Inaccurate media reporting, follow-up fails, and why most most dog-bite studies fail

Over the weekend, the NCRC released a follow-up report on the February incident involving Carolyn Baker.

If you remember, the 63 year old Baker was found outside her family's home and the media instantly reported the woman's death was caused by the family's Rottweiler -- that was found in the yard with her.  The woman was said to have "bite marks and severe right arm and shoulder injuries."

The next day, several media outlets followed up to report that the family was convinced that Ms Baker was not killed by the dog -- but that the woman was dead and the dog tried to drag her to the back door.

Then, silence. For three months, nothing.

However, according to the coroner's report obtained by the NCRC notes that Ms Baker had previously suffered both a stroke and a heart attack. While usually another family member let the dog in the house for the night, on this night, Ms. Baker went out to let the dog in. It was a cold night and she wore only a this, polyester nightgown. 

The Cuyahoga County  coroner said that Ms. Baker's death was due to cardiovascular disease. Contributing factors were hypothermia and blunt force trauna to the head (froma fall, not from a dog bite). While there were some claw marks on the woman's body, there were no bite marks found. This would be consistent with a dog trying to wake the woman up vs actually attacking her.

While the  autopsy report has been completed since March, the media has never reported that the dog was innocent and that the woman's death was an accidental tragedy. My heart still goes out to Ms. Baker's family.

You can read the full report here -- along with a history of the news headlines. 

*****

Unfortunately this story doesn't reprent a strange anomoly when it comes to media reporting of dog bites. It's not terribly uncommon to find reports of dog bites/attacks with significantly wrong information (remember, all early reports had the woman having bite marks on her, which was not true).  And often, by the time more accurate information (breed ID, cause of death, severity of injuries) is known, the media has already moved on to other stories and if the truth ever gets out there, it is usually only by a sole medium, instead of the multiple media outlets that cover the initial "breaking" news.

Unfortunately, there are some out there who rely very heavily (or often solely) on media reports to base their opinion on dogs and dog aggression. Obviously, with suspect (or often completely wrong) reporting, their opinions are then based on suspect (at best) information.

This again highlights why it is essential that when we make policies about aggressive dogs that we listen to the experts on the topic and take their advice -- and the experts nearly unanimously agree that targeting dogs based on their behavior, not breed, is the most successful way to solve the problem of biting dogs in communities.

Comments

[YesBiscuit]

This is a pet peeve of mine. I'm still waiting for the follow up reports on Princess Diana's death.

[EmilyS]

"some" with suspect MOTIVES ... of course your tag Merrit Clifton. But also of course Colleen (dogbite.org) Lynn and "Terrierman".

BTW, as a sad followup, I asked Karen Delise what happened to the dog. She wrote that even though the family defended it, they didn't claim it from the shelter, which of course ultimately killed it (my guess is they never even tried to adopt it because of its "bite" history)

[Brent]

Sure Emily, there are others as well -- I just don't have tags for them (and likely never will).

Really unfortunate about the dog as well...they lost two family members that day.

[Chris Shaughness]

What a sad case and unfortunately more common than we think. You may remember back in 2007, a man died on Ving Rhames' property and the press was quick to announce that the man had been mauled by Rhames' dogs. In fact, the coroner came out months later and stated that the man had died from a pre-existing heart problem. This clarification was not blasted on the front page, however.

[jtuck004]

From what I read in the paper the family tried to reclaim the dog, but based on the public reporting and assumption of a dog bite the family was told they would have to submit to some rather onerous and expensive restrictions (insurance, kennel, etc) which they could not afford, so the shelter killed the dog.

[PetDocsOnCall09]

Unfortunately, in the world of media, the fact that the dog was proven innocent is a non-story. News media thrives on controversy to generate views and ratings. So, as much as we would all like to see a retraction, it simply won't happen. The news reporters and editors have already moved on to the next "sensational" story.

We see the same thing happen with veterinarians who are accused of killing dogs through negligence (no story ever comes out to show that they were innocent) and researchers who have their research interrupted and degraded by false accusations from PETA, etc. In the famous Silver Springs monkey case in which PETA made their name, several (I think 4) different organizations cleared the scientist who PETA had arrested on animal cruelty charges. Yet, outside of specific publications that cater to research science, I don't think any major news outlet saw fit to discuss his innocence (I could be wrong...it was a while ago).

Sadly, the news folks are just doing what WE (the public) want...bring us more controversy and sensationalism. It's why celebrity criminals continue to gain notoriety.

[MichelleD]

jtuck004 - I was wondering about that. In a lot of these cases the family has to pony up a bunch of money, upfront, to pay for boarding and care of the dog. If they don't come up with the money in 5 days the animal is considered relinquished. In this case there is no way the dog would have gone to rescue/put up for adoption. For pets and their owners, guilty until proven innocent.

"bite marks and severe right arm and shoulder injuries" WHEN are people going to be held accountable for lying?

[Carianne Burnley]

This story has now made it to the local Cleveland news, http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/05/rottweiler_destroyed_for_mauli.html. What is unfortunate is reading through the blogs and seeing the breed as the reason it should have been euthanized. This definitely goes back to the old adage, you can't fix stupid.

[Angela]

This reminds me of a local story - http://www.scotiaweb.ca/201005101828/nova-scotia/rcmp/rcmp-members-shoot-pit-bull-in-wellington.html Where the dog was named a "pit bull" and this story even got picked up by US news... when in reality the dog was a "boxer mastiff". I could only find ONE article that called the dog a boxer, all other articles called the dog a pit bull. This kind of media ignorance and mis information is why BSL gets put in place. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2010/05/10/ns-pit-bull-shot.html

[Karen Delise]

"This story has now made it to the local Cleveland news"

Yes, they were sent the NCRC report and are now acting like they just got around to following it up.

It's called "damage control"

karen

[Karen Delise]

Oh, Brent, sorry, forgot to thank you for posting this story.

[Brent]

Karen, thanks for your continued work and follow-up -- and kindness in making this information available for all of us to use.

[EmilyS]

"Cpt. Ron Salcer said the dog was deemed vicious ...because the dog regurgitated part of the woman's bra about a week after it was impounded"

words fail...

[Jennifer Brighton]

Gee, would it be these kinds of headlines we're talking about:

MOUNT VERNON POLICE DESTROYING TWO KILLER PIT BULLS

The Associated Press
MOUNT VERNON, Wash. Mount Vernon police say two pit bulls that killed two other dogs in separate attacks will be destroyed.

Lt. Chris Cammock told the Skagit Valley Herald the owner turned her dogs over to police because she feared more attacks.

The dogs escaped from the owner's house Monday and killed two small dogs in their yards in the neighborhood in east Mount Vernon.

Read more: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2010/05/18/1437302/pit-bulls-kill-2-smaller-dogs.html#ixzz0oP3Fgkh5

This headline sure got my attention in my local paper until I realize that it was dogs the pit bulls killed, not people. Not that that makes it right. If another dog killed my dog, I would be outraged, probably at the dog that did it and mostly the irresponsible owner.

[Jennifer Brighton]

Oops - meant to post this under the creation of fear blog, but it sort of applies here as well as I think the headline was totally misleading. Can you imagine if it was a Labrador that killed these dogs. I am quite sure the headline would not have read, "Police Destroying Two Killer Labs."