Eating Meat and Ethical Treatment of Animals

Essay #1-Comparative Analysis
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Jessica Scott Reid's article “Are anti-meat subway ads effective? Yes” highlights that subway advertisements against meat consumption are effective as they influence change in behavior and actions even as there are those who claim that the ads are associated with limiting personal choices. The organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has been effective in influencing change in thinking by using the subway advertisement by dropping the more controversial approaches. The article “Are anti-meat subway ads effective? No” highlights a difference stance where the anti-meat subway ads to support are ineffective because of cognitive dissonance and the impact of these ethical campaigns are short lived.  Article 1 and two both look into the effectiveness of advertising against the consumption of animal meat, but they differ in targeting the audiences and evidence used. The articles target audiences to evaluate the ads’ effectiveness and whether the ethical campaign is likely to influence long term changes in meat consumption. According to Scott-Reid (2018), PETA took a less controversial stance in an ethical campaign to convince those who are more likely to choose veganism or be vegetarians. In this case, staying away from meat consumption is an ethical choice, and the author claims this is convincing. In article 2, the author expresses skepticism that those targeted will change their eating behaviors since the campaigns focus too much on ethics and may result in cognitive dissonance, and people would still choose meat if it seems they are forced to evaluate their food choices (Zaraska, 2018). People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (...