By Connie Patrick

PETA may have good intentions, but its passion has erupted to a point that calls for intervention.  While the government commends the organization’s ambition and absolute devotion to a cause that is worthy of attention, PETA’s abusive utilization of the media is becoming increasingly detrimental to the well being of society. Many of their supposed acts of “justice” have been classified as instances of public disturbance. Here are some examples:

1.    January 26, 2007: PETA volunteers protest a Burberry store’s use of fur in Washington. They stood nearly naked in front of the store for over an hour, claiming that they would rather go naked than wear fur. 
2.    October 19, 2009: PETA members dressed as seals lay “dead” on Pennsylvania Avenue calling for an end to Canada’s annual seal hunt. It blocked traffic along one of the busiest streets in the nation’s capital. 
3.    June 21, 2007: Members of PETA participate in the “Running of the Nudes”, a protest against the annual Running of the Bulls. This happens in front of the Spanish Embassy in Washington. 

The above shows just a few of the many protests that PETA has conducted over the past decade. Not only to their actions violate the law in many instances, but they area also willing to publicize a gory, gruesome side of their cause. While they may believe it’s an integral part of their propaganda, their extreme behavior is merely their way of manipulating the media, and making their presence known. 

Pictures like the one shown here have exploded all over the Internet, allowing the organization and therefore the cause to gain popularity and influence, at the expense of innocent web-surfers or pedestrians uncomfortable with the racket they are making. 

The banner they put up on the streets compares the treatment of animals to the treatment of the Jewish during the Holocaust. The contrast between black/white and color not only highlight the purpose of the banner, which is to draw attention to animal rights activism, but also contrast between the past and the present, indicating that animal torture can be looked upon as a “Modern Holocaust”. 

While potentially effective in addressing the extent to which animals are being mistreated, the banner’s message assumes that humans and animals belong on the same level. It ignores our intellectual superiority and our status as the apex predator, outright implying that we are the same. 

The banner’s allusion to the Holocaust is undoubtedly controversial, and the picture shown has the potentially damaging psychological effects, especially when placed on the sidewalk in the middle of a city. The historical and social context of the picture, originally used as a tool to evoke emotion (pathos), can in fact evoke negative emotion that is detrimental to society. While PETA’s passion may cause it to believe the Holocaust is an appropriate analogy for their cause, their lack of consideration for emotional implications should be pointed out and condemned as an inappropriate method of spreading their message. 

On top of this, as if a visual comparison between animals and the Holocaust was not enough, PETA chose to include a header saying: “To animals, all people are Nazis”. The header directly compares “all people” to Nazis, which are arguably the most controversial and despised group in history. Such bold words may have had hyperbolic or metaphorical intentions, but could easily be taken the wrong way, and for obvious reason be offensive to many. 

This other picture presents an instance where PETA members chose to dress up as members of the Ku Klux Klan right outside of Madison Square Garden. To be fair, PETA members were not trying to portray themselves as Klan members. In an attempt to condemn the American Kennel Club’s efforts to promote pure-breeding of dogs, PETA compares their ideas to the ideas of the KKK, arguing that they both strive to promote a “master race”. 

Again, PETA attempts to draw connections and provide the public with analogies that give them something more relatable to play with, which in this case is the KKK. It grasps on to the idea of a “master race” as its only hint of logos in its argument, while hoping to overwhelm its audiences with pathos through the KKK allusion. The costumes speak for themselves. The KKK is a terrorist organization, responsible for a countless number of crimes. To compare selective breeding to the actions of the KKK is simply an example of PETA stopping at nothing to push its agenda, no matter who it marginalizes, no matter who it hurts. 

Its tactics can be traced to its management, its purpose, and its goals.

Its tactics can be outrageous, over the top and even racist. PETA's founder Ingrid Newkirk readily admits, "we're not afraid of making idiots of ourselves."

And while we are tolerant of citizens passionately fighting for social causes, self-proclaimed idiots are definitely aren’t what we want our citizens to become. 

PETA’s extreme tactics are commonly labeled as shock advertising, or “shockvertising”, which deliberately startles and offends audiences by violating social norms. PETA does this in hope to capture attention and generate “buzz” in the media, which attracts previously uninvolved audiences to and brings awareness to animal rights, an issue they are really advocating for. Using tactics to deliberately provoke a negative and potentially harming reaction from citizens not only may achieve the opposite effect and turn audiences away from the issue, but also has potentially threatening implications to civil order in society. 

Looking behind the scenes at PETA’s true intentions, the information becomes even more alarming in an ethical sense. 

PETA is an organization that has a long history of supporting the most radical wing the animal rights movement, looking to achieve what it calls “total animal liberation.” PETA represents ideas that are unpopular and labeled by the majority of the population as “too radical”, and it has been furiously trying to convince them otherwise, often in ways that are ethically questionable. 

While PETA does not directly carry out violent attacks, it has encouraged, and advocated for them. Their media campaign coordinator Bruce Friedrich said this in 2005:

The government does not tolerate public statements that encourage civil unrest and violence. 

Aside from statements, PETA has also donated to several organizations that have been involved in violent practice. Now while it may not be the one doing the harm, they are well aware of their influence in the media, and donations are portrayed as direct support in the media, which can be interpreted as it supporting violence. 

In 2001, PETA made a $1,500 donation to a group called the "Earth Liberation Front," which has claimed responsibility for fires set to luxury apartments, homes and SUVs in southern California. The FBI calls the Earth Liberation Front, and the Animal Liberation Front, the group Coronado was working for, "domestic terrorist" organizations, responsible for more than 600 crimes, and $43 million in damage since 1996.

To the preservation of civil order, and the elimination of public unrest, the government demands that PETA cut down on their aggressive media tactics.