Pit Bull Lives Matter! The Media's Silent Breed War

By Aaron Grubbs on October 3, 2016

So we’ve all heard about the ferocious killing power of a pit bull. We’ve all seen the headlines talking about a family’s beloved pet pit bull going rogue and attacking a neighbor or its owner. Here’s a question maybe you’ve never thought to ask or at least never looked for an honest answer to: Why is it that we’ve all seen these headlines? Well, according to the reporters writing these stories and the many online dog bite statistics one can find with a google search you would have to think that it’s because pit bulls are by far the most dangerous breed of dog there is.

For example, if you were to google the phrase “Pit bull dog bite statistics” the first four hits you would get would all come from the website “Dogbites.org.” With google pulling from this site for its quick answer bubble at the top of the page, you would be shown a neat little graph informing you that 82% of dog bite fatalities came from pit bulls and if you combine it with the second most dangerous dog breed, Rottweilers, the number jumps to 91%. You can even click on the pages to be flooded with the specific case stories of many of the victims.

Seems legit, right?

Well, as I’ve talked about in other articles, we as consumers of information have to be more proactive in discerning the truth in what we consume.

The reality of the statistics listed on this site, as well as many others, is that they are not a depiction of the rate of pit bull caused fatalities but rather a depiction merely of the rate at which news sources reported on these specific dog bites.

Dogbites.org, as well as many other online number counting sites, simply search for news reports of incidents to tally up results for their statistics. This is a glaring problem for at least two reasons. First, the likelihood that “researchers” (in quotations to depict the vast amount of sarcasm behind that word in this context) could find every single news report to get an accurate count is hugely unlikely. Secondly, even if they somehow did manage to record every article published in a given time period there’s nothing to say that the frequency of these news articles would accurately depict the frequency of real life cases in a fair and balanced way.

In fact, there’s evidence to suspect the opposite.

For example, in a 2010 article by Amelia Glynn for the San Francisco Chronicle on this very issue, she reveals in her own search through the records of the Chronicle that of the 34 dog attack articles published from January 1, 2005 to the then-current date of the article (September 9, 2010), 22 of them were about pitbull attacks and the breed was included in the headline of all 22 of them. The other 12 articles, about shepherd mixes, boxers, and a single golden retriever, featured only generic dog bite headlines rather than immediately outing the breed.

Additionally, Ms. Glynn referenced a similar article by John Davidson for the Denver Post. In Davidson’s article he reveals that when he searched for Denver Post’s articles about dog bites published in the past five years (pre-July 18, 2010). 20 came up. 8 of which had headlines that included “pitbull” and 1 included “rottweiler.” The other 11 didn’t include a breed at all in the headline.

So back to that question: Why is it that we’ve all seen these headlines? The ASPCA had once released this statement, “Animal control officers across the country have told the ASPCA that when they alert the media to a dog attack, news outlets respond that they have no interest in reporting on the incident unless it involved a pit bull.”

There’s your answer.

However, it is fair to point out that there are articles which use real studies with number’s collected from first person sources like hospital records. In the same google search I mentioned before, you can scroll down and find the Livescience.com article that makes references to multiple studies performed by the National Center for Biotechnology Information. These studies would strongly back the assertion that pit bulls are by far the most dangerous dog breed with numbers as high as 50% of injuries originating from pit bull bites.

At least that’s what is reported but there is absolutely no evidence in those hospital reports to definitively prove what the breed of the dog was. It’s simply recorded whatever the patient came in and told the doctors.

Heather Paul, Spokeswoman for State Farm Insurance, told Huffington Post, “Pit Bulls are often misidentified when a bite incident occurs, so reliable bite statistics related to the dog’s breed are unreliable and serve no purpose.”

State Farm is the largest insurance company, gathers more data than the US government and still does not deem it necessary to make sweeping policy decisions that discriminate against “Pit Bull-type dogs” as many other insurance companies do.

“Pit Bull” is not actually a breed of dog anyway though, but rather a general category which most accurately includes the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. However, as many as 30 other breeds can be loosely thrown into this category as well based simply on a few broad physical traits. It’s no wonder then why people are so quick to call a dog they don’t recognize immediately the breed of as being a “pit bull.” But actually only 50 of the 20,000 genes a dog has decide it’s physical appearance. The rest help to build its unique character among other bodily functions. Therefore, all dogs are individuals.

Huffingtonpost.com

So since it’s been established that current statistics of dog bite incidents separated by dog breed are unreliable, because their sources (news articles and/or hospital records) are either biased to sell more sensational articles or simply include unsubstantiated and plausibly unreliable claims and information, what then can you look at for an accurate depiction of your likelihood of facing a harmful dog bite?

The National Safety Council’s goal is to reduce home and workplace injuries and deaths by studying and educating people and communities on everyday dangers and how to avoid them. They also release statistics on a person’s odds of dying from specific dangers. As it turns out, your likelihood of being mauled and killed by a dog is 1 in 114,622. Let me put that in perspective for you though…

You have roughly the same likelihood of being sentenced to a legal, government sanctioned execution as you are to being killed by a dog. Better yet, you’re about twice as likely to die from a hornet, wasp, or bee sting than you are of being killed by a dog. And you’re actually about 33 times more likely to die from exposure to radiation than you are to die from a dog.

But seriously, don’t let yourself get too worried or stressed over these numbers because you are nearly 1,200 times more likely to take your own life than you are to have it taken by a dog.

Nsc.org

 

We don’t always only harm ourselves by being inaccurately informed. In some cases, such as this, it translates into law which is harmful to the life and well-being of living animals that have been scapegoated for decades now. Countless counties and municipalities have put restrictions and bans on “pit bull type breeds” such as the most recent one gaining much attention in Manchester, Canada where future ownership is prohibited and current owners must apply and pay for a special license. A license that, if they can’t afford it, then the law would require their dog to be euthanized. Veterinarians and dog advocates are pushing back though thankfully, saying that no law can require a Veterinarian to euthanize a perfectly healthy animal.

We have allowed ourselves to be duped by our news sources again and again on all different types of issues, not just this one. They show us the stories they know we want to see because that sells papers. They tell us only the facts of those hand picked stories assuming we won’t go looking for the rest of the bigger picture but that’s what we have to start doing. We have to discipline our share buttons. We have to read more than just headlines. We have to research our sources. And we have to question the “facts” that we’re being fed because ignorance harms more than just ourselves.

Follow Uloop

Apply to Write for Uloop News

Join the Uloop News Team

Discuss This Article

Get Top Stories Delivered Weekly

Back to Top

Log In

Contact Us

Upload An Image

Please select an image to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format
OR
Provide URL where image can be downloaded
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format

By clicking this button,
you agree to the terms of use

By clicking "Create Alert" I agree to the Uloop Terms of Use.

Image not available.

Add a Photo

Please select a photo to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format