Unfortunately, I agree with most of the rest of the post.
My wife is a Certified Vet Tech (basically an animal nurse) so I hear all the horror stories about people who get animals that cannot afford them, buy from pet stores and puppy mills and get sick animals, and then there are the people who "rescue" animals that want them taken care of, but have no money to pay for the surgeries, etc the animal needs......
Our animals are part of our family, and I cried like a little kid when they had to euthanize the cat that belonged to my wife when we met. He became "my" cat, and he was my little buddy until that day came...... I love animals more than anyone, but I hate articles written for shock value.......
Condolonces on your loss.
Until one has loved an animal a part of one's soul remains unawakened.
-- Mark Twain
Regarding the shock value of the article, I would prefer less shock value. However, most, if not all, successful animal welfare campaigns use shock because the average person is so completely unaware of the reality of how animals are treated. When presenting the truth to folks, their first response is very often that of actual disbelief, as in they truly do not believe that these abuses occur with any significant regularity.
PETA, the shock king of them all, has always used shock value in much of their marketing on animal welfare issues. When asked why they "resort" to such tactics, their answer is simple. While they do much more than create shocking marketing to generate awareness and support for animal welfare, most of it receives very little attention compared to the shock value stuff. So it's the audience, not the presenter, that pretty much guarantees that shock value will continue to be utilised. It's effective in getting the word out. If something is effective, it makes sense to continue to use it, so long as truth is maintained. Much of the shock value used, is simply truth that we are generally uncomfortable with. For example:
Ringling Bros Circus is marketed as fun family entertainment for all ages. Yet here is how they treat the animals that they market as happy performers:
Ringling's Baby Elephants Tied Up and Electro-Shocked by Trainers | RinglingBeatsAnimals.com
They abuse the hell outta these animals so that they can used to make entertainment money. Abuse for money. That's all it. Yet for most of us, myself included, it would have never occurred to me that circus animals were abused unless the information were presented to me. With this information, we have to face the fact that buying a ticket to the circus is the same as paying Ringling to abuse their animals. If nobody buys those tickets, the abuse stops and no new animals are brought in to live the same horrid existence.
Apologies for the straying, but my point is, the shock value works. When I first learned about these things I was shocked. That made me think about what I was seeing/learning and that led me to consider my role in all of it and that led me to make choices consistent with my philosophy rather than just blindly doing what the dollars would have you do without thought or awareness.