animal rights

I don't get this one. The protest looks to be like two people standing on a highway protesting KFC for doing really bad things to my dinner before it's dead. An actual counter-argument would be something like "well, this bird's gonna die, be cut up, seasoned with bread crumbs, shipped a couple hundred miles in the process, be dropped in a commercial frying machine and make its way through my body and end up in some toilet within the next day --- so why should I get all pissed off because my dinner didn't die a humane death or live a happy life before it met my stomach?"

Unfortunatly, your counter argument is "look, some people at this one animal right's group have killed animals" and you link to a industry-funded hit site designed to attack PETA and any other organization that gets in the way of said industry's profit margins.

I would find a level-headed non-vegetarian (of which there are plenty of) to be your counter to the tiny PETA protest --- you got a pretty good interview out of one of the protestors, and I think having a retort/counter argument from an individual who geniuenly disagrees with the mission of these protestors would make for a much better short video.

For a different video about the same protest, go here.

Level headed meat-eater reporting for comment. First off let me say that yes, PETA is indeed a massively hypocritical political hate machine. That said, here are the problems with this piece. As mentioned by Grossman, you're video starts off as recording people protesting KFC, this is all well and good, but we don't know that they're with PETA and your counter argument has to be stronger than PETA kills animals. It's no shocker that KFC kills animals, that's where chicken comes from. The shock comes from the way in which they kill them.

A good approach would have been to comment that this is one of thousands of protests lead by PETA supporters every year. Though this protest is pretty peaceful, not all of them are so tame. Then maybe show a fire-bombed research lab or a bunch of naked morons lying on the ground in front of some fashion mall where they sell fur. Afterwards feel more than free to call them hypocrits and site that they too kill animals. Make us believe that the majority of PETA's followers are merely miss-guided animal lovers that don't know about the non-profit's dirty tactics and get them to join the other organizations. Also mention these other oganizations and how they're trying to stop this kind of cruelty in a humane and legal way instead of flipping out and dumping paint on people while threatening the lives of their children.

Add some more dimension that way and maybe re-upload. Again, let me re-iterate, this is not a bad piece, you just have to wok on your counter-argument a little bit. Also, the shot of the chick on the street corner, ran a little long. Keep up the fight and good luck.

Same animal protest difrent view hmmm I like the other one better

This was a very poor done approach to trying to prove a point. First of all, the footage is very uncompelling and boring, I personally don't care to look at websites while I am watching TV, but you didn't really show any shocking stats or footage, which would have helped your argument. The audio was poorly recorded. And bringing the ASPCA into your argument of KFC vs PETA totally threw your argument out of wack. If you want to produce an effective rant, focus and put more time, organization, and thought into your production. And use more facts and actually SHOW things to back up your position. An internet search is not a legit statistic of proof, since anyone can create content for the internet, it doesn't neccessarily mean it is all factual information. Like the others said, you want to prove that PETA is so violent, yet, you don't really show much to back that up.

you have a valid point, but taking things out of context really works against you. you wind up ,i dont wanna say looking stupid, but destroying your own credibility for having the capacity for inteligent or logical thought. i think if you added more substance to this video it would be great. you might look into some other industries who might be doing the same things , you know just to show that it's the injustice that you're against, not just KFC. BTW did you know that there are KFC in europe? it just strikes me as funny.

I have to agree with RiverWind and MelissF, you need stronger content. You can't rely on petakillsanimals.com to deliver this message to your audience. It's a decent source of information, but your pod is supposed to tell us, not that website. Also, the CFCF is famous for taking money from corporations that make money from meat. That doesn't make the Center for Consumer Freedom complete liars (as the photos of dead dogs and cats are legit), but it does damage their credibility in the minds and eyes of people who support PETA.

As for the issue. People should be free to eat meat in my opinion, but that doesn't mean we should torture animals to do so. Animal Cruely is wrong and in-humane, which is why the government and multiple ogranizations work very hard to end it, while keeping the freedom to eat meat. On that note, smoking will kill you eventually, that's why there are programs in place to help people break the habit and get healthy instead of banning tobacco use and sales. Not to mention the hazards to yourself and others when you drink alcohol (the last legal drug). No state outlaws drinking but they all have powerful drunk driving enforcement.

You should note that the government doesn't go out of its way to completely ban the eating of meat, the smoking of cigarettes, or the drinking of alcohol, as these markets are great for our economy. As such, the CFCF doesn't really have to do that much work, they don't have the celebrity backing of PETA, but they do have economical factors on their side, and about as much money to play with as them.

As I stated before, the piece is not all that well shot and you flubbed the name of the website in your narration, but don't let my comments get you down. Get up and shoot another protest, get some more on the street interviews, provide a valid counter argumet and explain different organizations' goals and intentions.

Not very interesting or creative. Website stills make the pod stale, one or two - fine but you've used far too many. The "music" at the end treats, what I hope you feel is a serious subject, simply as a joke.