View Single Post
Old 06-24-2009, 05:08 PM
TXBatman's Avatar
TXBatman TXBatman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 702
15 yr Member
TXBatman TXBatman is offline
Member
TXBatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 702
15 yr Member
Default

I think PETA started with a laudable goal...get people to think about the way they treat animals. Somewhere along the line though, they have become a caricature of the absolute worst an eco-whacko group could possibly be. In their zeal to protect every single living creature from any possible kind of harm, they have left behind the concept of actually reaching an audience. Instead, their whacky tactics and absurd protestations about killing flies, etc. makes it very simple for people to dismiss them AND their message and go on about whatever it was they were doing.

There is alot of low hanging fruit out there for PETA to go after...veal calves, abused circus animals, crappy conditions at some zoos, etc. But instead they are going after Obama for killing a fly? Going after people who catch fish? Really? That is where they think their time, energy, and efforts are best spent? Instead of publicizing the plight of animals in ways that could make an impact, they put naked women in tiger stripe paint chained in a cage on a street corner near the circus. Sure, they get alot of publicity about having a naked woman on a street corner, but no media outlet gets beyond "hey there was a naked lady on a street corner today" when they report the story.

PETA is a group that needs to hire an outsider to handle their PR efforts and they need to give that person veto power to kill some of these stunts that are clearly just bad ideas and that harm the image of the group and the cause they are promoting. I will never forget when a pesticide company was advertising a fire ant killing product. The commercial was about how people didn't want ants to just die, you wanted it to be slow and painful and agonizing to get them back for what the ants do to you. It was obviously meant as tongue in cheek humor, but PETA came out publicly on the side of the fire ants and "humane treatment" for them. If there is any position out there that is more of a complete loser than choosing the side of fire ants, I am not aware of it. That is a case where PETA needed somebody to say "guys if you come out and attack anybody on behalf of fire ants, you are going to look like a bunch of morons...let's not do this." Criticizing Obama for killing a fly was another case where they needed that inner voice that is obviously missing.
TXBatman is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
"Thanks for this!" says:
Blessings2You (06-24-2009), hollym (06-26-2009)