Have a Good NEWS

Peta recent announcement caused outrage at the mockery of campaigns for charities that work with victims of physical violence. Have you gone too far?

Last week, PETA animal rights campaign caused a stir with an online ad that suggested you do not have to eat meat to be a man of blood red. The proof? A girl with a necklace as a result of injuries caused by her boyfriend vegan who could "put a tantric porn star." But it's just indignation of the audience to convey a message?

Peter Stanford, broadcaster and director of the Foundation Longford

Yes, they have to use shock tactics, and perhaps we need to do more. The two "causes" that have worked in most - prison reform and the rights of disabled people, are good examples where measured, rational, sensible tactics gave lean. Now everyone knows why the prison is not "work", but still allow our politicians to lock up more people than anywhere else in Europe. This is shocking. Why not take some of that, and a rear impact, so that people stand up and be careful. The fact that we are talking about PETA ad shows the effectiveness of this approach is that something happens to make this organization and its message opposite to that-I-think-of-that-morning to the top of the. Program

Alex Clark, journalist and writer

Well, we might be talking, but I'm not sure we can say how this will result in a person) to put their hands in their pockets or b) take over , so to speak, animals on behalf of the oppressed of the world. In fact, I suppose it's most likely give a boost to a lot of discussion around the middle, and much less on the message. Digital advertising "was betrothed vegan" shows a young woman with a neck brace, limping home with the groceries, no animal strictly, of course. "Jessica" suffers from a syndrome called "boyfriend was vegan and has bottomed out at me", that is so full of energy and strength is your partner for pork chops keeping your sex life leaves it looks a victim of domestic violence.

And therein lies the problem: the reason people were shocked by PETA ad is that it is essentially a parody of campaigns by charities working with victims of sexual and physical abuse. The shock tactics are one thing, but it bends the work of other organizations for their subversive really the answer

shock tactics are clearly right and wrong. Peta is a veteran here, after they have been used effectively for several years to rise well above the animal welfare charity - in terms of impact and public fundraising that goes with it. And yes, it is very close to the candle in the wind. What they are difficult here is the popular stereotype that vegans are insipid, pale and weak. They are mixed in a fashionable patina of sex, probably to attract a younger audience. Whether sexual violence is questionable parody. You could easily argue that simply adopts the language of sex movies hot. I am not well placed to judge, but not immediately feel the ad is to minimize the important issue of sexual abuse.

can be unpleasant, but to meet the widest point: Charities, like businesses, the need to "build a reference "for the association is not immediately in the public mind between the name of charity and the theme. Think about animal welfare, Peta. And this organization has been very successful. Once the link is established, can be exploited to make a case more measured and detailed. But shock tactics have also clocked up some notable victories on issues. Think about the pregnant man ad the Family Planning Association in 1970 that changed the attitude of men to their responsibility for contraception, or the many striking campaigns around drinking and driving have changed dramatically notions of what constitutes a acceptable behavior when behind the wheel of a car.