Two apologies, actually.
First, I need to apologize to Buzzblog readers for writing on Thursday that Verizon deserved praise for standing up to animal rights activists who found offensive the company's new commercial for its LG Dare cell phone. That spot features a pair of chained, snarling junkyard dogs, pit bulls to be exact.
Praise? What could I have been thinking? How could I have been so blind as to not foresee the inevitable: that Verizon would surrender before the pixels on that post were dry. Following a reported torrent of complaints, the commercial -- which commits no greater sin than depicting junkyard dogs as junkyard dogs -- "is no longer on the schedule," according to a Verizon spokesman quoted in this story. (Translation: We caved.)
I'm sorry, Buzzblog readers. You have a right to expect better from me than to expect better from Verizon ... especially given the fact that I've made something of a fetish of chronicling Verizon foibles.
My second apology goes out to the animal rights activists. Again, I have no explanation for my lapse in judgment. After all, I have been writing, editing and/or managing opinion sections of news publications for the bulk of my 30 years as a professional journalist and if I've said it a thousand times, well, that's 7,000 in dog times: No group of advocates -- not the National Rifle Association, not Move-On.org, not Rush Limbaugh's legions, not the NAACP, not even those who oppose abortion rights, can muster the volume, vehemence and persistence of protest than can the animal-rights lobby.
As protesters go, you might call them junkyard dogs, except they are a species unto themselves. So, for me to think for even one moment that these folks would be incapable of breaking the will of a bottom-line conscious corporation -- especially one as spineless Verizon -- well, I can understand why they might find my lack of faith offensive.
I am truly sorry, animal rights activists. Never again will I underestimate your might.
Finally, there is a third party deserving of an apology in this episode, but I am not in a good position to offer it given that I have been on occasion (in the view of some) a member of the aggrieved class.
In addition to the pair of pit bulls, there was a third central character in that now-banished junkyard dog commercial. A young man -- twentysomething, shaggy hair, in need of a shave -- scales the junkyard's chain-link fence and sprints directly toward the animals despite the fact that they are giving off every intention of having him for lunch. Nevertheless, he snatches the phone right out from under their noses, after which we get Verizon's message: "Dare to touch it."
Stupid white males -- Madison Avenue's all-purpose, risk-free punching bags -- take another one on the chin. Don't hold your breath waiting for anyone to apologize.
Welcome regulars and passersby. Here are a few more recent Buzzblog items. And, if you'd like to receive Buzzblog via e-mail newsletter, here's where to sign up.
Doing the Laptop Drive of Shame.
Bank of America to support Firefox, finally.
What does Cisco have against Quebec? (Answer: silly contest rules.)
Attrition.org nails another nitwit ... this time with Monty Python's Holy Grail.
"I have a lost laptop horror story for you."
Kellogg's and LEGO team up to teach kids to choke.
The REAL sticking point between Microsoft and Yahoo!
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries.
Top 10 Buzzblog posts for '07: Verizon's there, of course, along with Gates, Wikipedia and the guy who lost a girlfriend to Blackberry's blackout.
When not blogging, I am a Network World news editor and write the 'Net Buzz column.
The opinions expressed in this Weblog are those of the writer and may not represent the opinions of Network World.
|
|
Pit Bulls
The ignorance about pit bulls is rampant. Most people can't tell a pitbull from any number of other breeds,
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
can you?
I agree
I agree with the author. I dont see where the animal rights activists have a beef here. So there were angry dogs in the commercial protecting their property. Do dogs no longer perform these acts? Someone needs to explain this one better to me.
The problem with this TV ad
The problem with this TV ad is the fact that this breed is not mean for protection. The breed already has a bad name because of irresponsible people that own them. They do not how to keep their dogs contained. If people were more educated on this breed they would know they are supposed to be dog/animal aggressive. It is in their nature, but it IS NOT in their nature to be HUMAN aggressive. That is what they had these dogs portraying to be...they are not.
I know that there are SOME human aggressive dogs in this breed and the mix of, and to be quite honest, if you know the breed and the history of the breed then you would know that MOST of them are NOT American Pit Bull Terriers, they are mutts! They are pure bred nothings. Just a mutt. But the name goes to the "pit bull" in which that name in itself is also a term that is used to describe many breeds these days, because people simply cannot point out a REAL APBT.
Now back to what I was saying earlier. Breeders are breeding dogs to make a buck, they are breeding anything together that looks pretty. They do not know what they are doing. When you breed dogs, you have to know what you are doing...IN ANY BREED...you do not do it just because you can. You the right together, for the right reasons, if you do not know the reasons, then you need not be breeding. True good breeders will not breed dogs with bad genetics i.e. health problems, human aggressive traits, unsound temperaments, etc.....
The other problem that this breed is facing is the fact that MANY breeds are capable AND DO bite people, but more often than not they are not singled out, and when they are, they are called "pit bulls" when they in fact ARE NOT.
There are many issues that TV ad brings to life. It needs to be removed. It is nothing but slander, and making a dog look bad because of a few irresponsible owners. If people would ENFORCE LEASH LAWS AND CONTAINMENT LAWS, then MOST of these problems, would in fact no be problems. But it seems the world would rather make NEW laws and hurt everyone, including the responsible people that do what they are doing and have sweet human friendly dogs.
Here is a site you all can visit.
It teaches about the breed.
www.pitbull-chat.com
Tell them FearlessKnight sent you!
Enjoy yourself.
chained dogs
I can understand how many people view the sight of a dog kept chained by its neck for its life to be...well, normal. After all, people have been chaining dogs to trees, broken-down old cars and plywood "dog houses" for centuries. This antiquated method of canine confinement is so ingrained into certain segments of society that people sometimes fail to see the obvious: keeping a social, intelligent, pack animal on a chain for all or most of its life, forcing it to pace the same patch of dirt and excrement for year after agonizing year, well, it is torture in the extreme. If we set out to devise the most heinous form of torture imaginable for a dog, we'd be hard pressed to come up with something worse (barring live medical experiments...) Chained dogs become neurotic, aggressive and sometimes even go insane. Often, they pose a danger to people. So called "guard dogs" can't distinguish between an intruder and a child just wanting to "pet the doggie." A 3-year-old in Jackson, Miss. was killed this week by an angry, unsocialized chained dog. And many more children will meet the same fate this year. See www. mothersagainstdogchaining.org.
Even if you think, "Oh, it is just a dog," you would have to have to be lacking in even the most basic compassion not to recognize that keeping a dog in this way is cruel in the extreme.
Verizon's commercial perpetuated the notion that it is appropriate to chain a dog in the yard and leave it there to grow angry and aggressive in its life of solitary confinement.
Perpetually chained dogs rarely receive vet care, exercise, basic grooming, etc. They suffer from parasites and many lack even basic food and water on a regular basis. Many strangle themselves on their tethers, or die of heatstroke, or freeze to death. A chained dog is a forgotten dog.
Animal rights people are not all a bunch of "wackos." We are parents, teachers, lawyers, housewives who just happen to feel it is important and right to stand up for sentient beings who have no voice -- vulnerable creatures who are completely at our mercy and who suffer and die every second to feed us, entertain us, clothe us, etc. What is so horrendous about that?
Check out www.dogsdeservebetter.org or www.unchainyourdog.org.
another point of view
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Pit-bulls--The-most-abused-by-Daphna-Nachminovit-080731-356.html
animal rights at odds with pit bull owners
I have to say that pit bull owners are always at odds with animal rights activists. Now, I am a vegetarian and concerned about animal welfare, however I detest the elitist attitude that many of them have and although I know some great vegans and vegetarians I would rather not associate with them. Being an active member of a pit bull board there are regular posts about animal rights groups esp. PETA who actually favor banning of pit bulls. They seek to take away ownership of pets and make us guardians which alone poses a threat to our right to property--our dogs. Without the law protecting dogs as property we would be more susceptible to breed bans and would no longer be protected under the state constitutions restrictions on seizure of property and the like. No, pit bull owners are more likely to be concerned with animal welfare, not rights.
You forgot something
You forgot to end with, no animals were hurt in the writing of this entry...only bloggers...
Network World blogs don't perpetuate ignorance, blind political correctness does...
Verizon ad
Actually if you went and watched the video it was not the animal rights activist that were up in arms, it was the owners and breeders of American Pit Bull Terriers.(APBT)
They took offense at their beloved breed being depicted in this manner. This breed was never bred as a "guard" breed. They were never bred to be human aggressive. The negative image of the of the breed by this ad was the issue.
Actually, ASPCA weighed in, too
As you can see in this press release.
Are you going to be saying
Are you going to be saying "I'm sorry" to the Animal rights groups when they take away your constitutional right to choose? No more meat, eggs or fish for you. No more shoes, cars, airplane rides for you (yes they use animal products in cars, all shoes and airplanes). The animal rights movement is a front for a Socialist group. And here you are kissing there backsides. This is about destroying human rights. Whos paying those people? ThATS THE QUESTION YOU SHOULD BE ASKING? KISS UP KISS UP KISS UP.......
Post new comment