I used to (sometimes) like to read Dan Rodricks when I lived in Baltimore. Even when I disagreed with him, I generally believed he seemed to be fairly well-informed on the topics he chose to write about. And then he comes out with this one, which is nothing but sensational and opportunistic, and it now casts a shadow over all the other columns I've read from him over the years. Rather than paint a complete picture, he's cherry-picking details and throwing around half-truths. His description of the MDSPCA March for the Animals where the pit bulls are all "tethered" and "chained" to their owners alone is intentionally inflammatory. I've been to that event every year for five years, and there were always plenty of friendly pit bulls on leashes, just like all the other dogs, that attended. They aren't tethered or chained, they're on leashes, as they should be. As all the dogs there should be. They don't make the event "weird" – they've always been well-represented in the rescue community in that city, and they're as much a part of the fabric of that event -- of that community -- as any other breed of dog. Is Rodricks making stuff up, or is he just that out of touch with what really goes on in Baltimore?
This column now casts everything I've read from Rodricks in doubt. I'm well aware of the details he writes about in his column, and as a result, I can see what he's trying to do and how he's trying to twist the facts to evoke outrage and emotion in readers. Makes me realize that's probably what he's done all along, on every topic he's ever covered.
What a damn shame.