Kollar 1

Alex Kollar

2 November 2014

Dr. Beitler

ENGW 214

PETAs Desire to Construct a Coherent Worldview

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), is a well-known animal

advocacy group. The organizations reach is far and wide; it would be hard to find

someone who has not heard of PETAs beliefs and efforts. Although PETA is a famous

organization, there are a few misconceptions about what the organization actually does.

When asked about what she thought PETA does, Emma DiBernardo, a Wheaton College

student, said, I was under the impression that they helped rescue animals (Emma

DiBernardo)1. Although PETA does organize programs to rescue mistreated animals,

according to the official PETA website, the organization was founded to actively change

society (PETAs History: Compassion in Action). PETA seeks to completely change the

way that humans see animals through the use of ethos, pathos, and logos.

To see how PETA alters peoples minds to align with their views and beliefs, we

will analyze an article found on the PETA website, entitled: Animal Rights

Uncompromised: Pets. In this article, PETA addresses the issue of domestic animal

overpopulation. In the introduction, the article suggests there is a crisis regarding pet

keeping (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets) that through irresponsible breeding

there is a surplus of animals that are mindlessly destroyed by shelters and individual

owners. As the article progresses, it gives examples of how this overpopulation crisis

1 To establish my credibility, I use information gathered from multiple sources (ethos)

 Kollar 2

(Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets) is the cause of thousands of cases of animal

mistreatment and abuse. In the concluding paragraph, PETA restates the need of pet

owners to spay and neuter their pets to reduce suffering in the world (Animal Rights

Uncompromised: Pets).

At first glace, this article seems to be advocating the need for spaying or neutering

pets and the importance of being a responsible pet owner; but there is another motive

hidden beneath its presented purpose. By analyzing and evaluating this article, we shall

see how it stands as an example of how PETA uses rhetorical devices and persuasion

techniques - ethos, pathos, and logos - to change the way readers treat animals.

Ethos is a powerful tool of persuasion; it is how an author of a piece presents

information to establish credibility with his/her audience2. Throughout this article, PETA

utilizes ethos to make their argument more appealing. Since this article is mainly geared

towards potential and current pet owners, PETA seeks to identify with that specific

demographic. In the articles first paragraph, PETA states, We at PETA very much love

the animal companions who share our home (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets), in

order to build a kind of trust with readers. By initially establishing that PETA supports the

idea of people and animals coexisting, the organization is presented as a group of pet-

lovers who want the best for our animal friends. PETA continues to build on this image

by later stating in the last paragraph; Contrary to myth, PETA does not want to

confiscate animals who are well cared for and set them free (Animal Rights

Uncompromised: Pets).

Besides presenting the organization as a trustworthy animal advocacy group, the

article also builds credibility by commenting on the amount of information that PETA has

2 Introduction of ethos
 Kollar 3

on animal treatment. In the fifth paragraph, the article states that PETA has inches-thick

files on cases (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets) of animal abuse. Showing that

the organization has seen and dealt with these reports firsthand convinces readers that

PETA is a trustworthy source to speak on the subject of animal abuse and pet owning.

By presenting itself as an organization fighting to protect the rights of animals,

PETA has gained a huge following. According to Tom Holder, a journalist for

SpeakingofResearch.com, in 2010, alone, PETAs donations totaled $33 million, that is

not counting the extra $2 million in merchandise sales and other revenue (Holder).

From this statistic, it would seem that the organizations use of ethos is effective to an

extent. This article presents PETA as a noble group devoted to uncovering the injustice

suffered by animals, however the methods they use to communicate their beliefs are

surrounded in controversy. Although the article only uses positive language and

statements when it talks about PETA, the reality of the way the organization operates is

much harsher than the article suggests. PETA uses shocking campaigns to communicate

their beliefs to the world, from throwing paint on people wearing fur coats, to comparing

pregnant women to fattened cows to protest farmed meat (Holder), and even urging

Ben and Jerrys ice cream to drop cow milk in favor of human milk (Holder). These

shocking and offensive campaigns bring the organizations integrity into question.

Besides the questionable campaigns, PETA has also come under scrutiny for their

actions that contradict their beliefs. In an article in the New York Times it was revealed

that PETA kills an average of about 2,000 dogs and cats each year at its animal shelter

[in New York] (Winerip). On their website, PETA does reveal that they euthanize

animals out of compassion (Newkirk, Why We Euthanize), but in the article we are
 Kollar 4

analyzing, PETA criticizes shelters that kill animals. This claim seems hypocritical when

PETA is doing the exact same thing. Of course the Pets article never mentions these

facts. Instead of addressing these facts, the articles ethos is built on the hope that readers

either (1) do not do any further research on the organizations questionable methods, or

(2) support PETA regardless of these offensive and contradictory facts.

Pathos, like ethos, is a tool of persuasion; it is the emotional appeal of an

argument3. The Pets article we have been looking at uses pathos a great deal to win the

support of readers. The entirety of the article is making the point that because there are so

many animals being bred and given away to shelters and other undesirable situations,

they are abused and mistreated. The very first paragraph opens by saying that millions of

unwanted animals are destroyed (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets). This sets a

dark and desperate tone for the article that causes readers to sympathize with these

animals. The article continues to evoke these feelings by describing the lives of these

animals that are taken in as pets. In paragraph five, the article lists off horrifying ways

animals are abused, including: shot with arrows, blown up with firecrackers, [and]

doused in gasoline and set on fire (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets), just to name

a few.

Using such strong language to describe the suffering of animals has a powerful

impact on readers. With such graphic examples of abuse and bold language, the article

alters the minds of the readers to pity the animals and have a desire to do something

about it; in this case, spay or neuter their pets.

Pathos is a powerful tool of persuasion, and this article is an example of how

PETA has mastered it. As stated in the paragraph above, the article uses examples of

3 Introduction of pathos
 Kollar 5

animal abuse and strong, descriptive language to evoke emotional responses from

readers. But the article uses pathos for more than just gaining support for spaying and

neutering; through these emotional appeals the article is actually changing the way

readers see pet keeping.

In the second paragraph, the article calls pet keeping a selfish desire to possess

animals (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets) and the cause of all the suffering that

animals go through. The article continues by saying that animals kept as pets are

restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and

even urinate when humans allow them to (Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets).

These bold statements about pet owning evoke more than sympathy for these animals;

they evoke guilt. When pet owners, who love their pets and support PETAs desire to

protect animal rights, stumble upon this article, suddenly owning and taking care of pets

is not a fun or noble action, it is a manipulative act of slavery4.

As mentioned above, the article focuses a lot on pathos, and in doing so, leaves

less room for logical support. Implementing the technique of logos means supporting an

argument with logical and factual evidence5. In the Pets article, PETA supports its

claims by providing separate articles for evidence. In paragraph four, the article claims

that there have been multiple reports of animal abuse. But instead of providing specific

examples of abuse, the article provides links to other articles that expand on the topic.

Though it seems the article provides sufficient evidence, and in some cases it does make

the argument more credible, the lack of direct examples leads to a lack of logos and a

biased argument.

4 I use strong language to evoke pathos

5 Introduction of logos
 Kollar 6

Throughout the entire article, there is no information that is pulled from any

outside source; PETA is the sole provider of all the information. Since PETA is very

passionate about their purpose, the organization is biased. Even in the first paragraph of

the article, PETA says that they wish that pet keeping never existed (Animal Rights

Uncompromised: Pets). The fact that PETA is biased is not the issue; it is the lack of

specific evidence that hurts this article and the organization.

Every company and organization uses rhetorical devices to persuade people to

join their cause; thats the purpose of rhetoric, to persuade. PETA is no different. When

reading Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets, or any article found on the PETA website,

readers are bombarded by elements of persuasion. The articles use of ethos constantly

convinces readers PETA is a noble organization, pathos evokes emotions of injustice and

guilt, and logos provides biased information that favors PETAs view. However, all these

rhetorical devices are used to, not only support spaying and neutering pets, but are in the

article to further PETAs goal. This goal, as president and cofounder Ingrid E. Newkirk,

states, is to show people that they must respect [animals] as fellow beings, as other

individuals and families and tribes who have the same basic interests in experiencing joy

and love and living without needless pain and harassment as we do (A Message from

PETAs President).

Works Cited

Animal Rights Uncompromised: Pets. PETA. PETA, 2014. Web. 13, Oct. 2014.

http://www.peta.org/about-peta/why-peta/pets/

DiBernardo, Emma. Personal interview. 29 Oct. 2014.

 Kollar 7

Holder, Tom. Where do PETAs donation dollars go? Speaking of Research.

WordPress, 18 Jan. 2011. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.

Newkirk, Ingrid E. A Message from PETAs President. PETA. PETA 2014. Web. 30

Oct. 2014. http://www.peta.org/about-peta/learn-about-peta/ingrid-newkirk/

http://speakingofresearch.com/2011/01/18/where-do-petas-donation-dollars-go/

Newkirk, Ingrid E. Why We Euthanize. PETA. PETA, 21 Mar. 2013. Web. 4 Nov.

2014. http://www.peta.org/blog/euthanize/

PETAs History: Compassion in Action. PETA. PETA, 2014. Web. 29 Oct. 2014.

http://www.peta.org/about-peta/learn-about-peta/history/

Winerip, Michael. PETA Finds Itself on Receiving End of Others Anger. The New

York Times. The New York Times, 6 July 2013. Web. 30 Oct. 2014.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/peta-finds-itself-on-receiving-end-of-

others-anger.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0