On the front page of the SPCA of Texas website, one of the blurbs says “JUDGE AWARDS CUSTORY OF 26,411 ANIMALS SEIZED IN DECEMBER TO THE CITY OF ARLINGTON”. Of course, this is a blatant LIE. The judge said no such thing in his order AND he couldn’t award custody of all the animals seized because the City of Arlington has already admitted that nearly 4,000 were dead as of last week. Even if the judge had said such a thing, it would be a LIE and one they, as caretakers of the animals, know full well is a LIE. They have a similar statement on another page where it says: “City of Arlington Awarded Custody of 26,411…” If I were one of their donors, I would certainly consider these kinds of lies to be an outright fraud to obtain a donation and a fraud upon the public’s trust. I’ve come to expect them to be misrepresentative, to fail to give updates (particularly on animals that die in their care), to keep asking for donations for animals long gone from their care; but, wow, even I’m shocked at the audacity of this LIE.
And then there’s the “media”… I’m really having trouble using the term “journalism” at this point to describe the unethical reporting that I’m seeing.
The Star-Telegram started off with a similar statement about “27000” animals. When I commented on that, the story was changed and, POOF, my comment disappeared. They’re back at it now. I re-posted my comment. Gee, I wonder how long before it goes “poof” this time :)
The second story to post today was WFAA’s. What a surprise to see “He gave the city custody… all 27,000 of them.” AND that they had closed the story to comments!!! OK, well, it wasn’t really a surprise to me. I’ve been watching the comments on stories and WE are turning the tide there. WE aren’t willing to be so easily BS’d by reporters and spin. Keep up the good work with the comments out there!!! Let's make it clear we want FACTS, not fables and spin.
It is incredible to me that reporters would jump on the bandwagon of um, er, hm, "misrepresentation" (the kindest I can come up with); as any responsible journalist would certainly know about the nearly 4,000 dead animals and could surely find someone to help them subtract if they needed help!
The animals, “they're rebounding now”. Really? Then why not give a weekly update on deaths, euthanasias, and births? Why not prove you’ve got better stats and improving them with time and experience? Oh, yeah, that might take you from Lies and Damned Lies right up to Statistical Lies.
“All these unusual expenses keep cropping up…” Well, DUH, just goes to show you DIDN’T have a clue how to care for the animals in the first place!!!
“The SPCA is gnawing through thousands of dollars a day and dipping into reserves.” GOOD. Let’s all make sure our friends know what LIES they tell, cut off their donation stream and maybe we can drive them right out of the business of helping to steal other people’s property. $240,000+/month; shouldn’t take too long, perhaps by the end of the appeal even. I can and do dream :)
And a quick internet search indicated they are already “promising” out the animals. You may be surprised at what qualifies as “sanctuaries and rescue foundations”; not to mention the pre-maturity of making such “promises”. More on that later. (Hey, humane guys, just keep feeding me easy material. I'm LUVIN' IT.)