The recent petition against the cruelty of eating dog meat in Southern China has generated a lot of outrage on the internet in the UK, but interestingly there has been a fairer and more balanced argument emerging through news media that if you are against the cruelty of how the dogs are skinned alive, killed and eaten, then why not oppose the conditions in which British livestock are kept & inhumanly slaughtered in. Seeing examples of this type of balanced reporting has made me feel more positive on how the British media is reporting this issue in China, that hopefully marks a trend of balanced media reporting I hope to see more of.
There is often a temptation to jump on the bandwagon with these type of issues, without thinking it through. We will often accuse other governments of misbehaving, whilst ignorantly neglecting similar issues at home. This debate reminds me of why if I mention my current occupation of working in China, it brings up the stereotypes of 'watching what you eat' and similar sweeping generalizations there. Unsurprisingly it leaves me with the impossible job of arguing the other side of the argument, whilst appearing to remain diplomatic and non-biased.
It is certainly behaviour that is rooted in British (Western) culture and manifests itself in what you could 'Anti-Chinese' behaviour. We are all recipients of our environment. The UK happens to be a country where dogs are pets and not food. In China, dogs are increasingly pets too, but the practice of eating dog meat is a long established in Southern Chinese cuisine. Sadly there is an inevitability that everyone with only a general knowledge on this story will fall easily into the argument that 'everyone in China eats dog meat, and they don't care about animal rights at all'. In truth, there are less dog meat eaters in China and more animal lovers in China than ever before. However the stereotype can neither improve nor will progress ever seen to be made unless 'the average British person' can learn to see the issue in a more rounded way, for example, by the fairer balanced reporting displayed here.
This type of reporting however could be seen to be linked to the rise of the internet over the years. As easily as netizens can comment and write blogs on topics (such as yours truly), it is equally as easy for the traditional news outlets to post less corporate or slightly away from opinions they may voice through traditional outlets such as TV or print. Of course, the Internet is still in a work in progress state, it remains to be seen how much other opinions and issues will be covered going forward.
Both The Guardian and The Independent reported the hypocrisy of UK citizens in a blunt, but not very sensationalist manner (see links below) to highlight the slight ignorance of ignoring issues at home. This does not mean the same thing as ignoring animal rights issues, because only by highlighting and discussing them in a balanced manner will the debate bring about change and improvement. We may not agree with dog meat eating, but we need to bring constructiveness and rationality to the debate, not emotion.
Comments and viewpoints always welcomed!
Reference;
