Pit Bulls As Overarching Media Themes (Part 6 of 8)

This is part 6 of my 8 part series on Daniel Gardner’s book, the Science of Fear.

 

On May 4, 2006, Alan Hill of Independence, MO was seriously wounded when he was attacked by three ‘pit bulls’.  The dogs were known to be aggressive and the caretaker of a property where the dogs stayed purposefully let the dogs out just “to see what would happen.”

 

Over the course of the next 6 months, the Kansas City Star newspaper ran no fewer than 124 stories about ‘pit bulls’ (which is the equivalent of 2 articles running every 3 days for six months. Many were editorials. Many were news stories. The news stories covered everything from cities discussing breed bans to a few additional bite incidents. A couple of the bites were major – but many were simply stories about dogs that scratched someone. One TV news station’s lead story on a Friday night consisted of one of their camera men SEEING a pit bull – and the video they showed is a shaky video of a photographer trying to capture a pit bull on film as the dog slinks away into a wooded area afraid.

 

As the stories mounted, cities throughout the Kansas City metropolitan area began discussing potential bans on pit bulls. The newspaper was there to cover it. The more the Star covered these stories, the more of a moral panic there became – which led to more articles by the media.  The feedback loop was in full force.

 

Articles from the newspaper showed a clear bias about what cities should do about pit bulls – they all must go. Headlines included:

 

“Lee’s Summit stalls on dog regulations”

“Independence poised to approve ban”

“Incidents prove pits must go”

“Action on dogs delayed”

“Efforts across the area to put new limits on pit bulls will continue tonight”

“Olathe stands by its dog law; given second chance to ban pit bulls, council declines, going against the trend in other cites.”

 

The last one is especially damning because at the time, 19 area cities had discussed a potential ban on pit bulls, and only 3 had chosen to move forward with breed specific restrictions.

 

To put the 124 articles in six months into perspective, in the year prior to the attack on Alan Hill, the Star ran only 16 stories about ‘pit bulls’ – with several of those being articles that cast them in a positive light.

 

Over the years, similar things have happened in cities around the country. The media will virtually ignore ‘pit bulls’ for years at a time, but then, when one attack occurs, the media will begin to write all kinds of negative articles about these types of dogs. 

 

In Omaha, in the 12 months prior to June 24, 2008, KETV ran 19 news stories about ‘pit bulls’ (about 25% of which were about Mike Vick).  On June 24^th, a three year old girl was attacked by a ‘pit bull’, and in the 12 months that followed, the news station ran 62 news stories.

 

In The Science of Fear, Gardner notes that in many cases, one big event may lead to the formation of a larger narrative. Whenever a story fits into an existing storyline, it is generally strengthened by the larger story.  If a story isn’t part of a larger narrative – or worse, if it contradicts the narrative – it is far less likely to see the light of day.

 

Gardner uses the media publicity about Road Rage as an example:

 

“In 1998, Time magazine declared, “It’s high noon on the country’s streets and highways. This is road recklessness, auto anarchy, an epidemic of wanton carmanship.”  Road rage. In 1994, the term scarcely existed and the issue was nowhere to be seen. In 1995, the phrase started to multiply in the media, and by 1996, the issue had become a serious public concern.  Americans were increasingly rude, nasty and violent behind the wheel; berserk drivers were injuring and killing in growing numbers; it was an “epidemic”.  Everyone knew that, and by 1997, everyone was talking about it.  Then it stopped. Just like that.  The term road rage still appears now and then in the media – it’s too catchy to let go – but the issue just vanished about the time Monica Lewinsky became the most famous White House Intern in history.”

 

The feedback loop was broken, and the media moved on to the new interest among the American public.  Ironically, there appeared to be no real reason for the heavy emphasis on road rage. From the book:

 

“’Headlines not withstanding, there was not – there is not – the least statistical or other scientific evidence of more aggressive driving on our nation’s roads,’ concluded journalist Michael Fumento in a detailed examination of the alleged epidemic published in The Atlantic Monthly in August 1998. “Indeed, accidental, fatality and injury rates have been edging down. There is no evidence that ‘road rage’ or an aggressive-driving ‘epidemic’ is anything but a media invention, inspired primarily by something as simple as alliteration: road rage.’”

 

 

In the late 1970s, society had begun to take an interest in the cruel sport of dog fighting in the US. Media reports began to increase as reports of law enforcement raids on dog fighting rings began to pop up. 

 

In July, 1987, Rolling Stone Magazine did a remarkable and graphic report on teenagers, inner city gangs, violence and abuse of ‘pit bulls’ entitled “A Boy and his Dog in Hell”.  On July 27^th of 1987, Sports Illustrated ran a cover article – complete with a picture of a teeth-baring pit bull (pictured left) with the headline “Beware of this Dog.”

 

In the same month, Time Magazine ran an article entitled “Time Bomb on Legs”.  The article may have been the worst of the articles that ran. From Karen Delise’s book The Pit Bull Placebo:

 

“Horror Author Stephen King could not have created a more frightening monster than this portrayal of the Pit bull. The second sentence of this article reads: “never in the delirious dream of a disordered brain could anything more savage, more appalling, more hellish, be conceived than the dark form and savage face (of the pit bull). The rest of the article descends even further, vilifying the Pit bull as a creature that revels in the “frenzy of blood-letting,” and described as “lethal weapons” with “steel trap jaws” and as “killer dogs” and the new “hound of the Baskervilles.” An unproven, unreferenced claim of Pit bulls biting with 1800 psi is even included.” 

 

(My note, since, science has shown us that pit bulls indeed bite with the same relative bite force as other medium sized dogs – at about 320 psi).

 

In this same month, in 1987, People magazine ALSO ran an article on ‘pit bulls’ entitled “An Instinct for the Kill”.

 

By the end of August, 1987, the larger narrative of ‘pit bulls’ as “aggressive killers” was begun. It didn’t matter much of the information included in the articles wasn’t really true – and that many of the claims were as outrageously wrong and unsubstantiated as the 1800 psi statements.  It didn’t matter there were literally thousands of examples of ‘pit bulls’ as household pets that existed. It didn't matter if statistically and scientifically the fear they were creating was not valid -- much like in the "road rage" example. All that seemed to matter was that a type of dog, with a very “cool” sounding name, ‘pit bulls’, made for very dramatic magazine articles, very dramatic covers and increase sales.

 

It is almost no wonder, with the media coverage of the time that created a moral panic, that over the next 18 months, some of the country's post notable bans on pit bulls came into existance -- Denver, Kansas City, KS, and Miami -Dade County all passed their breed bans in 1989 -- and all exist today, in spite of the wealth of science and research that has shown that there is little scientific reason to ban particular breeds of dogs, and evidence that shows that such bans are not effective.

 

And yet, the narrative began – and it is a narrative that continues to this day. It’s the same narrative that leads to stories that normally wouldn’t be “newsworthy” on their own making it into the headlines because it supports the larger narrative.

 

It’s the same narrative that allows a news station in Mobile, AL to report on only 6 of the city’s 80 dog bites throughout the year – but in every incident where a breed of dog was mentioned, the breed was a ‘pit bull’ – even though they did not lead the list of biting breeds and made up only a small percentage of the total bites.

 

It’s the same narrative that allows media outlets in places like Kansas City and Omaha to create even larger local narratives whenever a singular incident gives them the opportunity to.

 

And it’s the larger narrative that relies on the feedback loop to continue to create fear, and then have the public fear come to them in terms of more viewers/readers, that leads them to create even more stories about ‘pit bulls’ that feeds the cycle.

 

It’s time to end the narrative.

Comments

[EmilyS]

this series is outstanding, Brent.
On the media coverage, I see the exact trend in the Cheyenne paper. Periodically they'll reprint a report on a pit bull "attack" in some other town.... they never print reports on "attacks" by other breeds.

[Brent Toellner]

Thanks Emily. It really is amazing that this book was written about fear in general and covered a huge array of different areas where this plays out. Not once did it mention dogs. But it could not have painted a more clear picture of how we've gotten to this point when it comes to how society views "pit bulls".

[PAMM - People Against Mauled Men]

The Alan Hill situation was extremely bizarre and involved a lot of people who had histories of illegal activites. There have been a lot of rumors about what may or may not have been going on in that situation that the media completely ignored.

Don't forget Jimmie Mae McConnell that died from a HEART ATTACK while being attacked by an alleged pit bull around the same time as the Hill incident - none of her bites were serious but the paper didn't note that. Talk about a perfect storm...

The whole crack epidemic played out the same way - that was media hysteria there was not big influx of crack heads.

[Rinalia]

Just wanted to say that I've been enjoying this series immensely, Brent.

[ERICA ALBERDA]

I OWN A VERY VERY LOVING PITBULL NAMES BLUE WHO WOULD NEVER HURT A SOUL, 2 YEARS AGO MY DAUGHTER WAS MAULED BY A MIXED BREED SPRINGER SPANIEL AND LOST HER TOP LIP, IT NEVER MADE THE PAPER. BLUE MY 4 YEAR OLD PIT SAVED US FROM INTRUDERS BREAKING INTO OUR HOUSE IN APRIL OF LAST YEAR IT NEVER MADE THE PAPERS. I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE GOOD AND NOT THE BAD, LETS START PROMOTING THE LOYAL,CARING BREED THAT THEY ARE AND EXPOSING THE BAD OWNERS WHO TORMENT THESE WONDERFUL DOGS.

[Joanne]

What upsets me about dog attack reporting is that ANY big-headed short haired breed is described as a "pitbull type", most especially the Mastif. Two I remember the most were a Presa Canario, and then a Canne Corso, both described as pitbull breeds

[Jonathan]

I am a dog walker in Australia and found this post really interesting "how society views pit bulls". We had only last week two people mauled in Sydney by a pit bull that the police shot dead-however I looked further into the story and feel it was not all the dogs fault-however will not discuss that for legal reasons-great post!

[Jonathan]

I am a dog walker in Australia and found this post really interesting "how society views pit bulls". We had only last week two people mauled in Sydney by a pit bull that the police shot dead-however I looked further into the story and feel it was not all the dogs fault-however will not discuss that for legal reasons-great post!