Mind Bombs and Meat

In reading DeLuca's essay on mind bombs and what they aim to accomplish, I kept thinking of a certain organization's print ads that do NOT aim to enact political change. This organization does the same things with their ads that most other companies try to do - attract a broad audience. They use barely clothed women and catchy slogans. Yet, unlike Greenpeace or Amnesty International or some other NPO that works for the greater good of the world and is almost unanimously supported and respected, this particular organization is hated by many who do not support it's ideals...


This organization is PETA, an often radical animal rights advocacy group. The ad above, featuring a fully nude Roselyn Sanchez, is just one of a number of ads in PETA's "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" campaign. But why does an ad campaign such as this one, featuring such gorgeous women like Ms. Sanchez less than clothed, fail. It is because of the message behind the campaign. The campaign featured in DeLuca's essay that dealt with Soviet whaling was encouraging us to help save the whales. PETA is also trying to help save animals, but they are doing it at the expense of other people's way of life. Who are they to tell us not to wear fur? Who are they to tell us that "meat is murder?" It is a known fact that people don't like being told what to do, and people probably like being told what NOT to do even less. Furthermore, while the whaling ad and fur ads both point to an enemy, it is interesting to note who the enemies are. The Greenpeace ad points to the whalers as the enemies, the PETA ad points to...wait, what?...yep, it points to YOU. Kinda hard to get behind an advertisement that paints yourself as the villain, isn't it? So while both ads are similar in a sense, they are different in their motivation and their target, which leads me to believe that is why one succeeds and the other fails.