Perhaps you should have put a little more thought into the name of your blog.
http://blog.peta.org/
:horrormirth:
:lulz:
PETA have outdone themselves yet again.
I'm not even sure there is any point in mocking PETA anymore
THEY ARE THEIR OWN HYPERBOLE!
:lulz: Awesomeness.
:whack: :whack: :whack:
poe's law corollary.... peta's law, if telling the difference between parody and the real thing is no longer possible, peta will do something fumier than any parody could ever be..
dude this just made my night a hell of a lot better. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
From an organisation which brought us "sea kittens", I wouldn't put it past them to have done this to get attention.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_jWNhyMUpjSE/Sbm6PB1_6jI/AAAAAAAAC_0/Sho4qWL5Dq4/s400/pedo-bear-seal-of-approval.png)
pedo bear
loves PETA
am i the only one who doesnt get the funniness? :cry:
Quote from: Fredtastic! on September 22, 2009, 06:34:53 AM
am i the only one who doesnt get the funniness? :cry:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_jWNhyMUpjSE/Sbm6PB1_6jI/AAAAAAAAC_0/Sho4qWL5Dq4/s400/pedo-bear-seal-of-approval.png)
Quote from: Fredtastic! on September 22, 2009, 06:34:53 AM
am i the only one who doesnt get the funniness? :cry:
Say it out loud.
ah. AHHHHHH got it. :lulz:
sorry this paper im writing sucked my brains out
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
Guys, some amazing pictures here (http://blog.peta.org/archives/2009/09/ben_hur.php)
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/petasdirtysecret.cfm
QuotePETA kills animals. Because it has other financial priorities.
PETA rakes in nearly $30 million each year in income, much of it raised from pet owners who think their donations actually help animals. Instead, the group spends huge sums on programs equating people who eat chicken with Nazis, scaring young children away from drinking milk, recruiting children into the radical animal-rights lifestyle, and intimidating businessmen and their families in their own neighborhoods. PETA has also spent tens of thousands of dollars defending arsonists and other violent extremists.
PETA claims it engages in outrageous media-seeking stunts "for the animals." But which animals? Carping about the value of future two-piece dinners while administering lethal injections to puppies and kittens isn't ethical. It's hypocritical -- with a death toll that PETA would protest if it weren't their own doing.
PETA kills animals. And its leaders dare lecture the rest of us?
:mittens: :awesome:
furfags lol
(http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news/images/article_156_comicbook.gif)
if god didn't want us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat.
thing about the blog name is,
it's clearly working.
we all clicked it, no?
no different than sending those models to walk around NYC in lettuce bikinis. It's just trying to grab eyeballs for the Mission.
Not all attention is good attention.
did you click the link?
did you talk about their blog or direct people to it?
that's good attention
Attention which turns/reveals the supposedly serious into the comedic is not certainly not, by definition, good attention. Unless the comedic aspect is intentionally put forward, which is arguably the case for anything we push.
I thought this was one of the primary tenants of Discordianism in media.
I believe the reaction that we had here was the intended effect
spreading the message, even to satirize it, serves the message's survival.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't have talked about it--
I'm saying that it was actually a very well chosen name.
check out all the forum activity about it: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22peta%20files%22&hl=en&client=opera&rls=en&output=search&tbs=frm:1&tbo=1
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=opera&rls=en&tbo=1&tbs=frm%3A1&q=blog.peta.org&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
It depends on PETA's goals. If PETA's goal is to work the margins, which I imagine it is, then it could be effective. In other words, if the message sinks in with 5 out of 100, or even 5 out of 1000, it might be viewed as a success.
It works the same way in my field. You want to find a message that is memorable, and that will actually sink in with somebody, even if it is only a few somebodies.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on September 22, 2009, 04:07:16 PM
It depends on PETA's goals. If PETA's goal is to work the margins, which I imagine it is, then it could be effective. In other words, if the message sinks in with 5 out of 100, or even 5 out of 1000, it might be viewed as a success.
It works the same way in my field. You want to find a message that is memorable, and that will actually sink in with somebody, even if it is only a few somebodies.
This was my thinking as well--capitalizing on something that's somewhat viral in order to garner more support, not just attention. It's just always good to be suspicious of why such a "mistake" was made...even if the attention they get for it is mainly negative.
PETA's intentions are to rile up their own base of support with the pretence of being "attacked" by the evil meat eating, animal hating masses, so they can press them for more cash.
Only this and nothing more.
according to google, the words "peta files" or a link to the blog have appeared on about 90 forums in the last 24 hours alone.
I'd wager their blog's goal is to raise awareness about their various causes. Even if you went to their blog to laugh at the title, you also saw their most recent post.
It really is very clever memetics:
The blog is smooth, (very easy to spread the message - it's just a link)
contageous, (it's an interesting thing to bring up in conversation)
and targets the promiscuous sneezers (who look cool by pointing out Peta's fail)
the contraversy surrounding the name springboards them into hives that would have never otherwise mentioned them. Pedophiles evoke emotions (like moral outrage) which they wish you to be feeling (perhaps preconsciously) when you read their blog entries.
Still and all...the desperation that drives them to ally themselves with pedofiles is just beyond horrormirthic proportions.
Quote from: Jenne on September 22, 2009, 04:34:14 PM
Still and all...the desperation that drives them to ally themselves with pedofiles is just beyond horrormirthic proportions.
Plausible deniability.
Until the 'Cramulus Advanced Memetic Dissemination Toolbar' for Firefox comes out, people will keep pulling shit like this because they can just claim it to be an accident. BUT we are slowly building the tools required to combat it. Of course, then the basterds will develop new tricks and tools, but I'm sure that'll keep them stumped for a little while.
Quote from: Lysergic on September 22, 2009, 10:28:18 AM
(http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news/images/article_156_comicbook.gif)
The thing about PETA trying to turn kids against their parents is, EFO stumbled across them on the internet and was, briefly, both traumatised and sympathetic. She asked me about them and I explained that they use shock and horror to try to gain followers, but that they are a hypocritical fundraising corporation which slaughters thousands of animals. She now hates them as much as I do. Kids will listen to their mommies before some random corporation, so trying to turn them against their parents is a fail strategy.
And turning kids against their parents is a real winner idea.
Cause it isn't hard enough raising kids to be good people and teaching them to be respectful.
I can see it now
"I murdered 250 people in a factory cause my mom made me eat meat."
:asplode:
It's really just leading to a younger generation who hates PETA.
As far as I'm concerned, all PETA supporters rape babies.