Peta Billboard Image

This image is a picture of a billboard. On the billboard is an ad from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), who is the largest animal rights organization in the world and focuses its attention on the safety animals. PETA is committed to the preventions of animals suffering in crowded, factory farms and slaughter houses. They have used this image with intention to trigger the emotions of parents. The image, on a billboard, contains a child on the left side of the ad who is no more than three years old. The innocent child is holding a cigar in his hand and mouth and to the right it reads, “You Wouldn’t Let Your Child Smoke. Like smoking, eating meat increases the risk of heart disease and cancer.” (PETA) The meaning of this picture …show more content…
The child is wearing a light blue, long-sleeve shirt with a hood. He is leaning down, resting on his elbows, in front of him lies an open book. This image captures the innocence of the child as he seems to be looking directly into the observer’s eyes. His soft blond hair and big blue eyes set amid the soft white background and exhibits the feelings of purity. The image on the billboard is located in a parking lot of some sort, this is indicated by two vehicles parked in front of it. On the left side is parked a blue sedan and to the right is a white minivan. Often the minivan is characterized as a family car, which is possibly why the photographer took the photograph at that moment. The young child, the light blue shirt, the soft white background and the white minivan are clear indications of family values and the purity a child …show more content…
The child, while kneeling down, resting on his elbows, behind an open book is smoking a cigar. His tiny hand barley able to cuff the cigar, his innocent glare almost hidden by the flow of smoke. With the message in large bold letters “YOU WOULDN’T LET YOUR CHILD SMOKE.” Then smaller evasive letters, “Like smoking, eating meat increases the risk of heart disease and cancer.” This image conveys a powerful message that in one hand, observers may be inclined to stop eating meat due to the increased risks of heart disease and cancer to their families. On the other hand, many might argue this message is misleading and falls into the category of “Faulty Causality”, which is a fallacy known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc, “The faulty assumption that because one event or action follows another, the first causes the second.” (Lunsford) Most people would agree that it is faulty to say eating meat in general will increase the risks of heart disease and cancer. Julia Glotz, managing editor of a British market leading magazine devoted to grocery sales that has been around since 1862, discusses why this particular advertisement was banned. This ad was found to include incorrect information by generalizing and misleading by saying all meat causes heart disease and cancer. The ad was forced to change their wording to, “Like smoking, eating bacon, sausages and other processed meat is linked to cancer.” (Glotz) They even left out heart