The Ellen DeGeneres Debacle

Well by now we've probably heard about Ellen DeGeneres and the controversy over Iggy. It seems Ellen adopted a Brussels Griffon mix from a rescue group. The dog, named Iggy, apparently did not get along well with her cats and after spending a large amount of money on training, Ellen gave the dog to her hairdresser and her family.

Now at this point I'm sure there is a collective groan coming from all members of the rescue community: almost all of us have contracts that state that if an adoption does not work out, the animal must be returned to the adoption agency/rescue.

The rescue group found out and took the dog back from the family on Sunday. When the family balked at returning the dog, the cops were called.

But the group failed to take into account they were dealing with a high profile celebrity with a television show. Now, when I was studying journalism as an undergrad, Dad would always joke that "you should never piss anyone off who buys ink by the barrel." In today's current climate make that "never piss anyone off who has a nationally syndicated talk show."

So, Ellen goes on television and explains her side of the story. In an emotional monologue, she claimed she did not read the entire contract and implored the group to return Iggy to her hairdresser whose two daughters had become attached to the dog.

Not surprisingly the press has taken the story and run with it along with most of the celebrity blogosphere.

PR-wise, I would have done things a lot differently. Instead of antagonizing the family and Ellen, I would have worked with the family. Now, by working with the family I don't mean necessarily letting them keep the dog. I would have let them keep the dog but apply for it through normal channels. If, for whatever reason, I felt the family and the dog would not mesh, I would have worked with them closely to acquire another dog, by networking with other rescuers/shelters, even reputable breeders. Be the family's personal pet locater, if you will.

You say that the group has the legal right to take the dog? I will admit that's true. Going back to Robin Cohn's PR Crisis Bible, she points out that just because an organization has the legal right to do something, doesn't mean it's a good PR move. Look at the RIAA: it's perfectly legal to sue individuals for downloading music but this has given the recording industry a lot of bad press.

Unfortunately, this situation may give the rescue movement a black eye, which I wrote about on Sunday. A lot of the comments on this story on TMZ include the usual I-tried-to-adopt-but-was-turned-down-so-I-went-to-a-breeder. Someone reading the story and the following negative rescue comments may start to think "I better stay away from rescue groups...they sound mean." And, who knows, that reader may be a great candidate for rescue.

My other fear is that if there is enough negative press about rescues, there might be a push to pass crippling regulations on rescues. For example, someone might go to their legislator and say "Those rescue groups won't let me adopt a Chihuahua because I have young children under five. I want you to pass a law that requires requires rescues and shelters to give animals to anyone who applies."

Sounds impossible? It could happen.

So how do we prevent this from happening? I think by practicing positive PR and educating the public. Also, as much as we love animals, we should not hesitate to work with those humans who want to adopt our animals.

They're not all bad, I promise.