I don't have particularly strong views either way about the RSPCA but tonight's Panorama hatchet job on them was really quite something (and was certainly meant as a hatchet job).
Except for a clear mistake on the RSPCA's part regarding the bird of prey man, I wholly sided with the RSPCA against the 'victims' in John Sweeney's narrative - the woman with over 60 cats (far too many for their own good), the man with the dog that lay dead for two days while he was 60 miles away (in terrible-looking conditions).
I just didn't get it. Why was Panorama defending these people?
It felt like Panorama's barrel of 'scoops' was being well-and-truly scraped, and then re-scraped.
It felt like Panorama's barrel of 'scoops' was being well-and-truly scraped, and then re-scraped.
30 minutes of one-sided, sensationalist reporting delivered by a star reporter (and his dog).
I'm sure there are plenty of things wrong with the RSPCA but this really didn't hit the mark for me. It threw me a stick but I'm not going to run after it and bring it back to the BBC, panting and wagging my tail.
I'm sure there are plenty of things wrong with the RSPCA but this really didn't hit the mark for me. It threw me a stick but I'm not going to run after it and bring it back to the BBC, panting and wagging my tail.
Well, those are my feelings. Those of a blogger. Did any of you see it? What did you make of it?
To illustrate the point Sisyphus is making in the comments thread below, he's asked me to post these photos of an urban fox doing what urban foxes sometimes do. One shows a fox cub playing with its mother's tail. The other shows mother fox bringing back someone's pet ginger kitten back for lunch:
P.S. **Disturbing image warning**
