RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

Bannasidhe

DubInMeath wrote: »

It might but as the legal owner they can decide the fate of their animals.

Have mixed feelings on the ispca given comments made around new years.

The different spca associations are not always affiliated with them and don't want to be for various reasons.

But once they surrender the dog they are no longer the owner, so with some political will it could be done. It's insane that a person can dictate what happens to a dog after they have ceased to own it.

I get what you are saying about the ISPCA - it is another organisation that can be be either excellent or... not... depending on area of the country.

Same with the different spca associations.

Again, the whole area of animal welfare including Rescues/Pounds/etc needs proper oversight. But who is going to do that? DAFM? Local Authorities? Sure they are part of the problem.

Discodog

DubInMeath wrote: »

I would have said the opposite here on the east coast, especially the north east.

The council run pounds have people bringing them dogs from different counties because the outsourced pounds have a bad reputation and deservedly so.

They are businesses & run for profit, not animal welfare.

strandroad

DubInMeath wrote: »

It might but as the legal owner they can decide the fate of their animals.

I think that's debatable, please don't make me look for links now but to quote my earlier post: "I heard that in some EU countries it is illegal to put a healthy dog or cat down, you can only do it in case of serious illness or suffering or if it's a blind litter of puppies or kittens. Is it state legislation level, or is it wider EU rules that we are flouting, as you do?"

gozunda

strandroad wrote: »

...

Barry's Tea is getting absolutely hammered on Facebook, it's very interesting to see. They haven't addressed the issue openly, but their promo posts have hundreds of protest comments on them and when you click on the profiles it's not hipsters or hippies posting, it's your Irish mammy demographics switching to Lyons en masse. Twitter, Instagram are the same. Wondering how many emails they received.

That type of social media bullying is inexcusable and little more than mob intimidation . I dont agree with it - I've seen similar descend into death threats and threats of violence. Tbh it has no place in any society. If you dont want to buy a product don't. As it stands greyhound racing is legal - dont like it fine but what some of those posting are doing is at best borderline imo.

strandroad

gozunda wrote: »

That type of social media bullying is inexcusable and little more than mob intimidation . I dont agree with it - I've seen similar descend into death threats and threats of violence. Tbh it has no place in any society. If you dont want to buy a product don't. As it stands greyhound racing is legal - dont like it fine but what some of those posting are doing is at best borderline imo.

What a massive exaggeration. Telling a tea brand that you're switching to another tea brand until they stop their sponsorship of cruelty sports is as peaceful as it can be. No one is torching their premises, chill.

Blinky Plebum

Don't want to watch the documentary but for some reason the greyhound racing industry has been continually propped up by the government to a level far greater than it's importance to society.

I completely understand funding sports whether it's GAA,Soccer,Rugby,Tennis,Golf,Athletics,Swimming, Cricket etc etc put funding for an "industry" which just exists for the purposes of gambling and is provides a zero benefit for society (every other sport does have genuine benefits for society) is ridiculous and yet the greyhound industry for some reason has been some sort of sacred cow.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

I think this needs to change.

The ISPCA are the National organisation. The conflict between the ISPCA & SPCA's is a major cause of animal welfare problems here. There is no focus unlike with the RSPCA in the UK.

It's more that the ispca want to be the only organisation for animal welfare. They are moving out of running pounds due to bad publicity they received.

The problem with them being the only organisation for animal welfare, is that animals suffer because of this. The ispca aren't available out of hours and weekends.So the local rescues and spca members take on this work and going by comments made around new years this is something that is worrying a lot of people in rescue and welfare.

gozunda

strandroad wrote: »

What a massive exaggeration. Telling a tea brand that you're switching to another tea brand until they stop their sponsorship of cruelty sports is as peaceful as it can be. No one is torching their premises, chill.

It's a hell more than that. Organised online bullying and intimidation is a huge issue atm. Businesses are at the forefront of much of that. Greyhound racing is legal. Some dont like it and that's their prerogative but online bullying and or intimidation is inxcusable. Dont want to buy a brand then dont. Simple.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But once they surrender the dog they are no longer the owner, so with some political will it could be done. It's insane that a person can dictate what happens to a dog after they have ceased to own it.

I get what you are saying about the ISPCA - it is another organisation that can be be either excellent or... not... depending on area of the country.

Same with the different spca associations.

Again, the whole area of animal welfare including Rescues/Pounds/etc needs proper oversight. But who is going to do that? DAFM? Local Authorities? Sure they are part of the problem.

strandroad wrote: »

I think that's debatable, please don't make me look for links now but to quote my earlier post: "I heard that in some EU countries it is illegal to put a healthy dog or cat down, you can only do it in case of serious illness or suffering or if it's a blind litter of puppies or kittens. Is it state legislation level, or is it wider EU rules that we are flouting, as you do?"

The situation is unique to greyhounds due to them being legally farm animals and not dogs. If another person surrenders their dog to the pound they have no say in what happens to the dog and the pound can try to rehome or the rescues that they work with can foster and rehome the dog.

Edit: Just to add a vet in Ireland isn't required to put a healthy pet down just because the owner comes into their practice and wants it done.

strandroad

DubInMeath wrote: »

The situation is unique to greyhounds due to them being legally farm animals and not dogs.

What kind of consequencies would it trigger for the industry if this was removed I wonder?

Discodog

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But once they surrender the dog they are no longer the owner, so with some political will it could be done. It's insane that a person can dictate what happens to a dog after they have ceased to own it.

I get what you are saying about the ISPCA - it is another organisation that can be be either excellent or... not... depending on area of the country.

Same with the different spca associations.

Again, the whole area of animal welfare including Rescues/Pounds/etc needs proper oversight. But who is going to do that? DAFM? Local Authorities? Sure they are part of the problem.

They have 5 Inspectors covering the whole country. To have the same coverage as the UK they would need 120. That's how bad the situation is here.

Bannasidhe

gozunda wrote: »

That type of social media bullying is inexcusable and little more than mob intimidation . I dont agree with it - I've seen similar descend into death threats and threats of violence. Tbh it has no place in any society. If you dont want to buy a product don't. As it stands greyhound racing is legal - dont like it fine but what some of those posting are doing is at best borderline imo.

Threatening to boycott is a perfectly legitimate form of protest. Companies like Barry's Tea sponsor greyhound racing to get publicity to encourage people to buy their products. It is reasonable for consumers to say we will not buy your product while you sponsor greyhound racing.
If a lot of people are threatening to boycott a company that is not 'mob intimidation' - that is a PR disaster for the company.

Death threats? Hyperbole much?

Giving out about people posting stuff is that is - in your opinion- 'borderline legal' when greyhound owners are on film committing completely illegal acts is a bit rich.

Nobelium

If the Irish can be forced to eat Brazilian beef, surely with a few backhanders and bit of creative politics, the Koreans can be forced to eat Irish Dog ? Problem solved.

Bannasidhe

Discodog wrote: »

They have 5 Inspectors covering the whole country. To have the same coverage as the UK they would need 120. That's how bad the situation is here.

I can only speak from experience of the situation in Cork where we have an exceptional ISPCA inspector. But I do know that in other regions the situation is bad.

Discodog

DubInMeath wrote: »

The situation is unique to greyhounds due to them being legally farm animals and not dogs. If another person surrenders their dog to the pound they have no say in what happens to the dog and the pound can try to rehome or the rescues that they work with can foster and rehome the dog.

Edit: Just to add a vet in Ireland isn't required to put a healthy pet down just because the owner comes into their practice and wants it done.

Where is this in the legislation ?

I am hearing that Vets will refuse & that the IGB will have to try to employ their own vets.

Nobelium

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Threatening to boycott is a perfectly legitimate form of protest. Companies like Barry's Tea sponsor greyhound racing to get publicity to encourage people to buy their products. It is reasonable for consumers to say we will not buy your product while you sponsor greyhound racing.
If a lot of people are threatening to boycott a company that is not 'mob intimidation' - that is a PR disaster for the company.

Punjana is way better Tea than Barry's anyway, and there is also very good alternatives in Aldi / Lidl

gozunda

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Threatening to boycott is a perfectly legitimate form of protest. Companies like Barry's Tea sponsor greyhound racing to get publicity to encourage people to buy their products. It is reasonable for consumers to say we will not buy your product while you sponsor greyhound racing.
If a lot of people are threatening to boycott a company that is not 'mob intimidation' - that is a PR disaster for the company. Death threats? Hyperbole much? Giving out about people posting stuff is that is - in your opinion- 'borderline legal' when greyhound owners are on film committing completely illegal acts is a bit rich.

Wrong. Looking at some of those comments that go far beyond 'threatening to boycot' (sic) imo. A quick search online and it's not difficult to see who is behind this organised intimidation and online bullying. Yes similar organised intimidation elsewhere has turned into death threats - one notable one was online eejits sending death threats to a farmer and his family who posted a video of a cow giving birth. That happened in this country. Similar in the UK and elsewhere. (And no I'm not going to post links thanks) This kind of ****e has no excuse.

Re borderline legal - It's not a competition - see something illegal, then report it. Dont like a brand - then don't buy it. Neither excuses or gives anyone the right to engage in organised online bullying and intimidation.

Bannasidhe

strandroad wrote: »

I saw a post shared about a protest in Mullingar, good sized protest on both sides of the road with dogs placards and chanting, and apparently a busload of punters arriving to the stadium turned around and left upon seeing that, to a major cheer from the crowd.

Barry's Tea is getting absolutely hammered on Facebook, it's very interesting to see. They haven't addressed the issue openly, but their promo posts have hundreds of protest comments on them and when you click on the profiles it's not hipsters or hippies posting, it's your Irish mammy demographics switching to Lyons en masse. Twitter, Instagram are the same. Wondering how many emails they received.

Irish mammies were the majority of protesters at Curraheen last night - myself included.
Very few women in the cars/vans going into the stadium. Mostly middle aged men.

Am hearing anecdotally that the 'hen party' trade has plummeted after RTE aired the programme - lot of women saying they won't go to the track now that they have seen what goes on in the industry. Even my 80 odd year old Cork born and bred Mam has thrown out her Barry's tea. She said she could just about stomach that the Barry's were blueshirts but this is too much. It's Lyons for her now and she isn't enjoying it one bit.

Bannasidhe

gozunda wrote: »

Wrong. Looking at some of those comments that go far beyond 'threatening to boycot' (sic) imo. A quick search online and it's not difficult to see who is behind this organised intimidation and online bullying. Yes similar organised intimidation has turned into death threats - one notable one was online eejits sending death threats to a farmer and his family who posted a video of a cow giving birth. That happened in this country. Similar in the UK and elsewhere. (And no I'm not going to post links thanks) This kind of ****e has no excuse.

Re borderline legal - It's not a competition - see something illegal, then report it. Dont like a brand - then don't buy it. Neither excuses or gives anyone the right to engage in organised online bullying and intimidation.

So you haven't actually seen anyone threatening companies sponsoring greyhound racing with death threats?

You saw other people threatening in instances completely unrelated to what we are talking about here.

More deflection.

If anyone issues death threats they should be prosecuted. End of story.

But they haven't in this case have they?
They have said we won't buy your product. Which is a completely legal thing to say.

Bit like when a lot of men said they would boycott Gilette over a certain ad.
Was that mob intimidation too?

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Where is this in the legislation ?

I am hearing that Vets will refuse & that the IGB will have to try to employ their own vets.

The situation isn't covered by legislation, vets as owners/employees of a practice can decide that they won't put down a healthy animal at the request of a customer and refuse their business, or they can do as requested by their customer.

gozunda

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So you haven't actually seen anyone threatening companies sponsoring greyhound racing with death threats?You saw other people threatening in instances completely unrelated to what we are talking about here.More deflection.
If anyone issues death threats they should be prosecuted. End of story.But they haven't in this case have they?They have said we won't buy your product. Which is a completely legal thing to say. Bit like when a lot of men said they would boycott Gilette over a certain ad.
Was that mob intimidation too?

Wrong. I criticised some of the comments currently being posted on fb. You doubted it when I detailed these type of campaigns leading to intimidation and online threats. I gave an example of this in relation to online death threats arising from organised bullying and intimdation when you claimed it was hyperbole. I detailed that this does happen online. Tbh I am surprised that as a moderator you believe that any organised online bullying an intimidation can somehow be acceptable or excused because of someones personal opinion. As I said dont like a brand dont buy it - if that is your goal.

Discodog

DubInMeath wrote: »

The situation isn't covered by legislation, vets as owners/employees of a practice can decide that they won't put down a healthy animal at the request of a customer and refuse their business, or they can do as requested by their customer.

I meant the legislation that defines a Greyhound as a farm animal ?

Bannasidhe

While some are trying to say it's 'mob intimidation' and make hyperbolic statements about death threats what is actually happening is petitions, tweets, FB comments saying we will boycott.

Over 36,000 people have signed a petition and put the wind up Barry's Tea who can see their appeal to the Irish Mammy and desire to be seen as a wholesome part of family life go to the dogs - (pun intended).

Over 36,000 have signed an online petition urging Barry’s Tea “to show compassion for the dogs and permanently end its sponsorship of greyhound racing”.

Following the airing of the shocking show on Wednesday, we have learned Barry’s Tea is considering pulling the plug on its greyhound sponsorship.

A spokeswoman for Barry’s Tea told the Irish Sun on Sunday: “We are very concerned at the revelations highlighted in the RTE Investigates programme which aired on Wednesday this week.

“We are currently reviewing our sponsorship of the annual race in Curraheen Park, Cork.”

https://www.thesun.ie/news/4273167/barrys-tea-greyhound-sponsorship/

Bannasidhe

gozunda wrote: »

Wrong. I criticised some of the comments currently being posted on fb. You doubted it when I detailed these type of campaigns leading to intimidation and online threats. I gave an example of this in relation to online death threats arising from organised bullying and intimdation when you claimed it was hyperbole. I detailed that this does happen online. Tbh I am surprised that as a moderator you believe that any organised online bullying an intimidation can somehow be acceptable or excused because of someones personal opinion. As I said dont like a brand dont buy it - if that is your goal.

Never said there aren't eejits who post on-line threats. And I clearly said any who do so should be prosecuted.

What I called into question was where this has happened in relation to calls to boycott certain sponsors of Irish Greyhound racing. The example you gave has nothing to do with the Greyhound industry.

If you can supply an example of where this has happened I will absolutely condemn it.

Also not sure what my being a mod in a completely different forum has to do with a cup of tea.

If you cannot then it is just more deflection.

Don't really see why you are getting so worked up about people politely telling a company they refuse to buy their product. Consumers are perfectly within their rights to do so.

As I said, not sure what my being a mod in a completely different forum has to do with it but if you posted in that forum that people were making death threats to sponsors of Irish greyhound racing I would be asking you to provide some proof of that tbh, as it's a serious allegation. .

Discodog

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Never said there aren't eejits who post on-line threats. And I clearly said any who do so should be prosecuted.

What I called into question was where this has happened in relation to calls to boycott certain sponsors of Irish Greyhound racing. The example you gave has nothing to do with the Greyhound industry.

If you can supply an example of where this has happened I will absolutely condemn it.

Also not sure what my being a mod in a completely different forum has to do with a cup of tea.

If you cannot then it is just more deflection.

Don't really see why you are getting so worked up about people politely telling a company they refuse to buy their product. Consumers are perfectly within their rights to do so.

Hopefully local groups can do the same for their local track sponsors.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Wrong. I criticised some of the comments currently being posted on fb. You doubted it when I detailed these type of campaigns leading to intimidation and online threats. I gave an example of this in relation to online death threats arising from organised bullying and intimdation when you claimed it was hyperbole. I detailed that this does happen online. Tbh I am surprised that as a moderator you believe that any organised online bullying an intimidation can somehow be acceptable or excused because of someones personal opinion. As I said dont like a brand dont buy it - if that is your goal.

How can you make death threats against a company ???
You can make them against a person and yes that is an offence ........ but against Barry’s Tea? Is someone going to kill Barry’s Tea? Like buy every tea bag in the country and burn it to death ?

You’re clutching at straws again :D

( i stayed up late last night reading the FB posts on Barry’s Tea page and adding my own. I didn’t see any death threats to the tea bags, just people saying they’re switching to Lyons. I prefer Twinings )

gozunda

Bannasidhe wrote: »

what is actually happening is the usual suspects pushing organised petitions, tweets, FB comments.

Fixed that for you btw.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/4273167/barrys-tea-greyhound-sponsorship/[/quote]

Yup the Sun newspaper is about right there :rolleyes:

Interestingly Barry's fb page have taken to deleting some of the worst comments posted...

Hopefully new online laws currently in the pipeline regarding any harmful content up to and including death threats (as detailed has happened with other online campaigns) or intimidation will mean those posting that type of ****e could well face serious consequences.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

I meant the legislation that defines a Greyhound as a farm animal ?

They fall under the auspices of the department of agriculture, who determine the legislation specifically for them as racing dogs with how they are to be medically treated, bought and sold etc

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

How can you make death threats against a company ???
You can make them against a person and yes that is an offence ........ but against Barry’s Tea? Is someone going to kill Barry’s Tea? Like buy every tea bag in the country and burn it to death ?

You’re clutching at straws again :D

( i stayed up late last night reading the FB posts on Barry’s Tea page and adding my own. I didn’t see any death threats to the tea bags, just people saying they’re switching to Lyons. I prefer Twinings )

=gozunda;110568227]Fixed that for you btw.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/4273167/barrys-tea-greyhound-sponsorship/

Yup the Sun newspaper is about right there :rolleyes:

Interestingly Barry's fb page have taken to deleting some of the worst comments posted...

Hopefully new online laws currently in the pipeline regarding any harmful content including death threats or intimidation will mean those posting that type of ****e could well face serious consequences.

Seriously - is quoting one line from my post and editing it to add the words "usual suspects" the only response you can make - oh and :rolleyes: at the Sun who highlighted that a knackery was illegally killing greyhounds in 2009 - and still doing so 10 years later but they had put their price up. Are they incorrect?


Strange how one poster says they had been reading the comments on Barry's tea FB page last night and saw none of these threats you speak of but you know that Barry's have been deleting them because... You just know.
Hope they were paying their staff double -time to sit there on a Saturday night deleting FB comments.


I happen to agree that those who make threats on-line should be prosecuted. This is the third time I have said so.

Fact remains - you have not been able to provide one shred of evidence that anyone has issued any threats beyond saying they will refuse to purchase certain products so your continued going on about it really does look like more deflection.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How can you make death threats against a company ???You can make them against a person and yes that is an offence but against Barry’s Tea? Is someone going to kill Barry’s Tea? Like buy every tea bag in the country and burn it to death ?You’re clutching at straws again ( i stayed up late last night reading the FB posts on Barry’s Tea page and adding my own. I didn’t see any death threats to the tea bags, just people saying they’re switching to Lyons. I prefer Twinings )

The point was organised intimidation and online bullying campaigns As explained threats are the extreme end of that. Do they happen - yes they do as in the example I gave. Please note - no one said there was death threats in this instance btw so get the facts straight.

But if you really dont think harmful content on social media doesnt happen? unfortunately it seems to be all too common ...

Heres another redtop detailing just that . It seems to be the source of choice ..

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/farm-mistaken-company-centre-animal-16489616

Re Barry's- Of note those posting some of the comments have commented on them being deleted...but sure who can you believe :rolleyes:

"Straw clutching" is right"...