?