Dear Mark Morford: Why you got it all wrong about PETA
By Christie Keith
July 13, 2009
I’m usually honored to share space with Mark Morford on SFGate.com. He’s a brilliant thinker, a dazzling writer, hysterically funny and politically both progressive and innovative. But his column about PETA? He got it wrong.
He said that PETA’s recent press release objecting to President Obama swatting a fly was “laughably insane and out of touch” but also “terribly beautiful. Luminous. Aiming toward something like purity, enlightenment, higher consciousness…”
He suggested that perhaps we should consider that we do, indeed, hold animal life cheap in our society, and that spending a few moments thinking about the value of that life wouldn’t hurt us. Maybe, he seemed to say, however over the top they are with the messaging, PETA has a point.
That sounds good. It does. Because yes, we should spend more time thinking about life in all its incandescent beauty. But Mark, PETA didn’t object to Obama swatting a fly because they have a reverence for life so great that it extends even to the lowest most germy members of the animal kingdom. I know this, because if they did, they’d be incapable of killing 95 percent of the dogs and cats taken into their shelter in Norfolk, Virginia. And yet, that’s just what they do.
Those kill rate statistics come from documents PETA filed with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, which requires that all shelters that “take in animals for purposes of adoption” report how many of those animals leave the shelter alive each year.
Last year, PETA’s total intake of such animals was 2,216 dogs, cats, and a very few other pets. The organization, which has an annual budget of $32 million that they’re obviously very happy to spend on press releases about fly-swatting that the media obediently laps up like thirsty puppy dogs, found homes for exactly seven of those animals.
The other 2,209? They killed them.
Don’t tell me that’s the best they could do. The average kill rate for all shelters in Virginia is less than 50 percent. Many shelters that would die of happiness to get their hands on a fraction of PETA’s budget have save rates as high as PETA’s kill rate.
Camden County, New Jersey, has one of the highest poverty rates in America, and yet its Animal Welfare Association, with a budget less than 10 percent of PETA’s, only euthanized 224 of the 3343 dogs and cats who came in its doors last year.
Maybe PETA just likes flies better than dogs and cats, I don’t know. I do know PETA head Ingrid Newkirk, who never met a publicity stunt she didn’t like, certainly doesn’t seem to feel the same way about cats. Back when no-kill crusader Nathan Winograd was president of the Palo Alto Humane Society, he sought PETA’s support for a program to save the lives of feral cats. Newkirk refused, sending him a postcard saying that PETA does not “advocate ‘right to life’ for animals.”
No, PETA doesn’t have a reverence for life. PETA has a publicity machine that leaps on every little thing that will get them the attention of the media. And why should they stop? It keeps working.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t care if PETA wants to advocate for flies and against cats. This is, after all, America, and they have the right to advocate for every inconsistent public policy that floats their boat. I don’t even care if they’re fooling their own donor base, because if the people who give money to organizations can’t be bothered to take a look behind the curtain, well… that’s a shame, but certainly no shock.
But it’s long past time for journalists to stop taking PETA’s press-released bait, to no longer accept without question the veneer of love for animals and life they put over their less then “terribly beautiful” actions.
Because what PETA does to the dogs and cats who come into their “shelter” is not beautiful at all. It’s just terrible.
word.
When will the press stop being suckers?
Comment by EmilyS — July 13, 2009 @ 6:52 am
I’ve told myself for a long time that it’s just that we’re “inside the beltway” on this issue, and PETA’s public image is so carefully crafted that only insiders see through it.
But the cracks in their public image are so HUGE now, it’s very grating to see so many journalists continue to take their messaging at face value, and think that mocking their PR methods as “over the top” is enough critical analysis. Even Stephen Colbert takes that approach. :(
However, to be fair, the analysis on the other side is also ineffective and shallow. I really wish more people who seek to critique PETA would have a more sophisticated understanding of the issues as well. Screaming “OMG AR AGENDA!” is not effective messaging, and journalists just tune it out. And those few who do have decent messaging, like petakillsanimals.com, are so hopelessly tainted by special interests (food and tobacco industry front group) that no journalist worth their salt can take them uncritically, either.
I’d like to see the more mainstream animal welfare groups start saying publicly what they KNOW: that PETA is not benign and does not care about individual animals AT ALL, but is enslaved by an ideology that goes to some very dark and horrific places. Until they stop enabling PETA, things are not likely to change.
Comment by Christie Keith — July 13, 2009 @ 8:31 am
I knew this was true after a PETA rep tried to close down my aunt’s farm 20 years ago. They said that her very babied cows (small free-range herd with large field and well stocked supplemental feeding stations, heated barn and spotless, state of the art milking shed) should be killed rather than “enslaved for milk production”.
Comment by Ravana — July 13, 2009 @ 8:45 am
Well said.
Comment by katie — July 13, 2009 @ 9:47 am
I’m sick of peta and the inhumane society H$U$
Comment by maggie b — July 13, 2009 @ 11:13 am
I first noticed a change in PETA when a friend of mine rescued an abused Pit Bull/mix - my friend went on to find the pooch an amazing loving couple who gave him love and a wonderful home - the amazing couple told us of PETA’s stance on killing pit bulls - I thought they had to be mistaken but sadly they were so right - since those several years ago its been one sad and sick series of incidences of what I think is PETA decline into the dark side…..with the animals paying the ultimate price…the truth is coming out.
Comment by mary francis — July 13, 2009 @ 12:14 pm
Buddha says to refrain from taking life and be nonviolent with all sentient life forms.
PETA just kills animals them rather than let them be pets, or even rather than live out their lives without the ability to reproduce.
PETA: the anti-Buddha. Does that mean PETA is in line to be the Antichrist?Oh heck, I think they’re more like the Antichrist…
Comment by Phyllis DeGioia — July 13, 2009 @ 4:10 pm
PETA serves a very useful purpose for other AR groups like the HSUS and the ASPCA. They make these groups seem “middle of the road”, especially when dealing with legislators and the media.. two of their top targets for their draconian programs.The HSUS says “oh those silly lettuce ladies” while pushing for mandatory spay/neuter laws or maximun number of intact dog laws. They do not want to see PETA go away even if they do take some of their donation money. As for the flip side of the coin..CCF is a very effective group in my opinion. People ( especially the HSUS) like to call them a “front group” for alcohol, tobacco and the restaurant industry but as far as I know it is still legal to smoke, drink a glass of wine and certainly eat in a restaurant where your choice of foods are yours to make as long as you can pay for them.
But next year .. who knows…LA city council has already prohiited “fast food’ places in some of the poorer sections of LA..so now the poor people have to take a bus to get a burger.or even to go to work in a “fast food” pace.how does that improve their “carbon footprint”?
PETA KILLS ANIMALS and they still get their name all over the media.. often quoted as “experts” on animals.. that should be stopped.. thanks for pointing this out ..we need to be vigilant and let the media know
PETA KILLS ANIMALS…
Comment by bestuvall — July 13, 2009 @ 5:22 pm
Bestuvall … read up on “astroturfing.” It’s disingenuous no matter who does it, and the CCF is not excluded. That said, they’ve done everyone a service in exposing PETA’s shelter kill rates. (More on CCF here, on the most excellent Source Watch site.)
As for HSUS and mandatory spay-neuter … I don’t know how many times it has to be pointed out that the HSUS, which wholeheartedly supported mandatory spay-neuter in CA last year, has gone neutral this year while it considers a possible change of policy with regard to mandatory spay-neuter.
How the policy ends up is anyone’s guess, but as of now, with SB 250 heading to an Assembly committee in Sacramento on Wednesday, the HSUS has remained neutral. Again, this is a matter of public record — as is PETA’s shelter kill rate.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — July 13, 2009 @ 5:33 pm
Peta are indeed murderers.
Want to support someone who saves lives?
Forget PETA, HSUS, ASPCA, etc. and support Best Friends Animal Society (www.bestfriends.org), The No Kill Advocacy Center (www.nokilladvocacycenter.org)North Shore Animal league America (www.nsalamerica.org) and visit Nathan Winograd’s (Who wrote “Redemption”-the greatest book ever written on animal shelters) website (www.nathanwinograd.com).
America has to become No-Kill. Lets get it done, America.
Comment by Matt — July 13, 2009 @ 5:49 pm
HSUS is not neutral on SB 250.. follow the money….. they have donated to Social Compassion in Legislation ( Judie Mancuso’s group who wrote and are sponsoring SB 250 Florez -D -Shafer) who has in turn donated to a few key Senators who support the bill.. it is all about the money.. in Sacramento a “neutral stance” is the same to many as a support.. as you might remember the AKC went ‘neutral” on AB 1634 until they were double crossed by Levine and his crew.. the hue and cry was fierce and they quickly went back to OPPOSE.
i wonder why it is taking the HSUS so long to ponder somethng as simple as opposing mandated surgery upon millions of pet owners.
and personally I prefer to choose grass ( roots) or astroturf.. regardless of what “source watch says I will pull this quote out.. we are becoming a “Nanny Culture — the growing fraternity of food cops, health care enforcers, anti-meat activists, and meddling bureaucrats who ‘know what’s best for you”. now that I can agree with from source watch. Our choices of all sorts of things are becoming more and more limited.. even down to the type of dog we many own and if they can keep their reproductive parts. Enough is enough.. I am off to swat about a million flies, have a glass of wine.(or two). and eat a big fat juicy rare burger.. I would smoke a big cigar.. but it isn’t that kind of party!
Comment by bestuvall — July 13, 2009 @ 7:50 pm
OT but really not. I’ve just heard that the Pro SB 250 phone machine cough cough phone banks cough, is up and running hard to push SB 250 through committee
It’s time to flood the phones, burn the faxes out and take no prisoners
Forward from a leg list:
PLEASE CROSSPOST WIDELY
A contact on the Appropriations Committee has just told us that, until today, calls in opposition to SB250 have outnumbered the ones in support but that dramatically turned around today. Mancuso’s minions are flooding the committee members with calls and faxes. We MUST do the same! Please get everyone you know to call and fax.
And, if you possibly can, come to the Capitol, Room 4202, for the hearing at 9 am Wednesday morning.
Geraldine
* * *
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS:
Democratic Party Members:
Assemblyman Kevin De Leon, Chair
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 2114
Sacramento, CA 94249-0045
Phone: (916) 319-2045
Fax: (916) 319-2145
Assemblymember.deLeon@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Tom Ammiano
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 2175
Sacramento, CA 94249-0013
Phone: (916) 319-2013
Fax: (916) 319-2113
Assemblymember.Ammiano@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Charles M. Calderon
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 2117
Sacramento, CA 94249-0058
Phone: (916) 319-2058
Fax: (916) 319-2158
Assemblymember.Calderon@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Joe Coto
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 2013
Sacramento, CA 94249-0023
Phone: (916) 319-2023
Fax: (916) 319-2123
Assemblymember.coto@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Mike Davis
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 2160
Sacramento, CA 94249-0048
Phone: (916) 319-2048
Fax: (916) 319-2148
Assemblymember.Davis@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 5136
Sacramento, CA 94249-0039
Phone: (916) 319-2039
Fax: (916) 319-2139
Assemblymember.fuentes@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Isadore Hall III
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 6025
Sacramento, CA 94249-0052
Phone: (916) 319-2052
Fax: (916) 319-2152
Assemblymember.Hall@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman John A. Perez
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 3160
Sacramento, CA 94249-0046
Phone: (916) 319-2046
Fax: (916) 319-2146
Assemblymember.John.Perez@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 4126
Sacramento, CA 94249-0014
Phone: (916) 319-2014
Fax: (916) 319-2114
Assemblymember.Skinner@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Jose Solorio
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 2196
Sacramento, CA 94249-0069
Phone: (916) 319-2069
Fax: (916) 319-2169
Assemblymember.solorio@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Tom Torlakson
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 5160
Sacramento, CA 94249-0011
Phone: (916) 319-2011
Fax: (916) 319-2111
Assemblymember.Torlakson@assembly.ca.gov
(Republican Party Members)
Assemblyman Jim Nielsen, Vice Chair
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 6031
Sacramento, CA 94249-0002
Phone: (916) 319-2002
Fax: (916) 319-2102
Assemblymember.Nielsen@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Michael Duvall
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 4139
Sacramento, CA 94249-0072
Phone: (916) 319-2072
Fax: (916) 319-2172
(916) 319-2072
Assemblymember.Duvall@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblywoman Diane L. Harkey
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 4177
Sacramento, CA 94249-0073
Phone: (916) 319-2073
Fax: (916) 319-2173
Assemblymember.Harkey@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblyman Jeff Miller
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 3147
Sacramento, CA 94249-0071
Phone: (916) 319-2071
Fax: (916) 319-2171
Assemblymember.Miller@assembly.ca.gov
Assemblywoman Audra Strickland
State Capitol, P.O. Box 942849, Room 4208
Sacramento, CA 94249-0037
Phone: (916) 319-2037
Fax: (916) 319-2137
Assemblymember.strickland@assembly.ca.gov
Comment by JenniferJ — July 13, 2009 @ 8:05 pm
in between phone calls.. this came in:
• $HSUS gave $10,000. to SCiL last year
• PeTA gave $5,000. to SCiL last year
• Compassion for Animals gave $30,000. to SCiL last year
• SCiL gave $1,500. to Steinberg’s re-election campaign for 2010
• SCiL gave $10,000. to Steinberg’s 527 PAC
• SCiL gave $$ to Florez, but would have to look up details. Probably gave others too.
FOLLOW THE MONEY..
Comment by bestuvall — July 13, 2009 @ 11:08 pm
most of the mailboxes are FULL.. time to FAX.. no on SB 250..Thank you
Comment by bestuvall — July 13, 2009 @ 11:11 pm
HSUS’ donation was made LAST YEAR. They were huge supporters of AB 1634 LAST YEAR. Apparently things have changed. Which you’d think would be something we’d want to mention, that almost none of the big name supporters of AB 1634 have come out for SB 250 — not the CVMA, not HSUS. Insisting HSUS is “supersekritly backing SB 250” hurts US, not them. It’s completely bass ackwards.
Comment by Christie Keith — July 13, 2009 @ 11:26 pm
The HSUS donation to Judie Mancuso’s pro-MSN group SCiL that I have seen documented evidence for happened in 2007. I have not seen evidence of a 2008 or 2009 donation from HSUS to SCiL.
Comment by LauraS — July 14, 2009 @ 6:25 am
Hey.. I am glad the HSUS is staying out of it. ( for now).but I don’t trust them for one minute.. nor do I think that when Wayne is visiting “behind closed doors” in Sac that he isn’t pushing this bill even if the HSUS is “neutral”.
Comment by bestuvall — July 14, 2009 @ 10:06 am