PHOTO: Editorial bit too hard

I have said little, in a comparatively polite manner, about this debacle. However, I must speak up about your editorial, “Sometimes, Social media Bites.” It is true that often, little can be gleaned from one picture. However, in this case, it is 100 percent clear that the dog is uncomfortable. What detractors have failed to hear, is that it is easy to tell an appeasing grin from a snarl. Numerous bodily signals accompany each, and these CAN be seen in the photo in question. Secondly, while it CANNOT be determined from the picture what the dog was upset about, this is immaterial. Regardless of the primary trigger, a baby that close to the face of a dog that uncomfortable is vulnerable to a redirected bite; or, could become a secondary trigger.

More to the point, is the fact that the inflammatory language in your editorial is hypocritical and unprofessional. Of course abusive comments are unnecessary (in your case, too), and often cruel. Most of the EXPERTS did not post those types of comments as, having worked with dozens or hundreds of families, they understand that such behavior is counterproductive (again, same goes for you). Vicious comments more often come from less seasoned professionals or, I imagine, people who’ve just been pushed over the edge. I won’t excuse that. My point is that your responding in kind is not constructive; nor does it lend credibility to your publication. MANY of the comments were extremely polite, and clearly intended to be helpful.

DANIELLE GRAND