The ad intends to promote veganism and question the widespread assumption that certain species were more deserving of compassion than others. Fish, like cats and other animals, are intelligent, sensitive individuals. If you wouldn’t eat your animal companion, don’t eat sea life.
LIAM O’DELL: Back in April, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) organisation revealed it had put up a billboard advertisement in the seaside town of Cleethorpes, in Lincolnshire. The blog post announcing the advert came with a headline which made the argument that “eating a fish is like eating a cat”.
The charity wrote: “From one angle, you may see a smiling fishmonger holding a dead fish, but from another, she is holding a dead cat. “This unsettling sight has been erected by Peta to provide locals with food for thought. “Fish – like cats and other animals – are intelligent, sensitive individuals. If you wouldn’t eat your animal companion, go vegan and don’t eat sea life”…
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received several complaints calling the advert “excessively distressing”… The complainants also questioned whether the ad was “responsibly targeted”, given it was in a public place – near a fish and chip shop – where “children could see it”.
When approached by the ASA for a response as part of its investigation, Peta said the ad intended to “promote veganism by challenging the societal tendency to treat animals merely as a means of fulfilling human desires”, and that it sought to “question the widespread assumption that certain species were more deserving of compassion than others”… “that the cat’s portrayal was not graphic and had been carefully designed to minimise any risk of distress. It was not depicted with any external wounds, or other outward indicators of injury or suffering”…
In their assessment, the ASA said: “[We] acknowledged that some viewers would find the ad unsettling or distasteful. However, we considered that viewers would understand that the ad was for an animal justice charity, promoting the vegan diet, and that it aimed to challenge societal norms regarding the moral significance of meat consumption.
“We considered that the cat’s depiction was neither gruesome, nor shocking, and was unlikely to be considered particularly realistic by most viewers. On that basis, we considered that viewers, including children, were unlikely to regard the image as relatively mild”. “For that reason. We concluded that the ad was not excessively distressing, or likely to cause serious or widespread offence, and had not been irresponsibly targeted”. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEOS: