A recent controversy in the municipality of ZacatlánIn the Sierra Norte region of Puebla (Mexico), the debate on how to address the presence of [unspecified species] has been brought into the public eye. stray dogs and what limits should not be crossed when discussing them in the media or digital content. The controversy erupted after the broadcast of an episode of a local podcast in which the possibility was raised, in a tone that its authors describe as humorous, of “disappear” homeless dogs resorting to violent methods.
What initially seemed like a comment made without much thought ended up becoming a viral case on social media, with a cascade of criticism citizens, animal shelters and authoritiesThe situation, although it occurs in Mexico, also resonates in Spain and Europewhere mistreatment and incitement to violence against animals are equally prosecuted by law and generate strong social rejection.
The podcast episode that sparked the controversy
The conflict originated from an incident in podcast “Old Gachos”, led by the brothers Juan Enrique González Ruiz y Rodolfo González Ruiz, recorded in Zacatlán and broadcast on various digital platforms. During the conversation, the presenters addressed the problems of stray dogsrelating it to the dirt in the streets, possible public health risks and the supposed deterioration of the urban image Township.
At one point in the program, one of the hosts, identified as Juan EnriqueHe went further and suggested that the way to solve the problem would involve... disappearance of animals, explicitly mentioning the option of resorting to violent acts or poisoningsThese words, although framed by the authors as an attempt at dark humor or informal commentary, were interpreted by a significant portion of the audience as a direct incitement to animal abuseThis type of case connects with previous news about the poisoning of stray dogs which have raised social alarm in other localities.
Fragments of the episode began circulating in social media like X and Facebook, where users clipped and shared the most controversial passages. From there, the spread exploded and the issue quickly went from being an anecdote from a local program to a matter of public interest, with hundreds of comments of rejection and calls for action from both the authorities and the animal rights organizations.
This type of content, which normalizes or trivializes violence towards animals, clashes head-on with the current trends in animal protection which also exist in European countries, where those who generate digital content are required to have a minimum of discursive responsibility when dealing with sensitive issues such as abandonment, mistreatment, or the management of street colonies. In some regions, examples of effective public policies have been observed, such as the experience of The Netherlands, the first country without abandoned dogs, which illustrate different approaches to violence.
Animal shelters and authorities react to calls to eliminate stray dogs
The first organized response came from Carita de Pelos Foundation, an animal protection organization in the Sierra Norte region of Puebla. The organization issued a public complaint in which he indicated that the podcast comments could be translated into a incitement to animal abuseespecially when referring to the elimination of stray dogs through violence or poisoningRecent cases of rescues and actions by animal shelters, such as when 50 abandoned dogs rescuedThey show the other side of the problem and the work of local NGOs.
The foundation emphasized that these types of messages, even when presented as humor or personal opinion, contribute to normalizing cruelty to animals and can encourage people to take action. For the organization, joking about making homeless dogs “disappear” in Zacatlán, or any other municipality, poses a real risk, as it socially legitimizes practices that are already prohibited by law.
The complaint expressly noted that the mistreatment, threats and incitement to violence towards animals are classified as crimes in the State Penal Code and in the Animal Welfare LawThese regulations cover everything from financial fines to prison sentences depending on the seriousness of the events, something that is very familiar in the European context, where many countries have similar legislation to protect pets and stray animals.
In parallel, the Zacatlán City Council, through its Animal Welfare Center, issued a statement in which it categorically rejected any speech or action that promotes violence, the abuse and disappearance of animals on public roadsThe municipal administration emphasized that the social and coexistence problems They cannot be solved through threats, aggression, or cruelty towards living beings.
The council also acknowledged that there is a Public concern about the presence of stray dogs and catsThis is also observed in numerous Spanish and European cities. However, he drew a clear line by insisting that the responses must be based on the responsible ownership, the sterilization, the animal respect education and file a complaint through official channelsnever in the physical elimination of animals.
The legal framework and the parallels with Spain and Europe
The Zacatlán case brings to the forefront the role of the laws of animal welfare when it comes to curbing violent behavior and hate speech towards animals. Both in the state of Puebla and in many regions of MexicoThe regulations already include the mistreatment, cruelty, and incitement to these acts as punishable conduct, similarly to what happens in Spain and a good part of EuropeIn fact, in Mexico and in states like the State of Mexico, measures have been promoted to strengthen the fight against the overpopulation of stray dogs as a response to similar problems.
In the Spanish context, for example, the recent state regulations on animal protection and the various regional penal codes have been hardening penalties for mistreatmentincluding the dissemination of content that may encourage violence against dogs, cats, and other companion animals. The European trend is moving in the same direction: strengthening legal protections for animal welfare and sending a clear message that cruelty, even when disguised as a joke, has legal consequences.
This regulatory framework also affects the responsibility of those who generate content, whether podcasters, influencers, or media outletsBeyond freedom of expression, a minimum of prudence and sensitivity when addressing issues related to the abandonment, slaughter, or management of stray animals, especially in an environment where social networks massively amplify any message.
In Europe, some institutional and NGO campaigns have focused on combating normalization of animal abuse in public speeches, series, entertainment programs, or digital content. The Zacatlán case fits perfectly into this debate, since the controversy has arisen less from a fait accompli and more from the verbal legitimization of violence towards stray dogs.
Public apologies from the drivers and social debate about responsibility
Before the avalanche of criticism and the so-called digital “funa” that was unleashed, the people responsible for the podcast “Old Gachos” They decided to react. The González brothers released a new video in which they tried to qualify their words and reduce the tension generated, aware that the episode had transcended the local area of Zacatlán.
In that message, the drivers insisted that the controversial statements They were not carried out with dolobut “from the ignorance"and with the intention of creating humor that they themselves acknowledged as unfortunate and insensitiveThey asserted that there was no intention to incite violence nor to promote animal abuse against stray dogs, and They apologized to the public. and those who might have felt offended.
Despite these apologies, much of the public debate has focused on whether it is enough to acknowledge the mistake or whether they should assume responsibility. greater responsibilitiesDepending on what the competent authorities determine. Organizations like the Carita de Pelos Foundation insist that the comments made could fall under the criminal offense of incitement to abuseespecially when mentioning specific methods such as the poisoning of dogs.
The controversy has also served to reopen the discussion about the extent to which content creators should find out about current legislation Before publicly expressing opinions on sensitive topics, this reflection is becoming increasingly common in Spain and other European countries: those with an audience, large or small, are aware that their words can have concrete effects on the behavior of others.
At the same time, many users have taken advantage of the case to claim a focus change in the informative and informative treatment of stray dogsBoth in Mexico and in the European context: to leave behind the image of the animal as a "nuisance" or "problem" and focus on the shared civic responsibility, the adoption —as shown by successful initiatives in cities that encourage the reintegration of animals into homes— and the massive campaigns of sterilization as real and sustainable solutions.
This whole episode in Zacatlán has shown the extent to which the social sensitivity towards animals Things have changed in recent years, not only in Latin America but also in Europe. A comment that not so long ago would have gone virtually unnoticed now generates widespread and well-articulated rejection, with Reactions from NGOs, institutions and citizensThe management of stray dogs, whether in Zacatlán, a Spanish city, or any European urban center, is increasingly perceived as a challenge that demands responsible public policiesEducation, respect, and ethical solutions are far removed from any approach that involves "making animals disappear" through violence.
