How Would You Like It? Your sitting down to dinner; it’s a home cooked meal. There are sides of mashed potatoes, green beans, yams, and macaroni and cheese. Your drink of choice being soda, and for dessert ice cream. I almost forgot the star of the show, a T-bone steak.As you enjoy this luscious meal with your family and friends, you laugh, smile, and are thankful for the individuals around you. In addition you are thankful for the food you are cosumering, but did you stop and think for one second that you are consuming someone's mother, father, child, or cousin? I’m pretty sure you didn’t. Human beings predominantly see animals as food; except in the case of your family cat, dog, or snake to just name a few. Animals such as pigs, cows, and …show more content…
Due to the mass amount of intake, humans have cause climate change, excess water use, waste of land, and have harm oceans. Roughly 51 percent of greenhouse gas emissions can be attributed to animal agriculture. It takes over 3,500 gallons of water to amass one gallon of milk. In the United States alone, 56 million acres of land are reserve for the use of growing feed for the animals that we consume. Lastly, because of commercial fishing coral reefs are becoming extinct (PETA). As a result, PETA demands that we take responsibility for our action and follow a planted based or vegan diet. To try to reverse the effects of the Western diet. According to a study done that, if the United States went vegan researchers found that, “ 23 percent increase in the amount of food available—mainly in grains—and a 28 percent decrease in agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. However, they only found a 2.6 percent decrease in overall greenhouse gas emissions” (Mandelbaum). The study displays that in actuality we would be producing more food than we waste by going vegan. One would think, if the whole United States went vegan we would be killing more plants, because we are consuming more of them…but it is just the opposite. With production mainly being from grains; which in turn are so much better for your health, than a piece of steak. In addition, the percentage of greenhouse gases would decrease a hefty amount; almost ¼ …show more content…
The authors acknowledges that, “ PETA seeks any media attention regardless of whether is positive or negative, and utilizes the potential shock value of media to popularize it's cause, name or point” (Matusitz, Jonathan and Forrester). Any attention is good attention, even negative for PETA. Negative attention is actually more beneficial to them, because controversial will always capture the notice of others more than positive. As a result, more followers; and more followers equates more lives of animals saved. At the end of the day, PETA is controversial, because they want to get their point across & the only way to accomplish this is through controversy. What gets attention nowadays one might ask is….scandal! News outlines won’t just cover anything; it has to be juicy. Individuals won’t tweet nor post about something per say that is boring; it has to be mind-boggling. Somehow, PETA has managed to create shock value since day one; and once one sees a PETA advert one cannot ever forget. Their adverts, protests, and PSA’s for the most part are grotesque. They include carcass of dead animals, shaming those who are overweight or obese, exploit the female body, and hence on to name a few. Take the case of the controversial advert of a baby smoking. This advert was created in October 2015 in Iowa. It’s message being that “you wouldn’t let your child smoke. Like smoking, eating meat causes heart disease and cancer”
The truth about PETA, is that they do not want all animals to roam free. They want the population of dogs and cats to be reduced through spaying and neutering. They would like people to adopt animals from pounds or animal shelters, rather than buying from pet shops or breeders. They do claim to be the number one animal activist groups out there. Are they who they claim to be? What they don't advertise, is that
Introduction (Attention Step): What do you think is the greatest cause of emission pollution? What do you believe is harming our planet? Well if you guessed that fossil fuel emissions are the biggest emission polluters, then you are completely wrong (attention getter). Animal Agriculture is actually the number one Greenhouse Gas emitter in the planet. Yes, cow farts are destroying the environment. It sounds crazy, but ever since the mid 60’s, agriculture associations have been spreading across the Americas and dominated the industry. The most destructive of all Ag corps are Livestock Corporation. These associations include IBP, Conagra, Perdue, Farmland National Beef, Cargill, etc … Animal Agriculture is effecting every single person in this room because we all breathe in the same air, drink the same water, and eat the same (credibility). The buildup of Animal Agriculture is a great destruction to our planet and our species because it is creating
Despite being labeled as an animal rights organization in the United States, both PETA and the ASPCA (two of the largest groups in the US) have favored funding over the original mission statement their organizations created. One way that these groups are able to receive their funding is through obscure and controversial protests. For instance, PETA uses in person protests rather than creating commercials to lower their cost on creating material, and relies on the media to record and broadcast their protests. Through these protests, PETA is able to gain a total revenue of upwards of 67 million dollars as of last year (PETA, Financial Reports). In 2003, PETA conducted a exhibit that chose to relate chickens to the value and importance of Jewish Holocaust victims.
Let’s take chicken farming as an example. Chickens are injected with growth hormones to make their breasts bigger for human consumption. The film showed chickens that were abnormally large. These modified chickens can only walk a few steps before having to sit back down because they can’t carry their own weight for too long. Some farmers will recycle the dead carcasses of the animals into the feed for herbivores on the farm. So plant eating animals will be eating the meat of a dead carcass. Animals could get sick or contract a disease from the dead animals. This infection would soon get
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is an animal advocacy organization who are dedicated to spreading awareness about animal cruelty. They believe that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment. PETA was founded in 1980 and has become the is largest organization of its kind in the world. They are a non-profit organization, and therefore, instead of selling products, they use their mass amounts of supporters in order to fuel and fund their continuously criticized and controversial advertising campaigns. (Salva-Ramirez, 1997) The reason their campaigns are often criticized, is due to their often sexual, graphic, and offensive nature. In this paper, I will be exploring the rhetoric used in PETA’s campaigns, and discussing how their controversial content influences
As one of the most well-recognized animal rights organizations, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, better known as PETA, uses different rhetorical techniques in order to convey their message that “it is the right of all beings - human and non-human - to be free of harm.” (peta.org) PETA has made a significant impact on the animal rights movement over the past 36 years through their persistence, campaigning, and advocating for animal rights. According to PETA’s website they focus their attention on the four areas which produce the greatest amount of animal suffering: factory farms, the clothing trade, laboratories, and the entertainment industry. “Creative appeals of an advertisement [determine] the persuasive style of the message content. Message content consists of what is stated in the ad as well as the manner in which it was said. Persuasive or creative appeals of advertisements have been depicted in numerous ways including fear, humor, sex, and intellectual appeals” (Bebko, and Sciulli 23). PETA fights for ethical advancements with regard to humane treatment for animals while attempting to elicit the same compassion a person would have for another human being. It is the goal of PETA’s unorthodox rhetoric in videos, exposes, protests and campaigns to acknowledge animals rights issues to
The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is one of the most recognizable organizations within the animal rights movement, due in part to their attention grabbing antics and controversial advertisements. While PETA has been successful in creating visual rhetoric that generally appeals to the audience’s cognitive reasoning and emotions they are often not successful in catalyzing actual change in behaviour.
PETA’s main principle is that “Animals are not ours to consume, wear, experiment on, or for the use of our entertainment.” In layman’s terms, animals should be able live their lives without interference from humans.
PETA’s website have so many things that you can do and find out about and you have the options to volunteer, work at PETA, donate, or intern at PETA (PETA). The way that they do this is by having a big advertisement about animal cruelty and they also have plenty of pictures of animals being treated terribly because that way you can see their point of view and join them out of sympathy or common interest. In my opinion, I feel like PETA uses the prognostic and motivational frame. The reason for motivational frame is because they want to motivate you to join their protest events and protest against animal cruelty. There is this one incident where PETA wrote a letter to Homeland Security to stop the race because it is animal cruelty for forcing dogs to run more than a thousand miles in the ice cold weather (O’Keefe). They take action for what they feel are wrong and immediately take action to it. Also, I feel like their solution to everything is basically stop the animal cruelty by being vegan, treating animals with respect, and don’t wear them around your
Phrases like “Change lives with your change” and “It’s as simple as swiping your debit or credit card” suggest that PETA’s activism has been motivated by money. As a non-profit organization in a competitive market whose bureaucratic success and continued growth largely depend on its capacity to attract donations, PETA relies on financial support to operate, so logically, it would try and appeal to a wealthy group of potential donors. But its fixation on financial support has undermined its social change message. PETA’s focus on donations has made it clear that it is more interested in financial growth than addressing speciesism and nonhuman animal cruelty. The organization has utilized the mechanisms of capitalism to challenge nonhuman
Relevance: We all share the same planet, therefore, I believe it is vital to know the ways animal agriculture shapes our environment.
The subject of my documentary film will be based on an American interest group called PETA. PETA stands for “people for the ethical treatment of animals”, it is an organization that stands against animal testing and abuse. Founded March 1980 by Ingrid Newkirk and Alex Pacheco, PETA’s motto remains to be "animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way." This interest group’s strong opposing stance on anything related to the animal usage norm or cruelty in our country, gives members of society a simple reason to support them: “since PETA stands against the mistreatment of animals they must be good.” I have chosen to document this particular subject matter because of the interesting ways PETA
PETA, though it does many things, has four main objectives. They focus on animal cruelty on factory farms, which are also known as confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and intensive livestock operations (ILOs). These farms are more worried about profits and high volumes of goods than they are about human health, safe food, the environment, fair treatment of animals, and the surrounding economy (Factory Farms). PETA also focuses on cruel treatment to animals in laboratories, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry (like Khartoum). They also work on projects helping birds, beavers, and abused backyard dogs, as some examples. To reach the public, PETA uses many tactics, including working “through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and direct action.” (PETA: Official Page). PETA tries to reach the public any way possible.
While vegetarianism has been proven to help environmental, health, and animal rights impacts, some people believe it to be too extreme. While vegetarianism claims to be helping the environment, there may be environmental problems associated with non-meat products. Stated before, animal agriculture produces greenhouse gas emissions. The farming of soybeans, which vegetarians fulfil their protein needs with, also has environmental impacts (Coogan,T.). Due to the increase in vegetarianism, there has also been an increase in the demand for soybean farming. Soybean farms have taken over many rainforests and diverse ecosystems (Coogan,T.). Ultimately, the creation of soybean farms destroys biodiversity. Biodiversity is necessary for ecosystems to
PETA is an organization that has been “trying to change the world” for the last 30 years. Usually, organizations that try to change the world focus on the negatives that people are doing, and glorify what they’re doing to create a good name for their company. A lot of the time, organizations try to reach certain people through advertisement. A great way to advertise a brand is through internet or social media, because with a click of a mouse information can reach a large number of people instantaneously. With the knowledge that they can reach a large amount of people, PETA makes sure what they post will not necessarily make the reader happy, but to create an alternate sense of reality; but like social media sites you and your friends run, does PETA really stand up for all the things they post, or is it just a scam gain trust and popularity?