PETA always has its reputation in its controversial advertising campaigns that feature nude or semi-nude celebrities and shockingly abused women images in order to educate the public about animal rights.
Some famous campaigns include its "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" print ad series
and the recent sexy Vegetarian Superbowl TVC that is undoubtedly banned...The objective of all these rather controversial advertisements are clear in its own way (regardless of how they're ACTUALLY percieved by the public on a larger scale), that is to protect animal rights, catching audience's attention on the issue which PETA cares about, for example fur wearing and carnivorism alike. And as cliche as the purpose can be, PETA chose to deliver their message in the most outrageous way, with its bold and graphic execution throughout female nudity and abusive scenes (either in print, broadcast, or experience) appealing to the (male) audience's eyes.
hmmm, thoughts?
I mean, I get it. Sex sells. And PETA surely well-understand the power of female bodies. In fact, we all have to admit that PETA has a rather strong marketing ability as they really know the golden rule of engaging different types of audience differently. Simply check this out: Other than the mainstream PETA website, there are also PETA2 which targets young adults, PETA kids for children and PETA prime for the old folks. And they do raise more than a few eyebrows everytime they have something new coming out.
However as a critical thinker, there are still a few issues that I identify with amongst these outrageous PETA campaigns. and the main concern lies in the ratio of respect given to women verses animals.
We've seen quite a bit of commentators online having the same concern. According to homepage DAILY, an online student newspaper, "these ads get your attention but they only do so because of the sexualization and not the message. Showing someone a bare ass and a nice set of breasts does not make them into a vegetarian. PETA has increasingly shown no conscience when it comes to respect for women, or the roles that they place us in."
(Source: Pitch News)
(Source: NowPublic)
The way that PETA utilises female nudity to get attention has the tendency of degrading women's identity and making them a passive sex object or even worse. However my question to them would be, in a marketing communication perspective, if their target audience is the entire human world, then would this kind of advertising - despite its effectiveness - be suitable for all ages in the first place?
Some may argue that as PETA targets their market so carefully, there must be some ads suitable for your young kids at home.
Ironically, according to The Ten Most Controvesial Ads of 2007 reported by Stephen Whiteside, PETA's "Feeding kids meat is child abuse" ad, though not upheld, had recieved 68 complaints from the consumers by ASA as being offensive, misleading and irresponsible.
(Source: WARC - The Ten Most Controvesial Ads of 2007)
And now it has just become harder for PETA to counter all the criticisms flooding toward its politically-incorrect advertising method. Well, way to go for them.
Here's another interesting article I've found that says something about PETA's advertising stunt, have a read.
Eco Salon - When Good Causes Go Wrong: 7 Utterly Outrageous PETA Stunts
Also, here's some anti-PETA ads consumer-generated content, just for a laugh.
And finally, to balance off the angle of the article, PETA's response to the numerous criticisms toward its disgrading of females beings is that they do not base the ad campaigns on sexism but simply on what that catches the attention of the audience.
Alongside with it I have another article for you, this time written by PETA in reponse to the rejection of NBC to its sexy SuperBowl ad, which was shown previously in the post.
NBC's Sexually-Explicit Super Bowl Ad Rejection Makes Us Blush
Ha! Good call, PETA.it seems like the war between the wild and the civilised is still on...
J.
No comments:
Post a Comment