Humane Society of the United States Misled Americans With Fundraising Pitch, Says Center for Consumer Freedom
7 janvier 2008
Animal rights group falsely claimed it would “care for” Michael Vick’s dogs
WASHINGTON, Aug. 2, 2007 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today the nonprofit
Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) called on the Humane Society of the
United States (HSUS) to return all the money it has raised in the wake of
the Michael Vick dogfighting scandal. CCF revealed today that beginning on
July 18 — the day after Vick’s criminal indictment — HSUS promised on its
website that financial contributions would be earmarked for helping it
“care for the dogs seized in the Michael Vick case.” But yesterday The New
York Times reported that HSUS is not, in fact, caring for the animals. And
HSUS president Wayne Pacelle told the Times that his group is recommending
that government officials “put down” (that is, kill) the dogs rather than
adopt them out to suitable homes.
“Like most Americans, we can’t stand dogfighting,” said Center for
Consumer Freedom Director of Research David Martosko. “But we also can’t
stand animal-rights fundraising that smells this fishy.”
The Humane Society of the United States is not affiliated with any
local “humane societies.” Although the organization runs no hands-on dog or
cat shelters anywhere, some of its fundraising materials hint at a direct
connection with pet rescue operations.
HSUS’s online fundraising pitch related to Michael Vick has now been
quietly altered to remove the claim that the group is caring for his pit
bulls. But there’s no reliable way to know how much money the group raised
on the basis of its earlier promises.
“As usual, HSUS is exploiting Americans’ emotions about dogs to build
its war chest for anti-meat, anti-dairy, and anti-medical-research
campaigns,” Martosko added. “These predatory activists should return every
cent and apologize for misleading the public.”
In a similar episode, HSUS raised a reported $32 million in the wake of
the Hurricane Katrina disaster, promising to use the funds to rescue and
reunite lost pets with their owners. But since March 2006, Louisiana
Attorney General Charles Foti’s office has been investigating what happened
to the majority of those funds, which HSUS does not appear to have used for
Katrina- related rescues.
– The New York Times article is online here
– HSUS’s false fundraising claim is preserved online here
For more information about the Humane Society of the United States,
visit www.ActivistCash.com/HSUS.
For an interview, call
202-463-7112.
The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition supported by
restaurants, food companies, and consumers, working together to promote
personal responsibility and protect consumer choices.
Media Contact: Sarah Longwell
202-463-7112
Entry Filed under: Animal Rights, Animalist, Animaliste, Animals, Animaux, Droits des animaux, Environment, Environnement, Extremist, Extrémiste, Humane Society. Mots-clefs: Animal, Animalist, Animaliste, Animaux, États-Unis, Environment, Environnement, Extrémiste, Extremist, Humane Society, United States.
2 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

1.
Tracy | 7 janvier 2008 at 6:28
The only reason the CCF cares about the Humane Society of the United States is because it threatens the meat industry, which the CCF helps to protect. The CCF doesn’t give a damn about consumers. Visit SourceWatch for more information. (By the way, the CCF was founded with money from the tobacco industry.)
2.
forumcanadaeurope | 7 janvier 2008 at 10:19
If you search “sourcewatch” on Sourcewatch.org you can find:
1) Sourcewatch has been created by John Stauber (who has created before the Center for Media and Democracy). But sourcewatch website don’t say that Stauber is member of anti-beef industry activist group like the Humane Society… strange no?
Look at the PDF document:
http://www.beefusa.org/uDocs/profilingactivistgroups.pdf
2) On Sourcewatch, you have every informations on CCF (financing, support, etc) but NOTHING on the Humane Society… strange no?
Obviously transparency is good for some but not for others…
3) John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton (the other person who has created Sourcewatch) are editors of PR Watch newsletter… where is defended and quoted the Humane Society point of view… strange no?
4) “SourceWatch is an encyclopedia of people, issues and groups shaping the public agenda” (definition by Sourcewatch itself). That means everybody can write everything… But who has the control of the publication?