staffymad Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 The editor can appoligise all they like, but this article has given even more amunition to the anti dog brigade and in a way given trainers and those who don't care about the dogs they abuse in the racing industry the chance to say 'Hey, even a national magazine and vet reckon we should kill these dogs after racing' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotslass Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 From the editor's blog... "She'd (Emma) just spent eight hours trying to save a little dog that had been disemboweled by two ex-racing Greyhounds while out on a walk. She didn't succeed and the dogs elderly owner was devastated. I suspect Emma wrote it pretty soon after the obviously distressing incident. When she filed her copy it was highlighted by our chief sub as being 'likely to generate lots of letters'. But Emma is a feisty vet and she often get a hefty mailbag as she does tend to say what she thinks. No alarms bells went off for me at this point - which I regret. Emma has written for us for several years. The article was sent for illustration and design. It was an even busier month for me than usual, I had the dreaded Vat to do and a couple of new staff starting so I'll admit my eye was off the ball. I had already planned the edition and commissioned the major features, but I ran out of time and didn't proof read all the regulars this month - leaving it to others. After a few years columnists are given their head to pretty much write what they feel. One of my staff did say the same thing - that Emma's column would generate lots of letters. But I'm afraid I still didn't get the hairs standing up on the neck feeling of impending doom" Editors shouldn't rely on hairs standing up on their necks - it's her responsibility to check all material - her chief sub highlighted a possible problem and she still didn't pursue it? And if Emma Milne is so emotionally involved (as a vet) that she can't think straight afterwards, I wouldn't want her operating on my pet. I think both are to blame but the editor is ultimately responsible for all published material, and it's unprofessional of her to blame the contributor. If she has time to write a blog, she has time to proof-read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 I was shocked when I read the article, talk about a knee jerking report that is one of the best. Instead of blaming the owner of the Greyhounds she blamed the Greys. Not very professional from a vet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Instead of blaming the owner of the Greyhounds she blamed the Greys. Not very professional from a vet. That's very well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacobean Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 The editor should put the item she has written in her blog in the paper itself next month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyMalc Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 It seems like the editor has got a permanent 'woe is me' attitude - if it's not for one thing it's for another. Doing an 8-page spread last year on how she got "backstabbed" by the large organisations who wanted the Wag&Bone show organised by someone else kinda did it for me. Being p!ssed off about that I can totally understand, using your magazine to go on an 8-page 'woe is me' rant is a bit much. And now this: she's too "busy" with all sorts of other things to take full responsibility for a magzine she edits and owns. This attitude of a vet is completely unprofessional and irresponsible, and I agree with those who have said that I wouldn't want her to treat their dogs. It is a complete scandal that this article was allowed to be published. That Emma Milne is "feisty enough" to deal with the bags of letters that this will generate is completely beside the point. It is not about her being able to deal with criticism, it's about her having an opinion that is completely wrong. I couldn't care less whether she's got the balls to stand up for it, like I don't care whether Nick Griffin (Griffiths) has got the balls to stand up for what the BNP stand for, I think they're still wrong!! :angry: Rant over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemstone Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 I have not read the article yet but have posted the follwoing on the ediors blog - But surely a magazine editor SHOULD read everything before it is published in their magazine? That is your job!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurel n Hardy Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Unfortunately reading her 'reply' on her blog it appears that she still believes she is right and that people are misintepreting her. I hope Beverley Cuddy prints something distancing DT from the article and sacks the stupid woman. However, as it's Beverley Cuddy and DT I rather doubt it. DT is the doggie equivalent of tabloid press. not only can we all complain, but we can also mention that we won't be buying her mag again - if it's going to hit her in the pocket, she may well do the decent thing and offer a full blown apology, as well as sacking Emma Milne. can we raise a complaint with the RCVS as well i wonder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmagic Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 If that person hadn't been on a reality t.v. show she would be a bog standard vet in a small town and no one would have heard of her. Instead here she is spouting some of the most ridiculous shite I've ever read. I have never heard of a grey attacking a dog in our local parks, other breeds yes but never a greyhound. Arran even uses his pal as a stepping stone to try and get to people. Terri I must say I agree with you. I have never held any of her writings in any high regard. She is very opinionated on things. I reckon she gets her money easy. I had an ex racer come to my training class. She had never seen anything but greyhounds and was terrified of all the other dogs. It took three weeks for her to venture down from the 'safety' of the stage in the hall. She slowly inspected hand picked gentle dogs and retreated. That became the norm. She entered the class, went round all the dogs and then joined in the training. She screamed with excitement at other dogs retrieving, but when it came to her turn she refused to chase anything. We even tried a rabbit skin on a rope with no success. She only wore her muzzle for a few months and the owner's mother's jack russells were her best friends, after careful introductions. She was a great hit with all the park users. She was the most gentle, dignified dog I have come across. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Merlin is an ex racer and is the most gentle, kind dog I have every met. Yes he will kill small furries like rabbits, but he also lives with a dog that is 10ins tall without a problem. I had Merlin before I got Gracie and never had any problems with him wanting to kill her in fact it was the other way round, Gracie wanted to kill him Merlin my killer Greyhound playing with Gracie, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacobean Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 It's worrying that someone so opinionated is a vet. Daren't think about some of the rubbish she must spurt out to her clients and the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kats n greys Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Talking about kicking a dog when it's down!! Like other owners of one of the gentlest breeds known, I'm astounded that a vet who is suppose to be concerned about animal welfare can by means of a ill thought out article totally condemn a whole breed. I can understand that she's upset at seeing another dog killed; I would be too. I would very much doubt that greyhound are the biggest killers of the dog world, but if Emma has proof of this I would be interested in seeing it, otherwise I feel that her article is pure tabloid scare mongering. I don’t see that it presents a coherent argument against racing, it just attacks the rehoming of them after their career has finished or as in the case of many, before as so many are rejected before they even make it on to the track. I agree with her call for the banning of racing, but I’m afraid the article comes over as an attack on the breed, not the so-called sport. I wonder how many greyhounds will now be killed, due to this ill conceived vent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elricc Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Where are the offices of dogs today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kats n greys Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Dogs Today Town Mill, Bagshot Road, Chobham, Surrey, GU24 8BZ tel 01276 858880, fax 01276 858860 [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merledogs Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Poorly researched (as in non-existent), poorly written piece of shite. I wouldn't wipe my arse on it. Stupid bint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts