National Canine Research Council

There are two ways editorial judgment of audience interest can influence reporting about dogs and dog attacks.

• Over-reporting because of breed
• Sensationalized reporting

• A three-year-old Virginia boy was admitted to the hospital with “extensive injuries”. The child was attacked by a dog described as a Golden Retriever mix. The wounds to the child required 300 stitches. The child was further described as requiring  additional surgeries to “functionally repair muscles, nerves and work on scars”. This incident was reported in only two local newspapers.

• A 3-year-old girl was admitted to Children’s Hospital in Denver with serious lacerations to her face and head. The hospital declined to release the child’s name or information on her condition. She had been attacked at her home by a dog believed to be a Labrador Retriever. This attack was reported four times and only in Colorado outlets.

• An Indiana woman was attacked and knocked to the ground by a dog identified as a German Shepherd. The dog she was walking, a small Sheltie mix was also attacked. Neighbors responded and managed to restrain the German Shepherd, but not before the woman was bitten twice in the face. Her small dog was so gravely injured that it was euthanized. This incident was reported in only one local newspaper.

• An 11-year-old California girl was bitten in the leg and received “serious, but not life-threatening injuries”, when she was attacked by two pit bulls. Her injuries required hospitalization. This incident was reported in over ninety national and international newspapers. Forbes, FOX News, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles  Times, the Chicago Tribune, and dozens of other major news organizations headlined this “Pit Bull Attack”.

Media Bias  (2006)   Pit bull paparazzi 2006

Media Bias  (2007)   Pit bull paparazzi 2007

Media Bias (2008)   Pit Bull paparazzi-2008

Dog Attack Stories as Entertainment:

“I write for a tab, not Newsweek.  So certain things are played up in a story…”

Reporter Simone Weichselbaum, New York Daily News in conversation with Director of Research Karen Delise, explaining why accurate information was not included in a story,  July 7, 2008.

It is important that people using news stories for their information on dog attacks (or any subject for that matter)  recognize that the impulse to play a story up emotionally will compromise, even contradict, accurate reporting of events. While there are literally hundreds of dog attack stories that can  illustrate this point, only two examples are presented:

An attack on a 6-year-old Youngstown boy by his father’s yard dog was reported in a number of Ohio papers.  Here are excerpts from some of the more sensational accounts:

Case # 1 — The Reporting:

“The boy was fading in and out.” “I never seen anything like it in my life.” “I heard the mother screaming and saw the dog rolling the baby like a tumbleweed, I heard the bones crush on his left arm.” “The dog bit the boy’s face and neck, ripped his lip, and bent his arm back like paper.” “The mother was trying to free her son from the pit bull’s jaws, but the dog kept tearing at the child’s flesh as they rolling in the yard.” “Neighbors used a baseball bat and a steel rake to beat the dog away.” “He (the dog) had a lock on the baby.” “The dog clamped his jaws around the boy’s neck.” “The initial call to police listed the victim as a nonbreather.” (Quotes from Vindy.com, May 26, 2008 & Tribune Chronicle, May 27, 2008)

The Facts:

Sadly, a 6-year-old boy experienced a frightening, painful and unfortunate attack by his father’s yard dog and no doubt he was seriously injured. Happily, however, despite the graphic descriptions of locking jaws, crushing bones, ripping of skin and tearing of flesh, and the victim being a “nonbreather, “ –  The boy was released from the hospital a few hours after the attack.

Case # 2 — The Reporting:

On February 17, 2008, a Lubbock, Texas newspaper trumpeted the headline: “Boy Critical after Pit Bull Mauling.”  The article claimed the boy was in “critical condition after being mauled by a Pit bull – Boxer mix.”  And in an “expanded coverage sidebar,”  the paper went on to list each and every story of any pit bull encounter (with or without injuries) with a human or animal that they found in their archives.  Included in the  follow-up coverage was an emotional editorial urging a ban on all pit bulls.

The Facts:

Less than 24 hours later, the “critically injured” boy was at home, running around and playing like a normal 3-year-old. Photos of the boy reveal a sweet-looking boy with a few scrapes and abrasions on his forehead.  Indeed, it was later reported that it could not be determined if the dog actually bit the boy or if the abrasions were caused by the dog’s claws when he jumped on the boy.

So, here again is another “pit bull” encounter with a human that has been terribly misrepresented by the media, and which re-enforces the hysteria around pit bulls and dog attacks.

Did an irresponsible owner allow his dog of undetermined breed to roam loose and frighten and injure a child?   Yes

Did this dog actually “attack” this child or did the dog simply react (chase and jump) on a small boy who admittedly ran because he was scared of dogs?   Undetermined.  The injuries suggest this was not an attack, but an over-stimulated dog chasing and jumping on a fleeing child.

Was the boy “critically injured”?  No

Was the boy “mauled”?    No

Was this an unnecessary, preventable, and frightening incident for a child?  Yes

Did the media report this incident accurately and with due regard for the impact their coverage might have on the community?   No.    Rather, the media stirred up a storm of controversy and hysteria about “pit bulls.”

National Canine Research Council