[mod hat] You've all been generally well-behaved here, though a few of you have gotten in the general vicinity of the line (though still on the right side) since this has been going a while. Keep doing what you've been doing--this can be a sensitive topic, but this is an interesting discussion and I'd rather not have to growl and send this to the Debate Board. :)[/modliness]
ahoteinrun wrote:
Pudding wrote:
It's bad that I saw this while I was having a conversation with my roommate about maybe being a pescatarian for a while, isn't it?
ahoteinrun wrote:
What exactly is the right way?
If you were doing a campaign to gain general knowledge about the decimation of ocean life how would you go about doing it? Putting out reports, or papers hasn't worked, so what will? A few reports released in my province a few weeks ago barely garnered a mention in the paper.
What will it take? (too little too late IMO anyways, but whatever).
I'd do some advertisements that represent the problem well visually, rather than loud invitations to ridicule. Most people who know about overfishing at least lay off the orange roughy and the Pacific salmon; it's probably worthwhile to increase the size of that group before you break out the weird terminology. A TV commercial (or even an online banner ad) about the depletion of oceanic resources could direct people to a website with more facts about the issue and what they can do about it.
This is just kind of weird and silly and designed to appeal to 11 year-old non-Alaskan girls.
Money money money money... Putting something on a website is cheaper. And how many people pay attention to commercials? For getting the word out, the world wide web, does a wonderful and frankly cheap job. And this is at least, getting the word out there, ridicule or not. It is absolutely ridiculous. And yet... it's working. To get the spread and breadth of advertisement that this is, I doubt they could have done it with serious articles.
And I hate myself right now for defending PETA. But I think I get why they're doing what they did.
Not necessarily TV ads; well-made, attention-grabbing banner ads for a good website with well-represented factual information (and a silly attention-grabbing slogan, as this is PeTA we're talking about) could do the job just as well. The card Siniri mentioned sounds brill (though an OK-to-eat is really not PeTA's MO; they could still come up with something) and materials like that that actually educate, rather than just saying, "Don't eat fishies! They're fluffy!" will do far more good.
I think that the "sea kittens" campaign, where effective, is more likely to feed into the issue of people just caring about "cute animals" rather than getting them to educate themselves on the depletion of oceanic resources. They might develop a wider view of "cuteness" though...and I will acknowledge that that is a start.