Advertising Your Dogs

[Topoftheheap]

I have found that looking through some of the ads for various kennels that some of them have only the pictures of the dogs and others are artistic pieces of work featuring both the owner/handler mainly and the dog a tidbit in the side.

Ive also noticed how expensive advertising is, and for many spending that amount of money is just a dream, and i believe that the space between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' is stretching ever further away from one another. We all know the benefits of advertising.

Do you think there should be regulations in force stating how you should be allowed to advertise your kennels and your dog?

For example, should people not be allowed in them at all? should the dog have to feature in it mainly?

I have my own opinion, and that is that the advertising should be about your breed, your dog, and your kennels and the dogs should be the focus of any advertisement, but i would be interested to hear in other peoples opinions?

[Sandra777]

It's a free country.

Yep some people make sure the photo of the person is nice and clear but if judges are going to be influenced by this then they're not very good judges anyway so who cares about their opinion?

[WreckitWhippet]

Why not just give everyone a "generic" dog and make it a level playing field, because let's face it, it takes money to buy or breed yourself a great dog or bitch and not everyone has the money for that either.

If owners/handlers/breeders can afford to advertise and they are talented enough to create great websites and ads, then good on them. I've also seen lots of dogs that are excellent examples of their breed and the only way to see them is in the flesh, so it's not all doom and gloom for those without the money.

[Topoftheheap]

i agree with both of you. hopefully judges aren't swayed by flashy advertising, and im not talking about just fantastic websites, and good advertising. im talking about the even average websites that have a 'face' splattered all over them.

and yes dogs in the flesh generally take your breath away alot better than a well placed photo on a website, however, i don't think anyone can deny the fact that the more money you have to put towards your dogs and breeding, the more successful you will be. For example, someone who can afford to have 30 bitches will have a higher chance just by mere numbers to produce a better dog than someone who has 2. Also money gives you access to better puppies, imports and semen, and i don't think that anyone can deny that.

And i think thats ok, if you have the money spend it on what you want, but should there be rules about what can actually appear on the ad. after all if you have an amazing specimen of a dog wouldn't you want to show that off, showing its structure and comformation, rather than it sitting in your lap?

[Sandra777]

The more money you have to throw at any sport or hobby doesn't guarantee you success and in many cases doesn't even make you even with someone with talent - and breeding great dogs isn't a science, it's talent all the way.

Yes, having the money to import semen from a top stud dog helps - but generally someone with the ability to breed great dogs will be able to find the money to do this once and make a difference - those with lots of money will often do it lots and if they don't have the associated talent then they may as well tip it down the sink.

The straight $$$$$ to buy an adult top winning dog/bitch is a short term way of getting lots of pretty ribbons. If the dog/bitch isn't any good as a producer then it really makes zero difference if it cost $1 or a $1,000,000 - five years after it's retired it will be forgotten.

If you have a great dog which is genuinely great on it's own, nearly every time the advert will show the dog that way - it's the ones that aren't necessarily that great which tend to be advertised with the associated props

Personally I'd rather magazines/websites/ANKC put rules in place about advertising dogs/puppies with attributes they simply do not possess - champion bloodlines when there's 1 champion in 5 generations (either side) "perfect to standard" when it's twice the desired weight and possesses not a scrap of breed type - all stuff that confuses new comers and leads to a lot of disappointment for people who could well become stalwarts of the dog show world.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Sandra777

[SwaY]

I'm not sure about putting rules or regulations on it, but some of the ads do give me a good laugh

Dogs who are badly photo shopped, Ads that mention BISS and you knows it was an open show, using the same pictures over and over again as they can't get a better one of a bad dog etc

[Faolmor]

Yep some people make sure the photo of the person is nice and clear but if judges are going to be influenced by this then they're not very good judges anyway so who cares about their opinion?

You're kidding, right?

This is the wording from the National Dog Annual on the front page of this very website:

"MAKE NO MISTAKE this beautiful gloss publication will be sold in newsagents around Australia and a physical copy sent to All Breeds dog judges in Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and selected Asian nations." Where do the bulk of judges who come to Australia come from, I wonder??

Sorry, but the cynic in me wonders why else would some people will advertise, if not to bring certain dogs to judges' attention? Even the magazine recognises it. Let's just see how many "not very good judges" there are, after the magazine comes out I for one will definitely care about their opinion, because I care about my breed.

[Sandra777]

Yep some people make sure the photo of the person is nice and clear but if judges are going to be influenced by this then they're not very good judges anyway so who cares about their opinion?

You're kidding, right?

This is the wording from the National Dog Annual on the front page of this very website:

"MAKE NO MISTAKE this beautiful gloss publication will be sold in newsagents around Australia and a physical copy sent to All Breeds dog judges in Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and selected Asian nations." Where do the bulk of judges who come to Australia come from, I wonder??

Sorry, but the cynic in me wonders why else would some people will advertise, if not to bring certain dogs to judges' attention? Even the magazine recognises it. Let's just see how many "not very good judges" there are, after the magazine comes out I for one will definitely care about their opinion, because I care about my breed.

So you actually care about the opinion of a judge who doesn't know the standard and judges according to what they saw in the latest magazine?

These are the judges whose opinion I care the LEAST about and this is because I care very passionately about the future of my breed and don't intend to leave it in the hands of judges who are so influenced by the latest glossy magazine that they are, basically, corrupt.

There's no argument that some people advertise lovely pictures of themselves so they will be able to influence these judges - but a good judge isn't influenced by these things and surely it is the opinion of the GOOD judges that people need to concern themselves with.

There will always be people who are easily lead - be they school kids, all breeds dog show judges or soccer moms

[klink]

Surely, any of us that have been showing for any longer than half a dozen shows knows what goes' on. We all know and they all know, and at the end of the day should we not just ENJOY our beautiful dogs and the company of good friends, or am I being a little naive ? Nothing we all moan about will change the situation because those running the organisation have been groomed by the system so why would they want to clean it up ....would you ?

Having shown for over 28years nothing has changed, sorry it has its' got worse.

We can all recall many incidents over the years that have made the showing experience unpleasant but now i just try to enjoy the day out, win or lose.

It has be said many many times by us all , at the end of the show we all take the best dogs home.

[Shaar]

Advertisements have been around for donkeys years. The photoshopping has improved, but they are still the same... Sure it might influence some judges but if a judge is going to be influenced by a picture in a magazine who's to say they aren't going to be influenced by reading pointscores on DOL, or by friending people on Facebook. Does that mean we should stop ALL forms of advertising, ban photos of dogs from the internet and any form of publication? Of course not, I trust most judges to be honest and those who aren't... well... another day, another show, no skin off my nose as long as I've got a bottle of wine and a few friends to enjoy the day with.

[Faolmor]

Yep some people make sure the photo of the person is nice and clear but if judges are going to be influenced by this then they're not very good judges anyway so who cares about their opinion?

You're kidding, right?

This is the wording from the National Dog Annual on the front page of this very website:

"MAKE NO MISTAKE this beautiful gloss publication will be sold in newsagents around Australia and a physical copy sent to All Breeds dog judges in Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and selected Asian nations." Where do the bulk of judges who come to Australia come from, I wonder??

Sorry, but the cynic in me wonders why else would some people will advertise, if not to bring certain dogs to judges' attention? Even the magazine recognises it. Let's just see how many "not very good judges" there are, after the magazine comes out I for one will definitely care about their opinion, because I care about my breed.

So you actually care about the opinion of a judge who doesn't know the standard and judges according to what they saw in the latest magazine?

These are the judges whose opinion I care the LEAST about and this is because I care very passionately about the future of my breed and don't intend to leave it in the hands of judges who are so influenced by the latest glossy magazine that they are, basically, corrupt.

There's no argument that some people advertise lovely pictures of themselves so they will be able to influence these judges - but a good judge isn't influenced by these things and surely it is the opinion of the GOOD judges that people need to concern themselves with.

There will always be people who are easily lead - be they school kids, all breeds dog show judges or soccer moms

No, I don't care about their opinion. I care about the effect their opinion has on the breed.

[Ceilidh]

So what if I am judging one day and I put up one of these dogs that have been extensively advertised with the handler, am I automatically a crook judge or is it just possible that I have actually put up the best dog? In your opinion?

[hollee]

Yep some people make sure the photo of the person is nice and clear but if judges are going to be influenced by this then they're not very good judges anyway so who cares about their opinion?

You're kidding, right?

This is the wording from the National Dog Annual on the front page of this very website:

"MAKE NO MISTAKE this beautiful gloss publication will be sold in newsagents around Australia and a physical copy sent to All Breeds dog judges in Australia, New Zealand, Thailand and selected Asian nations." Where do the bulk of judges who come to Australia come from, I wonder??

I do agree with you Faolmor.

I sometimes wonder if the ad is of the person and the dog is an after thought!

I like that in the state publications ( ie Vic dogs) the dog alone is in the photo, after all that is who is being judged ( well we hope so!)

And if the advertising didn't work, well people wouldn't do it.

And, I too am concerned about what the affect is on the breed with the judges who do take notice of who is on the other end of the lead.

Sorry, but the cynic in me wonders why else would some people will advertise, if not to bring certain dogs to judges' attention? Even the magazine recognises it. Let's just see how many "not very good judges" there are, after the magazine comes out I for one will definitely care about their opinion, because I care about my breed.

[Sandra777]

So what if I am judging one day and I put up one of these dogs that have been extensively advertised with the handler, am I automatically a crook judge or is it just possible that I have actually put up the best dog? In your opinion?

You can usually tell by what else the judge does, what they are actually judging on

[Topoftheheap]

So what if I am judging one day and I put up one of these dogs that have been extensively advertised with the handler, am I automatically a crook judge or is it just possible that I have actually put up the best dog? In your opinion?

I suppose that's what my point is. should there be rules to regulate the advertising of dogs, so that the handler does not feature in it? that way it breaks down the possibility of being accused of 'crook' judging.

[Topoftheheap]

The points that everyone has brought up are the things that have led me to ask this question.

And im not suggesting the dog should be generic by any means - that's exactly what im against!

Maybe some rules could include:

- no handler's featuring in the ads, or at least thier faces not prominent!

- no photoshopping of dogs

- and truth in advertising (a point i think the media as a whole needs to address but that's another issue!)

that way, it is the DOGS being judged!

[Blakbelgian]

As the topic says "Advertising your dog" not advertising handler or owner.

I have seen some pics where the person in the pic with the dog is more promenant to the eye than the dog.

I would prefer to focus on the dog not who else is in the pic.

So no person should be in the pic if possible.

Artistic backgrounds or borders are great if they don't take away from the dog/s.

BB

[Mandalay]

Many good breeds have been ruined by SOME handlers/owners who advertise with themselves as the main feature

But lets hope that judges can see through all the crap that is printed & if you really look at the dog & read the standard all will come clear, breeding to me is not the person who can do the most shows or gain the most points or use an impoted dog, that way the breed itself never improves, stick with your ethic. (Some people have none)

I feel a little sorry for those that get ripped off buying a Pup thinking they are going out to win with a dog from these people, they just believe all the crap these people advertise

In fact I know of one lady buying a pup because these breeders told them they had the best and it was dead in 24 hours after arriving......the puppy was very sick in deed...

Edited November 30, 2011 by Mandalay

[conztruct]

Many good breeds have been ruined by SOME handlers/owners who advertise with them as the main feature

But lets hope that judges can see through all the crap that is printed & if you really look at the dog & read the standard all will come clear, breeding to me is not the person who can do the most shows or gain the most points or use an impoted dog, that way the breed itself never improves, stick with your ethic. (Some people have none)

I feel a little sorry for those that get ripped off buying a Pup thinking they are going out to win with a dog from these people, they just believe all the crap these people advertise

In fact I know of one lady buying a pup because these breeders told them they had the best and it was dead in 24 hours after arriving......the puppy was very sick in deed...

I agree with you to a point. Rather than see through the printed media, the judges need to have some integrity and be above all of that. If judges cannot see past this or are influenced by it, then they are not a good judge and they lack integrity and objectivity and need to judge what is presented to them on its merits. By banning advertising it will do nothing to address the deficiencies of the judge in question.

As for buying deficient pups - it is an awful situation but it really does highlight the importance of the buyer doing their research upfront. Without all the facts of the cited situation and what both parties did in the aftermath, I imagine that a refund would be on the cards in line with the legislation pertaining to sale of goods.

Edited November 30, 2011 by conztruct

[SparkyTansy]

I have heard a few times from long time exhibitors that showing seemed to be on a much more even playing field when there was less advertising on the internet and magazines... of course this was also when numbers were huge compared to now across all breeds... and this isn't from people who don't win, btw, but people who have won big over many years showing dogs.