PETA Vs. Pokemon

from the wrongosaur-i-choose-you dept

It feels like it should be a strange dichotomy, my love for animals coupled with my absolute disdain for PETA, but it isn't. It essentially boils down to this: PETA has a good premise, anti-cruelty to animals, but the organization seems to like to ensure it won't be relevant by doubling down on the stupid and crazy. One needs only to look toward their recent foray into the .XXX domain world should one require a head-shaking exercise. They've also had occasion in the past to delve into the world of video games, such as when they created a parody of Cooking Mama, focused on having "Mama" kill animals for food.

But now, in an apparent attempt to win both the "Petty Award" and the first annual "We Don't Know The Video Games We're Protesting Award", PETA is now coming out against Pokemon, claiming that the game franchise teaches children to see real world animals as objects that should fight one another for our amusement.
In other words, PETA has decided that Pokemon's upcoming release of two new games is just grand enough to stand upon.

Much like animals in the real world, Pokémon are treated as unfeeling objects and used for such things as human entertainment and as subjects in experiments. The way that Pokémon are stuffed into pokéballs is similar to how circuses chain elephants inside railroad cars and let them out only to perform confusing and often painful tricks that were taught using sharp steel-tipped bullhooks and electric shock prods …if PETA existed in Unova, our motto would be: Pokémon are not ours to use or abuse. They exist for their own reasons. We believe that this is the message that should be sent to children.

It would be very easy to simply write this off as an attempt by PETA to put themselves in the headlines on the backs of a popular game franchise's latest release. Indeed, that is exactly what they're doing here, though they may want to recognize that there is such a thing as bad attention. However, it seems impossible not to call PETA out on the blatant stupidity of this move. First of all, at best, nobody cares. Anyone with half a brain knows that there is zero reason to correlate cartoonish animal universes like Pokemon to real-world cruelty. PETA might as well come out against the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles for fear that kids will go down to their local ponds, see a snapping turtle, and karate kick its face off for fear that the animal is going to steal their double-crust pizza. As a child of the 80's I can assure you that it only takes two or three times roundhousing helpless turtles to realize that they really aren't so bad and it's in fact you, said karate kicker, who is the jackass.

Second, it's brutally clear that nobody at PETA has bothered to actually play the Pokemon games. As Forbes notes, if they had, they would realize that the core theme of the universe is largely in line with their own views.

PETA seems to have missed the single biggest theme of the Pokémon series: That Pokémon should be treated humanely and live as our equals. The games are loaded with an endless stream of characters who go on and on about true friendship between man and Pokémon. It’s so saccharine and so completely the opposite of what PETA suggests that it boggles the mind.

So here's to you, PETA. You've managed to waste everybody's time while simultaneously proving you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Again. For ever and ever. Amen.

Filed Under: peta, pokeman, publicity stunts, video games

Details Released On The Radiohead Experiment Results: A Tremendous Success

from the good-for-them dept

While Trent Reznor has been very open in discussing the results of his various business model experiments, Radiohead has been notoriously quiet about it -- leading some to falsely assume that the experiment was a failure. CNN even called it one of the dumbest moments in business last year. That seemed ridiculous on its face, as it was quite clear that the experiment was a huge success for Radiohead, even if the band was quiet about the numbers. However, Radiohead's publisher has now come out and revealed some of the numbers and debunked the myth that the experiment was a failure (thanks to SteveD for sending this over). Instead, it turns out that Radiohead made much more money from this experiment than from their previous album. The band's music was spread much more widely than previous albums, with over 1.75 million physical albums sold (and that's not counting all of the paid downloads) -- as compared to its previous albums, which all sold in the hundreds of thousands. About the only downside to the experiment was that the band found itself talking about the experiment more than the music.

Now, of course, some will point out that this experiment isn't very representative, because Radiohead got a huge boost by being the first high profile band to do this. And that's absolutely true. But that doesn't mean the business model doesn't work at a more reasonable level. Obviously, Radiohead got a big boost from doing something unique and different, but that just gives other bands reasons to look at not just copying Radiohead, but adding more unique offerings themselves. That's how business models innovate, by trying out new stuff and trying to attract attention. Unfortunately, though, we still have big record labels who think business model innovation is having Congress protect your old business model.

Filed Under: business models, free music, music, publicity stunts, radiohead

Don't Read Too Much Into Radiohead's Claim That It Won't Offer Music For Free Again

from the just-wait-and-see dept

Radiohead is making some noise again today, with lead singer Thom Yorke basically saying that the band won't do a promotion giving away free music again. Some are using this to suggest the model was a failure or that those of us who recognize the clear economic trends toward free music were somehow wrong. That's not the case at all. Early on Yorke had admitted that there was no large theory behind the decision to do the name your own price offering. One of the band's managers suggested it and the group went with it as a publicity stunt -- which worked. The fact that the band then pulled down the download offering prior to releasing the actual CD confirmed that the band merely viewed the free offering as a stunt, rather than part of a larger strategy. As such, it's not at all surprising that Yorke would say the band won't do it again. Since they only viewed it as a stunt, repeating the stunt doesn't make sense. They'll come up with some other stunt for the next release. That doesn't, however, mean that the idea was wrong or a failure. Just that the band wants its publicity stunts to be new and different each time. The fact that this most recent one tapped into an obvious trend seems to have been more of a lucky guess than the sign of a well-thought out strategy. The good news is that it's made plenty of others start to realize the power of free music -- even if that line of thought hasn't permeated back to Radiohead and Yorke.

Filed Under: business models, free music, music, publicity stunts, radiohead