Gary Francione also has a great piece on this at opposingviews.com. Be sure to comment if you get the chance to let everyone know that animal rights is not about sexism, racism or other kinds of opportunism, it's about helping nonhuman animals.
Why not just criticize every little thing PeTA does? One of the ways PeTA manipulates the public and the advocacy community is to keep critical attention focused on them. For any of you unfamiliar with the term, PeTA's marketing and communications strategy is driven by what's called guerrilla marketing in the industry. As much as I dislike Wikipedia, you can learn more about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_marketing
This should help you understand the tactic and how it fits into an outreach strategy. In short, though, the purpose of PeTA's campaigns are to draw attention to PeTA (shocking, I know). But the premise of guerilla marketing is that
That's very important to marketing and donations activity when you want to get your message out in a way that is not "obviously marketing" and to keep as many donations for yourself as you can. So, when we respond to PeTA, even when we do so critically, we are engaged (if only partially) in helping them to market themselves.
To be clear, I am definitely not saying we shouldn't criticize PeTA. We should. I am saying that animal advocates should be careful to use PeTA's marketing, their notoriety, their brand awareness to the advantage of nonhuman animals as much as we can and to let them use us for their advantage as little as possible.
So, when we respond to PeTA, we must be careful to always lead with the clearest, most urgent and mostly publicly understandable criticism (e.g., PeTA has killed animals by the tens of thousands according to Newsweek, PeTA engages in offensive campaigns with racist and sexist overtones that alienate people potentially interested in animal rights and veganism). What�s important is to tell people what�s important for them to know as clearly as possible.
Stick to the facts and rely on credible sources and strong rational arguments. For example, this Newsweek article claims that PeTA killed 17,000 animals since 1998. More than 85% of the nonhuman animals they took in. Moreover, PeTA often uses racism and sexism in its campaigns, and that alienates interested people from taking nonhuman animal rights seriously. Further, PeTA engages in campaigns that do not meaningfully help nonhuman animals, as Gary L. Francione explains better than I can in The Four Problems of Animal Welfare in a Nutshell. Definitely worth reading for any advocate. Finally, PeTA rarely promotes veganism, which is the most meaningful way any of us can help nonhuman animals (and that includes animal advocates going vegans themselves).
Do not be afraid to repeat the facts. You may read another advocate's post or comment and think, I'll just add this point since s/h/ze has already covered X, Y and Z. Or you may think, some petapologist will jump out of an Interweb corner and call me a minion if I agree with another advocate. But
Why not just criticize every little thing PeTA does? One of the ways PeTA manipulates the public and the advocacy community is to keep critical attention focused on them. For any of you unfamiliar with the term, PeTA's marketing and communications strategy is driven by what's called guerrilla marketing in the industry. As much as I dislike Wikipedia, you can learn more about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_marketing
This should help you understand the tactic and how it fits into an outreach strategy. In short, though, the purpose of PeTA's campaigns are to draw attention to PeTA (shocking, I know). But the premise of guerilla marketing is that
- Most people cannot take-in or remember highly detailed discussions of substantive issues, but they can easily remember brand names and
- Antics and stunts provoke discussion of those antics and stunts (and their perpetrators) in the public sphere for what amounts to free media coverage and free marketing.
That's very important to marketing and donations activity when you want to get your message out in a way that is not "obviously marketing" and to keep as many donations for yourself as you can. So, when we respond to PeTA, even when we do so critically, we are engaged (if only partially) in helping them to market themselves.
To be clear, I am definitely not saying we shouldn't criticize PeTA. We should. I am saying that animal advocates should be careful to use PeTA's marketing, their notoriety, their brand awareness to the advantage of nonhuman animals as much as we can and to let them use us for their advantage as little as possible.
So, when we respond to PeTA, we must be careful to always lead with the clearest, most urgent and mostly publicly understandable criticism (e.g., PeTA has killed animals by the tens of thousands according to Newsweek, PeTA engages in offensive campaigns with racist and sexist overtones that alienate people potentially interested in animal rights and veganism). What�s important is to tell people what�s important for them to know as clearly as possible.
Stick to the facts and rely on credible sources and strong rational arguments. For example, this Newsweek article claims that PeTA killed 17,000 animals since 1998. More than 85% of the nonhuman animals they took in. Moreover, PeTA often uses racism and sexism in its campaigns, and that alienates interested people from taking nonhuman animal rights seriously. Further, PeTA engages in campaigns that do not meaningfully help nonhuman animals, as Gary L. Francione explains better than I can in The Four Problems of Animal Welfare in a Nutshell. Definitely worth reading for any advocate. Finally, PeTA rarely promotes veganism, which is the most meaningful way any of us can help nonhuman animals (and that includes animal advocates going vegans themselves).
Do not be afraid to repeat the facts. You may read another advocate's post or comment and think, I'll just add this point since s/h/ze has already covered X, Y and Z. Or you may think, some petapologist will jump out of an Interweb corner and call me a minion if I agree with another advocate. But
- This kind criticism reflects a strategy aimed at getting advocates to go 'off message' ourselves by 'trying to be original' in our criticism and/or, even better from their perspective, getting us to self-censor. It's meant to either splinter or silence our voices and to create a vacuum in which only national organizations like PeTA and similar figureheads can be heard.
- Remember, welfare figureheads and national groups are the same people who promote form letter campaigns, write for-profit guides to nanny advocates while enriching themselves and other kinds of cookie-cutter outreach when it suits them.
- Anyone in the public grappling with weighty moral questions like veganism cares more about the facts than who tells them the facts. If you know the facts, don�t be afraid to tell someone the same facts and arguments, even if another advocate already has. Education sometimes takes more than one try to take.
- Don�t be afraid to talk about veganism and why it is morally necessary. Get your abolitionist animal rights message out in front of the public. They�re ready to hear about veganism, as Victor Schonfeld�s recent piece in The Guardian and Gary Steiner�s piece in the New York Times make clear.
- Finally, people do not read everything presented to them in detail. They skim. Your blog article or your comment may be the only comment they read. Make it count.
In short, pay no attention whatsoever to attempts to silence you. Keep going. Of course, I am not saying copy someone's post or comment as your own. I'm saying think about what others have written, and don't be afraid to repeat their ideas if you agree (a link back or a proper citation is the right thing to do, though). If we care about racism, then the solution is more discussion and more leadership, not less. If we care about ending sexism, then the solution is more discussion and more leadership, not let. Why do national groups work so hard to tell regular advocates how to think and what to say?
They�re afraid that you�ll tell the public directly, and without confrontation, that veganism is absolutely a joyous celebration of nonviolence, and that the abolition of animal slavery is an ideology of love and justice that lifts us all up in a moral community together. That�s the last thing animal welfare groups (whose donations rely on convincing the public that happy meat is morally fine) want the public to hear. Their fighting for their relevance.
What nonhuman animals need is more discussion, not less. What they need is more leadership, not less. Groups like PeTA don�t want to share the spotlight with you. Advocacy is not about scoring hipster points by coming up with the most original criticism in order to impress people in the scene or being silent to make Nanny happy. It's about making a difference for nonhuman animals with effective outreach to the public (that's original, that's authentic, and that's powerful). Just think for yourself and express yourself based on the facts.
As a community, animal advocates must remind the public that the smears against our community are unfounded. It is difficult to think of a community more vibrant, more thoughtful, more creative, more progressive or more passionate about nonhuman animals than the abolitionist community. PeTA (and not just PeTA but their cronies in HSUS, �Vegan Outreach� and other groups) do their best to silence our community, to shame us for having our own idea and our own views.
As the only meaningful political force that stands a chance to life animal up out of slavery, we must resist. Criticism is one important part of that. We must also continue to build our own campaigns, our own outreach and our own creativity in coordinated ways, not with dehumanizing antics but with work that uplifts, inspires, and draws positive attention to what everyone owes other animals. I believe in you. As your colleague, I am not asking anyone to stand behind me, just beside me, and to make your own voices heard.
If you take animal seriously, but are confused by a confusing message from animal welfare groups, don�t feel bad. They don�t want you to make change. They want you to donate change. You can help nonhuman animals best by going vegan. Go vegan today if you aren�t. If you�re not an abolitionist, you can learn more about the approach at www.abolitionistapproach.com or by reading my previous articles.
What nonhuman animals need is more discussion, not less. What they need is more leadership, not less. Groups like PeTA don�t want to share the spotlight with you. Advocacy is not about scoring hipster points by coming up with the most original criticism in order to impress people in the scene or being silent to make Nanny happy. It's about making a difference for nonhuman animals with effective outreach to the public (that's original, that's authentic, and that's powerful). Just think for yourself and express yourself based on the facts.
As a community, animal advocates must remind the public that the smears against our community are unfounded. It is difficult to think of a community more vibrant, more thoughtful, more creative, more progressive or more passionate about nonhuman animals than the abolitionist community. PeTA (and not just PeTA but their cronies in HSUS, �Vegan Outreach� and other groups) do their best to silence our community, to shame us for having our own idea and our own views.
As the only meaningful political force that stands a chance to life animal up out of slavery, we must resist. Criticism is one important part of that. We must also continue to build our own campaigns, our own outreach and our own creativity in coordinated ways, not with dehumanizing antics but with work that uplifts, inspires, and draws positive attention to what everyone owes other animals. I believe in you. As your colleague, I am not asking anyone to stand behind me, just beside me, and to make your own voices heard.
If you take animal seriously, but are confused by a confusing message from animal welfare groups, don�t feel bad. They don�t want you to make change. They want you to donate change. You can help nonhuman animals best by going vegan. Go vegan today if you aren�t. If you�re not an abolitionist, you can learn more about the approach at www.abolitionistapproach.com or by reading my previous articles.
No comments:
Post a Comment