I suppose for very complex reasons, Americans tend to be more uptight and scared about nudity. However, this, I expect will gradually change. The advertising ploy is classic. "If you don't eat meat you will look sexy like me" or "young healthy, sexy people like me get their pets sterilized," which seems like a reasonable way to recruit a younger demographic. I imagine that is the demographic most influenced to your cause. The endorsement may even have some sort of subliminal sway over older, wiser people as well, since we all, whether we admit it or not, like to look at healthy human bodies.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | September 25, 2007 03:32 PM

Tasteful, perhaps, no one is contesting that. My beef (pardon the pun) is with PETA's claim that veganism is a quick-fix for weight loss. These ads seem less like they're trying to save animals and more like they're trying to sell weight loss supplements. I almost expect to see "Zantrex-3! YES!" at the top of the ads.

I'm one of those rare, elusive fat vegans who is much more interested in saving animals than fitting into my jeans, yet, it often seems like I should be ashamed of myself for not looking like Alicia Silverstone.

I understand they're trying to combat the belief that vegans are sickly, scrawny and unhealthy, but they have to realize that health comes in all shapes and sizes. I'm not helping animals less because I weigh more.

Posted by: Sarah | September 25, 2007 03:38 PM

Sarah has a good point...I've seen vegans and vegetarians in all shapes and sizes. That said, the ads are attention grabbing and that is the first rule of good advertising.

Posted by: Becca | September 25, 2007 04:24 PM

I think the sexy PETA ads turn off quite a few people who would otherwise be interested in the message. It makes it easier for some to not take PETA seriously.

At the same time, there are some people who might stumble upon animal rights through a PETA ad.

I am a PETA member of 15 years and although the ads don't bother me personally, I think these sexy ads do more harm than good for the animals PETA tries to save. I always hope the caring people who find these ads offensive decide join a more benign animal rights group instead of brushing off the entire animal movement as flaky and sensational.

Posted by: Mary | September 25, 2007 04:26 PM

Last I heard, adult women were allowed to make choices for themselves and control their own lives.

Come on, Kirsten!

Posted by: kelly | September 25, 2007 04:57 PM

Also- what we see is these ads is what we see in mainstream advertising and TV shows every day

We drive by billboards with ladies in undies

(remember the real women campaign by some soap company with ladies of different sizes in their undies? Those ads were applauded)

What's the difference?

Posted by: kelly | September 25, 2007 05:05 PM

Concerning myself - i don't find anything bad in showing a 'little bit more' for animals! Anyhow when i referred to the famous 'rather go naked' campaigns of PETA i met several times some difficulties with people here in France - they said that the campaigns are too 'naked' because of the children! For this reason i think also that PETA France got until now just lovely Eve Angeli for a naked campaign even if in France there are hosts of famous animal protectors! So let me say this: if there is an artist who is ready to campaign naked so let it be - but if an artist would like to do an ad - but not naked - Peta should accept his decision and shoot the ad with him or her being not naked! There should not happen anymore the difficulty which occurred with Britney Spears as i was told that Peta wanted to do her a naked ad and then she refused completely! In this case Peta should accept the artists decision!

Posted by: animalfriend | September 25, 2007 05:19 PM

Who would criticize an ad that helps animals?

Too sexy? If it saves one animal's life, then everyone should be applauding the ads.

Speaking of sexy, Lisa Lange....... wow!!

Posted by: Brian Linebaugh | September 25, 2007 05:28 PM

Sarah

I have several vegan friends that are not "slim", but like you, are doing the best thing for animals by not eating or wearing them. Not all vegans are "slim"; the most important thing is to be healthy. I happen to be on the slimmer side but you and I and my other vegan friends (that are not as slim) are all doing the best for animals equally. I applaud you no matter what your weight is. Compassion is the ultimate beauty.

Posted by: Ana | September 25, 2007 05:31 PM

I thought the ads, themselves, were tasteful and Alicia Silverstone's was beautifully done. I think the point made (above) that these ads prove that vegans aren't pale, pathetic little string beans is also good. But...
I do think that the ads run the risk of being sexist. I don't see Joaquin Phoenix taking off his clothes for PETA. I don't see Sir Paul streaking for PETA. And I guess the question is: what is the point of the nudity? If it's ONLY to get attention, there are other ways of doing that, ways that might carry a more serious message. It depends on what demographic you're trying to grab. People like me, who came from an era when we were very self-conscious about sexism in any form, when we were all about feminism, etc. could find it offensive. People in their 20's and 30's, though, for whom that wasn't such a big issue might feel otherwise. I do know that 20-somethings are much more easy with nudity, strippers, etc. than 50-somethings but it's not necessarily because we older types are prudes. We just had to fight stereotypes harder. So, to cut this shorter, I see nothing wrong with the ads,as such, but I would ask what point you're trying to make with the nudity and ask if that's the best way to do it. Do we want to appeal to people's libidos, or do we want to appeal to their humanity and compassion? Or both? The nude ads don't negate that latter possibility, of course, but they do distract and could possibly dilute the core issues. It does certainly grab attention,though! Thanks for asking!

Posted by: Susannah S | September 25, 2007 05:45 PM

P.S. A question: do you come away from the Dita Von Teese ad (take the first thought that comes to mind)thinking about ABC? Or about black garters? If you can honestly say ABC, then the ads are working to benefit PETA.

Posted by: Susannah S | September 25, 2007 05:48 PM

One more P.S.
I think the Jennie Garth ad conveys the PETA message much faster and probably more effectively than the nude ads. But that's just my opinion. It's all good.

Posted by: Susannah S | September 25, 2007 05:50 PM

I seem to recall the other lady in the show mentioning that this type of thing was better then throwing blood over other peoples´s fur coats. Whatever the tactics Peta is doing a fantastic job keeping the whole issue in the public eye!

Posted by: Maureen | September 25, 2007 06:10 PM

I absolutely love both ads, showcasing stunning women who are not afraid to take a stand for animal rights. Bravo to PETA and the staff. I applaud your talent, creativity and hard work, these ads have impact!

Posted by: Lynn Schlosser | September 25, 2007 06:11 PM

There are a lot of self centred people that just don’t care, if the ads get them thinking about something apart from themselves (more specifically animal rights) then good!

Posted by: Aran | September 25, 2007 06:21 PM

They make me uneasy, because I do think they alienate a lot of women. (Though I know of some who really like them.)

I'd appreciate it if men would take their clothes off for PETA once in a while...or if the ads would feature more "real-sized" (and still attractive) women. Then it would seem more fair.

Posted by: Canaduck | September 25, 2007 07:04 PM

I personally dislike sexy ads and nudity becase they seem vulgar and are not conductive to "family values." I know that nowadays most of the media has nothing to do with family values but It reallyb hurts to see them die (especially when their message is so important).

If I were a parent, I wouldn't show my kid many of the PETA ads becuase some are not very kid friendly.

I love PETA and I'm proud to be a member. Sometimes ,however, I wish they wouldsnt take off their clothes so often. There's got to be mopre ways to get our messages across more tastefully.

Also, ex/porn stars are not the best role models.

Posted by: Anne | September 25, 2007 07:13 PM

If it helps the animals, do whatever it takes! I think PETA knows what they are doing.

Posted by: Lisa | September 25, 2007 07:40 PM

I have been a serious feminist for 25 years now, and I think the ads are fabulous! Strong independent women who control their own lives and care about animals and the world are the best!!! I would LOVE to see men do these ads as well--George Clooney, Leo, Ben Afleck,and etc.!!!

Posted by: Kelley | September 25, 2007 07:48 PM

I, personally, do not have a problem with the ads. If they can get a message across then go for it.

Posted by: Brandon Harris | September 25, 2007 08:24 PM

I think from an advertising point of view, that it takes more creative thought to come up with an intriguing campaign.

It seems like the easy thing to do is get famous people naked or close to it and call that a effective campaign.

I would like to see more creativity and less nudity in the ads. I am nowhere near prude, I just want PETA's image to be more reasonable to the people they need to reach the most.

Posted by: Stacy P | September 25, 2007 10:07 PM

I've been a fan of Dita's for many years now, but what really struck me as strange about her ad is why PETA would hire a spokesmodel who is known for wearing furs. I've read her own endorsements of fur-wearing. Hell, I wear fur and feathers too, but I wouldn't expect PETA to get mixed up in that. :/

Posted by: Mina | September 25, 2007 11:23 PM

My big issue is as follows:
Isn't it more demeaning to women if we tell women like Alicia Silverstone that they CAN'T show their bodies on TV? This seems liberating in that these women CHOSE to take these photos to benefit a great cause. I don't see the cause for fuss.

Posted by: Kat R. | September 26, 2007 12:11 AM

I am 13 years old and a strong feminist. I didn't really know too much about PETA before I glimsped this ad. All I knew was that they were for the animals, and that was cool with me! I love animals and am all for saving them, but.....both of these ads absolutley disgusted me! SO this is what you have sunk to PETA?!?!?!? Now all you can do is sell sex? This was extremely offensive to me! Sure, there's no harm in being beautiful, fit, and a healthy vegetarian, but you don't need to SHOW EVERYBODY! Can't you just admire yourself? Trust me....the whole world doesn't want to see.
Also, showing women that becoming vegetarian or vegan will make you healthy and slim is a total stereotype! Sure, it may work for some poeple, but not all!
I am extemely upset by this. As teens, we watch a fair amount of tv, and i can't express how furious i am when a racy, exploiting ad comes on the tv. ARE THESE THE ROLE MODELS YOU WANT US TO HAVE?!?!?! Is this the only thing women are good for?!?! OUR BODIES!?!? For that's the message you send to me in by this ad.
No, it's not tastful; it's vulgar.
No, it's not right to exploit women just for money.
HOW DARE YOU?

I know you must be thinking; "O she's just a stupid teenager! Kids these days!"
But i leave you with this.... The youth of a nation is a reflection of the adult culture. We watch you and learn from all of you. YOU MAKE US WHAT WE ARE. So..... what do you want us to be? GIve us role models...we'll follow.
Thank you PETA. You gave us a couple of strippers to look up to. Hope you can live with what we become.

Posted by: Jenn | September 26, 2007 12:51 AM

Amazing job (as always)! PETA does an wonderful job with advertising. After all...do you see them discussing HSUS ads on TV?

Posted by: Jason Levy | September 26, 2007 01:10 AM

what does it say when the most sucessful publicity peta has had over the years is when women take off their close for your cheap publicity stunts? for most men, do you really think they care about peta's animal rights message and extreme agenda or do they just want to see some t& a? and how many women do you alienate by the casual use of nudity?

Posted by: steve | September 26, 2007 01:17 AM

A fact that's been lost here is that, as far as I can tell, women are more likely to become vegetarian/vegan than men (no I don't have statistics at the moment, just experience).

These ads make men take notice. If they weren't thinking about vegetarianism before, they have at least seen the word now. If you don't believe me, just one copy of Alicia's ad has been viewed 857,763 times on Youtube as of this post.

Posted by: DailyVegEditor | September 26, 2007 03:29 AM

Speaking only for myself: the image of a woman in a corset and stiletto heels who was recently divorced from Marilyn Manson would make me think twice about reproducing. However, it does not make me want to go out and spay my cat.

Posted by: adrian | September 26, 2007 09:46 AM

I think PETA's continued emphasis on nudity/sex is evidence of lack of imagination. I imagine that when PETA staffers fail to come up with a creative way to present an important issue, they say, "Heck, let's throw a naked woman at the issue." It was one thing to use nudity in the anti-fur campaign, but now it "sells" every message, from veganism to the circus. It's boring!

Posted by: Len | September 26, 2007 11:05 AM

Sex sells. Period.

Posted by: MeL | September 26, 2007 12:33 PM

I think the ads need to reach out to more cultures and levels in society. How is an inner city kid who eats mcdonalds all day supposed to relate to Dita? Also, what is a 'cheap' and filling alternative to a $1 burger? Should have some latinos, africans, men on these ads. Groups who are heavy into meat with some direction on how to change - where to get info, etc...

Posted by: JustAThought | September 26, 2007 12:50 PM

We got definitely three Steve on these blogs: the good one, then the bad and now the ugly!

Posted by: Old Spiderwoman | September 26, 2007 01:33 PM

Jenn, that was an excellent post. I am astonished beyond words.

However, let me point out something to you. First and foremost, yes, I am against the exploitation of women for money. However, Alicia Silverstone chose to take off her clothes for this ad.

Since she chose to do this, then, it is not exploitation. Also, nudity is beautiful.

I do not want to write a whole off-topic post about nudity. I think what Alicia Silverstone did was wonderful.

PETA needs to do all they can to get the word out in order to save animals.

I do not think that PETA is exploiting women.

Posted by: Brandon Harris | September 26, 2007 02:27 PM

I think the ads are AWESOME! And I saw that two days ago PETA was #4 on Yahoo's Top 100 Searches! That is really great. Thanks for your wonderful creative campaign team at PETA! The animals depend on getting the attention they otherwise wouldn't receive.

Posted by: Curtis | September 26, 2007 02:32 PM

Jenn-

No, of course we don't want you to grow up to be a stripper! Actually, Dita's ad strikes me as humorous - funny, really - not sexist. It harks back to a bygone era, and past concepts of beauty, as does Dita's entire act (which I think is extremely creative and thought-provoking).

If you want to see a fully clothed, age-appropriate version of PETA, please go to peta2.com - it is great. If you are willing to cry for animals, watch the video "Free Me" which is linked from the peta2 site.

Posted by: Steve | September 26, 2007 03:14 PM

I wish our society got more excited about ideas than about naked women, but alas that's not our world.

How can it be acceptable to use women's sex appeal to promote drunkenness but not acceptable to use it to promote compassion and justice?

Posted by: Bill | September 26, 2007 03:34 PM

The only thing I find offensive about these ads is the use of Dita VT. Her endorsement of fur as a fashion accessory is well documented - even in her own book ('...Art Of The Teese').
I am a big Burlesque fan, and a keen PETA supporter, but Dita and animal rights are not good bedfellows.

Posted by: Mike | September 26, 2007 04:00 PM

There is absolutely NOTHING offensive about any of PETA's ads. What's offensive is the cruel and painful torture of innocent animals, and whatever it takes to bring widespread attention to this hideous cruelty is all for the good.

Posted by: Fred | September 26, 2007 04:11 PM

There was a time when I used to be in the camp that didn't care for the nudie PETA ads. But not anymore.

As you know, there is an insurmountable amount of animal cruelty out there that needs focusing on. If it takes a risque PETA ad to get people's attention, well then, SO BE IT.

At the end of the day, I am happier knowing that PETA is making a huge difference for animals - with whatever means necessary - and getting people to think twice about the plight of animals.

One case in point is the current Alicia Silverstone TV ad. I believe that by pulling the ad, Comcast Cable gave it MORE attention than if they hadn't. Yes, it wasn't cool that Comcast chose not to air the ad. But nonetheless, that's what gave the ad more press. Doing this made people take note of all the controversy!

So thanks, Comcast Cable, for all the free publicity and for doing our work for us! :)

Posted by: Veronica Soto | September 26, 2007 04:43 PM

The point is, people who saw this ad are now talking. Weather negative or positive about the nudity, people are talking, which means they are also thinking, and thinking with information brings change.
Way to go PETA, Keep up the good work!

Posted by: Holly | September 26, 2007 04:54 PM

Old Spiderwoman:

Thank you for pointing out the muliplicity of Steves. I'll leave it to you to figure out which one I was before now, but going forward I will be .......

Posted by: The Good Steve | September 26, 2007 05:24 PM

I would just like to point out (and possibly be the devil's advocate here) that I am a Mormon vegan--and most of my friends are Mormon or atleast some form of Christian/Catholic. Most of the people I have met that would be willing to become vegan/veggie and join PETA to save animals have been turned off by these ads. We are not all teenage boys looking for a good dose of porn.
I think I speak for all others like me and my friends when I say, we put porn (etc) as far away as possible from us.

Posted by: Sophia | September 26, 2007 06:17 PM

So what you think is men look at alicia and want to look like that? Don't think so. Admire yes, emulate no.
Thanks for the view though.

Posted by: rojo | September 26, 2007 06:29 PM

I am offended by the nudity or near-nudity in the PETA ads. I love animals and want animal rights, but why can't we do it tastefully to reach all levels of society? I have this argument when the PETA vendors call me to ask why I am no longer a PETA member. I respect PETA's work but they should be able to advertise in such a way that any person of any age should be able to read and watch their ads. Be smart about what you're trying to do! It's a great cause!

Posted by: Jane Rubino | September 26, 2007 07:15 PM

lets see, its ok to show a 13 year old a dolphin getting its throat cut or a chicken being boiled alive.. but people freak out over a half exposed human breast...

I say it every time I go to the zoo...they got the wrong animals locked up.

Posted by: Dom | September 26, 2007 07:28 PM

"No, it's not right to exploit women just for money."

Strippers exploit men for their money.

Posted by: DailyVegEditor | September 26, 2007 10:37 PM

The ads are great. I'm a PETA member of 10 years and couldn't be more pleased with PETA's campaign ads for animals. I am a fit vegan female and have no problem with ladies using their sexy charms to get a VERY IMPORTANT message out here. We all know that sexy/naked gets attention and that's what the animals need. Plus it goes to show how hip we vegan animal activists are. I applaud Dita and Alicia's commitment to helping animals as well. Keep up the good work!

Posted by: vegan4animals | September 26, 2007 11:45 PM

Jenn, I'm much more concerned about the fact that you think that being a feminist means that you can control women and the choices they make, as well as be judgmental.

Maybe you need to worry first about being a human?

Posted by: kelly | September 27, 2007 03:12 AM

Why is Dita so sure that neutered animals are to be preferred to euthanizing? Is sex only important to humans? Don't animals have a right to family values?

Euthanasia is the instant and painless killing of animals. Spaying and neutering means lifelong mutilation, inducing strong behavioural changes. It seems a bit bewildering that the first is considered to be unquestionably preferred.

Posted by: Dorbeck | September 27, 2007 06:01 AM

I do not think either ad is offensive to women and I love the Alicia Silverstone ad because it was done with taste and people get the message easily. The ABC ad does not and I and everyone else, just don't get it at all. The ad makes no sense. What is the connection between that picture and spaying and neutering? Nothing, thats what. How is that telling people to spay and neuter and educating the public of the plight of homeless animals? And if you have to explain it to people, the ad is not working. It makes a mockery of the message, PETA and every animal advocate who is trying to help people understand the importance of spay and neuter and the pet overpopulation epidemic. PETA thinks its creating controversy and therefore the message is heard, but they are so wrong. It makes people laugh at PETA, ignore the message and further detaches mainstream America from animal causes. I have to explain these stupid PETA ads all the time to family,friends and co-workers and am embarassed all the time by PETA's assanine ads and actions. I wish people did not associate every animal advocate and vegan with PETA. I tell people look to the Humane Society of the United States for real messages and real progress for animals. They are smart, tasteful, influential, and they do not alienate the rest of America. They reach many more people than PETA, and people respect HSUS, they laugh at PETA and PETA is becoming a thorn in the side of the Animal Rights movement. PETA, step aside and let the real people who want to get real and important messages out there more creatively and really make a statement. Stop making a mockery of animal rights. HSUS is creative and you should follow their lead. I love the actual progress and the issues PETA tackles and at times they do help make positive changes for animals, but their ads are just totally ridiculous and everyone knows it.

Posted by: Nina Perino | September 27, 2007 06:58 AM

dailyveg, I think it is unfair to call alicia a stripper, she did do it for nothing, didn't she?

Posted by: rojo | September 27, 2007 09:45 AM

and i am the common sense steve who loves to remind petaphiles that there are 2 sides to every story. the peta side which is extreme and radical and the majority side that realizes that , yes we demand the best possible care and treatment of animals but that animal use is a real part of this world....
the world's population and businesses does want to be told by the rich, screaming, harrassing and threatening peta minority how to run their lives.... what to eat, what to wear and how to enjoy their free time.... and no nudity, no low life x basketball players, no porn stars or no hypocritical show business stars are going to change that.....

Posted by: steve | September 27, 2007 10:32 AM

I am so sick of the "she chose to pose naked" argument. Most porn stars choose their careers as do most strippers. Does that mean they're feminist? Does that mean that their activities advance the cause of women? Of course not. I don't like peta ads, despite being a staunch veggie, because they are sexist(where are the naked men?), unrealistic(perfect bodies), and cheesy. They're also pretty unimaginative. Let's try something new!

Posted by: nina | September 27, 2007 10:56 AM

Jane-
I think PETA IS being smart about their advertising. I think the Dita approach is more complex than the critics are giving them credit for. Some folks can't seem to see beyond the skin and makeup and sex appeal. For instance, O'reilly's criticism included questioning the "teacher" element. For one thing, children in grammer school aren't going to even give this ad second glance. But it goes beyond being a mere "sexy teacher" message. It has a slightly condescending but not insulting quality that's directed toward adults and, specifically middle-aged white men, as portrayed in the ad itself. It's kind of making fun of the fact that it takes a woman in lingerie to get the attention of someone who otherwise may not even consider the very serious matters involved in humane animal treatment. I see all the horrible things that people do to animals wrapped up in this beautiful stunning package as a way to slyly persuade this audience to pay attention. Of course, most people would be turned off and repulsed by what they could show as a result of overbreeding and abandonment, etc. Maybe I'm over analyzing, but I think its a brilliant approach. Sly, sexy, powerful...and simple. ABC!

Posted by: Doug | September 27, 2007 11:50 AM

Jane-
I think PETA IS being smart about their advertising. I think the Dita approach is more complex than the critics are giving them credit for. Some folks can't seem to see beyond the skin and makeup and sex appeal. For instance, O'reilly's criticism included questioning the "teacher" element. For one thing, children in grammer school aren't going to even give this ad second glance. But it goes beyond being a mere "sexy teacher" message. It has a slightly condescending but not insulting quality that's directed toward adults and, specifically middle-aged white men, as portrayed in the ad itself. It's kind of making fun of the fact that it takes a woman in lingerie to get the attention of someone who otherwise may not even consider the very serious matters involved in humane animal treatment. I see all the horrible things that people do to animals wrapped up in this beautiful stunning package as a way to slyly persuade this audience to pay attention. Of course, most people would be turned off and repulsed by what they could show as a result of overbreeding and abandonment, etc. Maybe I'm over analyzing, but I think its a brilliant approach. Sly, sexy, powerful...and simple. ABC!

Posted by: Doug | September 27, 2007 11:51 AM

These advertisements are effective on the people who feel celebrities have some sort of social credibility. I don't imagine most of us would like to style our lives after these people if we thought about it for a moment. Sure, we would all like to be rich and sexy, but the social disaster these people often are do not make me want to follow their lead. I suppose I am in the minority because I am not entertained by brainless reality shows or comedy sitcoms with fake laugh tracks. I am proud to say I am out of the loop on that. In essence, these adds are good for the average, media driven, brainless person. PETA certainly didn't invent this strategy, though as it is the contemporary norm.

As for the obese vegan. I expect you may be expecting me to say, "ah hah, see meat eating doesn't make you heavy." No, that wouldn't make sense at all. The only thing that causes obesity is eating more calories than you burn... If you eat nothing but
donuts you can lose weight. Two donuts three times a day and you will lose weight. You'll still be a vegan, but you will be a grumpy one because you'll be hungry all the time. Many of the plant based foods are very easy to digest (especially processed wheat and corn products) so they are quickly gone from your stomach. In fact, some weight loss medicines cause delayed gastric emptying. If you can choose more foods that
keep you fuller longer you can help to avoid intractable feelings of hunger. That's why Atkins works for weight loss (I don't advocate Atkins). When you eat foods more challenging to digest like fats and high protein food, you don't get hungry as quickly. Like anything, balance is the most important strategy.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | September 27, 2007 12:42 PM

It makes sense in a way, but remember, Jesus does not use sex to sell the Gospel, no matter its importance, for the sex approach is evil. Again, it makes sense in getting some attention and all, but for me it is a turn-off and it is not the model Jesus used to get a good message to people. Can someone really change and care for animals because they see some "sexy" or "naked" or so forth? Has anyone actually changed to help animals because of "naked" and "sexy" ads and not the facts? Well, even if they did, or maybe it got their attention to the facts, it is still harmful to society in other ways. And again, look at Jesus, for no matter how important his message, he would not be tempted to try to use methods like this, offered by the devil, to try to get people to pay attention to Him and His gospel. There is something else in spirit behind these ads. This stuff is foul. It should not have this carnal stuff but just trying to do good as caring Christians making a respectable case without this influence of sexual depravity getting a place in it.

Posted by: WWJD | September 27, 2007 01:50 PM

Anne writes:
If I were a parent, I wouldn't show my kid many of the PETA ads because some are not very kid friendly.
_____________________________
To Anne, I say there's no need to fret. That's why there's petakids.com. This is the website I use to pull animal info. for my 10-yr. old godchild (which I am very happy to say is quite sensitive toward animals, especially due to all the materials and tips that PETA offers to educate kids). She was so excited to see Hillary Duff on the cover of PETA's Grrr! Kids Bite Back magazine!

I say, there's something for everyone when it comes to PETA:
You've got the attention grabbing nudie ads :) for those that need something extra to divert their attention our way.

You've got all the informative materials, leaflets, videos, etc. (with not a nudie body in sight - well, at least not human) that inform the public of the animal issues; one such leaflet is what caught my eye at the age of 16 and there was no looking back!

You've got the kid-friendly website, materials and ads that are geared toward young minds. The young minds we are hoping to influence before the possibility of them turning into adults that are barbaric toward animals (i.e. Michael Vick, etc).

So I say, GO PETA! YOU'RE DOING A SUPERB JOB!

Posted by: V. Soto | September 27, 2007 02:55 PM

Alicia Silverstone fantastic very cool you make congratulations...

Posted by: JOSE GILBERTO | September 27, 2007 03:18 PM

Kelly - you're going to attack a 13 year old girl for being opposed to the nude ads? Do you really think a 13 year old is trying to tell women what to do? As for "being human", why don't you try it instead of jumping on a kid for expressing her opinion?

Mel: yeah, sex sells, but what are we "selling" here?
What's the relationship between going naked and caring about animal rights?

Holly:yes, people are talking but what are they saying?
I have no problem with the nudity, per se, but I do wonder how effective it is in "selling" the very serious message that animals are being used and abused and that veganism/vegetarianism is one answer that works. You have to do more than just attract attention. Maybe it's time for PETA to try a few different tactics, too?

Posted by: Susannah S | September 27, 2007 03:59 PM

PETA has done MANY types of campaigns in the war against animal abuse. Martha Stewart was involved in one of their campaigns against the use of fur in clothing. How many people do you think would be blogging about Martha if she were on one of the PETA files posts today? While the campaign was informative, it was not very controversial.

The "bottom" line is, PETA has the Alicia Silverstone type of ads because people respond to them. These types of ads provoke a lot of discussion, and though some may just look at them for the sex appeal, others will start thinking about what the campaign is trying to promote.

These ads are quite tasteful, and they are far less offensive than anything children see on television, including advertising and news programs. Lighten up!

Way to go PETA!

Posted by: Michele | September 27, 2007 04:24 PM

Hi Mike,

I know that Dita has been seen in fur in the past, but here are our thoughts on this issue: We'll often work with a celebrity on an issue that they feel comfortable supporting, whether its promoting spaying/neutering or speaking out against products tested on animals. The celebrity may not be an animal rights activist, but their contribution to any of our campaigns is appreciated and we like to commend them for taking a step in the right direction. We have worked with a long list of former fur wearers who eventually had a change of heart about wearing real fur, including Mary Tyler Moore, Anna Nicole Smith, Martha Stewart and Christy Turlington.  

Often, a celebrity gets involved with one issue and then learns more about other issues over time. For example, Alicia Silverstone wasn't a vegetarian when we first began working with her. Now, she's a strict vegan and talks about her vegan diet and animal rights in just about every interview. Making the transition to a vegan lifestyle is a gradual process, and we're happy to work with celebrities on even the most introductory levels. We hope, as you do, that eventually they'll make the transition.  

-Jack

Posted by: Jack | September 27, 2007 05:35 PM

common sense steve,
The world is changing as it always has. Tobacco growers are now given moneys not to grow tobacco but other crops instead, easing out tobacco. We dont ride in buggy's any longer, (unless we are Amish) but ride in cars, which are also changing.
Meat eating and drinking milk is big business. In the future meat and milk business will be phased out just as the tobacco growers are being phased out now.
The world is changing and big business changes too.

Posted by: Holly | September 27, 2007 08:12 PM

Hi Susannah S, This ad is only one of thousands of ads promoting vegetarianism/vegan ism as a better way of life.
This ad did not just open the door to a better way of life for all living beings, but open many doors, like women's rights, animal rights, freedom of speech, and Jesus. This talk is good as we are all thinking, about many things. Its good to think, and talk about it.
Peta has worked so very hard to get the word out on many platforms. I think insead of bashing them, because some dont like this platform, we should be grateful for there boldness to save the animal's the earth, and us in anyway they can.

Posted by: Holly | September 27, 2007 08:52 PM

The thing is, Jack, that it's just bizarre. I totally get it - sexy draws attention. Fine. Fun. Clever.

But somehow protecting animals with sex is just...creepy. Not that you guys are TRYING to make a strange message, but I think on a subconscous level I expect campaigns to be clever, interesting, but sex just seems out of place here.

Again, I get it. Fun, sexy. But with animal rights? I think the average non animal-rights person may see it as odd.

Posted by: Maya | September 27, 2007 09:44 PM

The lightedhearted and sexy ads are a welcome diversion from the sadness and rage that is very hard to bare. Anyone who is offended by the photo of Alicia Silverstone, that darling sweet girl from "Clueness" needs to have their head examined. The other ad "Dita" is a little more complicated. However, I totally get it. I totally get the humor and it is completely understandable why the people at PETA need these playful distractions. Is it effective? It seems to me that it is. It is planting a seed to a targeted audience, Afterall Porn stars and porn watchers are people too. Also, it seems to me that PETA is well rounded, it is a great big world out there and trying to please everyone isn't easy. So if you are offended start your own organization. I try to reach out to the Christian community. It's so frustrating, everytime you go to church they want you for ice cream, lunch, picnics, roasts, ect. The Bible is being misinterpreted. Sex is not evil, but torturing animals is evil. To WWJD dear God I feel sorry for you. You have been victimized by misinformation and you are hurting the cause of Christ. King Solomon and King David had hundreds of lovers. You can have one lover. that you are married to and have wrong negative sex. And you can have hundreds of lovers like King David and be a person after God's own heart as he is described in the Bible.

Posted by: Kimberly Smith | September 28, 2007 02:25 AM

holly... "the meat andmilk business will be phased out." which vegan crap are you smoking??

and yes the world is constantly changing but the one thing that will never change is that the world's population does not want to be told how to run their lives......

Posted by: steve | September 28, 2007 08:07 AM

@Jack:
Sorry, I really can't accept your reasoning for using a confirmed fur lover in PETA's ad campaign. Were there really no animal loving 'celebrities' you could use instead? Alicia becoming a vegan (for how long?) and Dita promoting fur are quite, quite different issues. Can you reasonably conceive this happening with any other emotive charities (Gary Glitter promoting Childline, anyone?) ?
I find it VERY hard to reconcile one week receiving an horrific PETA fur farm video, and the next week learn that you are paying fur wearers for their services.
Until PETA can get their priorities straight and start to become a little less confused about where their allegiances should lie, I will have to review my monthly donation.

Posted by: Mike | September 28, 2007 09:24 AM

I don't really see a problem with them. I mean, ads sell shampoo, body wash, make-up, and almost anything else using the sex-appeal of half naked women to grab your attention, why not animal rights? At the same time like others have said I worry slightly the message will get construed if wrong people see it and will turn them off. My suggestion is just placement. Place the sexy ads in men's magazines, Cosmo, etc. but not ads for Better Parenting magazines or people who might get easily offended. I'm no advertiser though, so you do what works best.

Posted by: Brit | September 28, 2007 10:08 AM

after viewing an animal,beaten and skinned alive,and left to writhe in pain SKINLESS, i am bawling and anything that can be done to stop this disgusting cruel act i am all for it. that vid will haunt me for a long time.it was hard to watch but for ppl to understand the extent of cruelty they have to show them. poor poor little things.

Posted by: dana bryant | September 28, 2007 10:23 AM

Steve,
Wise up!
This is a quote from -United Nations Food & Agriculture Organization-
"Worldwide livestock production produces 18% of human's greenhouse gas-more than our cars, trucks, motorcycles, motorboats, jetliners and cruise ships- all forms of travel, the locus of our "addiction of fossil fuels."
Steve if we dont wise up we wont have a world with people or animals or trees or any life form on this earth.
If we dont make wise choices now, it will all be lost.

Posted by: Holly | September 28, 2007 10:37 AM

Jack, first of all, I wholeheartedly commend PETA for working with celebrities who may wear fur or eat meat. I'd think it would be much more productive than blindly condemning people equally, when some may be willing to change!

I feel as though the celebrity animal ads are really underused. The PETA featuring the athlete speaking up for pitbulls was really cool.

I don't get offended by scantily clad women, or nudes. But PETA overuses that ploy. Once in a while it's fun and relevant, like here or in the "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" idea.

But I'm seeing boobies flashed every five seconds on PETA. You guys work for animal rights. Again, creepy.

I'd say pump up the use of celebs speaking up for animals in PSAs.

Posted by: Maya | September 28, 2007 10:46 AM

mike... does the phrase

PETA = HYPOCRICY

RING A BELL

Posted by: steve | September 28, 2007 10:53 AM

I believe a more effective ad would be for one of these women to be dressed in clothes and shoes that do not use animal products and still look stunning. For me the nude thing doesn't connect to the purpose of saving animals.

Posted by: Penny | September 28, 2007 10:59 AM

Lets also remember that October 1st is
World Vegetarian Day! and Vegetarian Awareness Month.
Lets all Celebrate and bring someone along into this vegetarian/vegan way of life that will bring peace to the animals, health to us, and save our earth from Global warming!
Peta Thank you for your hard work. We are listening and learning.

Posted by: Holly | September 28, 2007 11:04 AM

In my opinion these ads do what any other ad for any other product does, they get your attention. Most ads get your attention by sex, shock value or humor. Many of PETA's ads have been succesful in all three or at least 2 of the 3. What's most important about all of this is that it starts a discussion in many places where there wouldn't have been one. It raises awareness and that is really the whole point. A lot of people, like myself, immediately turn away when we see graphic violence or blood and gore so for me these ads convey a similar message in a much more palatable way that creates much much more discussion around the issues that are important to us all!

Posted by: Alicia | September 28, 2007 11:08 AM

Steve,

I think you have summed up the main problem I have with peta. I can't stand for people to tell me how to live my life. I am not perfect and I realize that more and more every day, but I enjoy learning from examples of good living as opposed to being told I am an evil rotten murdering redneck.
I don't think I am alone. I respect people who have strong convictions. I just can't stand it when people are evangelical to the point of interfering with the rights of law abiding people, specifically the right to be left alone. I don't like it when the JW's or the Mormons show up on my door and waste my free time to tell me I need to change my ways and I don't like it when urban space aliens leave their asphalt space ship to tell me what I am doing so wrong when I go hunting and fishing on my own land.

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | September 28, 2007 11:13 AM

Dorbeck,
I had a hysterectomy 15 years ago. It was not a very painful operation and I healed up quickly. I love my life and dont feel mutilated at all. I would much rather live with out my uterus than be dead! I think animal's do just fine and have very happy healthy lives with out sex organs! I speak from experience. Wake up and see the bigger picture. To many births cause more pain and suffering and death to the unwanted pets as a result of not spaying and neutering.
Way to go Peta for bring birth control into this form with your new ad.

Posted by: Holly | September 28, 2007 11:25 AM

I think the ads are good and bad in their own sense. Yes, the ads appeal to the younger generation and they do have a profound effect on some, but to many kids my age, it turns them off completely. Being in a fairly large highschool, there's a lot of diversity among students and those who are devout PETA members tend to scare off everyone else. They pass around all kinds of flyers(Your Mommy Kills Bunnies being the most popular right now) and they put the cute little stickers around the school everywhere (I am not a nugget). A select few, including myself, agree with them and are avid animal rights activists, but the majority are scared off because they see it all as too extreme. It's like the Jehova's Witness that comes to your door and tries to shove their bible down your throat. All the ads are taken as too intense and the people are often thought of as radicals, which isn't exactly any organization wants to portray. As soon as an org is called "radical", people become scared of it because of all the stuff associated with militant organizations (Neo Nazism, anyone?) I like the ads, but most people shy away it seems.

Posted by: Meg | September 28, 2007 01:42 PM

Anybody remember when every fucking news channel showed B.Spears coming out of her car without any panties, but thankfully they smeared the image?
Are you telling me that Alicia's commercial is more offensive than B. Spears ordeal?
Come the fuck on!!!
I am so fucking sick and tired of media idolizing the half naked Paris and pantiless Lohan and drunk out of her fucking mind Tera Reid, yet when someone so freakin gorgeous like Alicia does someting so tastefully promoting animal welfare and human health, gets booted off!!!
I fucking hate what the media has done, promoting fucking retards like Paris Britney and Lohan.
We need to seriously reevaluate our priorities.

Posted by: alisa | September 28, 2007 03:30 PM

Christopher Cochran, civilized & educated men don't take pleasure in shooting tame birds, or supporting puppy mills in their state.

If you don't like being labeled a backwards redneck, then maybe find some different pursuits? Because your interests are backwards, redneck pursuits.

Posted by: kelly | September 28, 2007 03:31 PM

Dove has also a sexy campaign and no one said anything. But if we try to do the same for animals then is wrong? Come on people, relax! Those ads are beautiful!

Posted by: Iliana | September 28, 2007 03:52 PM

A lot to think about!

V. Soto: Way to go! I have children from 18 to 2 and have used all PETA's different sites. They put out the same info to target and explain to different ages.

Brit: You're right on target! I don't think PETA will put Dita's ad in Parenting, but Men's Health? You bet! Unfortunatly, most ads nowadays are half-dressed or less.(Victoria's Secret, Desparet Housewives, etc.) I personally don't like or need them, but not everone is like me. We all have different tastes! If PETA did ALL their ads the same, we'd lose most people. We are an eclectic people and need different stimulation to attract our attention.

I have been a vegetarian for almost 27 years (since I was 11) and my 3 girls have also converted. I let them choose. They chose by watching my example and by looking at info of mine. My husband and boys eat meat, but only rarely. They eat vegetarian very often and prefer most meatless meals. I hope they will change, but they need to make that change for themselves. They are very compassionate about animals. They love the PETAkids site and avidly read PETA's magazines & leaflets (that I SELECT for them to see). I think PETA should include as many different types of advertising (that aren't illegal :-) ) as possible to include as many different kinds of people. Just go for that wide audience! Not EVERYONE will like every ad. That's the point. We're different. Keep up the different ads (although MORE men would be nice!) I'm not always happy with EVERY campaign, but I participate in what I think is best for me. It's your choice, USE IT!

Posted by: Kelly B. | September 28, 2007 03:57 PM

I've been a vegan since 1989, and a vegetarian and animal rights activist since 1988. Personally I applaud any celebrity who chooses to use their fame in the fight against animal cruelty.
I have no problem with nudity, or healthy sexuality being used to make a statement more provocative. What I do object to is PETA's choice of celebrities.
As a feminist I'm unwilling to ignore sexism in favor of animal rights. Playboy 'bunnies' promote misogyny to further their own careers. When PETA started using Pamela Anderson as a spokesperson I stopped donating to PETA. The fact that our society has deemed strippers and porn stars more acceptable in recent years doesn't make their jobs any less harmful to women as a whole in America. It's unfortunate that PETA either doesn't see that, or thinks it's unimportant.

Posted by: jade m | September 28, 2007 05:37 PM

Dr. Cochran,

Your statement was well put. Don't forget you are on the website of a very radical group, so take the responses with a grain of salt.

I'm a certified veterinary nurse and I'm earning a master's degree in conservation biology. I have dedicated my life to helping animals and I can safely call myself an animal rights activist, I think.

The point is, even if PETA doesn't realize that their din sometimes reaches the level of the religious right, you must understand that people who care about animals have gotten at least as much flack as you have.

Also for people who love animals but who don't have professional training (like a vet) it's extremely frustrating to see animals suffering and to feel helpless to change it.

People lash out for this reason - so forgive them.

And you should know that many animal caregivers are very moderate in their view of these things.

Posted by: Maya | September 28, 2007 07:26 PM

I think one important point also is that while nudity may get people's attention, does anyone here really believe it can change people??

I mean, if the ONLY reason some horny guy is checking out a PETA ad is because there's a naked woman on it, how does that convince them to go vegetraian, etc?

Let's face it, everyone has heard of PETA. So a sexy ad may be the quickest way to get attention, but do you really think someone would change a lifelong habit just because they saw some skin?

I doubt it.

(ps Yes they may go ahead and read the educational message that follows, but it would have to be pretty freakin' astounding literature to make someone instantly change their life.)

Posted by: Maya | September 28, 2007 07:37 PM

I'm not really into this kind of advertising, but I don't think it's fair to consider the PETA ads sexist with the argument that there aren't naked men. Untrue - PETA has used naked/half-naked men in ads. However, it's been shown that the public is, in fact, more responsive to the naked & lingerie-clad women. It's an attention-grabbing ploy, and it isn't as if these ads are all PETA focuses their efforts on. Compared to ads like these that grab attention, other campaigns are considered mundane. Do you really think PETA, let alone any advertisment, would use sex appeal if it was something (a majority of )people weren't interested in?

Posted by: Veronica | September 28, 2007 08:47 PM

Re: Alicia Ad. I too became a Vegan for health reasons - the health of the ANIMALS.
Re: Dita Ad. PETA will lose credibility using a fur/ feather wearer.
If PETA were headed up by a man instead of a woman, such ad's would be interpreted as sleazy. The nudity idea is old hat now. Animal images are incredibly appealing and could surely be used to better effect than a glorified stripper who can barely string an intelligent narrative together. You cannot protest against speciesm using sexism. There are many credible vegetarians out there, Paul Newman, Dustin Hoffman etc who could give weight to an ad without having to resort to cheap tactics. Having watched one of your anti-fur videos and cried hysterically with shock and been unable to sleep and get those images out of my consciousness, I am really horrified that you chose a fur wearer for one of your ad's. Has PETA lost the plot? Is your staff full of "yes" men who are afraid to challenge the status quo? Is there an ego trip going on here? I think I will support Animal Aid or another animal charity in future, they seem to keep their focus on the animals which is what it's supposed to be all about at the end of the day???

Posted by: Fiona | September 29, 2007 11:38 AM

Because I am vegetarian, people often ask me if I belong to PETA. And it pains me to say no. I think that PETA is amazing in what they do for animals. But I refuse to be part of PETA, and it's only because of these ads. I am a strong Christian, and I can't even begin to describe how much they offend me! It hurts so much to be innocently looking for ways to help animals, and come across some ad that only steals my innocence from me. I agree with the group that says use the pictures of the animals suffering. Why? Because they actually ADDRESS THE CAUSE. When people see these, it's not like they think, "Oh, look. It's just another animal with no skin." They can't ignore it, and it doesn't make PETA look unsensitive to us of the younger generation.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2007 05:49 PM

I speak as an ethically motivated vegan and a long-time PETA member and monthly contributer. PETA's courting of celebrities (most of whom are airheads, let alone the sexy ads) and their more flamboyant publicity stunts are not my style. But I can't blame them for that if they feel that these pursuits have political value. Certainly such advertising methods have a long history in our culture. The only important question here is whether they do more good than harm to the cause. I don't know, and I believe that PETA should engage an independent and expert consultant organization to find out, and then bite whatever bullet may be necessary and act according to the findings.

Posted by: Dennis Vail | September 30, 2007 12:36 AM

i love the sexy adds -- americans are puritanical when it comes to god-given beauty and showing it off, americans should be more scandalised over what happens before animal flesh hits their dinner plate --

Posted by: stasya berber | September 30, 2007 12:17 PM

Kelly, I shoot wild birds with the aid of dogs not from puppy mills. Can I be an Unredneck now?

Posted by: Christopher Cochran MD | October 1, 2007 12:39 AM

Cochran, your continued presence on the PETA files is quite interesting - you know very well how the animal rights people feel about you and your non-animal friendly lifestyle, you know that we will never agree with you, and you know that you can never hope to make one microscopic dent in our determination to help animals.

Are you that bored? Do you really think that you will get validation here? Go sing your praises where someone might actually care, like at a doctor's convention, or at a hunting lodge. We are not your friends - stop insulting us by calling us that.

Posted by: Michele | October 1, 2007 08:40 PM

I know what im about to say may sound awful to most of you. but i dont think we need to used women as objects to fight for animals, nor i think that healthy means thin, and beautiful, many of us are what i doctor would describe as healthy and also many of us "healthy" dont look like alicia silverston.
I love animals and i do what i can to help them but feed the stereotype of women as sexual objects in those ads... not my favorite. ( i know you hate me for saying it but that how i see it !!!

Posted by: Angelica | October 8, 2007 02:58 PM

Hats off to Peta and all the celebrities who are showing their support for animal rights and a healthy lifestyle.Sexy ads are part of western culture and are seen everywhere,these are in good taste and certainly get the point across.keep up the great work and ads..Thank you

Posted by: freddie kirchner | October 17, 2007 12:34 PM

No, it's eye candy. More pronz plz! (im kidding)

Posted by: Caboose | November 4, 2007 12:12 AM

The models in this ad are far from what is healthy. Aside from what the BMI says, which really is little more than a system of weight to help insurance companies charge people. You can be healthy at any size. PETA has had a great reptuation as having sizeist ads to promote their cause. Hey PETA, did you know that all Vegetarians aren't thin? Or would that ruin your "Becoming Vegetarian will make you magically thinner" campaign? Or maybe you just don't think fat people can care for animals, or want to care for animals. You can be healthy at any size, as long as you are active and eat healthy. Meaning a diet with all different kinds of food. I'm not suggesting meat, because I know there's no trying to get you to think straight about the issue of meat. You'll just go off on another hysterical tantrum about how bad meat is, and how it kills, like a cranky 2 year old.

Aside from that, objectifying women also doesn't help you. Pretty much you're shutting out a good lot of people who might want to care for animals between your sizeism and sexism. The models you have in your ads are not healthy, they are underweight. People do desire to look at healthy bodies, bodies that aren't super skinny. They are attracted to natural bodies, until society tells them no you need to be attracted to women who look like they're 18 years old, or younger. You wonder why we have a problem with pedophiles in our country. When there are people like PETA posting nude images, of women trying to look like sexy teenagers.

Objectifying men, for as little as you've attempted to do, isn't the answer either. If you want respect, then treat people who want to help animals with respect. Don't bite their head off, if they aren't going vegetarian. You can suggest it, but calling them fat, ugly, sick, one-foot in the grave isn't going to make them come back to your site. Make ads that are actually clever, an idiot can make a campaign with an naked model. Prove you're better than the average dick-brained idiot.

You do realize that PETA now is the official joke of the animal rights movement. Everyone waits for the next demonstration involving naked women, being objectified and treated like objects. Everyone laughs and says, "Oh there goes PETA again with another one of their crackhead demonstrations."

You're not the only animal welfare game in town. I won't mention other sites, seeing as how you'll probaly harass them over not harrasing people to become vegan, or not showing enough sick videos of animal abuse. Hey you know, if someone really enjoys watching animals being abused, they know to go to PETA. Really, this is the audience you want? People who come to PETA to watch animals being abused. You say don't exploit animals, yet at the same time exploit them all over your site. Cause apperantly human beings are souless creatures, who can't empathize with other beings unless they view a torture flick of the being suffering? Do you really think that is respectful of whoever would try to help you?

Basically here's the group of people you're currently targeting:

Horny teenage men who want to look at nude pictures of models, who could care less about animal rights, more about seeing a peice of ass.

People from sites like Rotten.com and Ogrish.com, who want to see footage of animals being tortured for kicks. And trust me, there is no point in trying to get those people to have a conscience.

People who have no purpose in life, and want to follow a cult-like movement. One that, I don't know, suggests they only eat a strict diet dictated by the movement. That suggests their followers go out and harrass people on the streets about animal rights, like some cult freaks handing out phamplets about their insights and movement.

Yeah, that's really something to be proud of. Now you're trying to get fat haters to your website, cause I guess that's the last group of people who might take you seriously. Or perhaps just come to the site to hate on fat people, and perhaps learn something about animal rights.

Try to revamp your movement, and make your site more about the animals. Not about animal torture snuff films, free pron, and sizeism.

Posted by: Jackie | March 6, 2008 12:04 AM