A Less Than Charitable Act
As anyone with cable can tell you, PETA is a highly-effective and highly-controversial animal-rights organization. Love them or hate them, few would argue that they haven't utilized innovative and edgy marketing techniques to advance their particular animal-driven agenda. Personally, I think they've done some smart things over the years, and in some cases, have actually stepped over the line and hurt their cause, that of protecting animals.
But I do think it's relevant to remember that this is a public charity, subsidized in effect by taxpayers, and chartered to serve the public good. And I'd be lying if I said I could therefore make a rational argument for why PETA decided to send (and subsequently publicize) a letter to filmmaker Michael Moore, in which PETA president Ingrid Newkirk mocks Moore for being fat, calling him "the elephant in the room." The letter was not in response to anything Moore had done or said, but an attempt to capitalize on the media attention surrounding his new movie "Sicko."
This is immature, stupid, insensitive, and an insult to the people who have donated to this group, and to the rest of us who pay taxes and subsequently make their tax-exempt dealings possible. Because Michael Moore is a polarizing presence and a public figure (not to mention a white male--there's no chance Oprah or any other woman or minority that struggles with their weight ever receives this letter), PETA will get away with this, and some will actually praise them for their strident advocacy. But that doesn't make it right.
Non-profit tax-exempt status should not be used as an excuse for charities, no matter their missions, to execute personal and malicious attacks on individuals, or to belittle entire subsets of people, for the charity's personal PR gain. At Charity Navigator, we of course only evaluate groups on the basis of their financial health and fiscal efficiencies, and in this area, PETA is good, but not great. If you give them a dollar, they're generally going to spend it on their mission. I just wish their mission didn't include calling people "fat."
But I do think it's relevant to remember that this is a public charity, subsidized in effect by taxpayers, and chartered to serve the public good. And I'd be lying if I said I could therefore make a rational argument for why PETA decided to send (and subsequently publicize) a letter to filmmaker Michael Moore, in which PETA president Ingrid Newkirk mocks Moore for being fat, calling him "the elephant in the room." The letter was not in response to anything Moore had done or said, but an attempt to capitalize on the media attention surrounding his new movie "Sicko."
This is immature, stupid, insensitive, and an insult to the people who have donated to this group, and to the rest of us who pay taxes and subsequently make their tax-exempt dealings possible. Because Michael Moore is a polarizing presence and a public figure (not to mention a white male--there's no chance Oprah or any other woman or minority that struggles with their weight ever receives this letter), PETA will get away with this, and some will actually praise them for their strident advocacy. But that doesn't make it right.
Non-profit tax-exempt status should not be used as an excuse for charities, no matter their missions, to execute personal and malicious attacks on individuals, or to belittle entire subsets of people, for the charity's personal PR gain. At Charity Navigator, we of course only evaluate groups on the basis of their financial health and fiscal efficiencies, and in this area, PETA is good, but not great. If you give them a dollar, they're generally going to spend it on their mission. I just wish their mission didn't include calling people "fat."
Labels: Ingrid Newkirk, Michael Moore, PETA, Sicko
posted by Trent Stamp at 1:50 PM
19 Comments:
i CANNOT stand Michael Moore, but you're right, calling him a fat elephant, and releasing a letter in which they give him diet tips (eat vegetarian!) is a pathetic and embarrassing act by a group more interested in whoring themselves out for the media lights than actually doing quality work.
Seems kind of strange that Peta would send a letter to Michael Moore. Did he go against them or attack them in some way to provoke this? (Example: Rosie and The Donald) lol
I love animals, but I cannot even spend a minute on the PETA website, without wanting to carpet bomb meat factories.. and I love meat way to much to do that.. so.
On a second level, I found it strange they would quote Nike ..considering their shoes are made from animal leather. Weird.
In a contest between who I would rather see stampeded by rampaging bulls, I'd be torn between Michael Moore and PETA. You couldn't lose either way. But you're right, I don't understand how PETA thinks that calling Moore fatso is within their rights as a public charity. They're embarrassing.
I agree with your conclusion that they'll get away with this despicable act because Moore is a white male. It's the last group in America that you can tar and feather with no fear of recrimination. Political correctness at its most foul. Of course, no one will listen to you (or me) because we're white males too.
This is Ingrid Newkirk. First, re: the Michael Moore letter blog editorial and comments, please know that I have never called Mr. Moore a "sicko," a "fasto," or a hypocrite. Those words were used by news outlets, not by me. And, if anyone has seen Michael Moore's films or read his books, he dishes it out far more bluntly than anything I have ever written to him. I imagine if he dishes it out, he can take it, so this was written in a watered-down, far more polite, but Michael Moore style, to get his attention. In the past, ever-so-polite letters to him on various subjects have failed. In my letter, I praise him for his film (yes, that's right) and tell him I think it is also important to address personal responsibility, since that is the main reason America faces a health crisis. It has been reported that it was hard for him to be taken seriously in some situations when he was shooting the film, because he is obese and has failed to look after his own health. That is changing now. He has just said that he is eating more fruits and vegetables and is going to lose more weight, a good thing, for his heart, his blood pressure, his longevity. And, for those people who do not know, Michael Moore has a terrible record on animal protection matters. He has constantly derided those who abhor cruelty to animals as nuts, he takes pot shots at every turn, and he actually sent people to our headquarters on a hot day with some very confused sheep, goats, other animals (including a goldfish being jostled about in a handheld bowl) "wearing" signs that weren't clever, e.g. "Animal rights people are stupid" and "Go eat a hamburger." Nevertheless, we were ready with coffee for the protestors and water for the animals. For those who don't know this, btw, "the elephant in the room" is an expression that means the subject everyone tries to avoid but is the crux of the matter. Personal responsibility for looking after ourselves, rather than gorging on fats and then hoping for a magic, all-expense paid pill, is the elephant in the room. The letter and blog comments on it can be seen at peta.org
Ingrid's reply is disingenuous.
I'm pretty sure almost everyone knows the meaning of the expression "elephant in the room" and it's also pretty clear that the expression was chosen as a play on words -- we were meant to see Mr. Moore literally as an elephant.
Address Mr. Moore's record on animal rights -- that is your perogative. Using public money to hurl insults at people who disagree with you is not.
I agree. Her response makes it even worse. She never apologizes for calling him fat (and in fact, tries to justify it by saying that his crew failed to take him seriously because of his weight), nor does she explain why this is within the organization's mission, or why it might be acceptable for a taxpayer-subsidized 501 c3 to engage in these scurrilous personal attacks.
Let me make sure I understand this, Ingrid. Because Michael Moore is fat, his film-making was compromised?
"It has been reported that it was hard for him to be taken seriously in some situations when he was shooting the film, because he is obese and has failed to look after his own health."
So, people who are large are not as qualified or competent as those that are thin and veggie eaters? I'd like to ask why you are allowed such bigotry?
I believe Trent writes about special places in hell for those who abuse the public trust for their own good. Have fun, Ingrid. I'm sure the heat there will help you stay thin.
why you trying to back away and be cute with your language now, ingrid? sounds like one of those "depends on your definition of is" kind of arguments. the quote (from ingrid's letter, not the wacko media outlets out to get peta) was "there is an elephant in the room, and it is you." we all know what the quote means in other contexts, and we all know what you meant here. do you stand behind your comment or not? you called the man an elephant. is this acceptable or not? based on your explanation that michael moore is cruel to animals, it sounds like you believe that your attack was justified on him. yes or no? no cute semantics allowed.
I'm not sure I agree with Trent's assertion that PETA is both highly controversial and highly effective. Controversial - yes, but I'm not sure how effective they are, at least not if they're measuring their effectiveness by the impact they are having on the well-being of animals. I am a strident supporter of animal rights and for many years was a practicing vegetarian. I should be counted among PETA's most faithful donors and yet, I choose to send my philanthropic dollars elsewhere. I do so because of exactly the type of media whoring that PETA seems to seek out -- the tactics they most recently exhibited in their letter to Michael Moore. It is not that I think they should shun media attention. Exactly the opposite, I love to see animal rights championed in the press. However, I believe their media strategy thrives on invented controversies like the one they created with their "elephant in the room" comment and that because of this, it does more harm than good to the general cause of animal welfare. PETA is omnipresent in the media and for this reason, many people associate the cause of animal rights with PETA alone. And since so many people find much of what PETA says publicly to be offensive, I suspect many are turned away from donating to animal rights organizations in general.
Can't anyone read. Of course it was a play on words, but she's saying (and if you bother to read the letter you'll verify, go to peta.org, I did) that she didn't "hurl insults' at him. And no, it doesn't make sense for an obese person who was doing nothing to combat his obesity to fail to take responsibility, any more than a person who makes no effort to keep their children out of the road can credibly scream about traffic.
joel-
i can read.
can you write?
your letter makes no sense, either logically or grammatically. and yes, we read the PETA letter, and are very impressed with your ability to find it online at peta.org--good cybersleuthing--of course, trent linked to it in the original post, so that might have been another way you could have found it.
my god, this is what the internet does to us all--i'm rebutting a moron because an idiotic organization called a fool a bad name...
Book club Jill: thank you for your sensible comment.
Anyone is totally free to hate Michael Moore, but I'm not one of the legions of people who feel they have to preface any comment about him with the standard disclaimer of "Oh, I hate him, but..." or "Yes, he's annoying and fat, but...."
He's an important commentator, and I respect his work, and it should go without saying that I can respect his work without claiming that he never makes a mistake or a mis-step or that I always agree with everything he does. Jeez. "Fahrenheit 911" was brilliant, and I am looking forward to "Sicko".
Magatha
...who is Michael Moore?
We need more Michael Moores in our world.
Connie
Well, at least now I know how to get charity work talked about. Insult famous people and your url gets posted. Should've thought of that myself. Well, I am off to find someone famous to insult and see if I can get my site hits up. Thanks.
Hello!
I wish I'd been on this when it happened.
Did you folks read Ingrid's letter or just rush to judgement?
I don't agree with everything PETA does (in fact I disagree with many of their methods) but come on people, "the elephant in the room"? It is a damned play on words. And part of Moore's point in Sicko is that people need to start taking better care of themselves - I'm assuming he's including white middle-aged men in that group - so could everyone stop taking themselves so seriously and get off it? Like there aren't more pressing matters to rant about.
From reading the numerous foregoing blogs, it seems to me that no matter what, there will be no way Ingrid can make herself understood. It's almost as if you don't understand the language and yet her blog is grammatically perfect (unlike the snide remarks levelled by some other cretin mentioned).
Sigh.
nsaynne
Hmmm. Trent supports PETA. That's nice. I wonder if he noticed that at the past FIVE Nine Inch Nails concerts I went to, the merch table has had genuine leather jackets with NIN emblazoned on them? Oh, wait. Trent only loves cute animals. And cows aren't cute. Guess I'll have a bleeding rare steak now...
Rusti
Post a Comment
<< Home