No, I think people are downvoting me for completely unfounded hate and rage.
I've made similar posts like this in other places, in regards to other topics, and I was high voted.

See, the logic there is just so wrong. It's like saying "I don't give a shit about rape since it's no worse than murder".
Both are really, really bad, okay? But if people don't care about pets, then how on earth do you expect them to care about farmyard animals?
Then I suggest you continue to make these posts there, and not here.

I guess Classy Community really does stand for something, eh ?

.............So, you're saying that I don't understand? I understand DAMN well, I just honestly don't care about some stupid cat being abused. If I wanted that sort of stuff, I'd go to my dead grandma's house where her husband lives and watch the cats die from not being fed. Oh, and to the rape part, low blow since a few of my friends ARE victims of it and 2 friends of mine died in a fire caused by their mom's boyfriend. After years of this shit, I just don't care about this stuff anymore.

Exactly my point. Cattle is grown in horrifying conditions and slaughter everyday in millions and everybody look the other way. But kill a cat and everybody go crazy. For me that cat is no different then chicken in KFC. Sorry

Where on this board have you posted similar threads? Could you link them so that I may bring my personal army and downvote them?
It's not about the goddamn cat. If you're too cynical to give a fuck, then so be it. Most people in the world however do not approve of animal cruelty, or even take the i-couldn't-give-a-shit stance you seem to be so fond of defending.
Animals make the world a better place. In addition, we ourselves are animals. That brings about some important realizations to most people which in turn brings about the desire to protect animals from unwarranted harm.
That is what we're discussing, not the cat, or the newsworthyness of the original story. If this discussion is suddenly about whether most news agencies suck or not, then yes I agree, they do.
However a story about a cat torturist being caught and facing justice feels good when you care about animals. The fuck-o got what he had coming.

Like I said, the guy didn't have to abuse the cat if he didn't like it. I'm not defending that guys actions at all, and the story is whatever, mostly not just the news worthy-ness, but the fact that people got all excited about some douchebag going to jail over this and were like "spread the news, spread the word! this is important!"
No, it's not important.
Yeah, you break the law, you go to jail, you pay fines, whatever. Douche got what he deserved, you're right. But I don't see why it needs to be spread all over the goddamn place.
I really don't even like the fact that the story was lifted off of a post on reddit.
If that helped the authorities, then fantastic, but it sounds like to me that it was just posted to be a scapegoat for PETA members.
The reason I say the violence is unnecessary, is because I have found myself in that situation when I was younger where I just wanted to abuse whatever animal for whatever thing that they did.
I still get to that point where I feel like doing that. But I don't do it, because I know it's entirely unnecessary.
No amount of abuse is going to change an animals behavior to where they won't do something. Animals don't always understand why it is you're angry at them.. and I know I don't know how to effectively communicate with an animal to let it know that it has done something inappropriate, so I just leave it alone.
I don't keep animals, but I have other family members who do, and I leave the discipline up to them.
It sounds like the guy probably just got frustrated with it, because he was too stupid to understand how to take care of an animal properly, and lost control.
If you don't know how to take care of an animal properly, don't do it.

Wha..? This thread is not dead yet?

Tell me about it. And I ran out of popcorn 20 hours ago :(

How much rep did Weclock lose anyway?

Alright. Have it your way.
For your question: the dead baby. Still doesn't make the pit dog right and still isn't a reason for you, Wec or anybody else to just claim that it shouldn't be newsworthy because it's just an animal.
If we manage to take all the bullshit happening on Earth only between humans each day and put in a newspaper, it would be massive. So massive, nobody would be buying or even reading it.
Now you expand it and add some of the other bullshit humans are doing against nature or animals. Still nobody's buying or reading it, but you guys can't claim "more" important stuff against humans have been left off for it - and you have achieved... nothing? Now what was the point again for this?
It wasn't in the news because there wasn't anything else they could have brought or because the cat was so cute. It was because it's showing human behaviour as it shouldn't happen in the first place, and because domestic animals / animals born and raised for slaughter are seen as valuable living beings by a lot of people, and that they and their treatment deserves press attention, too.
I'm not counting how many times the animal treatment at processing factories has been brought up. Now I'm far from stating that we as humans achieved a "animal friendly as possible" or even "acceptable" status there. But there's no doubt that within the last 20 years, it has improved. And guess what? That's mostly coming because somebody decided it to be newsworthy.
Now everybody claiming that this one cat isn't newsworthy - how come that this process IS newsworthy? After all, they're still just animals only in larger amounts, there's still more "important" news about humans around. Yet you guys bring it in, as if we don't mind it, all the while denying a news article about an abused cat being worth it.
If you think that story about the cat to be not newsworthy, you also deny the treatment of animals in those processing factories worthy enough for news, because there's ALWAYS more "important" possible news around.
Now on to what is newsworthy or not.
What you're trying to achieve with news? What are the goals you have to or can aim for?
1. your attention - no attention, no reader. No reader, dead news.
2. to inform (or misinform)
3. the ultimate goal: getting people to talk about it
Considering this 7 page thread alone, I'd say they achieved everything you can with a news article as best as they could - was it newsworthy? Decide for yourself.
Then why did you in the first place?

BK: Have it your way. =)
Dude, I UNDERSTAND IT, I just don't think a cat being abused is newsworthy if we turn a blind eye to major issues like kids starving in the streets and the increase of the AIDS virus.
I am not a fan of animal cruelty, but if people (Not the ones on here) are going to bitch about a CAT for being abused, then look at the CATTLE we slaughter every day.
@ Summit: Wow, someone who sees my POV...Awesomeness. +1

It would be great if we could always tackle the biggest issues first and work to the bottom. Sadly, this doesn't always work. There are times where that rock in your way is just to big and you have to start with the, seemingly, lesser problems first, to get more on your side.
Now how that story about an abused cat in the long run will help a starving kid is doubtable. However, we also know that it won't help if a newspaper / agency produces everyday another story about a different starving kid - people would tend to get annoyed and turn away completely.
It does however, raise awareness and yes, concerning that even those little things DO help.
So the point is, that every suffering or problem is or at least should be allowed to get their share of newswork. Even a little kitty.

If all the problem is the place that can take events about harmed/killed animals in the medias, well, first advice: take out sport results.
Sport results are nothing more than stats, and sport-themed TV news and channels already exist. Then, you'll have plenty of place and time to talk about humans and animals.