Determination
82
Minnesota
News Council
In the Matter of the Complaint of
Domestic European Ferret Fanciers and Breeders Association of Minnesota
against WCCO-TV, Channel 4
The complaint is that Channel 4 inaccurately, and hence
unfairly, characterized the domestic ferret as a wild animal, essentially
untamable and dangerous. Appearing on behalf of the complainant were
its president, Joel Johnson, and its strategic coordinator, Randy Sellers.
Channel 4 declined to attend.
Background: DEFFBAM (the Domestic European
Ferret Fanciers and Breeders Association of Minnesota) has some 30
members who breed and keep ferrets and who are devoted to educating
the public about this particular animal. In October 1989, Channel
4 aired a "Dimension" report on exotic, wild animals as pets. It reported
there was a growing industry to supply as pets such animals as lions,
zebras, cougars, bears, wolves, bobcats, foxes and raccoons. The report
warned these animals could be dangerous, causing physical harm to
persons, especially children.In the course of this discussion, during
the interview of Gabe Davidson, the owner of a fur and pet farm, Davidson
showed a white ferret for the camera. The reporter said: "And there
are albino ferrets, too." Davidson added: "They're definitely pets.
They're good apartment pets, actually." Following the airing of this
story, DEFFBAM members both wrote and called Channel 4 objecting to
ferrets being described as dangerous wild animals. In February 1990,
when a local news story broke about a pet cougar on the loose, Channel
4 again aired the same "Dimension" report. This time, at the close
of the report, the reporter stated:
"Last fall, when we first broadcast that
story, we got a lot of calls from an organization of ferret owners
who say we were unfair to ferrets. That group says that ferrets make
pretty good pets and are not wild animals. The Hennepin and Ramsey
County Humane Societies, however, do NOT recommend ferrets as house
pets. They say those animals have severely bitten some children."
Discussion: The European domestic ferret is
a "man-made" breed. It has never existed in the wild, and is not to
be confused with the weasel and the mink. In appearance and behavior
(two of the animals were brought to the hearing), it is more like
an otter. It can be housebroken and kept indoors. If let loose on
its own, it would survive only a few days. The animal can bite and
cause injury, but, so its adherents claim, no more so than a pet cat
or dog. It is important to note the precise nature of DEFFBAM's complaint.
The organization does not object to the ferret being called "exotic,"
as the animal is admittedly an uncommon pet. Furthermore, while the
complainant believes ferrets make suitable pets, it recognizes there
is a difference of opinion on their suitability, and the complainant
recognizes that it was fair comment for the Channel 4 report to set
out the conflicting opinions on ferrets as pets. Rather, DEFFBAM's
precise complaint is that it is inaccurate, and therefore unfair,
to label the ferret a "wild animal," lumping it with lions, cougars
and bears.
The News Council appreciates that DEFFBAM is a reputable
organization with responsible members. The News Council understands
the distinction between "domestic" and "wild." We do think, however,
that the complainant is unduly sensitive about the Channel 4 report.
The television story showed a pet farm owner holding a ferret in his
arms while explaining it made a good pet. This episode was very short,
appearing almost in passing, and the bulk of the report was devoted
to wolves, cougars and the like.
We think, too, on the rebroadcast of the television
story, Channel 4 did appropriately respond to the complainant's objections
by adding a closing comment setting out the organization's position
that ferrets are not wild animals and make suitable pets. While DEFFBAM
understandably would have liked a better explanation of its position,
the Council members who viewed the videotape believe the explanation
given was adequate and delivered fairly and objectively. Complainant
says that Channel 4 was rude and patronizing in dealing with its protests.
Channel 4 has chosen not to respond to this charge. While we do not
know what the television station might say in its defense, we assume
it would agree that rude and patronizing behavior is unacceptable.
One of the strengths of our society is the diversity of views and
interests. One of the functions of the news media is to explore this
diversity. To discount the position of some particular group of sincere,
responsible citizens simply because they represent only a small, "exotic"
segment of our society would be the height of rudeness. We note again,
however, that Channel 4 did, in its rebroadcast, appropriately state
the complainant's point of view.
The News Council finds that the "Dimension" report
was not inaccurate or unfair with respect to its portrayal of ferrets.
Grievance denied.
Concurring: Bednar, Casey, Chucker, Falkman,
Graham, Larson, Orwoll, Parrish, Persons, Simonett, Sundin, Swain,
Tanick, Warder
June 15, 1990
Read
Determination 83
Back
to Main Determination Index
Want
to comment? Send a message
to the News Council.
