I just can't believe this article
 

I can't believe this article/blog. Hasn't been any bully news lately so lets let reporters blog about them for hits
[url]http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2011/04/chow-comes-prepared-for-the-pitbull.html[/url]

OK so that poor unfortunate person is mental deficient. In little words. She has no brain. May the next door she knocks on be infested with flying monkeys and big a$$ed bedbugs. What a :loser:

I don't see anywhere in the article where the woman had any issues whatsoever about the dog. As a matter of fact, she is an animal lover who has campaigned for the regulation of pet foods in Canada.

I see the views in the story as being strictly that of the reporter, James Cudmore. I have no idea why he chose to write such a ridiculous article but if he wanted to score some points with his readers he obviously missed the mark, judging from the majority of the comments to the article. I got quite a chuckle out of some of the comments and rated most of them up.

It never ceases to amaze me how ridiculous journalists can be :frustrated:

I don't get it?:shrug: is it not a good article? is he not saying that even though the dog was built like a body builder but was really nice and was changing his mind about pitbull=trouble and book=cover? I must be missing something.

My take is that [B]even thought [/B] the dog was extremely well behaved, the owner totally in control and Ms. Chow completely at ease with the dog, the guy who wrote the article still couldn't get over his bias against the dog, based solely on looks and preconception.

Off-topic (sorta') - I understand that it probably was a slow news day but why oh why didn't he just yakk about the weather instead????

[QUOTE=Mirela;1003765]My take is that [B]even thought [/B] the dog was extremely well behaved, the owner totally in control and Ms. Chow completely at ease with the dog, the guy who wrote the article still couldn't get over his bias against the dog, based solely on looks and preconception.

[/QUOTE]

That's how I took it too.

journalists usually have multiple stories written and a lot of times, believe it or not, the editor will send out a mass email asking for any article that is in the top 25 "active interest" list to be sent to him to fill a certain size space in a newspaper....

[QUOTE=Melinda;1003747]I don't get it?:shrug: is it not a good article? is he not saying that even though the dog was built like a body builder but was really nice and was changing his mind about pitbull=trouble and book=cover? I must be missing something.[/QUOTE]

Same here Melinda , I read it twice , saw nothing wrong with the article. :shrug: Then again , you always have people feeling attacked , screaming bloody murder as soon as "Pitbulls" are mention.

[QUOTE=Mirela;1003765] the owner totally in control
[/QUOTE]

quoted from the article :

"He forced his way out the door and into the hall"

not too much control there.

I know this dog personally and Rocky's owner very, very well. Olivia Chow knows Rocky very well too. Nothing in this article is as it actually happened. Other than Rocky's famous slobbery kisses that is. The article is yet another example of extreme bias and incredibly irresponsible non-journalism ONCE AGAIN.

the article was probably edited two ways to sunday, my son will have his articles in the ottawa citizen and have roughly 1,500 words cut out each time.

[QUOTE=Shaykeija;1003705]OK so that poor unfortunate person is mental deficient. In little words. She has no brain. May the next door she knocks on be infested with flying monkeys and big a$$ed bedbugs. What a :loser:[/QUOTE]

:) Actually, she is one of the VERY few politicians I *trust*. She does what she says she's going to do. She is a passionate advocate for the poor and disenfranchised and absolutely loves animals. She and The Rockstar have a [U]very[/U] special relationship. If I were an NDPer and in her riding I would campaign for her in a heartbeat.

No bad on you Shayk... how could you know? We tend to trust journalists a little too much ~ me too!

It's one of the more assinine non-news articles I've read. I mean, this WAS supposed to be about HER right?

I'm with you on that MMM, Olivia Chow and her husband are great advocates for the needy. I would vote for either one in a heartbeat.

[QUOTE=mummummum;1003786]I know this dog personally and Rocky's owner very, very well. Olivia Chow knows Rocky very well too. Nothing in this article is as it actually happened. Other than Rocky's famous slobbery kisses that is. The article is yet another example of extreme bias and incredibly irresponsible non-journalism ONCE AGAIN.[/QUOTE]

Is Rocky's owner a member here mx3?

Yes m'dear. BabyRocky1. She is very very busy with fighting BSL and organizing and supporting Pitbull guardians/ lovers/supporters across the world and as such, isn't able to post often. The Rockstar (Rocky) is a true *breed* ambassador.

[QUOTE=mummummum;1003835]Yes m'dear. BabyRocky1. She is very very busy with fighting BSL and organizing and supporting Pitbull guardians/ lovers/supporters across the world and as such, isn't able to post often. The Rockstar (Rocky) is a true *breed* ambassador.[/QUOTE]

That's what I thought. :lovestruck:

In fact, here is the *vicious* pitbull with the toofies..." It wasn't that they were bared (although they were) so much as the they were attached to a giant set of muscular jaws".

[CENTER][ATTACH]73348[/ATTACH][/CENTER]

[QUOTE=mummummum;1003838]In fact, here is the *vicious* pitbull with the toofies..." It wasn't that they were bared (although they were) so much as the they were attached to a giant set of muscular jaws".

[CENTER][ATTACH]73348[/ATTACH][/CENTER][/QUOTE]

:eek: One could drown in doggy slobbers should Rocky decide to give kisses :eek:. :cloud9:.

I adore Rocky. He is now 12, can barely walk, has a Rockstar Mobile to get around, he has permanent scarring and almost constant bleeds on his nose owing to the muzzles yet NEVER and I mean NEVER does he cease to amaze me with his incredible patience, willingness to love, incredible good manners and...well, just look at the beauty of his soul ~ it shines in his face.

:censored:, this article makes me see red. It's so :censored: typical of the :censored: media and the :censored: politicians and the :censored: people who are naive enough to buy into the hype.

Yup... I'm primed and pumped. Thanks for posting that ERykah. Anybody need an edumecation? I'm in "the mood". :evil:

go get em mumX3

Being a bully guardian, all I'm saying on the topic is....
Rocky has one big beautiful bully smile!:lovestruck:

Does he ever :D
I've decided to leave this one alone after some comments until it was discovered who's dog was in question

Rocky is one handsome boy

I think you are taking that article entirely the wrong way. It's hilarious, as he meant it to be. I laughed right through it. The way he spoke about himself is so funny, scared of a big smiley dog while two ladies weren't. LOL. What a chicken. And the slobbery tongue hanging out from between parted, slobbery teeth .... come on, he could have said much worse if he was having a shot at the breed.
Lovely smile by the way, our cattle dogs often have the muscling that enables them to smile too.

But he could have mentioned it, I find it was left so vague that it could be taken either way depending on how you stand on the breed.

[QUOTE=Goldfields;1004360]I think you are taking that article entirely the wrong way. It's hilarious, as he meant it to be. I laughed right through it. The way he spoke about himself is so funny, scared of a big smiley dog while two ladies weren't. LOL. What a chicken. And the slobbery tongue hanging out from between parted, slobbery teeth .... come on, he could have said much worse if he was having a shot at the breed.
Lovely smile by the way, our cattle dogs often have the muscling that enables them to smile too.[/QUOTE]

Maybe you did, but with the attitude the general public here in Ontario has on pitbulls, it would have been taken as "see, pitbulls are to be feared". Pitbulls do NOT need any further negative publicity. The pic was not published with the article for people to see what a harmless dog Rocky is.

[QUOTE=Goldfields;1004360]I think you are taking that article entirely the wrong way. It's hilarious, as he meant it to be. I laughed right through it. The way he spoke about himself is so funny, scared of a big smiley dog while two ladies weren't. LOL. What a chicken. And the slobbery tongue hanging out from between parted, slobbery teeth .... come on, he could have said much worse if he was having a shot at the breed.
Lovely smile by the way, our cattle dogs often have the muscling that enables them to smile too.[/QUOTE]

Dawg knows I tried to see it that way GF...and thank you for bringing a different perspective.

I would like to live in a province ~ a world ~ where we can one day mock absurdities such as that which you point out. But, I cannot because we live in a province where dogs are legally removed from their families and killed simply because of the way they look. Perpetuating stereotypes with media hype and moronic politicians looking for a "if it bleeds it leads" headline and the knee-jerk reactionaries who vote for them have brought us Breed Specific Legislation.

What I read in this blog is tabloid schlock. The author is meant to be covering the campaign trail. Do you know anymore about Olivia or the NDP's platform since reading this other than she likes dogs? I don't. So where's the news? Where's the investigative journalism?

When I read this, I tried to step out of my anti-BSL mindset and my pro-pitbull bias. I also tried to step out of my "dog smarts" for a moment and read it as a casual reader. The *real truth* of the casual reader is to step into the shoes of someone who isn't knowledgeable about dogs, perhaps even fearful of dogs.

Pitbulls in particular, rarely get "good news" stories printed. If we read something negative often enough and it is reiterated by the people we elect to govern us, who then make law which reinforce both our unspoken and recognized fears ~ we will believe something like Breed Specific legislation to be valid and just and good. The media bias against pitbulls has been well studied and proven.

We should be able to laugh at ourselves I agree but, t's not as if this was an obviously tongue-in-cheek "cartoon".If he had interjected at some point or ended the article along the lines of "Boy, am I an idiot for being fearful of such a sweet dog" the story could have been funny and self-mocking. And until the laws are changed, I am unable to laugh at/with prejudice and discrimination, particularly when it leads to the death of an innocent who cannot speak for themselves.

A quick and dirty poll of my dog/ non-dog friends found it was received as neither funny nor self-mocking. I conclude that It was a sly, underhanded attempt to further denigrate pitbulls and their owners with a slap-dash of "sarcasm" thrown on as disguise.

Perhaps the Australian experience with Breed Specific Legislation is different given it's lengthy history in your country. All I know is, I don't want it in mine now or ever.

[QUOTE=Love4himies;1004395]it would have been taken as "see, pitbulls are to be feared". .[/QUOTE]

but I think that would have been the message had Rocky 'proved' to be 'mean', which clearly wasn't the case.

I don't know, I read the article as the reporter sort of making fun of himself and his own preconceptions about the breed, acknowledging that it's wrong to judge a book by its cover but that he can't really help it. I think it's acknowledging a problem in a humorous way. Maybe next reader who goes out and meets a bully breed will remember Rocky and will be more inclined to face their fears, irrational as they may be? :fingerscr

I understand the sensitivity though.

Well maybe nothing happened as the article said but I'm another who has no problem with it. I think it's cute and realistic in it's portrayal of a person who is nervous of a dog but discovers, a bit unwillingly, that the dog is not so bad.

Oh. I should have simply dittoed Onster. :)

[QUOTE=onster;1004409]Maybe next reader who goes out and meets a bully breed will remember Rocky and will be more inclined to face their fears, irrational as they may be? :fingerscr

I understand the sensitivity though.[/QUOTE]

Or could remember:

[I][COLOR="Red"]As it was, the teeth were very off-putting. It wasn't that they were bared (although they were) so much as the they were attached to a giant set of muscular jaws.[/COLOR][/I]

or

[I][COLOR="red"]The teeth and the jaws might have been a little less worrisome, if they weren't attached to those wide strong shoulders rippling with taut muscles. But they were. And the shoulders, in turn, were attached to a barrel of a chest, and thick haunches.[/COLOR][/I]

or


[I][COLOR="red"]Rocky, it seemed to me, liked to pump iron.

Or eat it.

Now with people, I make it a habit not to judge a book by its cover.

There was a time in my life when some of my best friends dressed like hoodlums... Each, of course, was a peach.

But with dogs, I'm still stuck on book = cover.

[B]And to my (at least when it comes to canines) judgmental mind, Pit Bulls = trouble[/B].[/COLOR][/I]

It's obviously a matter of opinion L4H, but to me, what he wrote above is just setting the stage, or explaining why he has that irrational fear. Out of context, sure it sounds bad (very bad), but I would hope that readers would read the whole article and get the 'moral' of the story :shrug:

In fact, I think him using such intense stereotypical/negative descriptors in his writing helps the cause. Contrasted against how happy go lucky the pup actually is/was, it shows you just how much more laughable these stereotypes are :2cents: