Well, firstly, Kudos to PETA for such wonderfully and creative ads, very well done!

Second, it is no surprise that Fox would do such a thing as they are very right wing in my view and also do not like Animal Rights Advocacy and/or PETA I suggest.

This ban on these great ads by PETA, in my opinion, was due to bias in favor of the Bush Administration also being Conservative.

As a proud member of PETA, I am very proud too see and also to distribute as I have already on my Facebook Profile, to all that I know.

Cornell, with all due respect to your death, and due to your vicious and malicious atrocities your founding company inflicts onto chickens, may you rot in your grave.

This is my opinion and I hope I haven't over stepped any boundaries?

Thank you for allowing me to comment, and again to PETA, Ingrid Newkirk, great ads and a clear and concise message.

Nick J Davis
Toronto Canada (Member)

Posted by: Nicholas Davis | February 6, 2008 10:41 AM

And this surprises people?

Here folks, go tell Fox what you think (many times):

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77538,00.html

Posted by: stoptorture | February 6, 2008 11:00 AM

These are by far some of the best PETA ads ever! It's such a shame that they weren't played during the Super Bowl.
I really love these ads!

Posted by: Jason Levy | February 6, 2008 11:14 AM

Over dramatic! I can see why Fox didn't want to air them!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 6, 2008 11:14 AM

And by the way, I love the new design of KentuckyFriedCruelty.com!

Posted by: Jason Levy | February 6, 2008 11:15 AM

WOW!

The quality of this Ads is much better from others I've seen before from PETA. Good Job Congratulations !!

Posted by: Steven | February 6, 2008 11:18 AM

Man, these are pretty heavy ads—like little shards of gothic cinema. Maybe Fox saw the violence, but not the message. As good as the artistry of the ads are, the underlying message may not be caught by a lot of people.

Posted by: Mike Quinoa | February 6, 2008 11:21 AM

I guess animal cruelty isn't a priority but drugs are. This is plain and simply a double stardard and they're BUSTED!! Can't wait to hear their response!

Posted by: Carla | February 6, 2008 01:31 PM

Yes, mainstream media is owned by the right wing and by Corporate America.

You know how NBC shut-out Dennis Kucinich from joining in on the democratic debate in Nevada? Well, Dennis has a policy against Nuclear Power (who knows why, I mean couldn't it wipe out all life on this planet) and GE owns NBC and they’re into it.

Those who are into trading life for the all-mighty $, well that's okay, but make a positive and peaceful difference; forget about it.

Sorry folks, this is not a democracy, it's a democratic dictatorship. Until we admit it, we will have to dig deep for the truth.

Thanks to PETA for putting it out there and making it so accessible on the Internet as well as those other groups that believe in true democracy and truth behind corrupt corporations like Air America and The Nation.

Let’s get this country back and demand the truth. It belongs to all of us.

Posted by: Eric S | February 6, 2008 02:00 PM

HA! now these are great, good work!

Peace.

Posted by: Hitchjr | February 6, 2008 03:15 PM

Fox did you a favor. Only your members would have been moved by those ads. To anyone who doesn't already agree with you, they are just stupid. A man with a chicken head? Colonel Sanders sitting in his car and not even apparently involved in the beating of chicken-man? It does nothing to get your point across.

Posted by: Mabel | February 6, 2008 03:17 PM

Eric S

You wrote words of truth!

Posted by: Ana | February 6, 2008 03:32 PM

I was kind of worried about watching the commercials, but they weren't ovely violent/graphic. Good, clear message.

Posted by: NutMeg | February 6, 2008 03:44 PM

My goodness, a racist, sexist, extreme right-wing network rejecting ads for animal rights? There's a shocker.

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | February 6, 2008 04:07 PM

Whew!!! At least one network is showin some solid common sense..

Posted by: tols | February 6, 2008 04:17 PM

Duh, FOX doesn't want a PETA freakshowmercial in the middle of the most enjoyable american past time.

In fact, no station does.
Humans have pointed teeth, we eat other animals. Just be happy we're civilized enough that we don't eat each other (except in cases of insanity)

Posted by: Grey | February 6, 2008 04:41 PM

I don't want to turn this into another discussion about the human anatomy, but Grey...humans have more in common with herbivores. Read a book. Anyway... Great ads...

Posted by: Vegancakes | February 6, 2008 06:06 PM

Use peta members money for outreach to college kids. Football watching, womanizing, 'ignorance is bliss', chicken wing eating men are not caring about changing their agenda or helping the 'others' in the world.

These guys sit around and talk about which cheerleader looks best when their wives leave the room, they think they would fall over dead or become women if they didn't eat meat and have nothing better to contribute to the world than spending money and time to watch a bunch of overpaid idiots run around after a ball(that was probably manufactured using 20cents per hour slave labor) while millions of people and animals are suffering and dying daily.

Can you imagine how many people and animals could be fed in the world on what these idiots spend on sports!

Posted by: Anonymous | February 6, 2008 11:39 PM

I agree with Grey on this one. Why would you want to put such an ad up during the superbowl, this is not your target audience. Football loving men, eating everything under the sun. If you haven't noticed, superbowl comercials are judged by how funny they are, not by how dark they can be. If you want an ad during the superbowl, you better hire a comedic writting team!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 7, 2008 09:22 AM

Maya
Do you not like right wing people? And how is Fox sexist and racist? I would hardly classify Fox as extreme right wing as well, they may be on the right, but not to the extreme like you suggest.

Posted by: Kurt K | February 7, 2008 09:56 AM

The organization was saved millions of dollars in exchange for not running ads that would have mattered to very few, if any, viewers (other than viewers who were already PETA members, as has been pointed out above.) Plus now you get to claim to be victims of unfair business practices. You actually came out ahead on this one!

Posted by: Ashes | February 7, 2008 10:41 AM

I watch FOX, and sometimes the bullshit that comes out of there mouth makes me say "wtf...?"

But like whats more important...teenage death, or animal death...

HELLO! It's Animal!!!

Well thats kind of contreversial....
See teenage death is preventable, tell those damned kids to smoke smoking and drinking and getting high and what not! send them to rehab! lock them in their damned room!!!

but noooooooooooo, nobody seems to care that these chickens are treating terribly! THEY HAVE FEELINGS TOO BUDDY!

Posted by: Amber Falobas | February 7, 2008 11:11 AM

Maya

Love your sarcasm!!! You are so right!! blessings!!!

Posted by: Ana | February 7, 2008 01:16 PM

Anonymous
NFL footballs are made by the Wilson Corp, they don't use slave labor, the footballs are actually hand crafted by sewing experts so all the balls used in the NFL weigh the same and have the same dimensions.
If you don't like football don't watch it. Don't insult men either. Stereotypes are wrong and you just stereotyped every man in the nation as a womanizing, idiotic slob that would cheat on his wife given the chance.
If you don't like this country, then leave, go somewhere else where you can entertain yourself.

Posted by: Kurt K | February 7, 2008 06:53 PM

Amber Falobas, what the heck are you saying?

The life of a teenager or animal should not be argued over one another. One thing is sure, they both can be prevented. And sayign the animals life counts more is creepy and disturbing, it lowers my outlook on mankind a bit. You can't honestly mean that, can you?
'tell those damned kids to smoke smoking and drinking and getting high and what not! send them to rehab! lock them in their damned room!!!' Over simplification of serious issues is a huge social problem that you are advocating. I might as well say 'tell those animal farming people to stop killing animals and abusing!' Does that sound logical or useful? It's redundant and hurtful to the cause.

For these ads, they are confusing and macabre (but not good, just kind of dim and gross) and I can completely understand the network not airing them. Try being a bit more subtle, bright or humorous. The point does not get across, although it may be an important one.

Posted by: Holly Farrell | February 7, 2008 08:55 PM

What an interesting ad. Now there is no sex or violence in this ad, but they allow half naked women ads. I know that sex sells, but for once they should allow some kind of controversy in ads. It would spark attention and get people talking and may have changed someone's outlook on things.

Posted by: Kris Shulfer | February 8, 2008 12:50 PM

A lot of people seem to be relying on the media reputation of Fox, as if any other network would have aired these ads during the Super Bowl. I still think you dodged an expensive bullet, so to speak, by having these ads rejected. They don't get your point across well at all, and the end result would not have been a bunch of converts to your cause. For the $2 million and up price tag of Super Bowl ads, surely you could have done something more helpful to your own cause. Fox's politics have nothing to do with that.

Posted by: Ashes | February 8, 2008 01:36 PM

The super bowl is not the time or place for activist ads of any kind. I don’t know who brought us the anti-drug piece but what a joke. Trust me drug dealers are doing just fine. You don’t want to waste your money anyway. People just don’t care about chickens. Food is food, they don’t care how it became a nugget. People who care will come to your web site for information on what they need to know and care about. I tell people about KFC all the time and they just don’t care. Basically they just think I am a fool and laugh at me. Now I just get rude comments about anything I eat, like how many under paid illegal immigrants did it take to supply you with that salad. The majority of the public, especially the one’s that watch the super bowl think you are a joke and should go away. If you did run your ads KFC sales would double. You are fighting a battle that you will never win and wasting donated money on such attempts to get you message across. Concentrate on the people that care about such things. Try an add that promotes PETA in a positive way, try selling “yourself” and get people to shop at Peta. Most people don’t like to feel guilty and put on the spot. If someone saw that add wile eating KFC the would only become angry with Peta, and buy more KFC. Get people to visit your website, trick them to go there, (The nude campaign thing was a good start) and then educate them on their own terms. Make a list of the food companies you have researched, with facts about the company, “is it Peta Friendly?”, if not “why?” and what can we do. Sometimes I feel Peta is just a group or a club, like “members only”. I am not a vegan or someone that would try to hurt someone for wearing a fur coat. But I do respect what I eat or wear and those I call my pet. I come to this web site often for information on companies I should or should not support. I think there’s a lot of people out there like me, well maybe not! Ok I am done now……

Posted by: Chicken Little | February 8, 2008 03:18 PM

Chicken Little makes a good point. If these ads had run, it would almost certainly have just reminded people of liking fried chicken. If you had run them what would you have done if you'd then heard about heightened sales at KFC in the next week? But instead you saved your money and the vast crowds of mostly meat-eaters watching the game weren't reminded of fried chicken.

Posted by: Mabel | February 8, 2008 05:26 PM

(There's a shocker)
Maya, that was funny. I appreciated your wit.

Posted by: lynda downie | February 9, 2008 12:29 AM

Hi Kurt!

I have many close friends who are Christian and Republican, and I actually understand many of their views. However, even my most conservative friends find Fox and extremist right wingers over the top and offensive.

I don't want to distract from the subject at hand, so I won't go any further but I most certainly did not mean to imply that all "right wing" folks are bad, not at all. Just the ones I consider extreme. Big topic, wrong forum.

Blessings.

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | February 9, 2008 12:57 PM

Chicken Little,

You said you "respect" the animals you eat and wear. You must have a much different definition of the word "respect" than I do. True respect for animals means not eating them or wearing them. It also means not supporting animal experimentation or using animals for entertainment. We can live in harmony with other animals, we can live vegan. I urge everyone who is not yet vegan to visit http://www.GoVeg.com/ to begin the transition. It's much easier than you think!

Posted by: Brandon Becker | February 9, 2008 06:19 PM

Chicken Little,

You said you "respect" the animals you eat and wear. You must have a much different definition of the word "respect" than I do. True respect for animals means not eating them or wearing them. It also means not supporting animal experimentation or using animals for entertainment. We can live in harmony with other animals, we can live vegan. I urge everyone who is not yet vegan to visit http://www.GoVeg.com/ to begin the transition. It's much easier than you think!

Posted by: Brandon Becker | February 9, 2008 08:28 PM

what is wrong with FOX Network? Did PETA getback its $4.2 million?

Posted by: Madonna | February 10, 2008 05:55 AM

Hi Ana and Lynda! Thanks! ;)

I've been reading some recent articles and studies about avian neuroscience. Hopefully in the next few years we'll be seeing some facinating articles about how scientists discovered that the avian brain has been completely misunderstood.

Scientists are actually renaming many parts of "bird brains" and we will see some articles that will make us rethink how we see chickens.

Peace!!

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | February 10, 2008 01:18 PM

Maya
You are absolutely right that some right wingers are extreme and over the top when it comes to policy and beliefs. I would classify myself as libertarian more than true conservative. Of course on the flip side, there are also extreme left wing people of the same token. It is probably safe to say that most Americans fall somewhere in the middle, picking and choosing a little from both.
Getting back to topic, I don't believe Fox didn't allow these ads because they were PETA, I think they understood what day it was a choose the funnier ads that wouldn't offend many viewers.
It would be like running a KFC comercial during a PETA awards show. The network was covering its bases by not wanting to offend a great majority of the its viewers.
I don't think there was any malice here!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 10, 2008 05:27 PM

I don't care if my chicken was taking a bath and got fried by a TV or if it was swimming in a vat of oil...All that matters is the end result.

Brandon- Any idea what would happen to all these animals if everybody turned vegan? They would die horrible gruesome deaths in the wild. Sorry, but thats the reality of it.

Posted by: Travis | February 11, 2008 02:27 AM

Hi Travis!

Brandon and I have debated the farm animal issue (and I apologize, Brandon, if I've been a bit psycho in my responses - long week....) but I can assure you, Travis, in reality any change would happen slowly.

Unless there is some science fiction type event in the next few days, there is no way every human in the U.S. will suddenly become vegetarian. If it happened at all, it would take place over a number of years, less farm animals would be bred because of less demand, and the practice would be phased out. No animals would be "released" or left behind.

And even if one does not care about the animals themselves, the Earth is crumbling under the weight of unsustainable farming practices; water sources are being polluted, sources that we will need when droughts hit from global warming. Think it's hard to live without meat? Try living without water.

Respectfully, we all need to try to at least give occasional vegetarianism a try, and see if we can live that way more often. We'd be doing ourselves a huge favor.

Peace! ;)

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | February 11, 2008 02:13 PM

You do have a point there Maya, but what about hunting? If people stopped hunting/fishing the results would be horrid.

Posted by: Travis | February 11, 2008 08:34 PM

After my earlier criticism of you, Maya, you have shown such humility and integrity that I'm truly amazed at you.

Posted by: lynda downie | February 12, 2008 01:52 AM

Hi again Travis!

Do you mean hunting by aboriginal and native folks? You might be surprised to learn that PETA takes a stance on acceptance that certain tribes should be allowed to hunt and fish, because it is life or death for them. So I'm with you there. The rest of us do have alternatives, I believe. A vegetarian diet can be extremely healthy if done right!

I get the feeling you mean overpopulation as well - the thing is, when prey animals like deer are overpopulated, it is because hunters have killed off all their native predators. When wolves were extripated from New England, the deer population exploded.

Hunters have not been successful in keeping populations normal for 2 reasons: one because a sudden decrease in pop. can cause prey animals to simply have more offspring, and second because hunting does not account for the forces of natural selection.

Anyway, I apologize if I misinterpreted your statement in anyway! ;)

Posted by: Maya, CVT | February 12, 2008 11:34 AM

Thank you Lynda! I'm not always great at expressing myself on paper, hopefully I can improve.... LOL ;)

Posted by: Maya, CVT | February 12, 2008 11:38 AM

You have, Maya, remarkably so. And I could use a truckload of improvement, myself.

Posted by: lynda downie | February 13, 2008 01:26 AM

You do have a point there Maya, but what about hunting? If people stopped hunting/fishing the results would be horrid.

Posted by: Travis | February 13, 2008 02:34 AM

Maya, I understand that before we got here there was a more natural balance of the food chain where animals policed themselves. But in many cases predators have disappeared for no other reason than loss of habitat. In that case, it's up to hunters to prevent diseases such as CWD from destroying the entire deer population.

But I was specifically talking about the snow goose or "snow carp" as it's unaffectionately called where I live in Nebraska. These birds are very smart and can adapt to nearly any habitat. The problem is their natural habitat can only hold a population of 3.1 million birds but their numbers are hovering at around 3.8 million. We even have an extra month to shoot nothing but snow geese here but that still isn't enough. These birds are still stealing the habitat of other endangered birds such as the sand hill crane. So hopefully you can see how hunting efforts can actually help the overall balance of migratory birds in the area.

In addition scientists in the area rely heavily on hunters to gather data about all sorts of species in the area.

Posted by: Travis | February 13, 2008 02:55 AM

Hi Travis!

I'm earning a grad degree in conservation biology right now, so I know what you mean. Often hunters spend twice as much time in the field than scientists!! ;)

Did you mean the whooping crane? The sandhill crane is not on the IUCN list as anything but Least Concern. Their habitat is declining, though...

Although we may disagree about hunting, I'm with you all the way on habitat protection. That's been ignored for decades and anyone who helps protect habitat is helping the bottom line, as far as I'm concerned. Bless you!!

Posted by: Maya, C.V.T. | February 13, 2008 02:14 PM

Brandon Becker,
I never said I Respect the “animals” I eat. However let’s just say I did. If I was going to eat a chicken, I would not beat the chicken, kick the chicken or be cruel to the chicken before I kill the chicken for dinner. I would also kill the chicken in the fastest way possible. I would thank that chicken for giving its life for my survival. You misquote me and try to give me a definition of what “true” respect is, nice. Does a lion not have “true” respect for the zebra and so on…. You are just another person who is part of the “members only” club misquoting people to throw out your message to “Go Vegan” to the wrong people. Next time try getting your message out without “True” disrespect and misquoting people. If you truly read my message, you would see I am not supporting cruelty, experimenting, or using animals for entertainment. However I am suggesting methods to get the point across to people that are naive to these things. I don’t know what world you live on but the majority of people were raised eating chicken, cow and pig. Most people are ignorant to what you call “True Respect” so for you to retort to my post the way you did only makes me want to have a cheeseburger for lunch, however since I am a vegetarian, not a vegan, I will have a garden burger with cheese.

Posted by: Chicken Little | February 13, 2008 02:19 PM

Hunting: Myth vs. Reality
http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/act-c-sh-mythreality.html

Posted by: Brandon Becker | February 13, 2008 04:29 PM

I am all for hunting, IF the hunted is also armed and shoots back. Imagine a deer capping a hunter in the ass and tracking him down with his hunting bunny, only to find it 2 hours later suffering, then “BANG”! giving “it” the final blow. I would like to see these hunters go up against a bear with a pocket knife, or maybe they could just hunt each other. Now that would be must see T.V.

Posted by: Chicken Little | February 14, 2008 11:07 AM

Kurt K: So you found the ad about kids getting high off their parents' drugs to be humorous?

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 16, 2008 02:36 PM

Travis: You are laboring under the mistaken belief that it is up to humans to regulate the ecosystem. NOT TRUE. If all humans were wiped off the Earth tomorrow, things would continue along just fine. Hunting does not help the ecosystem in any way--do not kid yourself into believing that it does.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 16, 2008 02:39 PM

Kurt K: Based on your comment, "If you haven't noticed, superbowl comercials are judged by how funny they are, not by how dark they can be. If you want an ad during the superbowl, you better hire a comedic writting team!" I can only assume that you found the ad about kids taking their parents' drugs to have been humorous.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 20, 2008 07:13 PM

Antigone
Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups. Actually I didn't like that comercial, and I have heard many people I know actually point that out.
For one night a year, druing the Superbowl, I wish this country could forget about all the problems and have a good time. It seems 50% of comercials these days is some kind of protest and thats fine, but I believe most people don't want to see that stuff during the superbowl.

Posted by: Kurt K | February 21, 2008 07:13 PM

Kurt K: There was no fuck-up. You made that comment as justification for Fox's denial of PETA's ad and I am merely pointing out that they ran at least one other ad that did not fit the criteria you feel should be observed in determing suitable Superbowl commercials.

Posted by: Antigone1000 | February 22, 2008 07:20 PM

Antigone,
You are right then. They did run that one ad with the drug dealer trying to recruit new kid clients. I didn't like that one, it did stick out and it didn't go unnoticed. I guess 29 out of 30 isn't too bad. Hopefully next year the will do better!

Posted by: Kurt K | February 25, 2008 12:42 PM