The Times plumbs new depths

That once grand journal, The Times, has taken in recent years to mimicking the tabloids but today it has surpassed itself in populist, irresponsible journalism verging on incitment to animal cruelty.

Firstly we find that Kit Malthouse, the Deputy Mayor for Policing who, last week in The Times, advocated a ban on all bull breeds, has a friend in Times' columist India Knight (she who thinks she can tell a "bad dog" by its appearance and that Rottweillers are "monstrous").

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle6917302.ece

But then, and this is what really gets me, The Times allows its moderated comments section to be used as thinly veiled encouragement to poison people's dogs.

Now - I'd rather The Times made at least a token effort at journalistic integrity but I don't care that much. If the Times wishes to promote bigotry and its readers are happy to be badly informed then that's their business. But to knowingly allow someone to use their platform to 'suggest' that poisoning dogs that readers may disapprove of is a way to resolve the fantasy problem that they have subscribed to is going too far. A long, long way too far.

That is SHOCKING!!! I would find it shocking from the lowest of tabloids let alone the Times!!
Words fail me.........

that is disgusting

Someone else also suggests squirting bleach inbetween a dogs eyes!?!?

It truely does amaze me! And having a law saying that all dogs must be a on a lead!? How unfair on the dogs is that!? Mine would go crazy if they couldn't get off lead! And it would make it pretty impossible to work them too!

But what can we do!? People are always going to hold the opinion that certain types of breeds are 'bad dogs.'

x

Thankyou for that link I have posted my opinion.

By the way Boris Johnson has told Kit no way to banning Bull Breeds.

It's not a very intelligent article, though is it? I could only imagine dog haters agreeing with it - people who neither like or dislike dogs would read it with an open mind. Anyone with any sense would know that dogs are not born bad.

What a silly reaction to the dog that went for her daughter. It should be the dog owner she wanted to tackle - or would that be too scary for her. So much easier to blame the dog.

John, I have known for about ten years now that the Times is no longer a reputable newspaper, their standards have been going down hill for some years and what you have highlighted here is just another example. I'm afraid I can't even bring myself to open that link.

But the 'Times' is now a tabloid, none of their journalists are any good, they deliberately go out of their way to incite and antagonise readers and I don't know anyone who reads it, don't know what it costs now but not worth a penny.

What really annoys me is their smug conceitedness, like they were working for the 'Times' as it used to be, not the cheap nasty newdpaper it is today.

Also let's not forget the article by some cookery writer who wanted all dogs banned. I can't remember if it was the Times or maybe it was the Guardian, God these journos don't half get my blood boiling

I remember when the Times was a paper. Now it's just another comic for people who live in lala land. So the jurnalist's daughter was knocked down by a dog, and the owner apologised - hardly a reason for wanting to shoot it! Notice it was a Rottweiler looking thing? WTF? These people make me sick. 'I don't like dogs'. Well sorry but I don't like pompous a**sholes, but I can't shoot, blind or poison them!

Yes, she had to get in that it was a 'Rottweiler looking thing' It probably never happened - she probably made it all up in front of her keyboard just to get noticed.

If it isn't required in the UK, dog and child lovers should be lobbying to have embittering agents added to antifreeze. It is quite spotty here. It can be highly effective.