PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has long been an advocate for proper treatment of great apes, including chimpanzees and orangutans, but their involvement in this issue has yet to impact the advertising world until now. This overlap has arisen due to the recently increasing use of these animals in television and print campaigns (see photo to right). There has been speculation of illegal practices and inhumane conditions that these primates are put through in order to create these ads, yet no direct charges have been made in recent times. The Ad Council, based in New York "is the leading producer of public service announcements (PSAs) since 1942," issued their statement supporting PETA from president and CEO, Peggy Conlon. She addressed their lack of use of any great ape in their 66 year history and that there is a need to outlaw the use of these animals as they "endure abuse as part of their behind-the-scenes training." However, with all of this, I feel the issue at hand should not be dealt with by removing great apes from the advertisements themselves, but instead PETA should be advocating for stricter practices in the treatment of the animals during their time being raised for acting and while working on the ads. To ask for a prompt and entire removal of chimpanzees and orangutans from commercials seems a little extreme, thus PETA and the Ad Council should steer their efforts towards gaining more humane treatment of these acting primates.This recent story has allowed many blogs online to take a humorous spin at the issue, while others simply state the ridiculousness of it all. PETA provides their description of the use of these primates in the news release and on their blog, The PETA Files, to portray the trainers of the monkeys as the problem and the use of their acting in ads as the original source causing this problem. Yet others who pick up the issue would rather point out what no longer will be seen in advertising instead of focusing on any positive outcome of their removal. Bloggers would rather scheme up the funny "what if" situations that could occur if all other agencies abide by this proposal. AdFreak entertains the thought that we should be glad PETA stopped these primates before they could become "intelligent enough to unionize one day and bring commercial production grinding to a halt" or even they may possess the "desire to subjugate humankind in a post-apocalyptic world" (see Planet of the Apes reference). From the mouth of a credible news source, even AdAge adds a spin to this issue by saying "this is one more step toward a chimp-free Super Bowl" and throws in its own reference to a previously famous commercial starring a monkey.
Meanwhile, AdRants.com takes off with the story to send a witty message about the life of the now out of work great ape that had appeared in the award-winning Cadbury commercial (photo below left).
Yet, this point goes barely beyond its screen-limited comedic tone because that great ape was obviously fake. But who knows what could come about, what if more great ads like this will never be taken beyond the drawing board because of this proposed limitation, why should the use of primates be wiped out entirely? There is still the chance to use people in costume ape suits or to show animated monkeys, but where is the fun in seeing that. The point has always been to see an animal that is so closely related to own human DNA that the actions are comparable enough for us to picture ourselves as them (perfect example was from CareerBuilder.com's Super Bowl TV spots showing chimps as your bosses). Having a live animal reenact our mundane lifestyle is often refreshing and warming. So far the agreement between PETA and the Ad Council has only limited influence on the advertising industry's broad reach, but with enough pressure this issue may soon be recognized by all major agencies and lead to the elimination of primates from commercials. What's next...the Aflac Duck? The Geico Gecko? The Coca-Cola Polar Bears? This problem is relevant but only within a certain extent of live animal usage and in the future we may see this set a standard that the industry will not be able to keep up with as a potential spark that causes exponential downward use of any live animals in commercials.
