Transcription

A Twitter post by Kylie Cunningham @kyyylieeeee that reads “today at the airport one of the drug dogs set off a false alarm and officers rushed over to find out the dog had alerted them for a piece of pizza. the handler just patted his head and goes “it’s okay buddy i know pizza always confuses you” and gave him his treat anyways.”

    • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Does me using the wrong word (“article” instead of “tweet”) alter the point that the previous poster’s absolute statement “they absolutely don’t reward these dogs for mistakes” is just an opionated statement with no backing meant only to contradict the event related in that tweet?

      In the face of two statements unsupported by evidence (the tweet and that post I replied to), what’s more believable:

      • That somebody saw a working dog handler rewarding a dog for doing something funny even though that’s not really what the dog was supposed to do?
      • That working dog handlers absolutely don’t (i.e. none, ever) reward dogs for mistakes?
      • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        It does, because a random person being humorous on twitter carries no presumption of truth. An “article” kinda implies that, unless it’s satire.