Over at the Stop the BBC Making Another PDE Facebook site (time for a new name, no?), there has been a bit of a spat today between the Group's leader, Mike Davidsohn, and poodle breeder Susan Horsfall over where the group goes now.
Ms Horsfall appears content to call it a day, saying that the fact that the film hasn't had much publicity and the fact that it was relegated to BBC Four must be due to their successful campaigning.
Mr Davidsohn, however, likens me to a tumour and wants me "cut out", claiming further that he's had lots of "PMs and emails" from others demanding this kind of satisfaction.
Ms Horsfall has recoiled rather from this overt display of Mr Davidsohn's vendetta against me and has said she wants no part of it. For which I thank her.
Truth is, I suspect, that the campaign has made Mr Davidsohn feel rather important (they wrote to the Queen you know and seemed inordinately pleased with what was an entirely stock reply) and now... well, I guess it's back to being a taxi driver and small-time poodle breeder and exhibitor.
It is true, incidentally, that the film hasn't had as much publicity as the first one (although there were features in most of the Sunday newspapers the day before transmission). But, really, it was never going to be the big news that Pedigree Dogs Exposed was in 2008 - sequels rarely are. And, yep, it was shown on BBC Four, rather than the heady heights of BBC One this time, meaning a much smaller audience. But that was nothing to do with any campaign. It was because the original film was commisisoned by the BBC's Richard Klein when he was a Commissioning Editor across all BBC Channels and now he's Controller of BBC Four. He wanted the sequel for his own Channel and of course I agreed. It was his faith in the project that ensured Pedigree Dogs Exposed got made in 2008.
The good news is that the most numerous complaint about the programme so far has been from viewers saying the film should have aired on BBC One. So who knows.... it may yet air to a bigger UK audience.. And we deliver the international version of the film next week.
And one more thing, Mr Davidsohn. It has been pointed out several times that you are mixing up Professor James Serpell with Professor Steve Jones and you did it again today by claiming that James Serpell was in the sequel. He wasn't. That was Steve Jones. Look him up. He's quite important in the scientific scheme of things. But it is true he has never bred a dog.
And, again, I have no links with HSUS or PETA, other than speaking at a conference last year co-sponsored by HSUS, alongside many others who could not in a million years be accused of having "links with HSUS", such as representatives of the American Kennel Club.
Your a member of HSUS and PeTA? Right. I believe we had a lovely day in the field with my working terriers and then dined on meat. A PeTA member? An HSUS vegan? I had no idea!
ReplyDeleteP.
I don't know why these people are so against you. Anyone looking at pedigree dogs can see that there is an abundance of genetic issues, and with such shallow gene pools, dogs are bound to end up inbred. What I've read here has been intelligent and interesting information, but by no means is it anything new or unexpected - I mean no offense by that. I know I'm just one of the people from overseas who means nothing in the grand scheme of things(their words, not mine), but I've had such fun reading your website lately, and have used this website to help my mother make an informed decision when selecting a breeder for her future puppy, the first purebred bought by our family, and a Labrador intended to do what it's supposed to; retrieve water fowl.
ReplyDeleteSo thank you.
Cant say I had noticed a lack of publicity around the new film! The BBC Press office did a pretty good job, with good length articles in several national newspapers, and intelligent reporting on the issues raised by PDE. Even in the dog press, Dog World is now neutrally sitting on the fence and giving fair and equal coverage to both those who agree with Jemima and those who dont. Our Dogs which has always been anti PDE, has falling circulation. And ALL the major interest groups concerned with dogs came out with prompt and measured responses, generally recognising the issues , although also saying slightly weakly, we dont have the legislative powers to address them. Unlike Mr Davidsohn's rabid kennel of supporters, even the Kennel Club were not barking "its all lies" ,but were prepared with a live Q and A session the next morning on Facebook, in which Caroline Kisko adroitly countered every question with "the Kennel Club have a strategy for this, the Kennel Club are working on this". If they have strategies, this means they accept there are problems which have to be addressed. What has come accross strongly in the responses to PDE Three Years On, is that denial is giving way to overt or tacit acknowledgement that there are real issues in pedigree dog breeding, and that change has to come, even if it will take years and decades to see it happening. One can see this on internet dog forums too, compared with the first PDE film, fewer people responding with outraged denial, fewer personal attacks on Jemima, more people responding with agreement on the issues raised, and , very important, more informed response - better understanding of genetics and the problems of small gene pools, lack of diversity and use of popular sires, better understanding of the health and welfare effects of breeding for exaggerated conformation. Jemima may be disappointed that more has not changed yet, but I think that the way dog breeders think has begun to change, and one can see that at the Kennel Club, even if it is going to take another 10 - 20 years at least to produce visible changes in the dogs themselves and their health. One cant breed out all the problems in one generation of dogs, but the first stage is about changing attitudes, and that is Jemima's biggest success story so far. The publicity around this film has been good, examining the issues intelligently, and the responses have been generally calmer and more objective
ReplyDeletePDE2 hasn't had the "legs" in the wider media that the first programme had...no one expected it to. On the dog forumns (my stomping ground anyway) the reaction has been generally supportive and oppisition distinctly muted.
DeleteIt's clear that open forumns are no longer the platform of choice for old school breeders/exhibitors. I guess they were so used to a draw full of cc's trumping any argument that they didn't know what to do when common sense was brought into play.
We may not hear so much from the "attack dogs" of the shires but under the surface there is still a fair percentage of the dog show community who believe that if they keep heads down and mouths shut all revert back to pre PDE "normal".
I don't think hearts and minds have been won in the way suggested above. In fact even minor changes remain a source of friction.
The 'cure' for Jemimaharrisonoma is simple; cut out inherited diseases by liberal application of health testing and a smattering of common sense. Follow up with genepool preserving antioxidants by outbreeding either within a breed where that is possible or carefully outside a breed for those breeds where the gene pool is very small.
ReplyDeleteThe major causes of Jemimaharrisonoma are greed and 'I'm all right Jack' syndrome which prevents breeders spotting the first signs of health problems in their breed and taking action!
VP
Is this Ms Harrison getting in the fist punch before she is knocked out by the dire viewing figures that are just to be released?
ReplyDeleteDogs are such loveable animals. Why do dog fanciers have to be so nasty to one another?
ReplyDeleteI'd say, if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen . . . and if you can stand the heat, realise that it's a sign that you have gotten a message across.
I had a look at the facebook group and he seems to have "cocked his leg" on your post Jemima.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that it is you, Anonymous, who are doomed to disappointment about the viewing figures which were above the average for 9pm BBC4 audiences. And as the Executive Producer for the programme, I've seen the log of the calls and emails received after transmission, the majority of which, as Jemima says, call for the programme to be shown on BBC1. You can't argue with the facts, however much you might disagree with them.
ReplyDeleteAbove average you say, but average of what is normally very little still isn’t much! when you consider the most popular programme on BBC4 is Inspector Montalbano with under 0.74 million views that just get number 28 of the top 30 channels that didn’t include BBC1,2 ITV Channel 4 &5, if you are so proud of the figures why have they not been published on here or any Official BBC site? What is Interesting is to find the that Jane M is the Executive producer for the show (and one assumes a BBC employee) making such comments on this site (and other previous comments) which must prove she has had a vested interested the subject which I suspect means her judgement in commissioning the programme should be questioned as to having a conflict of interest which should be investigated by the BBC. This of course will not be published here but perhaps very fact it won’t will show how damming these actions have been!
DeleteAnonymous 08:23 - please, before you embarrass yourself any further, invest in a film book and look into the word "Executive Producer" One of the Executive Producer's tasks is to use their judgement AND be very invested in it.
DeleteNot when they use public money to fund their own crusade, a judgement that is a bias one, there looks like there should be another (white wash) investigation by the BBC.
DeleteAnonymous – the viewing figures are no secret and are available from a number of sources. The overnight figures were 380,000 which don’t include the numbers for those who watched the two additional transmissions or on iPlayer. The programme got twice the average audience share for BBC4 (you can check with BARB for independent verification).
DeleteYou do need to be careful of making assumptions because they are the mother of all mistakes. I am NOT a BBC employee but an independent Executive Producer. Every programme commissioned by the BBC from an independent television production company will have an Executive Producer and in addition will have a Commissioning Executive Producer who IS employed by the BBC. I had no involvement with the commissioning of the programme. Furthermore, your suggestion that I might have behaved in any way unprofessionally is a serious allegation and I would advise you to desist from any further unsubstantiated remarks. You are of course at liberty to pursue your claims through the BBC complaints process and Ofcom.
By all means let me have the contact for the BBC complaints section (there website sets out to confuse so people dont bother) and will be happy to do so, and let the white wash commence
DeleteAnon wrote" |I had a look at the facebook group and he seems to have "cocked his leg on your post Jemima.
ReplyDeleteNow there's a mental image I could do without.
But yes, I saw, bizarrely claiming that my post somehow proved some collusion between a Daily Mail reporter and myself. Most odd.
Jemima
The Film is already making the rounds in the US underground. Thank you....
ReplyDeleteJemima, I'm not sure why you give Mike Davidsohn the time of day, no less devote a whole post to him. All he's doing is stomping his feet and whining real loud. He has yet to offer any information to prove you wrong. Neither has anyone else. Keep your head high, and don't sink to their level.
ReplyDeleteOur Dogs have failing circulation? Proof please or delete the post!
ReplyDeleteRe Our Dogs circulation. A recent inquiry from somebody interested in a "trade" advert in Our Dogs was told that the paper version of Our Dogs currently sells 4000 copies, with a larger number of online subscribers. One assumes that a trade inquirer will get an accurate answer about circulation, as they have to know what they are getting for their money when they advertise. The figure of 4000 paper copies was also confirmed by another source in the dog publishing world . Looks pretty small compared with the combined circulation of the national newspapers which gave positive coverage to PDE Three Years On
ReplyDeleteAnd Dog World circulation?
DeleteNot sure what viewership has to do with content. There is considerable value in being contrarian I think, and that does not often create or develop popularity. And why is the HSUS viewed as a radical left wing org in the UK? In my view, it is one of the more effective advocacy organizations in the US. Hoping your film will be available for viewing in the states soon!
ReplyDeleteA goal of the HSUS is to eradicate pet ownership in the United States by government edict. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA
DeleteNonsense Rod.
DeleteIt's NOT NOT NOT nonsense. Do your research!!! Elimination of pet ownership is a PRIMARY goal of the HSUS, not just PETA!!! Attend as many HSUS-sponsored events as I have and listen to their rhetoric before you decide that HSUS means pet ownership no harm.
DeleteAs an avid supporter of your campaign I would very much like you to succeed, but I have reasoned that as long as un-licensed, unchecked and therefore unregulated commercial breeding is allowed to continue under the dubious title “Hobby Breeder” it would be almost impossible to introduce the change in breeding practices you seek. Especially one that would almost certainly damage the finances of the said “Hobby Breeder”.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the notion that, as long as there are unregulated commercial breeders, change in impossible. Those breeders tag along. The Kennel Club and its breed clubs define what a purebred shall look like, and once changes in breed standards are made, the commercial breeders shall comply in order to satisfy the marketplace. It is time for the breed clubs to stop hiding behind that tired old excuse. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA
DeleteFoundonly,
DeleteI believe that the kennel club should be a better example & that 1 of the changes I would like to see is a register that will keep ALL dogs pedigrees & health results whether they be pure & registered, pure unregistered, cross bred, new breed or pure mongrel.
Then all breeders can be held to the same standard no matter what they breed. I do not think more regulations will help much at all but peer pressure would go a lot further. The registers infomation should be easily accesed by anyone who cares too so puppy buyers can look up their the parents & grandparents & so on of a pup the are looking at & know what health testing has been done & the results. Any dangerous dog convictions, trail results, dog sports & show results should be on each dogs record also.
Give ALL breeders something to work towards & make sure show breeders can see that others can breed healthy good dogs without having to heavily inbreed or win ribbons.
You may be right, the Kennel Clubs overall influence and importance in bringing about a change in attitude in breeding just for the pure ascetics of the animal in favour of health and well being cannot be ignored.
DeleteIt's clear also that given a normal evolutional scale without the intervention of this flawed god like organisation the changes would have been less ascetically driven and almost certainly beneficial to all the breeds featured.
The problem I see is that even if we get the Kennel club to back track on their perceived idea of what a particular breed should look like, and if that standard is reached, the breeders continuing exaggeration of the standard will start all over again.
Quite frankly I can see the day coming when not to be K.C registered will be a reasonable sign of your dogs overall quality, health and longevity of its life expectancy.
DeleteBreeders give the judges what the judges want to see. The bottleneck is the judges. They often ignore the breed standard, and after a while the breed clubs end up having to change the standards. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA
DeleteGood point, maybe it’s more the poor interpretation of the breed standard..
DeleteJemima,
ReplyDeleteI am so sorry this is happening to you as I absolutely dont feel you deserve such rancor from this indivdual who is clearly on a crusade. Looks like his hate is even putting off some of the people in his own group....good. Such energy of hate groups only serves to create divisiveness in the dog fancy...it is so counter-productive. I have warned or banned individuals from my breed health awareness page (Faces of FSF Awareness/Memorial project) who have attacked you specifically and Pet health advocates in general. We do not allow that hate energy on my page. Hate (regardless of the professed self-righteous ideology of the haters) is still just hate....and hate is never productive.
There are (as you have done with your films) more productive and positive ways to present the facts of the problems in the purebred dog fancy without engaging in and perpetuating personal vendettas and destructive energies. One cannot create positive change from negative energy....simple physics and common sense that unfortunately can be a difficult concept to grasp for some.
Keep doing what you are doing to raise awareness. I can absolutely relate to what you are experiencing from these hate groups and their personal vendetta's, libel and constant attempts at defaming you. I am experiencing the exact same thing and have been since December 2010.
The work you and other REAL pet health advocates are doing is important and there are those of us that, (despite the lies, hate and rhetoric perpetuated by those with personal vendettas), support your work to bring about positive and constructive changes to improve the health and lives of the dogs.
Namaste'
JL Wortham-Morgan
Blessings CSP, Faces of FSF Awareness & Memorial Project
So not sculking around Crufts today? or cant that camera phone be used to capture pictures you then want to to distort?
ReplyDeleteWHY would she distort photos there is no need, I've seen the extreme bred types with my own eyes they are already distorted, lol.
DeleteOPEN YOUR EYES!!!! How is it OK to breed any dog That you know will have a shortened life span & can not even walk but waddles???? Or a dog so covered in hair or wrinkles it can not even clan itself correctly. I could go on all day but these are the reasons I no longer go near a show ring.
No, not today. Going tomorrow, Saturday and Sunday hopefully. I am pleased to say that the KC has granted press accreditation.
ReplyDeleteI have never - and would never - distort a picture. There is no point. And, actually, no need.
Jemima
I hope to see you at Crufts on Friday, I will be either on the IRWS benches most of the day, or at the gamekeeper classes
ReplyDeleteIf I ever get into a taxi and the Psycho shower scene music is playing - at least I'll know who the driver is!
ReplyDeleteH
I hear a few favorite Pekes and Bulldogs are flunking the pre-ring health test at Crufts. I am sure you will be blamed. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA
ReplyDeleteGet your facts right before you post about our Crufts!
DeleteIt's so strange how many posters here are from the US - like they have a perfect country!!
Interesting happenings at Crufts today. Perhaps the breeders of those dogs will now admit that their dog's do have problems! Perhaps now the dog's wellbeing will come before trophies.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't like to be in the vet's shoes though. Hope that he has as tough a skin as you Jemima.
Maybe this will lead to judges stopping to award ribbons to dogs with such exaggerated features. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA
DeleteQuite frankly I can see the day coming when not to be K.C registered will be a reasonable sign of your dogs overall quality, health and longevity of its life expectancy.
DeleteYou can see it because the animal-rights brainwashing of the general public is effective.
DeleteWhat I want to know is when this movie will be seen in the US? Another hot bed of breeding for looks rather then the real good of the breed.
ReplyDeleteAnonymousMar 8, 2012 03:37 AM
ReplyDeleteAll I can say to your comment above re distorting pitures of dogs is Perhaps you are visualy challenged or refuse to see. I agree with Sam and Jemima there is no need to distort any photos for there is enough evidence of extreme breed types without it. I point to the Pekes and Bulldogs who failed their medicals today. Failed them at Crufts its selfe. Need I say more ?
As there has been NO report as to why the Vet did not let them in the group let not JUMP to conclusions, I know dogs who have gone lame for no good reason yet they are then sound 5 minutes latter, there could be dozens of reason why the dogs did not pass? or are you all able to be mindreaders of the vet? and lets not forget the other breeds on that check list who DID get approval and were shown, IE Chow Chow, CKCS, PUG!!!
DeleteCome on you don't need to be a vet or a mind reader to see why they would fail a medical. The pugs are lucky they don't carry the coat the Peke dose as between the breathing & the over hating most pekes heart rate is through the roof after any amount of exercise & a trott around the ring has them close to passing out. The Pugs legs are also not as deformed which further hinders the amount of walking it takes before the Peke is flustered followed shortly by raised heart rate extreme panting, over haeting & exhaustion etc.
DeleteLets hope the focus is on the judges that sent them through..which I would hope was the idea
ReplyDeleteThe bulldog failed because the vet pulled her eye about with a torch, found a tiny mark on the eye which he described as an old injury, not health issue, nothing wrong with the eye, you decide health or politics !!The reserve bitch CC Dotty , sat with the vet Nick Blayney under hot lights that made the greyhound pant (massage interview)with no signs of panting.
ReplyDeleteGood news from Crufts.... a Victory for dogs. Drinks all around. Double expresso for me! Smoke 'em if you got ' em, the good stuff for Jemima!
ReplyDeleteAnd, again, I have no links with HSUS or PETA, other than speaking at a conference last year co-sponsored by HSUS, "alongside many others who could not in a million years be accused of having "links with HSUS", such as representatives of the American Kennel Club."
ReplyDeletesays the blogger
a slight correction here.. none of the speakers represented the American Kennel Club at the HSUS conference. One or two were mentioned as being affiliated with the AKC in the past or present but none represented the AKC
Perhaps a statement of the obvious, but the HSUS and the AKC have opposite goals I think. The AKC has lobbied strenuously in opposition to nearly every animal welfare legislative effort, at a local and federal level, that has been proposed in the States in the last decade. The HSUS, an advocacy organization, has been slandered by numerous right wing, industry funded lobbying groups disguised as animal welfare advocates (HumaneWatch, National Animal Interest Alliance, etc)by distortion of fact and calculated misrepresentation of position. (A fine example of which appears above, from a reader in Orlando, Fl USA.)
Delete"Get your facts right before you post about our Crufts!"
ReplyDeletenot exactly YOUR Crufts any longer when there are so many dogs not from the UK
and Rod.. two things.. there are no "pre tests".( unless you are writing about before group instead of before breed). only the winners of the "notorious 15"are tested and then humiliated and sent to the corner like bad little breeders when their dogs fail a test by an "independent" (cough cough)vet.. I predict the owners will sue, as well they should.
the other thing: I agree with you 100 percent about the HSUS. It is too bad that Jemima cannot or will not see this. Oh and..Mr Burns please make that double a decaf..
Well said bestuvall! a lot of uneducated people about these days
DeleteWhat frightens me about the "vet check" system at Crufts is how many incompetent vets there are. Don't believe me? Just google "veterinary malpractice" or "veterinary incompetence." I THANK my lucky stars that my vet of the past 30 years is skilled and not just out to make a buck. Just a *few* of the "stupid vet" cases friends of mine have suffered: 1)on a routine spay, the vet sewed the bitch's urethra shut and she died two days later from not being able to urinate 2)on a routine spay, the vet (different vet from case 1) didn't stitch properly and the bitch died after her guts spilled out on her owner's kitchen floor 3) a vet diagnosed a gravely ill puppy as having parvo and sent it home to die. I rushed my friend & her pup to my vet. The pup was hyperglycemic (low blood sugar) ONLY, and was brought back to health with corn syrup. 4) an elderly woman, another friend of mine, had a small dog (a mongrel, NOT a purebred) suffer seizures. Local stupid vet gave the woman $6000 estimate of a bill that included MRI and probably brain surgery. She was on a fixed income and was about to have the dog put down. I took the dog to my vet, who put it on $10 of phenobarbital, which solved its problem (epilepsy).
ReplyDeleteAnd SO on and SO on. And then there's the "stifle scam" where a vet frightens an owner into $2500 surgery to fix a dog's "loose" stifles, despite the dog never having limped. This OUTRAGES the veterinary orthopedic surgeon who is a good friend of mine, who says "IF A DOG DOES NOT LIMP, THERE IS NO NEED TO FIX A LOOSE STIFLE!!" The "stifle game" is a means for unscrupulous vets to make their next BMW payment.
So my point is: before people start accepting the word of X-random veterinarian as the word of god, THINK AGAIN!!! Many are FAR from being experts, or even ethical.
Jemima - can you tell me if there are any plans for PDE2 to be shown in Australia?
ReplyDelete