Condor strapped to Bull, Peru, picture not given graphic warning in New York Times

[Beringia]

August 14, 2013

By Tim Zimmerman

Is A Condor Forced To Fight A Bull Graphic? The New York Times says no.

Well, we are used to seeing cruelty being inflicted by humans on other species in the name of culture.

But at least a NYT story and video featuring a Peruvian ritual that involves tying a condor to a bull was objectionable enough to be examined by the NYT Public Editor, Margaret Sullivan.

PETA called out the piece, arguing it should have come with a warning that it depicted graphic cruelty to animals. Sullivan went so far as to conclude that more space and voice should have been given to opponents of the practice, and those who deem it cruel (which is sound). But her discussion of whether the video was objectionable, and warranted a warning for graphic content, was interesting:

The video, intended to explain an important cultural practice in Peru, amounts to depicting animal abuse, wrote Amanda Schinke, a PETA spokeswoman.

Although we appreciate that the story touched briefly on conservationists’ opposition to this practice, we were surprised that it did not address the cruelty inherent in strapping a wild bird to a terrified bull and instead presented this cruel practice as a venerable tradition. It creates the impression that The Times endorses cruelty or insensitivity to animals. Would you please add a disclaimer that the story – especially the photo and video elements – depicts graphic cruelty to animals?

The Times, which is rapidly increasing its production of videos, brings the same standards to those videos that it does to its other journalism.

Does this video meet those standards? And is a disclaimer necessary here?

I asked Richard L. Berke, a senior editor who is directing video development, to respond.

“We do want to be sensitive to taste and possible offensiveness,” he said, “and in this case we were careful to edit out anything graphic.”

He noted that The Times often does use a disclaimer to alert viewers to disturbing or graphic content. Images of war and disaster, as in this video, which does include a disclaimer, are the most common examples.

In this case, however, “the video didn’t merit a disclaimer,” Mr. Berke said.

What’s interesting is that Berke seems to feel that the amount of blood or ripped flesh is what determines whether the images are graphic, rather than the entire concept of strapping a condor to a bull and then watching them try to rip into each other.

Would Berke consider a video of a pit bull ripping into a human which doesn’t show much injury or blood “graphic”? I would bet yes, because it is a human that is being harmed.

In any case, Sullivan agreed with Berke. Which goes to show that while human violence and cruelty involving other humans is considered “graphic” enough to warrant a warning, human cruelty to animals is still not objectionable enough to get the same treatment. Which is a telling insight into how we continue to view (nonhuman) animals and the human treatment of animals.


http://timzimmermann.com/

[theHandpuppet]

1. That is some kind of sick

I honestly don't know what else to say.

[Scootaloo]

2. "Important cultural practice"?

Somehow I suspect that's total bullshit

And that bird isn't "strapped" to the bull... there's no straps there. No, look at the bird's foot... see that little trickle of blood? It looks like it's nailed on.

Edit: Apparently, it's not bullshit... via wikipedia...

In Peru, they are occasionally shot, but more often revered and used for ceremonial purposes. The Yawar Fiesta is a celebration, the pinnacle of which is the tying of an Andean condor to the back of a bull, allowing the condor to kill the bull with its talons before being released. This ceremony is a symbolic representation of the power of the Andean peoples (the condor) over the Spanish (the bull).[66] There is also a ceremony known as the arranque del condor in which a live Andean Condor is suspended from a frame and is punched to death by horsemen as they ride by.

[enlightenment]

5. I'm getting a little tired of being told

that mistreatment of animals is an important cultural practice.

Out here (in the southwest), we have the delightful "sport" of horse tripping - presumably a cultural tradition of Mexican rodeo. It is exactly what it sounds like. Proponents say it is no different than calf roping, except - of course - for the fact that it isn't a calf, but a full grown horse, with a different center of gravity and a different bone and muscle structure.

It's abuse - just like this crap. How can you claim to "rever" something and then do things like this?

Throwing infants into fires and leaving them out on hillsides to be eaten by wolves used to be an "important cultural practice".

Things change. At least they should.

[RZM]

3. Sheriff Bull Condor . . .

Apparently Andean Condors are classified as 'near threatened.' So perhaps it's time to give this practice up.

[Beringia]

10. Yes they are threatened

I just read that too on some research.

[dipsydoodle]

4. That is wholly disgusting

[Rex]

6. What a cruel and barbaric thing to do.

The condor can rip huge chunks out of the bull, that look on the bull's face is probably from horrible pain. And the NYT is wrong...that is not a 'fight'. That is a crime against nature.

[arely staircase]

7. wow

just, wow.

[joeybee12]

8. According to the asshat Berke, if a man has a gun pointed at a kid, about to fire...

and there's no blood yet, that is acceptable too...this practice is sick and they're assholes at the Times.

[Brickbat]

9. Not all important cultural practices are created equal.

[Egnever]

11. Ugly sport

I would rather see the pic personally though so I can form my own opinions.

[Liberal_in_LA]

12. sick times 100