PETA, rhetorical fracture, and the power of digital activism

Abstract

Starting in 2013, SeaWorld faced a public relations disaster with the release of the documentary titled Blackfish that accused the company of mistreatment of its orcas. SeaWorld attempted to respond and rebuild its credibility, but activist group ‘People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ (PETA) doubled down on the corporation through its rhetorical shock tactics, deepening the organization’s woes. The PETA/SeaWorld controversy does more than provide another example of poor corporate public relations decision-making made in light of an activist group’s savvy use of digital technology. We argue that the case helps explain how digital technologies fundamentally change activism, whereby activists can use rhetorical fracturing, or quickly using digital media to puncture a target’s narrative, to create messages that challenge an opponent’s legitimacy to cultivate public opinion, thereby pressuring corporate policy change. Recent activism scholarship points out how digital media transforms organizational-activist relationships in profound ways, but this essay contributes to a gap in public relations scholarship by showing how strategic, message-level digital activism helps contribute to broad societal change. Indeed, given that SeaWorld’s stock was down nearly 40 percent in 2015 and ‘is about 50% below its all-time high’, its profits were down 84 percent in 2015, and attendance has fallen more than 7 percent at its parks, the case illustrates how digital activist campaigns help reshape societal understanding of a controversial issue such as using animals for entertainment.

Raining on SeaWorld’s Parade: PETA’s Direct Action and Public Interest Communication

“…Although the animal rights movement has grown rapidly since the 1980s, with thousands of active participants and "millions of sympathizers" (Jasper & Poulsen, 1995, p. 493), PETA is recognized as the international leader, crafting public controversy since 1980 to draw attention to animal rights arguments regarding what it considers to be animal cruelty, including wearing fur, testing on animals for drug manufacture, and making animals perform for entertainment (Stokes & Atkins-Sayre, 2018). Founded in the United States, it campaigns against organizations worldwide, influencing a variety of animal rights conversations including reform in horse racing, lab animal treatment standards, and closing circuses and zoos (Atkins-Sayre, 2010).…”

“…Within public relations scholarship that has deep connections to PIC, PETA is studied as an activist organization (Stokes & Atkins-Sayre, 2018) where activism is frequently defined as "a process by which groups of people exert pressure on organizations or other institutions to change policies, practices, or conditions that the activists find problematic" (Smith, 2005, p. 5). Briefly reviewing how activism is typically studied in public relations emphasizes the value of adding the PIC lens.…”

“…Witnessing the cramped, cold actors, however, invites a comparison in a way that is difficult to achieve through words alone. These performances are also more newsworthy than news releases in today's visually-oriented news cycles (Stokes & Atkins-Sayre, 2018). PETA couples moral shock with pranking strategies in ways that also encourage action and capture media attention.…”

“…2). Although PETA is known for its mix of "strategic opportunism and digital technologies" in support of its causes, and some have assessed its use of new media in its fight for orcas (Stokes & Atkins-Sayre, 2018), the role of its direct-action strategies in helping cultivate negative public sentiment has been overlooked.…”

“We Really Have to Hit Them Where It Hurts”: Analyzing Activists’ Corporate Campaigns

“…Many groups pursue all three goals (Coombs & Holladay, 2014). While research has explored the strategies and tactics used by activists in pursuit of these objectives (e.g., Jaques, 2013;Sommerfeldt, 2013;Stokes & Atkins-Sayre, 2018;Veil, Reno, Freihaut, & Oldham, 2015;Woods, 2018), this study examines how activist organizations try to produce change at the individual company level.…”