Pets Wonderland issues two new statements to address public concerns

Over the weekend, Pets Wonderland issued two new statements in response to growing public concern over alleged mistreatment of animals at its outlets. The issue gained traction online after netizens voiced outrage in Google reviews and public forums. The matter was also picked up by pet welfare platform My Forever Doggo and Chinese-language daily Sin Chew.

Concerns were first raised two weeks ago when a netizen uploaded a video showing two visibly malnourished dogs at Pets Wonderland’s Mid Valley outlet. The video brought renewed attention to a string of negative Google reviews alleging unhygienic conditions and poor treatment of animals at the store.

On 22 July, Pets Wonderland published its first statement via Instagram Stories, titled “Committed to listening, staying concerned, and taking action.” In it, the company thanked the public for its concern and said the Department of Veterinary Services (DVS) had visited the outlet. According to the brand, the DVS confirmed all dogs were healthy and within the required body condition standards. The company also pledged to take “meaningful action” to improve animal welfare and reaffirmed its commitment to complying with DVS guidelines.

Don't miss: Why Pets Wonderland's IG response leaves public trust unsettled

Its second statement, issued on 31 July via Instagram (but not posted to Facebook or its website), outlined further steps to ensure the wellbeing of its animals. The company said licensed veterinarians had once again confirmed the dogs were in good health. “We are implementing a comprehensive internal review that ensures our operations and care practices remain aligned with leading animal welfare principles,” the statement read.

The post reiterated the brand’s PR message: “listening, improving, and acting responsibly”, and included images of veterinary health check documents, along with a video of the puppies playing. The caption read: “Wagging tails don't lie. Real care, real joy.”

Despite this, the post drew widespread criticism. Many accused the brand of only acting after being exposed, and some questioned the sufficiency of the images and video as proof of good care. Others called for the pet shop to stop selling animals entirely and instead focus on promoting adoptions.

In a third statement issued on 2 August, Pets Wonderland announced that it would begin phasing out the sale of cats and dogs across all outlets, starting with its Mid Valley branch by the end of August. The decision, it said, came “after thoughtful reflection and extensive dialogue with customers, animal welfare organisations, and our internal teams.”

“It has been our privilege to serve pet lovers across the country, and we remain deeply committed to the wellbeing of animals and the communities we care so deeply about,” the statement continued. The company added that all cats and dogs currently in-store will be rehomed “responsibly and compassionately,” calling the move “a meaningful step towards a kinder and more ethical pet industry.”

While the announcement was welcomed by some, calls for boycotts persisted. Many netizens continued to criticise the company for its past treatment of animals, demanding greater transparency in the rehoming process. Others urged the company to extend its exit to include the sale of other small animals, such as rabbits and hamsters.

When the issue first arose, A+M spoke with PR professionals to unpack Pets Wonderland's statement on Instagram. Using Instagram stories to issue a statement, a format that disappears after 24 hours, was widely seen by industry players as a misstep. Aisya Hashim, managing director of Ariff Communications, said disappearing statements may cast doubt on whether an inspection even occurred, especially when there’s no follow-up from DVS. "This lack of permanence may create the impression that the brand is concealing information."

Syed Mohammed Idid, deputy chairman of the Public Relations Practitioners Society of Malaysia (PRactitioners) said that it is vital that the brand maintains momentum through consistent follow-up updates, and provide transparent sharings of inspection results, reports on improvements, involvement in welfare initiatives, or even to invite the media and NGOs for a behind-the-scenes visit.

Social listening by DATAXET Nama Malaysia last week showed overwhelmingly negative sentiment (92%), with netizens criticising the pet retailer for poor animal welfare practices, demanding boycotts and stronger enforcement. "Despite scattered calls for action and empathy-driven reactions, the dominant conversation painted a picture of systemic neglect and regulatory failure," the media monitoring firm said.

Join us on 13 August at PR Asia Malaysia where trust gets rebuilt, spin gets called out, and PR pros get real. Crack the scepticism, keep your influence clean, and outsmart policy curveballs before they hit. Be ready, be bold, be heard. 

Related articles: 
1Fit Malaysia closure: Why marketing without a margin puts brands at risk
Why Jetstar Asia’s closure announcement failed to land with consumers
Crisis comms or copy-paste? Air India draws scrutiny for CEO’s mirrored statement