Sea World's business strategy

Quote: reno

PETA thrives on publicity. They crave attention. They want to be in the limelight.

Sending in an undercover employee to infiltrate them gives the news media an angle, a story. Sea World is playing right into PETA's hands, and nothing about this benefits Sea World.

Ah, I gotcha. I get it now. Sorry. I was focused on the "fraud" part, and couldn't see legal problems.

I sort of think PETA needs even more coverage if for no other reason that it can then "trend" on social media, and allow me to identify the morons within my circle from the comfort of my recliner.

Effing PETA, man.

Quote: Face

Also, since PETA was mentioned I cannot end without saying - F#$% PETA. Just another productive idea ruined by extremist whack jobs.

Weirdly enough (or perhaps not) I would probably have to be a right to lifer if I was a PETA believer. They make such an effort to show cruelty to animals it really bleeds over to every living thing, IMO.

Although there are right to lifers who focus on humans as completely separate from all living things and can reject PETA arguments.

Quote: rxwine

Although there are right to lifers who focus on humans as completely separate from all living things and can reject PETA arguments.

The problem with PETA is they do not understand that animals are part of the human food chain and that animal husbandry is a legit human activity. They are the kings of anthropomorphism, a problem not limited to them but they are the biggest offenders.

Quote: AZDuffman

Not sure what PETA could sue for. I see no grounds.

In 1992, ABC News sent 2 reporters undercover with a hidden camera to video tape a grocery store selling expired rotten meat (the grocery store used bleach to hide the smell) and cheese that had been gnawed on by rats. The grocery store sued, and in December 1996, a jury found ABC liable for fraud, trespass and disloyalty. The next month, the same jury awarded Food Lion $1,400 in compensatory damages and $5.5 million in punitive damages for fraud, along with $2 in nominal damages for breach of loyalty and trespass. But the U.S. District Court found the punitive award excessive and reduced it to $315,000.

I'm not saying that the ABC's actions and Sea World's actions are identical, but this particular precedent would at least give PETA's lawyers something to work with. PETA still might lose the suit, but winning isn't their only goal... they'd be delighted just to get more publicity and further embarrass Sea World.

Quote: reno

In 1992, ABC News sent 2 reporters undercover with a hidden camera to video tape a grocery store selling expired rotten meat (the grocery store used bleach to hide the smell) and cheese that had been gnawed on by rats. The grocery store sued, and in December 1996, a jury found ABC liable for fraud, trespass and disloyalty. The next month, the same jury awarded Food Lion $1,400 in compensatory damages and $5.5 million in punitive damages for fraud, along with $2 in nominal damages for breach of loyalty and trespass. But the U.S. District Court found the punitive award excessive and reduced it to $315,000.

I'm not saying that the ABC's actions and Sea World's actions are identical, but this particular precedent would at least give PETA's lawyers something to work with. PETA still might lose the suit, but winning isn't their only goal... they'd be delighted just to get more publicity and further embarrass Sea World.

I see what you are saying but not sure if it totally fits. PETA has suffered no damages. The Sea World member did not draw a salary, or did they? Unless the person actively sought to embarrass PETA I do not see it.

I can't stand PETA, as I am sure is obvious. If they sue they open themselves to suits when they actively try to destroy a business, so they should tread lightly.

I am no fan of PETA
But I did watch the Blackfish documentary.
It was shocking.

I am sorry that farming reached its mass production practices with no one really paying attention to living conditions of some of the animals. The public dependency on mass production, and I assume the industries ability to buy enough influence has made it difficult to reverse. There are fights over giving animals two more inches so they can shift positions -- and that's as much compromise as you get. Not sure what animal deserves to live in such a confined area, literally no walking its entire life when it is born with legs. By comparison though Sea World is a paradise to some animal conditions.

PETA could have more credibility if they just focused on a few most critical areas (regardless of their beliefs) and probably have more of a following.

Quote: rxwine

I By comparison though Sea World is a paradise to some animal conditions.

Obviously you did not watch Blackfish.
Where do you think they keep the whales at night?
You think they want them swimming and jumping around at nite?
Watch Blackfish and you will be shocked.
Small dark pens wherer they cant even turn around.

Quote: terapined

Obviously you did not watch Blackfish.
Where do you think they keep the whales at night?
You think they want them swimming and jumping around at nite?
Watch Blackfish and you will be shocked.
Small dark pens wherer they cant even turn around.

You could probably make an argument that a stable is the same for a horse. I don't know that I buy that horse resting in a stable is worse than at night on an open range. No coyotes. No rain.

If you never let them out of the stable that would be different.

How much time does the film spend on both sides of the issue?

Quote: rxwine

PETA could have more credibility if they just focused on a few most critical areas (regardless of their beliefs) and probably have more of a following.

That's why I hate them. I often quote "A Bronx Tale" as a saying within it is one I hold myself - There is no worse thing than wasted talent. PETA has the potential to fix real things. We've all seen McLaughlin commercials where some dog's collar has worn away the fur, and the skin, and it has grown into the dog itself. I've seen things in some mass farms that far overshadow stuff like that. I think that if just about any non-sociopath saw some of the things I have, they'd say "hey, that needs to change".

But that's not what they do. They... they're just insane. AZD was generous saying they engage in anthropomorphism. In reality, it's far worse.

Quote: rxwine

How much time does the film spend on both sides of the issue?

Ha. That's rhetorical, right? Of course the answer is obvious. It's zero.