The New York Times (NYT) is recognised as an important journal of record. Expert commentators, from both sides of the political divide, inform, entertain and educate the readership. Their journalism explores solutions for society’s problems.
But in respect to the multi-billion-dollar pet food fraud, the NYT is more a part of the problem, not the solution.
They don’t tell their readers about the costly pet food/vet con trick.
However too often, designer dog promotions and tacky, sickly-sweet articles are given prominence and importance on the front page.
Is this systematic ‘product placement’ on behalf of junk pet food companies? Is the NYT providing millions of dollars worth of advertorials that encourage the consumption of junk dog food? Or is it a genuine reflection of how New Yorkers like to see themselves portrayed?
Note this loaded commentary:
How to Buy the Best Dog Food for Your Dog: https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/how-to-buy-the-best-dog-food/
Kaitlyn Wells, the author and self-styled pet food expert, encourages us to believe her because:
“I’ve covered complex topics that require months of research, including for our guides to dog DNA tests, pet insurance, and pet subscription boxes. For years, I ran an independent pet food blog, so I have a bit of knowledge on this complicated subject.”
I say:
Don’t believe her. Don’t believe the New York Times promotion of junk pet food that inflicts lifelong cruelty on pets and defrauds their owners.
A full-scale government commission of inquiry should be established at the earliest. Widespread fraud, committed in the open, in plain sight, is still fraud.
Stop Press:
The UK House of Commons has now approved the important new petition for UK citizens and residents:
Inquiry into the pet food industry and its relationship with the veterinary profession.
Help make a difference, please sign and share the petition.
If you are a citizen of another country, please consider starting a petition of your own.
