Topic: PETA ad targets a shark victim.
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #12,489
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/09/28/2011-09-28_peta_payback_is_hell_ad_aimed_at_florida_shark_attack_victim_causing_feeding_fre.html?r=news/national
How insensitive.
Enjoy looking at PETA ads that show lots of skin from sexy celebs?
Here's one that shows some flesh - just not in the way you would think.
A planned advertisement from the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that implies a shark-attack victim deserved his injuries has had the effect of chum in the water for the group's critics.
The proposed billboard features a great white shark biting into a severed human leg, with the jarring slogan, "PAYBACK IS HELL. GO VEGAN."
But there is a catch: PETA hasn't found a home for the ad. It is trying to put the advertisement up on Anna Maria Island in Florida, where a local man was mauled by a bull shark while spear-fishing Saturday.
Charles Wickersham, 21, survived the attack, but remains hospitalized with a severe wound on his left thigh.
"With sharks in the news, we thought it would be a good time to bring up the fact that sharks are not actually the most dangerous predators on the planet - we are," PETA spokeswoman Ashley Byrne told the News.
"Americans alone kill 12 billion fish for food every year."
PETA is still looking for an outdoor advertising company on the island that is willing to put up the hot-button billboard. The organization has casted a wider net throughout surrounding Manatee County.
"If I see one of those billboards that they plan on putting up, I will burn it down," shark angler Bill Goldschmitt told Florida's WWSB-TV, an ABC affiliate.
"We are glad that Mr. Wickersham will be okay," says Byrne. "We hope that after this painful and horrible experience he and other fishermen will consider the pain that fish feel and we hope they will consider taking up another pastime."
Here's one that shows some flesh - just not in the way you would think.
A planned advertisement from the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that implies a shark-attack victim deserved his injuries has had the effect of chum in the water for the group's critics.
The proposed billboard features a great white shark biting into a severed human leg, with the jarring slogan, "PAYBACK IS HELL. GO VEGAN."
But there is a catch: PETA hasn't found a home for the ad. It is trying to put the advertisement up on Anna Maria Island in Florida, where a local man was mauled by a bull shark while spear-fishing Saturday.
Charles Wickersham, 21, survived the attack, but remains hospitalized with a severe wound on his left thigh.
"With sharks in the news, we thought it would be a good time to bring up the fact that sharks are not actually the most dangerous predators on the planet - we are," PETA spokeswoman Ashley Byrne told the News.
"Americans alone kill 12 billion fish for food every year."
PETA is still looking for an outdoor advertising company on the island that is willing to put up the hot-button billboard. The organization has casted a wider net throughout surrounding Manatee County.
"If I see one of those billboards that they plan on putting up, I will burn it down," shark angler Bill Goldschmitt told Florida's WWSB-TV, an ABC affiliate.
"We are glad that Mr. Wickersham will be okay," says Byrne. "We hope that after this painful and horrible experience he and other fishermen will consider the pain that fish feel and we hope they will consider taking up another pastime."
How insensitive.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #224,093
PETA was always the left-wing Westboro.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,095
Dick move but isn't that what they do? They kind of have a point.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 24 seconds later, 5 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,096
@224,093 (B)
The two are very similar in their tactics, and they are both amazingly good at getting attention.
The two are very similar in their tactics, and they are both amazingly good at getting attention.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,097
@224,095 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
What I don't like is how they emphasize that "animals have feelings" over empathy for their fellow human beings. If they have a point then yes, they are obviously going about it in completely the wrong way.
What I don't like is how they emphasize that "animals have feelings" over empathy for their fellow human beings. If they have a point then yes, they are obviously going about it in completely the wrong way.
Anonymous B replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,098
It's a doggy-dog world.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,100
@224,097 (A)
It pretty much fits in with their philosophy, though. I don't agree with that philosophy, but I have a hard time arguing why it's so wrong of them to say.
They did at least pay lip service to sympathizing with the victim. And I think they do point out a pretty basic hypocrisy in people considering sharks so "savage" for simply responding in kind to an attack. If you go in the water with a spear, well...
It pretty much fits in with their philosophy, though. I don't agree with that philosophy, but I have a hard time arguing why it's so wrong of them to say.
They did at least pay lip service to sympathizing with the victim. And I think they do point out a pretty basic hypocrisy in people considering sharks so "savage" for simply responding in kind to an attack. If you go in the water with a spear, well...
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,102
@previous (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
> I have a hard time arguing why it's so wrong of them to say.
I guess it's trivial anyway, since nobody on either side of the issue is ultimately going to agree. I think it's "wrong of them to say" because it's sensationalism, so more or less them saying it at all.
> They did at least pay lip service to sympathizing with the victim.
It seemed somewhat back-handed to me, though. Yeah, there is a lot of misunderstanding with sharks and their behaviours, but again I just don't like the fact that their using someone's bad situation as sort of a platform for their own agendas.
> I have a hard time arguing why it's so wrong of them to say.
I guess it's trivial anyway, since nobody on either side of the issue is ultimately going to agree. I think it's "wrong of them to say" because it's sensationalism, so more or less them saying it at all.
> They did at least pay lip service to sympathizing with the victim.
It seemed somewhat back-handed to me, though. Yeah, there is a lot of misunderstanding with sharks and their behaviours, but again I just don't like the fact that their using someone's bad situation as sort of a platform for their own agendas.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 32 seconds later, 20 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,103
@224,100 (marvin !H0G.H/BnJg)
> I have a hard time arguing why it's so wrong of them to say.
For one, the slogan they chose is implying the shark attack was intended as a form of payback when they actually attack indiscriminately, as if the sharks are completely innocent.
> I have a hard time arguing why it's so wrong of them to say.
For one, the slogan they chose is implying the shark attack was intended as a form of payback when they actually attack indiscriminately, as if the sharks are completely innocent.
marvin !H0G.H/BnJg replied with this 15 years ago, 8 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #224,106
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,325
> The proposed billboard features a great white shark biting into a severed human leg, with the jarring slogan, "PAYBACK IS HELL. GO VEGAN."
BECOME A VEGAN OR A SHARK WILL GET YOU
BECOME A VEGAN OR A SHARK WILL GET YOU
hamfist !!snnYcROO9 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 28 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,349
Classy
stickybuns !bENfolDsOU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 59 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,372
I don't think they care about animals. Really, they just care about the attention it brings. Honestly, there are probably other animal-rights organisations which do more for animals than PETA does, and they most likely do it with less advertising and BAWWWW.
Timbukthree !!a+gklh4FO joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,374
Good. It's true. People torture fish all the time.
stickybuns !bENfolDsOU replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,378
Also, I don't think the shark was getting payback. They're trying to humanise the shark with a human feeling (revenge). Of course, it's a wild animal which attacked someone for it's own reasons (thinking it was food).
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,384
Just another retarded publicity stunt that makes no sense and alienates rational people from their bullshit.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,417
HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEswamplights !!V3J448+/B joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 15 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,427
swamplights !!V3J448+/B double-posted this 15 years ago, 22 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,428
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,453
I'll go vegan if the sharks agree to do it as well.
brie !OudrPWaUDQ joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,454
@previous (D)
I won't let that happen. For every shark that goes vegan, i'll go vegan three times.
;D
wait, that doesn't really work... okay, okay, for every shark that goes vegan, i'll, uhhh, shit... i don't know.
what do sharks even care about?
I won't let that happen. For every shark that goes vegan, i'll go vegan three times.
;D
wait, that doesn't really work... okay, okay, for every shark that goes vegan, i'll, uhhh, shit... i don't know.
what do sharks even care about?
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
sluggy joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,455
Its not really offensive. I think it is more offensive that they objectify women.
Anonymous D replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #224,456
@previous (sluggy)Those poor women are animals too! You should attend a PETA event and try to rescue them by letting them out of their cages and taking them home with you.