Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

30Sep/108

Computer game dog attack confusion

Evil computer games have made a dog attack a child, according to the Mail:

A terrified schoolgirl had her top lip torn off by a dog as she played with a computer game.

Megan Walker's family say a friend’s bull mastiff cross went berserk when it heard barking on a Nintendo DS game.

It dragged Megan, nine, off a sofa as she played the virtual pet puppy game Nintendogs.

The dog sank its teeth into her face, bit her several times and ripped off her top lip.

Quick-thinking police officers put the piece of lip on ice and surgeons were able to sew it back on.

'I think this game should carry some kind of warning,' said the girl’s grandma Jean Taylor.

'People should be told not to play it when there are dogs in the room.  I blame the game for what happened to Megan. If they hadn’t been playing it I don’t think the dog would have gone for her.'

This is one of those stories that fits neatly into the 'computers are evil' and 'scared of technology' narratives for the Mail. Imagine a game that makes dogs attack you, for no reason, with no provocation!

Ms Melville was unavailable for comment, but it is understood that she told police that Megan may have kicked Saracen and that is why he attacked her.

Ah. Well to be fair to the Mail, they did actually include that bit - albeit right at the bottom of the story. Still, a lot of readers won't have made it down there and might be convinced that it's computer games of doom that are definitely responsible for this dog attack.

Thanks to Chris for the spot!

Be Sociable, Share!

Related posts:

  1. More weather/climate confusion
  2. Cough syrup confusion
  3. Europe’s ‘Mumbai terror attack’
  4. How to get your terrorist attack noticed
  5. Austerity cuts new age of misery meltdown drinking game special
Comments (8) Trackbacks (0)
  1. Much as I am appalled by the usual content of the Dail Mail, and idiotically phrased as this story is, there’s a subtext here that I find extremely worrying and which – even more worryingly – actually ties in with the Mail’s moral panic.

    See, my first question was to wonder what would drive the child’s grandmother to blame the computer game when it seems fairly clear that the blame lies with the child. You don’t kick a particularly vicious breed of dog without consequences. So why circumvent the obvious solution and blame the computer game?

    Whatever the reason, the scary thing is the consequences – this child is being taught that bypassing reason and logic to find and excuse are good and valid ways of escaping responsibility for things. If this sort of behaviour is at all widespread then it’s no bloody wonder that we have children growing up as complete, ignorant delinquents, refusing to take responsibility for their own actions or analyse the potential consequences of a situation before acting!

  2. “‘I think this game should carry some kind of warning,’ said the girl’s grandma Jean Taylor.”

    Warning: Do not abuse animals while playing this game.

    At least the readers’ comments so far do not show any form of lynching mob against video games. Rather hard I suppose when its one of the most softcore game on the market and not a usual figure of hate like GTA.

  3. It’s funny too that the mother remains on holiday.

    I also notice that the Mail are now advertising a special version of Internet Explorer 8 that’s especially configured for Mail readers. Let me guess – like a normal browser but with more hateful content?

  4. “to be fair to the Mail, they did actually include that bit – albeit right at the bottom of the story.”

    Yep, they include the truth and/or counterpoints at the end. It’s not a matter of fair in the real sense, just saving their asses from complaints. We just look at the headlines and pictures of most stories, and of those we start we only finish a few. They know this full well, hence that structure.

    “the ‘computers are evil’ and ‘scared of technology’ narratives”

    It took them until six or seven years ago to stop using ‘internet’ in that way. The stories about the Mayday protest in 2000 were full of activists who were ‘believed to be organising using the internet’. Quite why telephones, biros and the English language weren’t similarly given the ‘wooooo, scary’ treatment escapes me.

  5. Should we have warnings on TV programmes too – “Warning the following programme contains the sound of dogs barking”?

  6. Wow, even by the Hate’s standards that’s back-of-a-fag-packet journalism. Makes you wonder, if they’re so technophobic, why they even have a website in the first place?

  7. Okay… this one intrigued me, for the way the blame has been placed, and my sister plays the game, so I asked her about doing so around real dogs. She replied as follows:

    “Yeah, the sound does annoy them sometimes, but usually they just bark or bristle, if anything. They’re never freaked-out enough to try and actually bite unless something else is wrong. It probably was ’cause she kicked it.”

  8. ‘I think this game should carry some kind of warning,’ said the girl’s grandma Jean Taylor.

    ‘People should be told not to play it when there are dogs in the room. I blame the game for what happened to Megan. If they hadn’t been playing it I don’t think the dog would have gone for her.’

    WTF?!?!?!?

    If you didn’t have a fucking great BULL MASTIFF in the same room as a small child, love, she wouldn’t have been mutilated.

    Jesus H Christ, what is wrong with this fucking country?

    NEXT WEEK: Jean Taylor leaves Megan alone on a sofa with a loaded and cocked pistol…


Leave a comment


No trackbacks yet.