Presentation on theme: "PeTA AdGirlZ. ‘‘We are complete press sluts’’ ‘‘PETA’s publicity formula—eighty percent outrage, ten percent each of celebrity and truth—insures that."— Presentation transcript:
‘‘We are complete press sluts’’ ‘‘PETA’s publicity formula—eighty percent outrage, ten percent each of celebrity and truth—insures that everything it does offends someone’’ (Michael Specter, 2003) According to the spoke person of PeTA the campaign was a result of a rising number of E.Coli, mad cows or swine flu infections amongst people. Moreover, he claims the ad warns against "dangers presented by filthy factory farms that supply the country with meat“. (Jennifer Whitehead,2009 in Brand Republic)
Unethically targeted... Direct Target Audience: Due to the location of the billboard, which was outside the Glasgow hospital, their direct target audience was the people from or around Glasgow and the patients from the hospital, where the first fatal case of swine flu has been registered.
Everybody Attention Please !!! Audience 1: Everyday people around the world. PeTA is trying to reach everyday consumers around the world and convince them to not buy meat or fur coats and to avoid cosmetic companies that test their products on animals. Audience 2: Businesses They target businesses, trying to get them to change their ways. In some cases, they're pushing for minor changes. Many companies now advertise their products as not being tested on animals. Audience 3: Lawmakers PETA also pushes for legal reforms, so they're also trying to persuade lawmakers, and there's no way they can match the money and lobbying firepower of the industries they're targeting. Audience 4: Mass media Whenever they can, PETA relies on free coverage in the mass media through PSA's (Public Service Announcements) and publicity stunts to reach its other intended audiences.. (Marketing.About.com, 2010)
No proof. Verdict: BANNED !!! “The ASA noted the poster referred to a number of diseases, two of which were known to have originated from eating meat and two that did not. Although we understood the intention was to refer to livestock and meat production rather than just eating meat, we considered that the message was, at best, ambiguous. We noted PETAs argument that there had been an extensive Government health education programme and media coverage about how the swine flu virus was spread, however we considered that that did not absolve PETA of their responsibility to ensure their ads did not mislead, or be likely to mislead.” (asa.org.uk, 2009)
Billboard The campaign – “Meat Kills – Go Vegetarian” was only supported by a billboard located near the Glasgow Hospital. The billboard in its former version was banned on 14 th October 2009 by Advertising Standards Authority as a medium carrying ambiguous messages. (asa.org.uk, 2009)
Semiotics Denotation Meat kills – just a slogan (red colour), background black with headings of names of diseases Connotation Red as a colour easily catching attention, it might symbolize blood as well. Black colour creates an atmosphere of anxiety, it is quite overwhelming. Moreover, the names of diseases indicate eating meat kills people. Myth The ad creates false assumptions that meat is unhealthy and causes diseases. It also makes recipients feel guilty and endangered. It might indicates, as well, people who eat meat put themselves in risk of getting ill.
Controversy works... There is no such thing as bad publicity...
Success... And successful ban... PeTA has about 1,070,000 followers on facebook Due to the fact that the billboard was banned the campaign has an amazing publicity (a copy of the billboard reproduced in, amongst others, The Campaign, Brand Republic, The Guardian, Marketing Week, etc.
Ethically problematic... Petal used names of different diseases and implied eating meat is a reason of swine flu or mad cow disease amongst people (only two of diseases mentioned in the billboard might be caused by eating infected meat) (asa.org.uk, 2009) As Wendy Atkins-Sayre (2010) PeTA pretty often uses information for its campaigns from pseudo-sctientific research that have no proof. This is misleading for average recipient. Putting the billboard with misleading information near the hospital and using a tragic death of the young woman is highly unethical. Even controversy has its limits.
References Advertising Standards Authority (2009) ‘ASA Adjudication on People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ [online] Available from: http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA- action/Adjudications/2009/10/People-for-the-Ethical-Treatment-of- Animals/TF_ADJ_47070.aspx [Accessed: 06.03.2011]http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA- action/Adjudications/2009/10/People-for-the-Ethical-Treatment-of- Animals/TF_ADJ_47070.aspx Atkins-Sayre, W. (2010) 'Articulating Identity: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Animal/Human Divide', Western Journal of Communication, 74: 3, 309 — 328 Marketing.About.com (2010) ‘Case Study: How PETA Targets A Global Audience’ [online] Available from: http://marketing.about.com/od/publicrelation1/a/how- peta-targets-a-global-audience.htm [Accessed: 06.03.2011]http://marketing.about.com/od/publicrelation1/a/how- peta-targets-a-global-audience.htm Specter, M. (2003, April 14) ‘The extremist: The woman behind the most successful radical group in America’ The New Yorker. Whitehead, J. (2009) ‘Peta erects 'meat kills' billboard outside Glasgow swine flu hospital’ Brand Republic [online] Available from: http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/915555/Peta-erects-meat-kills-billboard- outside-Glasgow-swine-flu-hospital/ [Accessed: 06.03.2011] http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/915555/Peta-erects-meat-kills-billboard- outside-Glasgow-swine-flu-hospital/