When asked why the broadcast had not included footage of the dog on the move, the KC said:
"In light of the concern over the particurlar dog we made the decision not to further highlight the unsound movement of the dog whilst we discuss ways forward to improve the health of the breed."Remember that the KC here is talking about the TV footage broadcast on Channel 4, a public service broadcaster.
Here's what the Channel 4 guidelines say on this point:
Broadcasters must retain complete editorial control over their programme content. In order to achieve this:
- programmes must always be and appear to be editorially independent;
- programmes should not promote or endorse the commercial products and services of others or appear to.
- any improper external influence on the editorial process must always be resisted e.g. by a commercial organisation, a contributor or anyone or any organisation who seeks to exercise some degree of control over programme content;
I have today submitted a complaint to Channel 4 - and will follow it up with the broadcasting watchdog, Ofcom.
I know this one won't provoke as much outrage as a deformed German Shepherd, but I'm a TV producer and guard very fiercely my editorial independence when making my own films.
Behind the scenes, there has been a lot of concern about the impartiality of the Crufts broadcasts because it is pretty obvious to anyone in the know that the Kennel Club pulls a lot of strings. Everyone invited on to that Crufts TV sofa is KC-friendly.
My understanding is that the live footage from the show is streamed to an OB (outside broadcast) team that edits the footage for broadcast, with a KC media representative overseeing the process.
Hopefully next year, if Channel 4 continues to broadcast the show that the BBC dropped on animal welfare grounds after Pedigree Dogs Exposed, measures will be put in place to ensure that the Kennel Club is not running the show.
Are you serious here Jemima, they vetoed the footage and C4 agreed to this? I would say I'm shocked by the KC but actually, I'm more concerned about C4's compliance here. But that's not to say they relinquished editorial control, they just capitulated!!
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Ian: shocking behaviour by the KC and C4.
DeleteIn other words, we decided to present ribbons to a defective dog because, reasons.
ReplyDeleteRob: Ribbon on dog = ratings
ReplyDeleteThis is very serious. It does look like C4 don't have editorial control which to be honest does come across quite strongly in their coverage.
ReplyDeleteMedia manipulation is still a big deal especially in a publicly owned company like C4 (I assume it still is) but it just shows though how the internet has fundamentally changed, by-passed, the way people receive news/information leaving traditional media in something of an extended state of chaos.
Maybe it were em pesky sponsors that demanded Crufts have final editorial. Samsung heavily sponsors Channel 4 and Crufts.
Nice one! good idea to complain to Ofcom as my complaints to C4 have been falling on deaf ears for the last few years..
ReplyDeleteThis may well be the KC Al Capone moment - can't get 'em on failing on canine welfare, but can get them on manipulating a broadcaster to prevent vital evidence being deliberately withheld from the public.
Shocking all round. And they really need to get some objectivity on that sofa - people who actually disagree with the KC. Qualified behaviourists, ethologists and biologists with canine welfare at their heart.
The KC ought to be disbanded.Showing has nothing to do with the dogs, just about the owners and shame on them too. To breed such awful disabilities into any animal is immoral, should be illegal and is incredibly cruel. Nature takes no prisoners. pity it can't get hold of those responsible for such cruelty. Shame 0n Ch 4 as well, for being so weak. And where is the RSPCA and other animal charities? Too busy trying to get money out of the public no doubt.
ReplyDeleteCouldn't have said it better myself.
DeletePenny, you hit the nail on the head. Very well said.
DeleteIronic Jemima, really ironic. The KC can employ and action with immediate effect a television programme to protect themselves. Yet they cannot employ and action ringside monitors, vets, judges who appear to have no regard for the dogs like Tori, who so clearly needed to be removed from the ring by her owner, never mind anyone else. Such was the desire to win she was subjected to a very upsetting episode, his words say the same, used, of course, as an excuse. Until the CCs are withdrawn and everyone involved in Tori's life see what they are doing to her the concern will remain for her wellbeing. Hips and elbows may well be acceptable, it's a different part of the body from the spine that appears to be damaged, her eyes are probably good, her coat colour is pretty, her ears pretty well perfect, but they don't play a part in her movement. A damaged spinal chord is exceedingly painful, I've been there, loss of co-ordination can definitely be affected and she shows these signs, mine was remedied after time, I very much doubt Tori's will be. Poor dog.
ReplyDeleteEven more ironic the C$ have begun broadcasting their own "The Public Service Broadcaster" adverts over the last few days
DeleteRemoving CCs, banning GSD's from KC shows, changing judges to ensure more public appeasing dogs are awarded. These are just a few of the sanctions I've read about since Saturday. But ultimately none of them will help the GSD and here's why....
DeleteThe breeders/owners/handlers of thos dogs will just move over to 100% attending non KC shows, most already do half & half throughout the show year as can be seen from Tori's awards. And the judges in those shows will still reward those dogs with the conformation they believe is correct. And this will perpetuate the breeding of more dogs with the same or worse exaggerated features so highly prized in the SV world.
Until there is clear clinical evidence of an 'issue' that can be presented to the World Union of German Shepherd Dog Clubs (WUSV) then they will have no reason to make any change and every reason to continue down this line of utter madness that is the deformation of the German Shepherd Dog.
Absolutely right, Ian.
DeleteWe now need money thrown at the science to nail it.
The thing is, if the science behind what they're doing proves they are wrong, will the WUSV listen to it? This has proved to be the case with the KC. It actually means the 'the pwoers that be' within the WUSV will have to concede that they were wrong and like the KC they will try to 'save face.' It's all to do with egotism. Have met it so many times in the past with breeders within the KC. It's not what you know (that frightens them) it's who you know and how they can clan together to make you the person in the right look wrong.
DeleteWhen the Chinese pay 6 figure sums for this style of dog, you can throw all the scientific evidence you like at them, and it won't make one iota of difference.
DeleteBy the time, you get an absolute with years and years of scientific research, the breed will be on the floor.
There was scientific studies done years and years ago anyhow where it was concluded that the difference in facet joint angles in GSD associated with the downward slope of the lumber spine and croup may correlate with the frequent occurrence of lumbosacral disk degeneration in this breed.
The KC has power here. Removing CCs or removing GSD from competition will have a knock-on effect by devaluing the breed world-wide. There is far too much crap breeding in GSD and too much money. Germanic show breeders make up about 20 to 25% of the population in the UK, and the bloodlines they are using are far from scarce. Whatever happens, there needs to be some radical thinking for the breed and quickly too, IMO.
Guess C4 has friends in the KC as well then? Only a matter of time before the KC has legislation behind it, I suppose because it has friends there too not because the KC know what they're doing but because it keeps everyone's job safe.
ReplyDeletePerhaps C4 would like to ask the owner of Tori if they can pay for a full scan to determine what, if any, problems show up in her spine. If the KC were to do it too then perhaps the owners would come to see that there is a potential problem. If they took the CC winners (the award should be withdrawn) and scanned them then that would be a start, the progeny of either of them, then start to fan out. Relying on people with vested interests will not fill the bill, it has to be independent, reported on by unbiased experts. The KC has the funds, Caroline Kisko needs to be seen to be sincere and DETERMINED to finally rule out this horrible deformity.
ReplyDelete'Caroline Kisko' and 'sincere' do not belong in the same sentence! But 'Caroline Kisko' and 'seen to be' are often the case!
DeleteI thought she was quite remarkable in her "seen to be" roll.
DeleteShe deserves a BAFTA she honestly does.
Sadly, the only thing Channel 4 will care about is the advertising revenue they get during the broadcasts. I would suggest that the KC have had editorial control of the raw OB footage the broadcasts for years.
ReplyDelete