u/Spiritual-Spread-992

Recently, there was a journalist who reached out to the organization I work for in order to do a story. It's a rather inflammatory story against the organization.

It definitely seems like regardless of what we would say, this journalist wants the story to go a specific way about the organization. The questions they sent in for us to answer are absolutely baffling to me...

These are simple questions to answer with a simple Google search and are common practice across similar organizations. Nothing we do is particularly unique or out of the ordinary. It feels frustrating (especially after getting a gag order from higher-ups to not answer the loaded questions from this journalist) that they seem to be completely unwilling or incapable of researching standard practice in the field I'm in before writing an article slamming us for doing things the way 90% of other organizations do them.

For reference, some of the questions feel like the equivalent of asking a hospital how they provide a patient information about their medications before leaving the hospital...

Does the amount of research depend on the journalist/type of media company they work for?

Do your shelters have guidelines or set timelines where someone who has found a pet or has been caring for a pet becomes the "owner" for the pet?

If so, does this apply to people feeding stray cats and then bringing them to you? Is it based on a city/county/state law or legal definition?

I am worried that because our team has set an arbitrary number of days for someone to be caring for a pet before it becomes "theirs" and goes from being a "stray" to an "owner surrender" we're putting people who are trying to do a good thing by the animal in a bad position. How do your shelters handle this?

I want to start this out by saying that I deeply value small rescues and the work they are doing. They are integral to the web of animal welfare that makes more second chances possible.

That said, I can get so exhausted by the double standard I see from a handful of smaller rescues in my area. I saw one make a post saying "why can't we all get along in animal welfare" after making posts with horrible accusations about their local open-intake shelter not long ago... Like, the call is coming from inside the house, my friend!

There are some that I've seen just say the most atrocious things about their local shelters and make poor-taste comments about their staff and I'll just sit there and think what if those shelters spread things about them online like they do to the shelters. Even saying they refused to accept a transfer placement, which could easily be the truth and could be easily understandable based on capacity, could cause online mobs. But, you rarely see large shelters slamming small rescues even when those rescues are doing it to them.

Sometimes it just gets a bit overwhelming and just plain exhausting to see.

Anyway, this is not a dig on all rescues, 99% of them are amazing and run by kind, compassionate people who give a damn and understand how hard this field is. For the other 1% out there... Please, please just think about the human beings on the other side of your smear campaigns. We all started working in animal welfare because we care deeply for animals. We may operate differently, but that doesn't mean we care less. If you have genuine concerns, just contact them and open a dialogue. Making a snarky social post doesn't help the animals...

Recently, our board terminated our Executive Director without any staff knowing the plan. This goes against a lot of staff wishes, as our director was well-liked and had been doing a lot for the organization.

Our board has consistently been a problem. We had board members who were also active volunteers who would verbally harass staff and would forget that there was a power imbalance in the positions and make staff jobs harder by going against staff recommendations. They regularly have refused to approve things that would actually help staff and have caused a lot of issues with process improvements and huge projects that are very needed. And more.

I feel as though the board is acting contrary to what is best for the organization and staff. Is there some way to report them to some authority or demand some an external review without harming the organization as a whole? It's ridiculous that they can seemingly do whatever they want contrary to what staff wants.