Caption, headline were out of line

I'm well aware that the Acorn is not subject to the rigorous journalistic scrutiny that's required of larger and more well-known newspapers, but I'm very concerned with the sensational reporting that surrounded the pit bull Blue.

In the May 10 edition, the caption of the photo reads: "Somebody cut through the fence and saw to it that Blue had an escape route." How does the staff of the Acorn presume to have acquired such omniscient information? Are certain figures at the Acorn privy to the motives of the person who stole, not liberated, Blue from the Agoura Animal Shelter? If so, they would be good to heed Nancy Needham's advice and contact the police. Anyone who has actually visited the shelter knows that it's much more difficult to leave or escape from the shelter than what's implied by the caption. The shelter is surrounded by a chainlink fence on all sides--opposable thumbs and upper body strength are required to leave the grounds as long as all of the gates are locked. And even if they weren't, the gate latch would still require some dexterity to lift.

In the previous article titled "Dog walk ends in bloodshed, terror," the headline itself is inflammatory. Terror? Yes, it would have been frightening, but certainly terror is over the top. It devalues what people who face true terror every day are made to endure.

The bottom line is that the language used in these articles does nothing but instill fear in people and imply that all pits are evil, terrifying creatures, and that's simply not the case.

Most pits, and dogs, for that matter, are "normal" dogs that have no desire to take a chunk out of anything other than what they're fed for dinner--and the occasional shoe, of course.

Any animal can be provoked if threatened, so just because your Rover is the sweetest dog in the world doesn't mean that it's impossible for him to turn into Kujo.

I am disappointed in the Acorn for falling into the trappings of yellow journalism. Instead of writing a strictly news piece about the facts, the editors and writers have employed somewhat misleading and inflammatory language to create a buzz.

Why not speak to pit bull experts and flesh out the story? Why leave it at how horrible Blue was?

If the Acorn truly wants to inform the public of such occurrences, and Blue is not the first animal to attack humans and other pets, and he will, unfortunately, not be the last, why not include information on how to react to dogs that behave in this manner?

Why do the editors and reporters not seek to empower their readers with information that will potentially save lives and further heartbreak?

Blue and the pets he killed are dead, and nothing can be done to bring any of them back, or prevent it from happening. But all pet owners and animal lovers can agree that opening up a dialogue to potentially prevent further attacks like these from happening is worthy of a little publicity.
Ashley Marcus
Thousand Oaks
This letter was written in response to coverage, not to the letter from Cheri Lee in the May 17 edition.