Phil. Daily News: Blaming Verizon Phone Co. for Dog's Death?

  • Bookmark and Share

Apparently Stu Bykofsky, columnist for the Philadelphia Daily News, thinks that cell service giant Verizon Wireless is somehow at fault for the death of a doggy. Or, if not guilty for the actual killing of the creature, Stu imagines that Verizon is somehow guilty of aiding and abetting those who killed the kidnapped pup of getting away with the horrid act. How is it that, as far as Bykofsky is concerned, Verizon is the guilty party in this kidnapping/killing of Edna the Beagle? Because Verizon wants to charge a fee to ferret out cell phone records so that police can track the ransom call to the dog's owner, that's why. So, because a capitalist company wants a fee to access records, the Philly Daily News is set to accuse Verizon of aiding and abetting dog torture, kidnapping and the beast's ultimate killing. Talk about emotionalism run amuck! This story and Bykofsky's silly reaction to it is a perfect example of the logical disconnect the left has between common sense and their hatred of capitalism. And, sadly, to the left, not even the death of a puppy is to be free of being used as an ideological weapon.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Apparently, last Halloween, Edna's owner, Bill Whiting, accidentally allowed his lovable little pup to run out the door as kids stood outside his door trick-or-treating that night. The next day, Whiting put up posters for the lost dog when it had not returned. 10 days later he got a call on his cell phone from two young boys who claimed to have the dog. They wanted $600, they said, and to prove they had Edna, the two boys hurt the dog to cause it to yelp so that Whiting could hear his pet.

They told Whiting to meet him at midnight somewhere (a location Whiting could not understand) but he demurred -- obviously worried over his own safety. When Whiting shied from their demands the boy on the phone hurt the dog some more, then exclaimed that he just wanted to kill the dog instead. At that point the line went dead.

After Whiting hung up the phone he called the Philadelphia police who termed the crime one of extortion.

At 3AM, a second call came to Whiting's landline (the contact number on the dog's tags) and the boy said he had killed the dog. Whiting has since heard nothing from the boys or the dog.

That's the story. Now here is the absurd take on the aftermath that Bykofsky had in the pages of the Philly Daily News. But, before we get into that, I have to highlight a bit of PCism that is ridiculous for its earnest desire not to connect "black kids" to a story concerned with kidnapping, torture, killing, and general lawlessness. So, instead of saying the kids sounded black, the story contains this gem of a description of the vernacular used by the kidnappers:

At first, Whiting says he could barely understand the younger boy, speaking in what he described as "American ghetto slang."

So, I guess "American ghetto slang" means the kid was talkin' street... in other words, the kids were black. Instead of just saying the kids sounded black, though we get both this University employee (no surprise there) and the columnist perpetrating the murder of the English language by employing cloying euphemisms to avoid the charge of racism.

Give me a break.

But, that aside, on with Bykofsky's ridiculous claim that Verizon is the bad guy in this tale of woe.

Later that morning, Whiting tried to find the phone number the extortionists had used. He called his service provider, Verizon, to tell them to release his phone records to police, but it wasn't that simple.

"I made about five calls and kept getting people who were good at passing the hot potato," Whiting says. He was told police know the procedure.

The detective working the case, who asked me not to use his name, says he got a search warrant and faxed it to Verizon on Nov. 16, but it took 12 days before he got a list of calls made to Whiting. The city was charged $150 for the search.

Verizon charged police $150?

Yes, they charged a fee. Do you think that Verizon employs whole armies of people whose job it might be to assemble past phone records for anyone who happens to call up requesting them? Does Bykofsky and Whiting imagine that these records can be retrieved for free merely at the asking? Is there no cost to Verizon to go back to find and assemble such records?

Apparently Bykofsky and Whiting imagine that we are in a Star Trek TV episode where all we have to do is ask our computer to get the records and presto-chango there they are. Anyone that works with computers knows that it isn't nearly as easy as just "pushing a button" and that despite the ease and speed of computers, it still doesn't work that way!

But, reality isn't good enough for Bykofsky.

In most cases, says Verizon spokesman Lee Gierczynski, "the company charges no fee or a nominal one," but in a "very small percentage of cases, Verizon will charge reimbursement fees for gathering information it does not routinely maintain."

The fee covers some of Verizon's costs and it makes no profit, he says. In a wired world, I find both the slow service and the high cost hard to swallow.

A crime has been committed.

It's a DOG, Mr. Bykofsky. These "American ghetto slang" talking kids hadn't kidnapped a person, after all! Even more to the point, the act had already been done. The records coming faster could not have saved the pup. And, exactly why should Verizon wireless have to eat the cost of these sorts of services in all cases, anyway?

Now get ready for the emotional appeal...

Whiting will live for a long time, maybe forever, with the pain of hearing his little brown dog tortured. But he doesn't want Edna to have died in vain. As her legacy, he wants the phone companies to act faster and cheaper. He thinks telecommunications companies should provide free assistance to police "as a public service. It's not like they have a narrow profit margin."

He's right. Who'll get the ball rolling?

It is absolutely absurd to focus on Verizon as if they are equally guilty in this situation.

What we have here is Bykofsky taking a heart rending situation and using it as a platform to attack what he most likely imagines is an eeeevil corporation. What we have here is another example of a leftist columnist casting the corporation in a role as bad as that of the actual evil doers, in this case a pair of "American ghetto slang" using dog killers. What we have here is typical leftist anti-capitalism on parade.

And all of Bukofsky's carping will neither bring back Edna, nor console Edna's survivor. But it can stir the pot and make matters worse.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The only surprise here is

The only surprise here is that he isn't suing Verizon for a million dollars for pain and suffering.

Well, at least not yet.

 

Now, I wonder what a million

Now, I wonder what a million human dollars is in dog dollars?

ROFL!

ROFL!

For all I know

"CALEA" regulates the possible fees charged, but I guess the main point is "anything to absolve/shift-blame-from the actual criminals."
JMR

Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.

Well, you know, sarc, if

Well, you know, sarc, if these were American ghetto slang kids, you have to be sensitive. 

I still think "Verizon" is going to translate to "deep pockets."  

}}---> Ghetto Street Slang

Did these ghetto street slangers identify themselves as male?

It could be any of a rising number of ghetto street girls who sound like guys.

This reminds me of the riots going on over in Paris where it is reported that the violence is occurring in areas where the police are not welcome. 

Can you say MUSLIMS?

Aren't these the same

Aren't these the same people who think it's a Constitutional crisis to use phone records to track terrorists?

When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

GREAT

GREAT POINT!!!!!!!!!

Sidebar;----And the little thugs need to be torchered, regardless of their age.

Not so fast....

What? Are these Michael Vick juniors? Doesn't matter what color they were these are dangerous "kids", who, if indeed they harmed the dog, are our future maimers and attackers and killers of human beings.

Verizon, in a usual big-company/pass the buck/mindless red tape mucking about should have hurried this case on and worried about the charges later--I think they should have waved them altogether.

In this case Verizon could have done better. If it was my dog, I would be pretty upset and even more upset that few care that these hoodlums are out abusing animals today and probably people as well, starting with kids their own age.

However, I do agree focusing on Verizon does in a sense take away from the real issues and if the kids sounded a certain way then they sounded a certain way.

Remember, it's a dog they

Remember, it's a dog they were talking about! Not a person!

September, no one is

September, no one is minimizing the crime. They are indeed sadistic little thugs.

We're talking about the owner's claims about Verizon. You think they could have done better. How does that translate to: few care that these hoodlums are out abusing animals today and probably people as well, starting with kids their own age.

Who said no one cares about it?

Just because someone disagrees with you about Verizon's culpability in this case, that certainly doesn't mean they think torturing a dog is funny, or nothing to be concerned about.

 

Interesting. My online

Interesting.

My online Verizon account shows incomming and out-going numbers within 5 minutes of the calls being made.

Why do the police need a warrant to see what this bloke could have showed them on his computer monitor?

 

BRITANNICUS SUM

motherbelt

Yeah. Call me a fuzzy-wuzzy bleeding heart wiberal on this one. I'll wear it comfortably and with absolute emotionality. I do believe corporations are insensitive at times in part bec that is the nature of the big beast, Verizon included. And, because sometimes parts of this society, as evidenced by the "it's just a dog" comments thrown out here and there, don't care that animals suffer and feel pain, or that kids who hurt them are on their way to hurting people. I am not saying you or anyone in particular doesn't care. Some. Some, Some.....parts of society do not take this kind of crime seriously. It's left to us emotional idiots to try and temper the issue. The libby reporter may have gone over the top with the blame, but I get his point, and I generally agree with it when I look at the big picture. Apologies ro all for implying anyone who loves animals does not care about them.