Categories: PETA

Facebook is censoring PETA videos forcing PETA to become shareholders in Facebook

Facebook is placing a warning at the beginning of PETA animal abuse videos which is putting off some viewers which in turn weakens PETA’s campaigns. They do this by putting up a black screen when the video play button is clicked which states, “This video may show violent or graphic content”. You can see an example below:

Facebook video warning censoring a video on animal welfare

This is a newish development. PETA argues that this reduces the number of people who view their videos. And they rely on their direct, difficult-to-view and digest videos to get their message across about animal abuse. PETA wants the public to decide for themselves. If a viewer does not like the video and finds it uncomfortable they can turn it off. PETA believes that Facebook is censoring their work unjustifiably.

They have asked Facebook to change their minds on this without success. They have asked their supporters to push Facebook but no change.

“People deserve to see what animals endure in laboratories, on factory farms and in slaughterhouses, when they’re skinned or plucked alive for clothing, and when they’re beaten so that they’ll perform tricks,” says PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman. “PETA urges Facebook to follow Twitter’s lead by allowing users to decide for themselves whether they want to opt in or out of warning covers.”

As a last resort, on July 1st 2019, PETA bought sufficient shares in Facebook to allow them to submit a shareholder resolution, attend Facebook’s AGM and challenge their executives.

This is the best way to put pressure on FB’s management. Shareholders have the ultimate power provided they have sufficient shares and therefore clout.

It is an interesting development. FB have been criticised heavily for allowing animal abuse videos on their platform. I have criticised them but these are videos which celebrate animal abuse. PETA’s videos are intended to stop animal abuse. This is the opposite objective. Therefore FB are wrong.


Google are doing the same thing. They have made it impossible for me to use their advertising across PoC because they object to their adverts being on pages where for example I show the scratched hand of a person! It is quite mad. They object to pages that fight for animal welfare where the images are uncomfortable. Google has become confused about images of animal abuse. There are two types. In one the accompanying text criticises animal abuse and uses the images to support the argument for better animal welfare. The other shows animal abuse for voyeurs who enjoy seeing it and doing it. The latter should be deleted. The former should be left alone.

Please comment here using either Facebook or WordPress (when available).
Michael Broad

Hi, I'm a 71-year-old retired solicitor (attorney in the US). Before qualifying I worked in many jobs including professional photography. I have a girlfriend, Michelle. I love nature, cats and all animals. I am concerned about their welfare.

Recent Posts

Domestic cat defends her kittens with extreme aggression and courage

BAGCILAR, ISTANBUL, TURKEY: This is a video taken from a television screen of a community…

8 hours ago

5 reasons why black cats are less likely to be adopted

Despite Cats Protection reporting that their campaign to promote black cats has been successful and…

14 hours ago

Prospect of water resources drying up affecting dog and cat food manufacturing in US

Water resources are under pressure and it will get worse. Globalisation is putting pressure on…

18 hours ago

Will driverless cars mean less cats killed on roads?

We're not sure how many cats are killed on roads in either the UK or…

19 hours ago

Do cats have nine lives?

Of course they don't. It's just a saying based on the fact that cats are…

20 hours ago

Feline mindfulness: staying in the present

John Gray, the philosopher, says that we should not live in "an imagined future". The…

20 hours ago