web analytics

PETA Calls LN Mashable Story ‘Nasty Rant’

by | Jun 30, 2017 | The Left

JAMES FITE

The truth hurts as the saying goes, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) seems to have taken issue with a recent dose of it served up right here at Liberty Nation.  In fact, a letter to the Editor at LN called my article a “nasty rant” misrepresenting PETA’s work. Well, that certainly begs a response, don’t you think?

In a June 25 article, I wrote that PETA reached out to Mashable with a request to spread a fake abuse video in which a man repeatedly slaps a computer-generated image (CGI) cat. Mashable refused and published an article revealing this and explaining their reasons in no uncertain terms. I wasn’t very kind to PETA in my article. Then again, Mashable wasn’t too happy with PETA either.

The main point of my article was that PETA tried to spread false news and that the folks at Mashable had the journalistic integrity to deny them. PETA admits – both to Mashable and us – that their initial plan was to portray the abuse video as real and only later reveal that it wasn’t. Animals do suffer, and suffering of any sort is horrible. However, creating fake news – even with the promise to confess the hoax later – is more than just a little gimmicky. Mashable called Peta out, and we simply reported the controversy. From Mashable:

Through this marketing effort, PETA is trying to convince the media to report and share a fake video as if it’s real, in hopes of deceiving the public to create manufactured outrage. As animal lovers, this is offensive. As a media outlet with a responsibility to truthfulness, this is unethical. As people with basic moral values, WTF?

Mashable went on to say:

We should note here that the issue isn’t that “Mashable didn’t like it” so much as that we here at Mashable don’t take kindly to being approached for partnership on a shady, ethically ass-backwards marketing campaign. But also, yeah, sure: We’re not fans of animal abuse videos, fake or otherwise.

These quotes from the Mashable article sum up the situation perfectly and yet PETA still refuses to acknowledge their part in the story. Here’s what Jennifer O’Connor wrote to Liberty Nation:

First, PETA had just uncovered the trainer of a tiger used in the film the Life of Pi, whipping a young tiger 19 times for “disobeying.” Our video depicting a CGI “cat” grew out of this upsetting discovery, and a simple question: What would it look like if someone did to beloved house cats what circus trainers do to tigers? It would clearly and ironically illustrate that tigers who are whipped, screamed at and abused are really no different from the cats who share our homes. An ad agency created a hyperbolic parody of circus and Hollywood training and they came up with the idea of releasing the “abuse” video first and then releasing a second video to create a serial narrative with a surprise ending, a two-parter.

Anyone who needs to watch a video of a man repeatedly slapping a house cat to realize that it’s wrong to beat tigers (at least ones that aren’t currently trying to eat you) has some serious cognitive deficiencies. PETA’s hyperbolic parody with a surprise ending seems like thin gruel to me as an explanation for a rejected and somewhat dubious ad campaign – but let’s just give Ms. O’Connor the benefit of the doubt here and quickly move onto PETA point number two in my “nasty rant”:

As for the criticism about PETA’s euthanasia rate, readers should know that PETA does something extraordinary: we take in all the animals that “no-kill” shelters shun: the elderly, aggressive, desperately ill, and injured as well as those who have spent their entire lives chained, aren’t housetrained or socialized, and aren’t suitable candidates for adoption. PETA offers a public service to animals who need and deserve a respectful, peaceful, and painless end and whose guardians can’t afford the high cost of euthanasia at a veterinarian’s office.

I did mention in my article PETA’s alarming kill rate, as well as some other strange behaviors.

The sources cited in the previous article contain information for 2010. In that year alone, PETA euthanized 1507 of 1553 dogs (97%) received and 693 of 792 cats (87.5%). PETAKillsAnimals.com – a website that compiled public records from 1998 to 2016 compiled these numbers. The lowest combined kill rate for dogs and cats of any year was 2016’s 71.9%. Here is the actual Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 2016 report for PETA. As you can see, PETA killed 1411 of 1963 dogs and cats (71.9%) they received last year. Of the remaining animals, only 97 of them (a mere 4.9%) were adopted. PETA is firmly against no-kill shelters, so transferred animals likely died as well. The takeaway here is that the high kill rate and low adoption rate of 2016 are the best PETA has done since at least 1998!

Both PETA’s email and a reader comment on my original article claim that these numbers are alarmingly high because PETA usually only takes in animals already knocking on death’s door. However, there is evidence that this simply isn’t true. NBC News reported in 2005 that two PETA employees were arrested and charged with animal cruelty after being caught repeatedly dumping euthanized animals in a dumpster behind a Piggly Wiggly in Ahoskie, North Carolina. According to the report:

PETA President Ingrid Newkirk said the workers were picking up animals to be brought to PETA headquarters for euthanization. Veterinarians and animal control officers said PETA workers had promised to find homes for the animals rather than euthanize them, according to police.

SFGATE also reported on the incident:

The arrest followed a rash of unwelcome discoveries of dead animals dumped in the area. According to veterinarian Patrick Proctor, the PETA people told North Carolina shelters they would try to find the dogs and cats homes. He handed over two adoptable kittens and their mother, only to learn later that they had died, without a chance to find a home, in the PETA van. “This is ethical?” Proctor railed over the phone. “I don’t really think so.”

In addition to lying about their intentions and then killing perfectly adoptable animals, PETA has also allegedly stolen pets! In 2014, the owners of Maya the Chihuahua told WAVY.com that PETA took their dog from their home and killed it. Reportedly, PETA initially denied the accusation. Only after the owner released his security video footage did the same PETA employee who dognapped Maya return with a fruit basket to negotiate.

These two stories alone are alarming, but according to former PETA employee Heather Harper-Troje, they are not unique. In a 2015 article on Huffpost, author Douglas Anthony Cooper explained how Mrs. Harper-Troje blew the whistle:

I know from first hand experience that the PETA leadership has no problem lying. I was told regularly to not enter animals into the log, or to euthanize off-site in order to prevent animals from even entering the building. I was told regularly to greatly overestimate the weight of animals whose euthanasia we recorded, in order to account for what would have otherwise been missing “blue juice” (the chemical used to euthanize); because that allowed us to euthanize animals off the books. I was told regularly to say whatever I had to say in order to get people to surrender animals to me: lying was not only acceptable, it was encouraged.

Not only does this former employee claim that she was told to lie both to owners and to the government, but she also says that she was encouraged to steal animals if that’s what it took to get them.

Getting back to PETA’s email to Liberty Nation, it concluded with this:

We don’t have to agree on all issues. But Fite’s nasty rant misrepresented PETA’s work and left readers with an erroneous impression of what the group does.

In light of what I – and now you – have seen, does my first article qualify as a “nasty rant” that misrepresents PETA’s work? If anything, I pulled my punches. PETA claims that I have “left readers with an erroneous impression of what the group does.” If this is true, it is only because I did not delve fully into the evidence to expose all of their alleged crimes and atrocities. I still haven’t.

What’s notably missing from this email is any denial of anything in the initial article, which left us with one question. What part of my “nasty rant” was factually incorrect? Without any evidence to the contrary, I must stick to my initial support of Mashable’s journalistic integrity and my assessment of PETA in general and of their attempt to push fake news.

My original conclusion stands, and here at Liberty Nation, we eagerly await PETA’s response.

Read More From James Fite

Latest Posts

Social Media or Bust?

While social media can be a good venue to find and connect with relatives and friends, it has been accused of...

White House Muzzling Free Speech?

The Supreme Court hears arguments against social media censorship. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY1v36oBgKc...

Survey Says: It’s Time to Leave New York

Things are tough all over in New York, and a recent citizens survey describes just how dissatisfied residents are...

Latest Posts

Social Media or Bust?

While social media can be a good venue to find and connect with relatives and friends, it has been accused of...