“It is sometimes necessary to shake people up in order to initiate discussion, debate, questioning of the status quo, and, of course, action.” This is not a quote from a revolutionary leader before an act of great civil disobedience; it is a quote from PETA’s “Why does PETA use controversial tactics?” page. PETA stands for People for Ethical Treatments of Animals and is a nonprofit aimed at animal rights activism. They are known for, in their own words, “colorful and controversial” marketing ploys and believe these tactics are necessary, and therefore justified, to raise awareness about and stop animal abuse. The advertisement I chose to focus on depicts Dawn Richard, a black popstar, lying naked as her skin is being yanked from her bottom …show more content…
The linguistic message is both “denotational” and “connotational,” meaning it consists of the actual words depicted and their implications (Barthes 33). The symbolic message, also known as the connoted image, is the visual cues present and what they are supposed to represent. Often times, it is based on a shared cultural knowledge. The literal message, or the denoted image, is the visual aspects without any significance or code attached to them. In my piece, the denotational message includes the centered tagline at the top, “LEATHER IS A RIP-OFF,” the smaller caption underneath, “That leather jacket or upholstery was someone’s skin,” and the D∆wn for PETA logo right next to it. The connotation behind that suggests buying leather products is cruel. The literal image is Richard’s skin being ripped off. Using learned social cues, the viewer is able to ascertain agony from her body language, her fingernails tensed and gripping the ground, foot anchored down, and veins in the neck protruding out, and her facial expression, her forehead scrunched and mouth agape, forming the symbolic message. Put together, the audience is intended feel how disgusting, inhumane, and morbid leather production is to animals and thus, should want to change it or at the very least, no longer participate in its purchase. A noble pursuit, however, PETA fails to recognize that implications go far beyond intention due to historical and contemporary racial