Omni Brain

Big Tobacco/Big McD’s VS. PETA

Normally I’m all for ripping PETA a new one, but there are all sorts of problems with this ad, which (among others) has appeared in Time Square and in the NYT.

i-dacab90d41be34967912b63dd2ed3e07-573px-Peta_AIDS.jpg


It seems that the Center for Consumer Freedom, who is sponsoring the ads and bills itself as a grass roots organization, is actually a front for big tobacco and the fast food companies.


From Wikipedia:

The group defines its mission as fighting against “a growing cabal of food cops, health care enforcers, militant activists, meddling bureaucrats, and violent radicals who think they know what’s best for you, [who] are pushing against our basic freedoms.” [1]
CCF has argued against smoking bans, for retaining the permissible driving blood-alcohol level at 0.10, and questions the heavily debated dangers of red meat consumption, and pesticides.[citation needed]

Do you support a group which has railed against some horrible groups (like PETA) but in the past has clearly been a tool of big tobacco etc. to simply make more money ignoring whether the consumer is harmed in the process?

I think the ads are clever and clearly someone needs to directly fight all the ridiculous things PETA has done in the past – but at what cost?

For more info check out the wikipedia article above and this one here.

What do you think?

Comments

  1. #1 quitter
    January 22, 2007

    Yes! I agree.

    PETA is so awful that I end up agreeing with BS libertarian “think tank” the Center For Consumer Freedom, this is very scary.

    And the proof that the Center is full of BS is all the pro-trans fat crap they have all over their webpage.

    I’d love to see a good anti-PETA organization, perhaps based upon Pro-Test rather than creepy libertarian business lovers who argue me being poisoned is a matter of my “freedom”.

  2. #2 anon
    January 22, 2007

    The problem though…
    They would need money to advertise in great places like the NYT and on times square…

    This money is usually concentrated in the hands of big mean transfat companies :( hehe..

  3. #3 quitter
    January 22, 2007

    Well, scientists and engineers have created the Scientists and Engineers for America lobby, that’s a good start, but it should probably be emphasized to them that if they don’t protect animal research, biology will face a threat from the left even larger than the one from the right.

  4. #4 Shelley Batts
    January 22, 2007

    Of course you don’t support this group. It is the well-funded shill of corporations who only criticize PETA because it hurts their bottom line. This is the same reason they support transfat as a “consumer’s choice.” Notice they don’t appeal to child welfare in that instance.

    That ad is as base as it gets. Absolutely no informational content, pure emotional appeal. What’s their motto: the less brain activation during ad view, the better the ad?

  5. #5 Mike the Mad Biologist
    January 22, 2007

    How about while they’re gnawing on each other, decent people sucker punch both them? Ok, to be serious, I think Shelley’s right.

  6. #6 steve
    January 22, 2007

    I’m actually with you guys for not supporting anything that comes from either of these jokers… but as far as their ad having no informational content I have to disagree – it is like every single other ad. It has bullet points and then gives somewhere to go for more information – I don’t know how good that somewhere else is though (I actually doubt it’s even decent).

  7. #7 T. Bruce McNeely
    January 22, 2007

    PETA is so loathsome that I wholeheartedly support the CCF in their efforts. So they’re funded by corporations? Geeze, who isn’t?
    In my opinion, the info the CCF gives is far more accurate than the utter BS promoted by PETA and their ilk.
    This comment, of course, is influenced by my sheer hatred of PETA and the so-called Physicians Committee for Responsible medicine.
    Let the inferno begin!

  8. #8 kemibe
    January 23, 2007

    If I may speak colloquially, CCF’s front man, Richard Berman, is a fucking douchebag, and his group is renowed for both distorting science and going after easy targets rife with well-intentioned but emotionally unstable nutballs, like PETA and MADD.

    The CCF is the sort of group that loop-the-loopers at places like “Big Fat Blog” point to when claiming that the medical data highlighting the health risks of obesity are grossly overstated if not nonexistent. This is an outfit that posits that lowering the legal limit for DUI to 0.08% is a draconian idea and not supported by either common sense or toxicological science. It’s one thing to fight for restaurant owners’ right to allow smoking in their establishments, btu another to buttress this position with lies.

    Basically, the CCF caters to people’s densibilities by trumpteing that so-and-so is trying to steal their personal rights, and they use this as a battering ram to drive bad science and bullshit into everyone’s heads. And it works, because so many Americas not only can’t think for themselves, but are reliant on some form of self-neglect or self-abuse involving food, drugs, or chemicals to get through the day more or less intact, and will thus believe something is “junk science” or “propaganda” if a well-heeled fucking douchebag makes enough noise to that effect.

    P.S. — I see that I made a typo, but I think I like “densibilities” better than “sensibilities” because it’s closer to the truth. So I’m leaving it as is.

  9. #9 Shelley Batts
    January 23, 2007

    And it works, because so many Americas not only can’t think for themselves, but are reliant on some form of self-neglect or self-abuse involving food, drugs, or chemicals to get through the day more or less intact, and will thus believe something is “junk science” or “propaganda” if a well-heeled fucking douchebag makes enough noise to that effect.

    Well said. Here’s a (transfat free) cookie!

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.