i know we've talked this subject to death with regards dangerous dogs etc but i was having a wee look on the net there, one of the things that comes up when you google dog attack is an article published by the BBC (supposedly a reputable news company) about a rttwieller attack a few years ago

"The 20-stone animal clamped the child around the head with its jaws and pulled her away."

sorry but thats either made up or is one fat rottie!

how can they justify such scaremongering and lies? makes me sick

also, the pic on this link
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1302630,00.html

the article says they don;t know if the dog was attacking the man, what does the picture suggest though?

Don't these so called newspeople talk some BS.

Its this kind of reporting that causes all the trouble.

I suppose the injuries on the man will decide whether the dog was helping or not. The media does sensationalise dog stories but this doesn't mean that dogs don't attack their owners for what seems no apparent reason. 

I read a few years ago about a woman who was mowing her lawn when her much loved Dobermann attacked her from behind.  The woman didn't see the attack coming and the dog was supposedly of lovely temperament.  What's more the woman bred the dog herself and had been breeding dogs for decades.  I remember that the article conveyed how heartbroken the woman was not just because she had to have the dog destroyed but that her faith in her own dogs had been destroyed.  She had felt that the dog that attacked her had been 100% trustworthy.  She assumes that the lawnmower set the dog off although the dog was familiar with the lawnmower being used.  It might have been the dog suffered some type of siezure or something, unfortunately dogs just can't tell us what's going on in their canine minds.

I can't for the life of me find the article on t'internet so I think I must have read about it somewhere else.

thats what i think, plus the total morons who post in response. just been looking on the Sunday Express - any the total idiots who think they have some iota of a clue about breeds and behaviour. they should focus on keepign their 2 braincells warm... (sorry, this really riles me)

the picture sky news use for all dog attack stories cracks me up.  Does anyone else think the picture has been seriously altered?  The muzzle and the rest of the dog look totally different. 

If my dog was slavering like that (when a camera happened to be nearby!) you would see the whites of her eyes as she was looking past her massive open jaw to see what she was going to sink her teeth into.  What a load of rubbish.  The story disappeared from the news when there was some doubt over whether it was an attack or the dog was trying to rouse its owner.

(sorry admin!)

yeah i know, the muzzle looks way to big doesn;t it? and overly gaping, looks like a snake dislocating its jaw to eat something! any of the rott people on the site ever seen one look like that? maybe its a really funny looking dog anyway?

God if it was 20 stone it would be the biggest dog in britain wouldnt it? the record being 18 or something similar, I have to put this in because its my beloved breed. But a tabloid Newspaper was talking about steven gerrard and his ''french mastiffs'' or ''demon dogs used for fighting''. Nothing mentioned about, them being used in war or hunting either, ''resembles a pitbull'' and ''shouldnt be anywhere near the children''. Made me abit mad as to mentioning this whilst the breed will be a bad name before it is fully recognised tut!

I think you need to remember that the press are in the business of selling newspapers, so if they sensationalise (sorry about the spelling!) any current hot topic, they are going to sell papers.

And unfortunatley, dogs currently fall into this catorgory.

I know they give breeds bad names, but for those in the know and fans of these breeds, we have to take it all with a pinch of salt.

the media has huge power to influence social ideology which can have massive repercussions for unknown lengths of time (my dissertation premis is that the media of ancient greece has effected the social postition of women even now). i feel that as the providers of information to society news outlets have a responsibility to give as far as possible unbiased and accurate accounts of things. it really worries me that misinformation campaigns like this could limit the lives of my dogs, which potential legistation agains guarding breeds might do

I think you need to remember that the press are in the business of selling newspapers, so if they sensationalise (sorry about the spelling!) any current hot topic, they are going to sell papers.

The BBC though are supposed to be presenting news in an trustworthy accurate and unbiased manner...which is why we pay our licence fee.  Well this is how I've understoodd it.

They are still in the business of appealing to the masses, they need to attract audiences as we wouldn't pay our licence fee, theoretically.

The BBC are indeed supposed to be providing a service to the nation, but they have to appeal to people as we now have so much choice, so by going OTT they achieve this.

Hence this debate!

I work as a writer.  From experience the reports vary from paper to paper - guranteed you will get "dog swallows toddlers head" from  the Sun, Mirror etc etc.  You are more likely to get the 'facts' from papers such as Guardian, Times, Independant etc

The press are there to report the news and they have to cater for a certain ordence, be it prince or pauper, lol

think you need to remember that the press are in the business of selling newspapers, so if they sensationalise (sorry about the spelling!) any current hot topic, they are going to sell papers.

That is soooo true Bez and you hit it right on the head, hook line and sinquer. ( insert angry smilie)

They dont give a **** who they hurt or what damage they do, all news is good news to sell, doesnt matter what newspaper it is either they all spin their own lie or side on it to sell it better to their own readers.

Why didnt they just wait for the man to come round and explin what happened? Rather then fabricating the whole story and asking people in the street who probably nowadays live in fear of dogs because all they hear is dog attacks child, dog mauls man, its disgusting and needs to stop.

I've just read a great book on this subject "The placebo Pit Bull" by Karen Delise. Its all hype generated by the media that even politicians believe in now .  You get these macho types who just want a "hard looking dog" so they feel more powerful. I think if they want to stop these daft people from buying this type they should bring in a dog license & mandatory micro-chipping.   

Whats the line the media likes to use?  "if it bleeds, it leads."

From looking over the media hype, when the breed ban came into effect here, you can see how bad Pits are portrayed in the media.  Its always a pick of a snarling dog, which looks like it has rabies or something.

But if it was a cuddly looking dog, no one would pick the paper up.  People want to read about vicious dogs, and horrific crimes. 

Astarte, your essay has also got me looking into things more, and I have come across a lot of different articles about dangerous dogs, etc.  Sad really, when most dogs arent like that, but you see these articles on certain breeds, and the pics to go along with them, and it really hurts the breed.  You think these "dangerous" breeds are really killers, if you had no idea what the breed was actually like.  Thought I was pretty versed on the subject, but realized we all have room to learn more!

Thanks Astarte for opening my eyes wider to the subject. 

I have been through 36 pages on the BBC news website, using the search criteria "Dog Attack".
Interestingly the following breeds (those that are) were mentioned:

Weimeraner, German Shepherd, Belgian Shepherd, two 'jack' russell terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terrier crosses, English bull terrier, Rottweilers, Dachsund, Boxer -type, Akita...

More interestingly it seemed to be the usual suspects who have been demonised and given the worst 'treatment' by the press, i.e. open mouthed, drooling pics of 'devil' dogs! ha!

As a few people have already said.. sensationalism sells!
I have never viewed the BBC as being particularly 'unbiased' in any respect of its reporting.

edited to add... it's also interesting that there was one story based on a Staffordshire bull terrier that had saved it's owner (that didn't get as much coverage of course) and also the stories about dogs being attacked by humans, funny how the words 'savage' and 'brutal' and 'frenzied' aren't used as prolifically as they are when a certain type of dog attacks a human being....

thats the thing we tend not to see this stuff till its pointed out then we see that its everywhere!

ta to you for the help with it crespin, as well as everyone else

lol tessies tracey thats kinda what my essays about! rather than actually being about dangerous dogs its about media construction of concepts of the self and how different articles are targeted to certain 'selves' interested in the dangerous dogs debate. i was looking at the highly emotive articles written about killer dogs and so on then i looked at the combination of the emotive (but not dramatic) and the more expert argument thats often put across in pro dog articles. basically media on the issue makes you choose the side of the poor wee kiddies who these monstors eat, or on the side of reason that it s the owners faults

thing is i don't think it did very well :(

lol, so I'm stating the blimmin obvious again then :-D
From what you have described with regard to the content of your essay, I'm sure it was very good!
I think the topic you chose shows exactly what media bias is all about

thanks, hopefully my lecturer will think so!

That essay would have been very hard for me to do, as I am such an emotional person.  Was never really good at fact based, no emotion essays.  I would have (unnoticably to myself) probably added lots of my personal emotions to it.  Thats why I steered clear of fact driven, or debate classes in college.

I am sure your essay, with the amount of work you have put in it, will be great.  You not only, have learned a whole lot about media, dogs, and of course yourself.  Props to you, for getting it done, and for choosing a subject that needs to be discussed.  One forum, one classroom, and soon, it could change a lot of peoples views.  The impact, just from talking on here, is a great one.  Just think of what you could have put in the wheels?????

lol thanks. would be very nice to end up making a difference in some little way! that why i'd like to go and do human rights law, get out in the world and fix some stuff :)

oh my god i graduate soon (gulp)

I agree with what others have said in that the papers add a great deal of drama to everything, it annoys me how they use such photographs as well, how often do you really see a Rottweiler in that context??

Astarte it sounds like your essay was really interesting to write and research, best of luck with it and your graduation :-)

thanks! i saw a pic of a rottie with one article that surely was photoshopped. you know how snakes dislocate their jaws to eat stuff and their mouths go freaky massive? looked just like that except a rottie, all slavery and supposedly barking or lunging... totally ridiculous. lol if the essay ends up being graded reasonably and i'm not mortally embarrased (definite possibility) then i might post it somewhere.

It is a big shame that the media only print the angle that they feel is the best seller. If they went to more trouble to be informative they could actually help prevent dog attacks. Education is the key to prevention - the media are the perfect people to do this, but they choose not to. They could offer tips on how to avoid being attacked alongside of thier big selling 'dog attack' stories, or run a small article on understanding dog behaviour.

Just look as this link and see how easy it could be for the media to help the public get a better understnading of the canine behaviour & therefore help avoid attacks, all they need to do is include things like this..

http://www.stopdogattacks.com/anatomy-of-a-dog-attack/

The biggest form of media bias is through not exploring all the details, this following incident happend outside my childrens school:

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/search/display.var.976505.0.dog_victim_hannah_goes_back_to_school.php

To read the story and see the pic it does seem like this was unprovoked, but when you see that that girl, even now will run full speed up to any dog and throw herslef at it wrapping her arms around it's neck and rubbing her face in its face, the story takes on a different light. (the girl has done this to my pup with her mum stood by saying nothing, although my pup is friendly I did tell the girl she should NEVER do that, but to no avail, she still doesn't to any dog she sees :( ).

I do feel for the girl, her mother should be teaching her not to do this, that incident was completely avoidable.

> but to no avail, she still doesn't to any dog she sees :-(

sorry, that bit should have read 'but to no avail, she stil DOES it to any dog she sees :( '

Just to throw something in here, what do you think of the use of the word ''attack''.
I know that in some of the recent cases, that yes, they have been what I would describe as an attack, but often times as well, it has been a 'bite'.
Neither very nice experiences of course, but again hype/overdoing by the media?

i quite agree its not the appropriate word use at all, it intensifies the fear displayed in the story, you see this through various different articles such as Sky News, "Children See Baby Cousin Mauled by Dog", 29/12/2007, [internet] words available at http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1298626,00.html. i looked at it in my essay:

"Words such as "snatched" and "mauled" emphasise the aggressive action and help to paint an even more frightening picture of this event. Coupled with dramatic descriptions of the event such as someone trying to "rescue him from the clutches of the 10-stone dog" [1] there is an added sense of danger." (wright, 2008) (dunno if i need to put this in quotes... just in case they web search my essay and think i plagerised lol)