Dog attack
A horrifying story out of Lockport on Tuesday was treated very differently by local radio and TV news outlets and this newspaper.
The incident was about a 2-year-old boy who had been viciously attacked by a pit bull, the family's pet. The child was admitted to Women and Children's Hospital in serious but improving condition.
We handled the story in the Police & Courts column in the City and Region section. And because the victim is a young child and the actions of the dog were considered quite rare, we chose not to include graphic details of the attack.
Local TV and radio broadcasts did include the disturbing details.
Is this a case of censorship? No, but it does underscore the important differences between The News, which is a family newspaper, and publications like the National Inquirer.
We reported the story accurately without offering secondary details that would disturb the great majority of our readers.
Susan LoTempio is the Readership Editor at The News, and as such, is well versed in what
readers like and dislike about their hometown newspaper.
Anyone hear about the 6 year old boy in Bath, NY who was killed by a 6 mo. old pit bull?
Proves my point...anyone who would let a child and pit bull together is an unfit parent (or guardian).
OK you animal lovers, lets hear about the poor misunderstood pit bull!
Posted by: Karen | August 02, 2007 at 04:51 PM
If I may ignore the big fight between newsguy and bobbycat and comment on the story itself....there is no reason for someone NOT to feel compassion for the dog as well as the child. Why? Because the dog doesn't know it did anything wrong...as someone else pointed out, that dog had to be TRAINED to do that!! And such training didn't occur in one session. Someone who had access to that dog taught it to do that, and unless this is investigated very thoroughly, said person is going to train another dog to do it again. So let's not be stingy with our outrage and compassion, because that dog has been abused no less than the child and somewhere, there is a sick human being with access TO THIS CHILD. I pray the child will make a full recovery and the police will find out who is to blame.
Posted by: Kitty | July 17, 2007 at 04:55 PM
(Ding!)
Okay, Newsguy and Bobby Cat, back to your corners.
Newsguy, you win this round for your unemotional, reasoned defense of local news. Plus, I agree with you.
Bobby Cat, Tom Bauerle is critical of George Bush frequently these days. And Ron Dobson could never be mistaken for a fan of George Bush. Don't know where you're getting the idea that WBEN is across-the-board biased for Bush.
I love WBEN radio. It's by far my most favorite part of being in the car. Big fan of Bauerle, huge, huge fan of Sandy Beach. Their news department - - Barbara Burns, Dave Debo, et al -- second to none.
Posted by: Libby56 | July 16, 2007 at 09:29 PM
Dear Newsguy,
I'll make whatever points I think are valid and I certainly don't need your permission to do so.
It should go without saying that every generalization is broad by definition and they all contain exceptions.
I'm not anti-media. I'm against media who mis-use the public's airwaves. WBEN denigrates most Democrats and celebrates most Republicans. That's a misuse of public airwaves.
Not allowing or conducting any public discussion of the seminal issue of our time - the Iraq war -
is a misuse of their priveledge, and a disgrace, in my book.
Ask the Firemen's union if they received an apology from WBEN and Mr. Bauerle for his crack about torching vacant buildings. That's a misuse of public airwaves. I don't believe they got their apology, but the rash of arsons continues.Co-incidence?
I think WBEN has lowered the standards of civility in this community, to an all time low.
They can't bring themselves to end the hurtful insults and the sophomoric name calling. WBEN used to be the "voice of Buffalo", but now its a stain on Buffalo and an embarassment to the region, in my view.
I listen from time to time, then phone their advertisers and tell them what is being said in their name, what kinds of insults they are paying for . I ask them why they pay to have any radio station insult democrats on a regular basis. Don't Democrats buy Chevys , too?, I ask them. And why would anybody do business with any merchant who insults them? They usually reply with "We had no idea..."
The fact that WBEN broadcast during a storm doesn't give them license to spew their vile insults for the other 364 days.
I hope and pray that Torontonians don't judge the people of WNY by what they hear on our radio.
I didn't mention the names of any news broadcasters, you did.
I didn't use the word 'baffoons", to describe anybody. You did.
I'm not 'anti-government", I'm against corrupt or incompetant government. And who isn't? Earth to Newsguy: We have two control boards. Hello....?
It sounds like you are taking this criticism much too personally, as if your ox is being gored.You failed to mention "Newsguy", if you are part of the media biz.
Posted by: BobbyCat | July 16, 2007 at 12:52 AM
You do have an agenda, "BobbyCat." It's an anti-media, anti-government agenda. The electronic media can do no right, and you blame the Buffalo News for not holding the electronic media accountable. You're simply ignoring some of the good work the electronic media is doing. Channel 2 is reporting on ways in which local governments are wasting taxpayer money. Channel 4 did an excellent investigative report on how Anthony Capozzi was railroaded by our justice system. And WBFO aired an investigative piece on how a caller to 911 was put on hold with a dying murder victim in his arms.
And, yes, WBEN may have its faults. But for 24 hours a day following the October Surprise, that station provided a life line to Western New Yorkers. The Buffalo News couldn't get its paper to subscribers (at least this one) for two days. And we couldn't watch TV because there was no power or cable. But WBEN was there, even at 2:00 in the morning.
Yes, "BobbyCat," you do have an agenda. Just because you think the Buffalo Common Council is filled with buffoons doesn't mean it's true. In fact, David Franczyk is one of the more intelligent people I know and he leads the Common Council.
Nobody is crying poor. We do what we can do with the resources we have, and I'm not going to let you make broad generalizations about how lousy the electronic media is. It's an insult to such talented journalists as Rich Newberg, Rich Kellman, Barbara Burns and others.
Posted by: Newsguy | July 15, 2007 at 09:36 PM
Whenever local media is criticized for not doing journalism, they cry poor: 'We have no money, We don't have the 'resources',
We can't afford it.' If new organizations don't have the money to do real journalism, maybe they should get out of the business.
My argument has been that the downward spiral of WNY has been caused in large measure by the lack of responsible media journalism - too much fluff and a lack of investigations. For a generation, electronic media took the advertising revenue and mailed it back to the home office. They didn't care enough about Buffalo to investigate anything. They simply chased fires and car wrecks for good footage. And Alan Pergament (and others) let them get away with it. I have an old Buffalo News letter in which Mr. Pergament pleads 'guilty' for giving up on Buffalo TV news departments because they were beyond repair. But that is no excuse for turning a blind eye toward the problem.
TV news has come a long way, its true, but they have a long way to go. Look at the Buffalo Common Council. If that is the best and the brightest slate of leaders that Buffalo can find, then TV news should examine the brain drain in Buffalo or...examine whey Len Lenihan and others do not demand better qualified leaders....or whether Mr. Lenihan himself has reached the Peter Principle level and is responsible for the decline in leadership.
Although Buffalo is a Democratic town by a 3 to 1 margin, Buffalo radio, namely WBEN, is Republican radio. No criticism of George W.Bush or his policies are tolerated. It is incredible that virtually no debates on the Iraq war have been aired in Buffalo,NY. WBEN has effectively silenced all criticism of republicans and rails against democrats, local and national. If you try to criticize Bush or any Republican, you are hectored, ambushed, shouted-down and humiliated. Freedom of speech has been missing from the 'voice of Buffalo'.Maybe its time to bring back the fairness doctrine, not to mention some journalistic criticism.
Why does The Buffalo News turns a blind eye to this? Is it because W"BEN" used to mean "Buffalo Evening News"?
And finally, when you run out of arguments, accuse your opponent of having a hidden 'agenda'. I have no connection to any news organization, past or present. I wonder if 'Newsguy" can say the same.
Posted by: BobbyCat | July 15, 2007 at 08:46 AM
A few points here. I'd like to respond to "BobbyCat's" criticism of the News at the beginning of this thread for failing to offer a critique of the electronic media. He must not be reading the same newspaper that I am. Alan Pergament often offers a harsh analysis of local TV newscasts, especially after newsworthy events. Sometimes Alan is dead on. Other times, he's not. I thought Alan's criticism of TV news reporters' naive questions at a recent Sabres news conference was way off base. I think the question, "How could you allow this to happen?" -- posed to Sabres management after Daniel Briere and Chris Drury left -- was not naive but entirely appropriate. I would dare say it was the question I was asking. I'm getting away from my main point here. But it's evidence that the News is offering critiques of TV newscasts.
Now radio is another matter. Since Anthony Violanti left, the News has ignored radio, and the media in general. Tony's excellent weekly articles on the media -- radio, the web, newspapers -- were always interesting and enlightening. The News needs to assign someone to this beat!
I must admit that I wonder about your agenda, "BobbyCat." I do see TV reporters, especially at Channel 2, reporting on government corruption and the waste of taxpayer dollars. Keep in mind that the News has the staff to do in-depth reporting. Even the best staffed TV station in town can't free up a reporter to spend the time that James Heaney did in his recent Power Authority series in the News. The electronic media does the best it can with the resources it has.
Finally, the topic at hand here. I am critical of WBEN for the way it covered the dog story. I agree we didn't need to know all the details. And the station's use of experts who said a dog would need to be trained to attack someone in that way was extremely unfair to the family. Unless the station was able to confirm that was, indeed, what happened, such expert analysis should not have been used. I think the News was right in the way it covered this story.
Posted by: Newsguy | July 14, 2007 at 12:25 PM
OK Chris, don't get hysterical. I believe you care about both animals and people (now that someone called attention to your "poor dog" statement.)
My thoughts and prayers are with the toddler who, according to news reports, has had surgery and will have to have more. Poor child.
I do believe the kindest thing that can be done for the dog is to euthanize it. Something is very wrong with it. No matter if it is genetic or human influence.
Posted by: Karen | July 13, 2007 at 02:22 PM
Yes Karen....I did say POOR DOG! The dog is slated to be euthanized. Wait and see that there will be more to this story. Some people only care about other people and to hell with animals, wild or domestic. I care about both.
Posted by: Chris | July 13, 2007 at 12:56 PM
I Do Believe that that "POOR" animal had no idea of what was going on in that home the owners should be held responsible for any actions taken. Granted dogs are smart, but how smart are we as owners to not have some type of control over our pets. I believe the owner lied about what really happened!
Posted by: Sherell Simmons | July 13, 2007 at 10:45 AM
Did you say "POOR DOG", Chris???????? Oh, my God. Where is your head???!!!!
Poor child should be any human being's first thought. Our society has reached a point of no return. People (some, that is) care more about animals than other people. How sad!!!!
Posted by: Karen | July 13, 2007 at 08:09 AM
Does anyone REALLY believe this story happened as it was told by the "Parent"? This family needs to be investigated, their computer needs to be confiscated and scrutinized. Poor dog.
Posted by: Chris | July 12, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Anyone who allows a pitbull to run free in a house where there are young children should be branded an unfit parent and the children taken away!
Posted by: Karen | July 12, 2007 at 08:40 PM
What amazes me is that nobody has suggested investigating this family. I belong to an animal group and know that this had to have been a learned behavior by this dog. If it wasn't you'd be hearing about it all the time. This dog had to have been taught this act & unfortunately the 2 yr. old suffered the consequences of the parent or parents. If that dog is put to sleep because of this shame on them & everyone involved.
Posted by: Joles52 | July 12, 2007 at 05:00 PM
leave it to someone like ron dobson, who's only know how to rant and incite a situation. the man goes on the air and the radio is turned off. get rid of dobsom and maybe we would not have to hear about the details that should not be talked about on the air.
Posted by: unhappy with wben | July 12, 2007 at 02:54 PM
I was shocked that WBEN930 chose to say the dog sodomized the child, sexually assaulted the child, etc., in its morning newscasts and via Ron Dobson.
My 11 y.o. son was in the car with me as I drove him to his 9:30 a.m. tennis lesson. We turned the radio off.
At the very least, the radio news should have contained the same kind of warning TV news sometimes does, when what follows is going to be inappropriate for children or particularly graphic.
It's salacious detail: no, Joe Average on the street does not NEED to know what happened in such detail with that dog and child. It serves no public good to be that graphic, and it's an invasion of the child's privacy. The poor kid.
Posted by: Libby56 | July 12, 2007 at 10:52 AM
You make the valid point that local radio and TV included the salacious details of the dog attack, but instead of naming the stations you single out the National Inquirer.
Why?
The Buffalo News continues its laizae faire policy - your refusal to criticize Buffalo's radio and TV media.
I have often voiced my theory that WNY has deterioratd into Appalachia mainly because the Buffalo media has, for a generation, shirked its responsibility to investigate wrong-doing and neglect by politicians, corporations and individuals alike.
For a generation, while TV news departments were chasing ambulances and fire trucks, they turned a blind eye toward corrupt and/or incompetant politicians who allowed this area to slowly fall apart.
All the while...for 25 years or more, nary a word of criticism came from the Buffalo News. You allowed the TV and radio stations to take the money and run while ignoring any semblance of journalism and the pressing needs of this community.
In the past few years, some TV news departments have become more aggresive in covering local pols. (WGRZ seems to lead the pack)
But still...the NEWS hints at criticism... but you fail to name names.
Is there no institutional lesson to be learned here?
Why is the NEWS so afraid to criticize the media in this town?
Posted by: BobbyCat | July 12, 2007 at 07:55 AM
The news is exactly that- news. Report it as it is because it is your job to inform people. I did not watch the news- I came here to find out what happened, and I am left still wondering what happened. Personally I want to know about the dog and whether his being put to sleep is justifiable.
Posted by: SR | July 11, 2007 at 06:55 PM