This document analyzes two images from PETA campaigns that compare human treatment of animals to the Holocaust. Through a rhetorical analysis, it identifies how the images use techniques like symmetry, labeling, color, and lighting to draw the comparison. Figure 1 places images of caged chickens and men on shelves side by side, labeling people as Nazis. Figure 2 depicts a dog with a Hitler-style mustache above the text "Master Race", suggesting dog breeders create a superior breed like Nazis. Both images aim to portray humans as oppressing animals similarly to how Nazis oppressed Jews.

1. "1
Animal Oppression as the New Holocaust? Visual Rhetoric of PETA campaigns.
Jessica Lanzetti
17 April 2014
The largest Animal Rights organization justification for rhetorical analysis:
Since the beginning of the Animal Rights Movement, People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals (PETA) has been one of the largest and most active animal rights
organization in the world. With over 3 million members working to promote animal
rights awareness, this non-profit organization totals revenue over 30 million in 2013 (Fi-nancial
Reports). In the last year, PETA organized around 1,000 protest and public
demonstrations, and even encouraged companies such as Coleman and Ann Taylor to
not use goose down. It can’t be denied that PETA is beneficial to Animals Right Move-ment,
yet many question the way this organization promotes itself with images.
One could say that PETA’s success derives from it’s unique campaigns style that
include controversial media images. For example, in 2009, NBC banned PETA’s Super
Bowl ‘veggie love’ commercial as it “created a lot of controversy with its sexy semi-nude
models engaging in unspeakable acts with vegetables”(Varghese). PETA is also well
know known for using advising strategy of using a celebrity to gain credibility. Chip and
Dan Heath say that authorities, celebrities, and other aspirational figures are used to
persuaded audience of their credibility (Heath). Behati Prinsloo, a model for Victoria
Secret’s & Ralph Lauren, took pictures wearing a “SeaWorld Kills”-PETA shirt promot-ing
the end of Orca Whale captivity SeaWorld (Kretzer).

2. "2
There have also been accusations about PETA using euthanasia on a number of
animals in its care. In 1991, reports showed that of rabbits needed of veterinary atten-tion,
but instead, they were euthanized (Francione 107). Francione states that “this
contention is difficult to understand not only in light of PETA’s budget, which, at the time
of Apsen Hill Killings, was in excess of $6 million per year” (106). More recently, in
2012, Winograd reported that “In 2012, 733 dogs entered this building. They killed 602
of them. Only 12 were adopted. Also in 2012, they impounded 1,110 cats. 1,045 were
put to death.” PETA claims that euthanasia is not a solution, yet rather dirty work that
needs to be done to fix the societal problem of over let pet population (Newkirk).
I believe that this justification sparks reason for rhetorical analysis of PETA. Two
images from two different PETA campaigns will be analyzed through a semiotic visual
rhetorical analysis and the theories of image event and ionic photo. With rhetorical
strategies such as symmetry, labeling, color and lighting I argue that PETA images
rhetorically persuades to audience that humans oppress animals much like Hitler and
the Nazis during the holocaust through juxtaposition of visual comfort with controversial
text.
Rhetorical Situation: Animal oppression and the rise of the Animal Rights Move-ment
The successful, controversial, and most talked about Animal Rights orgization,
PETA, didn’t pop out of thin air. Rhetoricians would say that this non-profit organization
is a response to issues in society that were in need of change (Bitzer 60). A “rhetorical
situation” is the context of either people, places, or events that creates discourse in re-

3. "3
sponse to a problem. Within a rhetorical situation, the notion of exigence is an imper-fection
marked by urgency; it is a defect, obstacle, something waiting to be done, a
thing which is other than it should be (Bitzer 62). I argue that the oppression of animals
called for PETA discourse. Specifically, there was exigencies such as fur in the clothing
trade, animal testing, factory farming, and the use of puppy mills.
In the 19th century people began to recognize the connection but dominated over
that have with animals ,over use known as speciesism. Darwin says that “most men
intellectually accepted their biological relationship with other animals without taking the
logical step of acknowledging a moral relationship” (Baird 36). The lack of connection
between man and animals lead to their oppression. The idea of speciesism began to be
discussed which is “the assumption of human superiority leading to the exploitation of
animals” (Oxford). Speciesism influenced people to believe that humans had no moral
obligation to animals and could use them at their disposal. The philosophy that that an-imals
are objects to be used by humans is the first part of the rhetorical situation of
PETA.
In addition, fur as symbol of wealth and power has existed for centuries. People
producing, selling and buying items with animal fur were, like speciesism, thinking of an-imals
as something to advance human profit. The phenomenon of fur fetishism, like
who as “ the lady who buys of fur coat merely completes the cycle and enables the
capitalist to commence another round of employment…” (Emberley 137). Notions like
“Fur Fetichism” and the “need” for fur was portrayed through early advertisements,
keeping the fur trade alive. This exigence sparked discourse around using animal fur
for commodities.

4. "4
Animal testing has been helpful for medical research and testing consumer
products, but also oppresses animals. In 1986, over 22 million animals are tested on in
1985. Animals undergo cruel “experiments that can include everything from testing new
drugs to infecting with diseases, poisoning for toxicity testing, burning skin, causing
brain damage, implanting electrodes into the brain, maiming, blinding, and other painful
and invasive procedures” (Bentham). The extremities of these tests ranged from painful
with anesthetic, to painful without using Anesthesia. Statistics show for painful tests
with no anesthesia that 88% of the animals are used for commercial products and the
remaining 12% for noncommercial (Baird). The main idea was that animals’ lives “ought
to be treated as mere interments of science and other human endeavors” (Baird) can be
an underling cause of this issue.
Another exigence for PETA was the growth of the human population and the de-mand
for mass produced food. “Factory farming” is a method for industry efficient meat
and dairy products, but it treats animals poorly. For instance, “egg-laying hens are
sometimes starved for up to 14 days, exposed to changing light patterns and given no
water in order to shock their bodies into molting…it’s common for 5-10% of hens to die
during the forced molting process”(11 Facts About Animals and Factory Farms). Along
with horrible conditions, factory farm animals never have the opportunity develop natural
instincts such as raising and caring for off-spring. This is common among cows in the
process of producing veal; the flash of a calf, used as food (oxford dictionary). Calves
are taken away from their mothers only hours after birth and “can become so distressed
from separation that they become sick, lose weight from not eating, and cry so much

5. "5
that their throats become raw” (Cows Used for Dairy/Cows Used for Meat). It is clear
that these corporations’ treatment of farm animals is oppressing.
Speciesism, the fur trade, animal testing, and factory farming have a long history,
but “puppy mills” are relatively new. The growing desire for the cutest puppies and
purest breeds of dog influenced breeders to breed large amounts of puppies for profit,
leasing to the statistic that 99% of pet store dogs today come from puppy mills (Bron-shteyn).
It is stated that dogs are kept in “tight quarters where they can’t even move
around, it’s completely inhumane. It’s a travesty” (Ban 'puppy Mill' Dogs from Pet
Stores, City Clerk Urges). The high demand for pets create revenue at 13.6 billion in
the pet store industry, leaving shelters full and adoptions low, as well as euthanizing 2.7
million adoptable cats and dogs each year (U.S. Pet Ownership and Shelter Population
Estimates) causing another exigence of an overpopulation of pets. This recent mis-treatment
of pets in puppy mills continues the oppression of animals.
Drastic modifications needed to be made on behalf of animal welfare, sparking
the Animal Rights Movement. In the late 1960s, “interest in alternatives to animal test-ing
surfaced in both England and the Untied State” (6 Welsh), establishing the United
Action for Animals in New York. New discourse emerged as organizations began to
persuade our society that we do in fact have a moral obligation to the animals. People
began to compare animal oppression to racism and sexism but at the same time “elimi-nating
speciesism does not mean granting all animals exactly the same rights as hu-mans…,
we should be consistent in treating individuals on the basis of morally relevant
characteristics” (Sharp). One of the first victories within the movement was after a full
page ad in The New York Times asked “How Many Rabbits Does Revlon Blind For

6. "6
Beauty’s Sake?”, eventually raising $750,000 for alternative animal testing research (7
Welsh). The rhetorical situation of the oppression of animals called forth the Animal
Rights Movement and organizations such as PETA. The belief in speciesism played a
role oppressing animals such specifically, factory farming, and puppy mills resulted in
the rise of PETA.
Rhetorical Analysis:
From the rhetorical situation of animal oppression emerged PETA, a non-profit
organization that has helped the Animal Rights Movement . PETA’s mission is to focus
on four animals oppression issues on factory farms, the clothing industry, in laborato-ries,
and in the entertainment industry, as well as issues such as cruelty to domesticat-ed
animals, birds, and beavers (PETA). Using a semiotic visual rhetorical analysis and
the theories of image event and iconic photo, I will analyze two of PETA’s campaign im-ages.
Specifically, I identify how symmetry, labeling, color and lighting in these two im-ages
rhetorically persuades juxtaposition of visual comfort with controversial text to see
how humans oppress animals that much like Hitler and the Nazis did during the holo-caust.
Figure 1 uses the strategy of symmetry creating a visual comforting image with
its message that is far from comforting. On the left of the image there is a picture of
men laying on shelves while equally to the right there is a picture that shows cages of
chickens on shelves. Campbell and Huxman say that “symmetry is designed to suggest
formality and is visually comforting” (267). The image is visually comforting but with the
use of image text juxtaposes that comfort.

7. "7
Analyzing the text of Figure 1 creates the juxtaposition from the visually pleasing
to the controversial text which compares people to Nazis. It is important to analyze the
text of the first image, which reveals the strategy of labeling. Text in Figure 1 includes
“TO ANIMALS, ALL PEOPLE ARE NAZIS” above the images of the men and the chick-ens.
Without the text, viewers would be puzzled as to why the picture of the men laying
on shelves is visually similar to the chickens in the cages on the shelf. The text breaks
the symmetrical comfort through denotatively labeling, or saying that what happened
between the Nazis and the Jews is happening today between humans and animals.
According to Campbell and Huxman, labeling is “a name or epithet chosen to character-ize
a person or thing” (181). This images labels all people as Nazis referring to them as
A member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party as well as a person who
holds and acts brutally in accordance with extreme racist or authoritarian views (oxford
dictionary). People are being referred to as Nazis in this image; and where they house
chickens is like a concentration camp due to the situation of factory farming. This cam-paign
was created as a response to the discourse that the growth of the human popula-tion
is creating the demand for more and more food. PETA is persuading people are
Nazis because we are killing mass amounts of chickens/other farm animals in mass
production like factory farms.
The textual and visual elements of Figure 1 rhetorically persuades that humans
are Nazis to animals through strategies common to iconic photos and the visual rhetori-cal
strategy of color. Hariman and Lucaites say iconic photos have artistic design and
portray emotional scenarios. The symmetry of the two pictures within the image is an
aspect of familiar artistic design, proving its iconicity. This image also “constructs a

8. "8
scenario in which specific emotional responses to an event become a powerful basis for
understanding and action” (Hariman and Lucaites 35). I argue that this image has ele-ments
of iconic photo because of its artistic design and emotional scenario, “providing
deep knowledge of social reality both in specific manifestations and as it is itself an un-ending
process of repetition” (Hariman and Lucaites 32). This image of the men is in
black and white which can be described as classic (Campbell & Huxman 267) portray-ing
value and something form a later time period, allowing viewers to connect the image
to the holocaust. More importantly, viewers feel how these men are in pain through the
sad expressions of their faces as well as their gaunt skin and bones.
Figure 2

9. "9
Figure 2 visually persuades superiority of humans over animals through the
strategies of color and lighting as well as the element of appropriation, creating the be-lief
that pure breeds are a master race while breeders are Hitler/Nazis. In Figure 2,
viewers see a white show dog as well a hand holding a black comb above his nose,
which looks like mustache. The background of the image is all white. Campbell and
Huxman say that white symbolizes innocence and purity while white space has been
associated with higher class and luxury (267). This suggests that the dog is high class
and superior, but superior to what? Hariman and Lucaites indicate that “ copying, imitat-ing,
satirizing, and other forms of appropriation are a critical sign of iconicity…(32). The
context of the black comb under the dogs nose resembles the Hitler mustache. “The
“Hitler mustache” is often appropriated in popular culture. The mustache has become
such a recognizable visual symbol that, in order to give the idea that a person (or even
an object) is bad, all one has to do is place a small mustache on it and the association
is almost assured”(Garrison). Appropriation allows viewers to make this connection
suggesting that humans breeding pure breed dogs is bad. This illustrates iconicity
through the element of appropriation portraying the notion that the overpopulation of an-imal
shelters is effected by pure breed dogs being sold.
With the addition of text and again the strategy of labeling in the second image
persuades viewers that this dog is a leader of a master race like Hitler. The text of Fig-ure
2 states “MASTER RACE? WRONG FOR PEOPLE. WRONG FOR DOGS. BOY-COTT
BREEDERS. ADOPT.” The labeling of master race relates to WWII when Hitler
and the Nazi party attempted to eliminate Jews because they were not of the Aryan
master white race. Through this strategy PETA persuades that the white dog is apart of

10. "10
a superior dog group. The text that says BOYCOTT BREEDERS suggest that dog
breeders are the ones creating this master race. This campaigns discourse responds
directly to animal oppression and idea of puppy mills. The desire for the cutest puppies
and purest breads of dog influenced breeders to breed large amounts of puppies for
profit (Bronshteyn). The visual of the hand and black comb along with the master race
is rhetoric that portrays humans as Nazis.
Figure 1 & 2
I also argue that Figure 1 and Figure 2 are apart of an image event protesting
humans that oppress animals. Delicath and DeLuca conceptualize an image event as a

11. "11
staged performance by social activists that creates controversy and debate (315-316).
Even though these two images were not staged performances, I believe that they can
still be considered an image event. First, PETA involves activists who aim to increase
animal rights awareness. What makes them an image event is the discourse that these
images create. Lesli Pace argues that PETA campaigns can be classified as an image
event. She states: image events “operate in the territory of the system but outside the
sense-making rules or the lines on the grid of intelligibility of the system” (20)…these
ads can be understood as violating the expectations of the system in which on is func-tion…
thus we see one example of how PETA’s ads function as image events”(Pace 37).
Therefore these two images within PETA’s campaigns can be defined as an image
event. PETA creates campaigns that challenge that social norms of animal oppression.
They aim to get a reaction out of the viewers giving them an alternative way of thinking
and acting, or provoking a new line of argument about the relation between humans and
animals.
These two images rhetorically persuade juxtaposition of visual comforting to con-troversial
text that animal oppression is occurring because humans are Hitler/Nazis. The
first image portrays visual and textual strategies of symmetry and labeling which creates
a visual comforting image with its message is far from comforting. With the addition of
iconicity the viewers are easily persuaded by PETA. The second image included strate-gies
such as labeling, color, and lighting which persuaded the dog as superior like a
master race. This image also incorporates ideas from the theory Iconic photo such as
appropriation. I also stated that both of these images are parts of image event but limit-ed
in their exigency.

12. "12
Conclusion and Implications Human Superiority to Animals, and Visual Rhetoric
The contrast of these visually comforting images and their controversial text
might shift discourse around the rhetorical situation of animal oppression and could
possibly leave viewers focused on PETA’s shock tactic. I believe if PETA was aiming to
create a new line of argument from these images it could have been a little more less
controversial on the way it which they portrayed this message. 1818 Figure 1 and Figure
2 were so blunt in calling all people and dog breeders Nazis the discourse from this im-ages
revolves around that, not the real issues such as puppy mills and factory farming.
An article from the Business Insider discussed the top 15 most offensive PETA cam-paigns.
Both of these images made the list and most of the article talks about how PETA
has “ developed a brand that's on the fringe, supporting its own extreme stances. Many
of the ads go out of their way to offend you and advertising authorities across the world”
(Bhasin). Not once was the issue of animal oppression discussed.
The over population of pets, like dogs is an implication from the notion that hu-mans
are more superior to animals. As previously stated when getting a dog as a pet
people are more likely to want one from a breeder because of a desired breed. Unfor-tunately,
this leads to pet over population as the less desirable dogs are left of the street
or euthanized due to crowed shelters. In the 2012 APPA claims that there are 83.3 mil-lion
dogs owned in America and only 20% of those dogs were adopted from an animal
shelters (Humane society). PETA persuades in image two that breeders can be com-pared
to Hitler while their selective breeding is similar to producing a master race. Re-sponsible
breeders breed dogs more ethically because quantity isn't their avoiding sell-

13. 13
ing their puppies through a Pet store in efforts to screen the people who are interested
in purchasing their puppies ensuring they will go to a good home (ASPCA). I argue that
by implying that dog breeders compared to Hitler is problematic because it doesn’t
clearly articulate the more serious problem of puppy mill breeders and the pet store in-dustry.
The two images from PETA’s campaign also implies that visual rhetoric is an im-portant
strategy in social activism campaigns. Burke states that “rhetoric seek and cre-ates
public audience through symbolic identifications situated in specific historical times,
places and contexts”. Additionally, the images of PETA’s campaigns suggest that visual
rhetoric incorporates the idea of the shock factor. The shock factor of these two images
is a very high dramatic ideological representing the idea that people are Nazis as well
as dog breeders attempting to create a “master race”. Chip and Dan Heath explain that
in order for an idea to be persuasive an “unexpected idea is more likely to stick because
surprise makes us pay attention and think” (pg 68). Though PETA’s images present un-expected
messages I argue that audiences don’t create discourse around the issues.
Instead, they create concern about the offensive way of comparing aspect of animal op-pression
to the holocaust. Mika discuses that this tactic may be plausible but at the
same time creates a black lash against the organization. She quotes Jasper and Nelkin
who believe that PETA’s “rhetoric that compares animal suffering with the holocaust,
thats equates speciesism with racism…these metaphors appear outlandish, threaten-ing,
dangerously defying accepted categories”(pg 921). This “shock” strategy can ulti-mately
turn away potential audience members from joining the animal rights movement.

14. 14
PETA’s controversial images and text might drive people away from joining their
movement yet they continue this using this strategy to avoid an Extension Dilemma.
Mika explains that an Extension Dilemma entails that “the further you expand your
group (or alliance), the less coherent your goals and actions can be”(pg. 939). I dis-agree
with this approach because the goal of activism is to bring a change within our
society I would think for that to be accomplished, an organization would aim to target its
message to a vast audience to spread awareness. For example, most of the members
of congress are older and might understand the implications of unethical acts towards
animals, and will certainly not be persuaded through these two controversial images.
This idea was brought to my attention before I started my research and showed these
two images to my 85 year old grandfather who was more interested in why PETA would
use appropriated imagery from the holocaust. As I explained the connection, he was
still more interested in why PETA was aiming to offend audiences, ultimalty learning
nothing about the issues of factory farming and over pet population.
Although extremely controversial, these two images from PETA’s campaign are
important to rhetorical studies since both textual and visual strategies are used to per-suade
our society to take a stance against animal oppression. I agree with Olson that
“to study visual rhetoric, then, means to study images or artifacts in larger textual or
perforative contexts in which an audience can encounter them…”(pg 2). Through this
analysis I now know that some images are more powerful with the addition of text. It is
also apparent that rhetoric is increasingly visual, and includes advertisements, maga-zines,
and TV shows rather then simply basic speeches. By rhetorically analyzing
PETA’s campaigns, it is clear that rhetoric can now be seen as visual textual.

15. 15
This study focused on two images from PETA’s campaign, but further research
can be conducted. The ASPCA is an organization that aims to prevent cruelty against
animals. It uses highly emotional rhetoric to persuade in its advertisements. Rhetorical
criticism could compare ASPCA strategies to PETA’s shock strategy. In addition the
method of focus groups can be used to asses audience reaction to the organizations
campaigns and find out if one is more persuasive then the other. Also PETA’s ethics
should be questioned given its use of euthanasia . Might it be possible that PETA
shares similarities to its own persuasive rhetoric that humans oppress animals much
like Hitler and the Nazi Party?

16. 16
Work Cited
11 Facts About Animals and Factory Farms. Do Something. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2014.
Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum. Animal Experimentation: The Moral Issues. Buffa-lo,
NY: Prometheus, 1991. Print.
Ban 'puppy Mill' Dogs from Pet Stores, City Clerk Urges. - Chicago Sun-Times. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.
Bentham, Jeremy. Harm and Suffering | Animal Use in Research. Harm and Suffering | Ani-mal
Use in Research. Neavs, n.d. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.
Bhasin, Kim. The 15 Most Offensive PETA Advertisements. Business Insider.
Business Insider, Inc, 12 Oct. 2011. Web. 10 Feb. 2014.
Bitzer, Lloyd F., and Carl R. Burgchardt. The Rhetorical Situation. Readings in
Rhetorical Criticism (n.d.): n. pag. Print.
Bronshteyn, Alla. IBISWorld Industry Report 45391 Pet Stores in the US. Market Research.
N.p., June 2010. Web.
Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs, and Susan Schultz Huxman. The rhetorical act: thinking,
speaking, and writing critically.. 3rd ed. Belmont, CA, USA: Thomson/Wadsworth,
2009. Print.
Clowney, David, and Patricia Mosto. The Land Ethic. Earthcare: An Anthology in
Environmental Ethics. Lanham: Rowman Littlefield, 2009. N. pag. Print.
Cows Used for Dairy/Cows Used for Meat. Farm Sanctuary. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr.
2014.
Definition of Speciesism in English:. Speciesism: Definition of Speciesism in Oxford
Dictionary (American English) (US). N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.
Delicath, John W. and Deluca, Kevin Micheal. Image Events, the Public Sphere, and
Argumentative Practice: The Case of Radical Environmental. Kluwer Academic
Publishers. 2003. Print

17. 17
Emberley, Julia. The Cultural Politics of Fur. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1997. Print.
Financial Reports. PETA. N.p., 31 July 2013. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
Francione, Gary L. Rain without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement.
Philadelphia, PA: Temple UP, 1996. Print.
Garrison, Taylor. Thinking Visually at UNL: Appropriation of the Hitler 'Stache. Thinking
Visually at UNL: Appropriation of the Hitler 'Stache. N.p., n.d. Web.
27 Mar. 2014.
Hariman, Robert, and John Louis. Lucaites. No Caption Needed: Iconic Photographs,
Public Culture, and Liberal Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago,
2007. Print.
Heath, Chip, and Dan Heath. Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die.
New York: Random House, 2007. Print.
Kretzer, Michelle. Victoria's Secret Angel Behati Prinsloo and Friends Model PETA's
'SeaWorld Kills' Shirt. PETA Victorias Secret Angel Behati Prinsloo and Friends
Model PETAs SeaWorld Kills Shirt Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
Leader, Jessica. 9 Facts About Factory Farming That Will Break Your Heart (GRAPHIC
PHOTOS). The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 17 Mar. 2014. Web. 16
Apr. 2014.
Newkirk, Ingrid. Why We Euthanize. PETA Why We Euthanize Comments. N.p., 21
Mar. 2013. Web. 9 Apr. 2014.
Oxford Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web.
Pace, Lesli. “Image Events and PETA’s Anit Fur Campaign. Women and Language, Vol
28, NO. 2. Print
Regan, Tom. The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley: U of California, 1983. Print.
Sharp, Matt. Why Speciesism Is as Serious as Other Prejudices. The Yorker. N.p., n.d. Web.
17 Feb. 2014.
U.S. Pet Ownership and Shelter Population Estimates : The Humane Society of the
United States. RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Feb. 2014.

18. 18
Varghese, Johnlee. Super Bowl XVIII: Top 10 Controversial Super Bowl Ads.
International Business Times. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.
Welsh, Heidi J. Animal Testing and Consumer Products. Washington, DC: Investor
Responsibility Research Center, 1990. Print.
Winograd, Nathan J. Shocking Photos: PETA's Secret Slaughter of Kittens, Puppies.
The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 02 Apr. 2013. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.