954_FurisGreen

Login / Register

You must Login or Register to rate this ad

Description:
It amazes me the leap the Fur Council of Canada made on the ad campaign. To say that owning fur is an eco-friendly activity goes against all common sense. Their ads try to make fur sound eco friendly by stating that buying fur will help keep natural habitats safe because without them, there would be no animals to skin for their fur. In another ad, they ask what you would do with the fur when you've eaten your beaver roast? This tries to imply that the fur is only taken from animals who were killed to be eatin first, which is highly unlikly the truth. Maybe its me, but when I think of enviroment activists and green campaigns, the fur trade is one of the last things that comes to mind.
Tags:               

RATINGS & COMMENTS

3.5durham3’s
Rating
Comment:
This advertisement disturbs me because the connection between protecting the environment and wearing the fur of animals is vague. I do not believe that the majority of trappers are primarily concerned with being eco-friendly, hence the fact that they are trappers and their livelihood is dependent upon the fur trade. It is true that the well-being of the Earth's forests is important for trappers for the mere reason that wildlife can prosper fitfully, but economically that is due to the fact that they will benefit financially. I do not consider trappers to be "protectors" of wildlife. It is also very hypocritical for the ad to say that trappers are "the first to sound the alarm when these vital wildlife habitats are threatened" since they are the ones who are actually harming the wildlife. Keeping the environment safe is necessary; killing animals to sell furcoats is not. The text is misleading in a non-obvious way but it is indeed obvious to me that FurisGreen.com and Beautifully Canada was scrambling to find some kind of correlation between wearing fur and going green.

4.2jm1698’s
Rating
Comment:
The ad environmental activist by www.furisgreen.com claims that buying fur is green. They argue that people in the cities help support people on the land by buying fur. However, people on the land are trying to preserve nature and wildlife so they can continue to live with the wild. I highly doubt that trappers are concerned about making a dollar when they live off of Mother Nature. I gave this ad a low rating because I think it is completely bogus and false. If there is such a need to preserve the diminishing wildlife then there needs to be no ads promoting fur. Instead, this ad should promote faux fur to show how the consumer can be both fashionable and still protect the wildlife. It also notes that the use of wildlife is supported by the international conservation authorities, but do they honestly support the way the fur is used in this ad? If the small populations of trappers only kill what they need to survive how do they have enough fur to make a dent in the fur demand in the city? Finally, this ad could have been a little less falsified if there was the same picture of the woman in fur but adds a wildlife local sitting next to her.

4.0rg1307’s
Rating
Comment:
The ad environmental activist by www.furisgreen.com claims that buying fur is green. They argue that people in the cities help support people on the land by buying fur. However, people on the land are trying to preserve nature and wildlife so they can continue to live with the wild. I highly doubt that trappers are concerned about making a dollar when they live off of Mother Nature. I gave this ad a low rating because I think it is completely bogus and false. If there is such a need to preserve the diminishing wildlife then there needs to be no ads promoting fur. Instead, this ad should promote faux fur to show how the consumer can be both fashionable and still protect the wildlife. It also notes that the use of wildlife is supported by the international conservation authorities, but do they honestly support the way the fur is used in this ad? If the small populations of trappers only kill what they need to survive how do they have enough fur to make a dent in the fur demand in the city? Finally, this ad could have been a little less falsified if there was the same picture of the woman in fur but adds a wildlife local sitting next to her.

4.1julioalvar’s
Rating
Comment:
For me, there is a clear contradiction about wear fur and green option (Eco-conscious). Firts of all, it doesn't add up the idea to hunt animals in order to use their fur. At least, it doesn't have any sense in a mass production system because it requieres a massive murder of animals to produce propper amount of clothes for selling in a store.Thus, it is unlikely to be Eco-Conscious with this behaviour.Besides, It is also uncommon to hunt in nature, if it is necessary to have enough raw materials. It's known that fur producers have their own farms with in-cage animals, and this situation shows a grim scenary, which it seems any vision except green and Eco-Conscious.