In a way, I don't see the fuss. Because, millions of animals are killed to end up in people's dinners every day, and people shouldn't be sensitive about that if they eat meat. I eat meat, so I should be aware of what died for me to eat it. That's just how I see it. People can be sensitive and ignorant at the same time, and in a way this giraffe makes that stand out, if the disregard for this giraffe's life is bad then... well, we should take a look at the mass disregard toward animals everywhere. The giraffe is treated like a pet so it's somehow worse to kill him? But what about all the animals who only exist to be our food? The guy in charge in the zoo sees the giraffe more like a commodity than a soul, and that's what it ended up as. And if that's insensitive, all of us who indirectly let animals be treated that way are responsible.
I'm not sentimental about that. I believe we're all part of nature and humans are naturally predisposed to eating meat, but I also believe you should treat your food humanely. Give it a pain free life before you eat it, kill it as humanely as you can, and don't eat more than you need. Respect it, in other words.
(The autopsy... well, I don't see that as bad. People shouldn't find it horrific, because it's educational. But I would much prefer if such a thing were done on an animal that died from natural causes or old age, than one that appeared to have been killed mainly to provide the spectacle. They don't do this any more in UK universities as far as I know, we didn't dissect anything intentionally killed for the purpose of dissection or I would probably have refused to do it. Bi products of the food industry sure, but not like in the past where they would go gas a hundred rats or frogs just so students could learn what you can just as easily read about in a book.)
That said, the giraffe had a lot of press on it and there were many people willing to save its life, the guy was really pushing it by claiming allowing it to live would do 'harm' to other zoos. It might not have been genetically sound as a partially inbred animal but it appeared healthy enough (many inbred animals are) and could have served just as well in another animal park as an attraction not intended for breeding. A lot of animals in zoos do not successfully breed and they aren't done away with just because of that. This guy, I figure, is holding himself as the authority over this giraffe because he believed it was his call and he 'knew best'.
But I suppose it will highlight the situation with animals and people will make of it what they will.