Over the course of the last few months, the Center for Consumer Freedom has ramped up its effort to educate Americans about the deceptive fundraising and spending practices of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). Most Americans don’t realize that less than one half of one percent of the society’s revenue goes to support hands-on pet shelters, despite their use of tear-jerking ads like this. As our advertising campaign gained traction and donors started dropping like flies, president Wayne Pacelle launched a full-scale personal attack on the Center for Consumer Freedom’s executive director, Rick Berman.

Rather than responding to the substance of our criticisms at HumaneWatch, Pacelle has lashed out, making all manner of bizarre ad hominem attacks against Berman and his staff. He filed an ethics complaint against a Berman-managed trade association, the American Beverage Institute—which, oddly enough, has nothing whatsoever to do with animals—that was so bogus that the environmental lobby should go after Pacelle for all the wasted legal paper.
Going even further off the deep end, Pacelle hired an out-of-work reporter to do a stalker-like, error-riddled “expose” on Berman that featured pictures and video of Berman’s home and cars, respectively.
The New York Times, ever our fans, felt obliged to cover this creepy story. I was quoted in the story asking, “In this new world of fake reporting, how do I go about getting a correction? Is there an ombudsman I can call?” But what about the old world of so-called “real journalism?” Are they any better? It turns out, the answer is “no.”
Recently our friends at the New York Times ran a front page story about Rick Berman and his nonprofit management company attempting to tar it as little more than a way to funnel money through nonprofit groups and into his pocket. We read the piece and thought, “Hey, we’re on the cover of the New York Times!”
The piece, unsurprisingly, doesn’t give us the loving treatment we always hope for from the Times. It was written at the behest of groups like the Humane Society, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (and a few other left-wing groups with which we routinely do battle)—the reporter admitted as much to me in conversation—and we knew it wasn’t going to be all hugs and sunshine. But since we are one hundred percent confident in the way we do business, and have nothing to hide, we invited Stephanie Strom to come hang out with us at Berman headquarters.

She spent two hours talking with me and Rick and we walked her through the way Berman and Company conducts its business. We showed her how we bill hours just like a law firm. Told her about how our boards employ outside auditors to run independent audits on us every year just to make sure we’re doing everything absolutely perfectly. We made our accountants, lawyers and board members available to answer her questions. And we showed her the results of our I.R.S. audits, which all have come to the same conclusion: That our nonprofit status is just fine.
And what did she turn around and do? She wrote a boring, confusing story that had even more factual inaccuracies than the story HSUS paid to have written. It’s filled with insinuation and cheap shots like, “Asked about critics like Wayne Pacelle, executive director of the Humane Society, Mr. Berman said, “You know Wayne is a vegan, right?” After two hours of conversation, with all there is to say (and all that we constantly say) about the Humane Society, that was the big takeaway? Are you sure you’re not just trying to get around printing our actual arguments? Of course you are.
Or there’s this, “Jack Reilly, a former lawyer for the I.R.S., said he thought a case could be made that the Berman nonprofits were established to provide business for Mr. Berman’s firm, and thus were commercial in nature.” I can make a case that the sky is black. But guess what? It’s blue.
But it’s cool New York Times, we’re not mad at you. You were looking for something nefarious and couldn’t find anything, so you had to try to keep it interesting. And unlike the paid piece on the society’s website, you do have an ombudsman we can call. And you can print corrections!
You, the reader, can check out all the factual errors, which we have submitted for formal corrections, here.
We know Wayne Pacelle likes dogs, but his favorite has got to be his New York Times lapdogs. He can sic them on us as often as he wants, because at the end of the day, when you’re on the cover of the New York Times it means people are paying attention to your message. And right now our main message is that the Humane Society gives less than one half of one percent of its revenue to hands-on pet shelters.






Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
238 Comments
If liberals advocated bashing kittens with baseball bats the 'New York Times' would summon up the neccessary mental gymnatics needed to SUPPORT kitten bashing or whatever the doctrinaire liberal postion might be.
We will ALL celebrate when old media dinosaurs like the "NYT's" collapse into the tar pits of irrelevance.
Learn something new every day. Guess I better start looking into the Humane society, and if not them, then who can I give to/suport that actually helps animals if I find I do not like the Humane society?
i just want to know, did you think the new york times could give you a fair shake?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, thehotjoints, Nick Campbell, Juli , Jason Lee and others. Jason Lee said: RT @BigJournalism: Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane Society Of the United States http://bit.ly/9eIbxm [...]
Ahhh, isn't that cute even the progressive "non-profits" are turning to Alinsky tactics.
The link from the fully vetted site to the story on humane society donations seems not to be working……..
I have personal knowledge of the Humane society. I know a person who worked there for a time.
Giving a pet or taking a stray to the humane society is a death sentence, and it does not take long either. The Humane Society's main game is raising money and pressuring cities to build huge buildings and then funding them at excessive rates and expense.
FOR WHAT, to put to death some dogs and cats that people no longer want? A vet can do that at a fraction of the cost and it won't need huge fancy buildings built by taxpayers to do so either.
[...] —————– A related blog explains the HSUS’s smear campaign against those who dare to expose the society: Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane Society Of the United States [...]
Their aim is to do away with hunting. Like everyone else on the left their intent is to remove some personal liberty. There are thousands of left wing organizations all chipping away at a different piece of your rights. The sum total of all their demands is slavery. Wow. That's progress… er right?
The HTML looks broken. Here's a link to the story: http://www.petmd.com/blogs/fullyvetted/2010/june/...
Someone please tell me that at least the SPCA is still on the up-and-up. Because otherwise I'm gonna be really mad that all the donations I gave them in honor of my two cats (whom I adopted from the SPCA) went to crap like this.
Seems to be no end to the lengths the left will go to advance their agenda thru obfuscation, half-truths, and sleight of hand.
I thought I'd seen everything from them. But now the pulling of heart strings thru the unfair use of puppies and kittens, well….
What's next, using children…??
Oh…
You can check out your LOCAL non-profit no-kill rescue groups. Many do an excellent job and really need the help. Most will also gladly accept donations of food, blankets, etc., rather than money.
As with the age old "Chinese water torture" we can follow the steady drip, drip, drip of the NYT hemoraging subscribers and more importantly advertizers. Even a leftist leaning board of directors is answerable to the stock holders of the NYT, eventually we will be playing auld lang sein for the gray lady.
The Human Society is a joke.
A few years ago, my local Humane Society got in serious trouble for euthanizing 90% of the animals in their care to cut spending
Luisced: Donating to your local shelter is always the best idea. They DO NOT receive funding from HSUS.
Sizemorew: If you're referring to an SPCA that belongs to a county, town or other area, they're probably a 'local shelter' and need your donations.
LibertyGeeK; You're right – HSUS wants to do away with hunting. Worse, they are making it extremely difficult for farmers to raise livestock. If they get their way, watch for food prices to increase dramatically. Many of us who are aware of HSUS's tactics also foresee them wanting to do away with domestic animals including service dogs, rescue dogs, trained drug-sniffing dogs, and even pets.
Most cities have no kill shelters that can use all kinds of support. They are a great outlet for the money you want to spend to help animals.
This is part of the problem. Your local Humane Society has NOTHING to do with the HSUS. This is the big scam of HSUS. MOST local Humane Societies are GREAT organizations, which are struggling to stay alive because people think they are helping them by giving to the HSUS.
Are there that many people around who are so shallow they do not do any research before jumping onboard with groups such as the HSUS. I suppose it is the ignorant class in America that the HSUS counts on to fall for thier scam. Wake up people and try a little harder to be at least a little discerning.
[...] » Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane … [...]
Great information and I put it out on Facebook, someone had a message about the Humane Society in Maricopa County AZ Humane Society running a special on adoptions because there are far too many animals at the shelter. I will only donate to a church (even sometimes they mis use funds) or an organization that I know that the money is going to be used for it's intended purpose. People might call that a begrudging giver but why donate money to the Humane Society when you have no clue where the money is going (I have yet to see a state of the art Humane Society) when you can go to the shelter and volunteer your time to the animals and the shelter. That is far more needed, or give a donation of food to the shelter. A good many local shelters have a website and they list on there what they need in donations. I'm tired of a handful of people getting rich off of charities. I don't begrudge anyone their wealth as long it is not ill gotten gains.
AGAIN, the Maricopa County AZ Humane Society, is NOT RELATED IN ANY WAY to the HSUS. The first and most important thing we need to do is get this into people's minds. The HSUS in NOT an ubrella org that funds local Humane Societies.
before you get your undies in a bundle I did it tactfully and to raise awareness to adopt pets from the shelter and to support shelters locally. Some people go to the HSUS website (like older folks) and send money every month to HSUS. Some people are confused, they think if they donate to the Humane Society it goes to all shelters.
You can also check out the Combined Federal Campaign website. It has a list of local, state, national and international charities, along with the percentage of donations that go DIRECTLY to overhead. The attached link is for their charity catalogue in PDF format. Its a bit long, but worth lookind over. http://www.cfcnca.org/files/cfcnca/docs/2009items...
Ms. Longwell is quite the liar, for starters. The HSUS responded point by point to the CCF's allegations a long time ago: http://www.hsus.org/response_to_ccfs_7_things.htm...
The New York Times also has run at least one if not two full page ads that the CCF has paid for to attack the HSUS, didn't see that mentioned here either.
The fact is that Ms. Longwell's boss IS an attack dog for the food and beverage industry. This latest campaign is not out of any compassion for animals, but nothing more than agribusiness and puppy millers banding together to fight back against the success the HSUS has had in gaining protections for the farm animals and breeding dogs.
CCF claims they just want to "educate" consumers. Problem is, they only want you to know the side of the story provided by their clients, who pay big bucks for the CCF to slander any group who might encourage you to question, even a little bit, the integrity of their positions. Just like when they attacked MADD while one of their researchers was out drinking and driving, they care nothing about the issue of ethical treatment of animals. They only care about collecting checks while painting the good guys in a bad light.
As to the HSUS campaign, the CCF is just mad because this is the largest opponent they've taken on and, guess what? They're fighting back. The claim that just because they don't directly fund your LOCAL shelter (which is what YOU should be doing), they don't help animals, is ludicrous.
I used to donate money to the Humane Society of Southern AZ, but I didn't know what my money was being spent on. Now I donate time and products (cat/dog food, etc), as they cannot be misused and I know that they are helping the animals in the shelter.
Thanks for the resource!
OhioGrrrrrl: If you live in Ohio, I hope you realize that if HSUS gets their way in your state, you'll be paying a lot more for meat, dairy and eggs. Just look at what happened in CA after HSUS 'did their thing' there. If you're already a vegan, food prices for you will also rise.
As far as CCF educating consumers, I think that most intelligent consumers have enough brains to look at all aspects of an issue. After CCF pointed out some of the facts about what HSUS does with peoples' money, people looked at 'the other side.'
Maxine beat me to it – support your local shelter and breed rescue groups. And be careful who you buy your next pet from – that's the real source of these kinds of pet overpopulation. Buy only from breeders who will mentor you, will have you sign a contract agreeing to return the pet to them if something happens that you can no longer care for the pet, and most importantly, leave breeding to those who have the knowledge, the integrity, and the time to socialize the pet from the moment of birth. Most adult dogs go to shelters because of behavior problems.
[...] the Original article Tags: About, Humane, Kittens, Puppies, Pushback:, Society, States, Truth, United Comment (RSS) [...]
Well said. Well said.
You got that right, nothing is more disgusting than a pet-mill.
Forgot to add: Here are some links to great sites that can help you sort out who is who: http://www.naiaonline.org/index.htm http://animalscam.com/ http://activistcash.com/ http://www.pet-law.com/index.html
As you can tell, this is near and dear to my heart!
Ms. Longwell's post is typical of the self-serving garbage spewed by the deceptive Center for Consumer Freedom, an "astroturfing" corporate front group well known for its hypocrisy and distortion of the facts.
To begin with, the CCF's "less than one percent" battle cry is a straw man. The HSUS does not exist to directly fund local shelters, it exists to combat animal cruelty. And it does so with remarkable success, which is why it is in the crosshairs of corporations that profit from the inhumane treatment of animals.
The advertisement Ms. Longwell holds up as a supposed example of HSUS duplicity is straightforward and honest throughout. Not once is the word "shelter" mentioned, and not once does the ad imply that donations will be used for local shelters. Every scene in that advertisement is from an HSUS rescue, investigation, or disaster relief — puppy mill rescues, Hurricane Ike, dogfighting ring busts — all animal welfare interventions funded by donations to HSUS.
The legislative initiatives spearheaded by HSUS have improved the quality of care for countless animals, and that's the real burr under the saddle of CCF's sponsors.
Ultimately, CCF is a personal enrichment scheme for Richard Berman, whose PR firm Berman and Company pocketed 92% of CCF "donations". Funneling 92% of your donations into the hands of a firm's CEO is not a charitable endeavor.
Disclosure: I am not affiliated with HSUS, other than being an enthusiastic donor and infrequent volunteer.
Don't most of the pets get to experience the Ovens?
The smoke stack at our local "animal shelter" is about 2 feet in diameter.
Humane Society. Media Matters. The pattern repeats and repeats and repeats. Quite simply they are pathological liars.
LIES LIES LIES. If the Progressives didn't have double standards then they'd have NO standards.
[...] See the original post here: » Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane … [...]
So, what you are saying is that Pacelle and all those people who run HSUS don't get paid at all or very little because they are more concerned with the well being of animals?
I'm curious how the less than one percent claim is a straw man argument in your eyes. HSUS is a lobbying organization, as you seem to concede. So why make the commericals in the first place? Why not simply tell people to donate funds to help LOBBY for better care for animals and make sure that point is CRYSTAL CLEAR?
Answer: Because they wouldn't get as many donations. They don't have to say it directally but the message is implied and they don't make any qualms about it. Thats PR 101. The CCF is simply saying so.
Also how is the CCF a ""astroturfing" corporate front group well known for its hypocrisy and distortion of the facts." to use your words. What specifically have they lied about in reguards to HSUS. If you make a claim that someone is a lier than I would assume you have specific examples.
Louisced, If you have a favorite breed of anything,, most of them have a national rescue you can donate to, that work to pull their breed out of shelter, or horse organizations are always in need.
The less structure to support between your money and the animal in whatever you choose to donate to, chances are more of your money will make it to support the animal.
Local shelters are great, and the purebred rescues pull purebreds to help many local shelters, because it frees up space and money for more animals to come in. Just donate locally, it really helps.
Even the HSUS will, when pressed, suggest you donate locally first -
Sheepwriter, I live in Los Angeles, and I haven't noticed a significant change in the price of food. Prop 2 doesn't go into effect until 2015… so what are you talking about?
Aside from that, I personally don't mind paying a few extra pennies for food that's not sickly and dying before it ever reaches my table, and for food that's been raised as humanely as possible.
Here's the problem with this article. . .it's written by a CCF thug, who has worked for Rich Berman for years. She's never worked in a law office, and if she had she'd recognize that Mr. Berman engages in perjury, libel, and dirty business practices. When Longwell lists CCF "opponents" she points out the BIG ones that hurt their clients the most. MADD, CCF hates. because they are pro ignition lock out devices for convicted drunk drivers. That means we have fewer drunks on the road. CCF hates the American medical association because CCF was originally funded by the Phillip Morris company, and the AMA has confirmed in blind study after blind study that tobacco inhaled via cigarettes and other methods causes cancer. And, last but not least, they hate the HSUS because if farmers have to treat animals lawfully and humanely, there's going to be a cost. If farmers monitored themselves and provided people with a safe food supply, this wouldn't have hit your paper. Next time, check your facts, and get a source with more credibility than Sarah Longwell.
After reading your link to HSUS I still fail to see how you get to the term "liar' in describing Ms. Longwell. No where does HSUS refute the "less than 1/2 of one percent" claim by the CCF.
I would ask that "OhioGrrrl" look into the actions of the HSUS Ohio Front Group "OhioHumane". This is an organization which sued the state of Ohio because they wanted to allow paid out of state pollsters go into Ohio to collect signatures on their proposed ballot measure. If this group were truly concerned citizens from Ohio, why the need to do this?
My point is that, yes the CCF has an agenda. But to sit there and state that HSUS is simply concened about the well being of animals and not anything else is as stupid as saying that ACORN was only concened about helping poor people.
Make no mistake, HSUS has an agenda as well, and I think you know that.
Does anyone capable of "Rational Thought" actually give the New York Times any credibility? After reading half the dribble the Times felt obligated to publish during the last presidential election , I gave up on them as a credible source of anything other than BIAS! They got their wish and we have a regular bunch of clowns running the country now—I sure cant wait until they go bankrupt
Ms. Longwell has obviously sold her soul to the devil himself, Rick Berman. Let’s see, so far, she’s come out in support of rights for drunk drivers, opposing increases to the minimum wage, fighting unions, supporting abusive payday loan practices, and now she’s against the humane treatment of animals. It seems she’ll take any contrarian position as long as she’s well compensated to do so.
The fact is, as an HSUS supporter, I know full well how they spend their money. I applaud them for doing the work on the national level that the local shelters and other animal welfare groups have been unable or unwilling to do. Their commercials show a variety of animals filmed during a number of HSUS direct actions: puppy mill and dog fighting raids, hoarding situations, disaster responses, and cruelty investigations. The fact that the CCF still likes to point to HSUS ads and interject some sort of nefarious intent where none exists, quite simply, reeks of desperation.
Anyone with three brain cells to string together can spend five minutes on the HSUS website and know exactly what their purpose is. Anyone who has donated online gets regular emails from HSUS detailing their mission and their actions.
Sadly, you will soon need to go back and tell your clients that you failed miserably in protecting their ability to use and abuse animals indiscriminately and without any regard for their humane treatment. You see, the times, they are a-changing. You and your clients can keep on trying to hold back progress on behalf of animals but the American public has had enough of the abuse and will not stand for it anymore. (See Conklin Dairy Farms, an atrocious example of the torture of dairy cows, which the members of your group regularly defend).
Saying that HSUS wants to do away with service dogs is ludicrous. HSUS officially supports HR 3266 to encourage the use of service and therapy dogs for disabled vets.
You would be hard-pressed to find a HSUS employee who doesn't have a pet! They even have publications on how to identify a good breeder if you can't find a shelter animal that's suited to your needs. Those are hardly the actions of an anti-pet conspiracy.
Your paranoia and willingness to parrot completely unfounded accusations is embarrassing. Glenn Beck would be proud.
Larry, I explained this already, but I'll try again.
HSUS is concerned with ALL aspects of animal welfare, including humane treatment of farm animals, elimination of puppy mills, disaster relief for animals, promoting responsible breeding practices, operating wildlife shelters, assisting law enforcement on hoarder and dogfighting rescues, and much more. Funding short-term solutions like local animal shelters is not their sole priority, and they have never made the claim that it is. Are we 100% clear on that?
Now, CCF loves to trot out that "less than 1%" argument because it makes the HSUS sound like they're deceiving donors, when in fact, the HSUS has never implied or stated that their sole mission is the funding of local shelters. The ad cited in Ms. Longwell's article specifically states that your donation will be used to fight animal cruelty, not to "save abandoned animals" or "fund local shelters".
It's smoke and mirrors from CCF, funded by Cargill and other corporations willing to sacrifice their humanity to make a buck. CCF likes to portray itself as a libertarian, grassroots movement, but they are corporate shills who exist to attack public interest groups.
And yes, they are all too happy to lie and spread misinformation. One notable example was their claim that HSUS supports terrorist groups, a lie so blatant and offensive that even CCF was forced to publicly retract it.
CCF is careful to skirt the edges of the truth, but will never tell you the whole story. I'd love to see them come clean about who their donors are (carefully hidden behind their phony charity status), or why 92% of their funding comes to rest in the hands of Rick Berman, but that will never happen.
I'd say they tell "less than one percent" of the whole story.
Does Pacelle get paid? Of course he does, just as the CEO of every major charity in North America does. And his compensation is right in line with comparable charities (and frequently a good deal less). And he certainly doesn't get paid 92% of the donations to the HSUS, that's for sure.
Contrast that with "humanitarian" Berman's compensation, and then tell me who's in it for the profit.
But my point is that even the Maricopa County AZ Humane Society does not receive funding, by donating to the HSUS. By continually putting local Humane Societies together with the HSUS, we are doing them a GREAT dis-service. Local Humane Societies are EXACTLY like any other local shelter, and most desreve our support.
"The claim that just because they don't directly fund your LOCAL shelter (which is what YOU should be doing), they don't help animals, is ludicrous. "
Fine, but why is 99% of HSUS advertising focusing on pictures of dogs and cats in shelters that tmoney given to such drives never ends up at?
I do not doubt that there are positive things that the HSUS is doing, so why not use THOSE things to raise your money? You KNOW why. Because people give money to help dogs and cats, so the HSUS pretends that is what they do, just long enough to cash the checks.
Excellent article Ms. Longwell! We look forward to your follow up on this.
Ohiogrrrl—
You’re adopting the same tactic as HSUS: making personal attacks without replying on substance.
It’s hard to see how Longwell is a “liar.” Can you point to any specifics, or are you just going to make accusations? The gist of Longwell’s piece is that the NYT did a sloppy, biased hit job. I don’t see you contesting that.
CCF’s complaint is that HSUS is deceptive—using ads with lots of puppies and kitties, but spending most of its money to further an animal rights agenda instead of helping shelters. A lot of people are confused that HSUS isn’t affiliated with local humane societies. I don’t see how pointing this out makes CCF the boogeyman.
And if it’s just about “industry” interests, how come pet shelters are miffed about HSUS, too? CCF compiled a set of quotes from news stories: http://consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/h/4192...
CCF simply provides another side of the issue. Frankly, I can make my own decision, but it helps to have both sides present. It seems you’d rather shut up the side you don’t agree with via name-calling. Just because a group disagrees with some of HSUS’s agenda doesn’t mean that they don’t care about the “ethical treatment of animals.” In fact, CCF encourages people to give to pet shelter in their communities.
I suggest you try responding to what CCF actually says, instead of responding to what you think they say.
Your local SPCA will most likely include the city or county as parts of its name (e.g., Pleasantville SPCA). Many are volunteer non-profits with all foster programs for their rescue animals . Some are larger and operate shelters, paid staff and may have contracts to serve as the shelter for a particular city and/or county. Local humane societies are often similar in nature. These local entities count on your support – they are not getting extra funds from the organizations that have marketed themselves as national animals groups (when they are nothing of the sort)
The ASPCA is also misleading. Unlike HSUS, they do provide care to rescue animals, runs clinics and have a shelter but its located in New York City. Check out their volunteer opportunities and animals available for adoption and you will find that they use the "American" to get people to donate thinking that money will be going to help animals in their own towns. In the past few years they have started some "outreach" programs but they are limited ( and often picked to make the entity seem like it does more nationwide – marketing). There has been a great deal of controversy over the salary of the Executive Director of ASPCA (400,000 – 500,00K plus huge benefit package). A lot of people commenting suggested moving the ASPCA to a less costly location not understanding that, regardless what the name might imply, the services are in NYC – therefore they expenses and salaries match NYC. Note: ASPCA Adoption Center, located at 424 E. 92nd St., between First and York Avenues.
Here's the kind of "good works" that the HSUS does: "The HSUS Condemns Mount Laurel Township’s Decision to Round Up and Kill Canada Geese" http://www.humanesociety.org/news/press_releases/...
I remember people weeping openly over the idea in Seattle of rounding up and killing Canada Geese there — man, what an incredible nuisance they are (the geese; oh, and the liberals too). Walking in a park there is worse than walking in a cow pasture, all because of the overabundance of a somewhat tasty bird. Thanks, HSUS, for stopping the senseless slaughter of Canada Geese, who are now free to crap everywhere!!!!
They also make it almost as hard to adopt a dog from them as it is to adopt a kid here in America… which is near impossible. I went there looking for a dog and they wanted tax returns and to do a home inspection… FOR A DOG!
Berman has never said that he is helping anyone other than his clients, and yes, he is a shill, in it specifically for profit. (duh) but then so is Pacelle.
To borrow one of your points:
"HSUS is concerned with ALL aspects of animal welfare, including humane treatment of farm animals, elimination of puppy mills, disaster relief for animals, promoting responsible breeding practices, operating wildlife shelters, assisting law enforcement on hoarder and dogfighting rescues, and much more. Funding short-term solutions like local animal shelters is not their sole priority, and they have never made the claim that it is."
You're perhaps right, that they've never made the claim that they fund local shelters but by the same token they've also never say EXPLICITALLY in their ads that they don't.
And what would that entail. BIG BOLD LETTERING LIKE THIS, stating that your funds don't go to local shelters but to the larger animal rights/welfare cause. Doing so would not leave anyone with confusion that they are only concerned with the care of animals.
Smoke and mirrors from the CCF? You better believe it. These guys are about as trustworthy as those wall street morons. Smoke and Mirrors from HSUS? You better believe it as well. If people were actually concened with helping the animals shown in these HSUS ads they would donate to their local shelters which need the money more so than some national organization which does very little at the local level, contrary to what it may claim.
And I'd venture to guess that you would agree that local shelters need the funds more so these days, especally given the economic situation.
[...] » Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane Society Of the United States &… [...]
Glad to be of service my friend. Keep in mind, this only covers non-profits who participate in the CFC and is not all inclusive.
Very good points on selecting a breeder! Most of my animals are rescues and I quit adopting from the Humane Society because the animals tend not to be well socialized, whereas a lot of local no-kill "shelters" keep the animals in foster homes as opposed to in cages.
You need to make sure /which/ humane society you are talking about. There are many regionals, plus HSUS (the "educational" one, mentioned above).
So far as I can tell, their true purpose is to make money. They pander to the anti hunters and anti gun crowd in order to get donations.
They had to buy time to find a dog or an excuse to say 'no' if they could not find one.
I think it flip flops according to who is in charge. I have heard nothing bad recently.
Yeah, I think they spend more time baking pets than anything else. The smokestacks are always busy.
——————————————
Obama's Presidency summed up in one photo: http://bit.ly/bbu9HZ
People get confused as to /which/ HS they are giving money to. Seems like all of them call themselves "Humane Society" and leave off the rest.
Yes, folks need to really watch where they send their donations.
HSUS does a very good job at marketing. Last year a local television piece profiled an animal shelter that I used to work for. The piece was about how the donations they collect do not support local shelters despite their almost constant airing on television. It was interesting because the piece only aired twice and the station pulled it due to 'copyright violations'. Call that what you will, but either the HSUS put pressure on the station or their followers beat them down because they were questioning how they spend the donations.
At the time I was doing communications for a large animal shelter in Atlanta and the reporter contacted me to see if I was aware of what they do. They aren't doing anything wrong, but it is borderline misleading as what they do is mainly lobbying against animal cruelty or helping awareness, instead of physically helping the critters.
Occasionally they will reimburse local animal shelters when work is done in an emergency or high profile instances.
.
If folks want to help the animals then they should donate to a respected local charity. If they want to donate to an organization that does national cruelty/lobbying, then HSUS is one of your choices.
Your local 'humane society' is not affiliated with HSUS. They may receive a little bit of money from them, but it will be just a little, like in the case of a specific rescue or cruelty case. Humane society is a general term that some shelters use to get under another organization's reputation. If you're donating to an animal organization be certain that the acronym is where you want the money to go. Lots of organizations have similar sounding names, but may have totally different operating protocols.
There are also several great sources that do free research on non profit organizations. Lastly, any charity should be willing to share their 990 with you, that will give you a great idea of how responsible they will be with your donation
It's not the same outfit. Each has to be researched independently.
Browsing52, CCF has engaged in a great deal of unabashed lying.
Just off the top of my head:
* Claiming the HSUS funds terrorists.
* Claiming the HSUS wants to force everyone to be vegans.
* Claiming (repeatedly) that HSUS did not account for Katrina funds, despite the HSUS (repeatedly) making the most current accounting available on their website.
* Claiming that it's perfectly safe for pregnant women to eat 10x the FDA recommendation of mercury-contaminated fish.
* Claiming that drinking and driving is not drunk driving, while their "Director of Research" was being convicted of DUI violations.
The full list is much longer. CCF is a fundamentally dishonest organization that thrives on misinformation. Yes, it presents "another side of the issue", but it's an artificial, corporate-sponsored, horribly distorted view of that issue that slanders the men and women of organizations whose good works are undeniable.
The supposed rift between local shelters and the HSUS has been exaggerated by CCF. Out of *thousands* of humane societies and shelters, CCF has managed to collect a devastating SIX quotes. Clearly, civil war is about to erupt, eh? And if you read the *full* statements by those agencies, not the cherry-picked, out-of-context snippets offered by CCF, you'll see that most of the shelters are extremely supportive of HSUS; they're just concerned that people are confused about the nature of independent shelters. They have not accused the HSUS of misrepresenting themselves, as CCF would like you to believe.
You accuse them of criminal behavior. Get with HSUS and help them bring charges, or quit slandering CCF.
I know its not the same organization, but the same principle holds true. My point was not about the charity per se, but rather how I choose to donate. My apologies for any confusion.
Hi Larry, I will take issue with your suggestion that HSUS is an animal rights organization: it most definitely is NOT. It is an animal welfare organization, and every action the group has taken has been to promote animal welfare and fight animal cruelty.
That said, I see your point on the advertising disclaimer.
However, I suspect that HSUS-detractors would still complain that the statement wasn't bold enough, or that they dare to show kittens and puppies from HSUS-led rescues when everyone "knows" that a puppy or kitten means that a shelter is involved… A disclaimer can't educate, or overcome consumer laziness.
I think it's a bogus issue, and the real issue here is that HSUS is inconvenient for irresponsible companies. But I also think there's common ground and room for a compromise without trashing everything positive that the HSUS accomplishes.
Well said, Trey. However, the Form 990 is a matter of public record: a charity is *required* to share it. And you're right, it's a great indicator of how the organization handles your donation, even if it doesn't tell the entire story.
I'll take goose crap over CCF's crap any day!
Pick your bedfellows wisely. HSUS is not a good choice.
http://animalscam.com/organizations.cfm
JohnDopp doesn't seem to understand the idea of "sins of omission." Sure, HSUS might not say that it gives a lot of money to local shelters. But its ads certainly give off that impression. As does its name.
HSUS does say on its website…somewhere…that it's not affiliated with any local shelters. Why doesn't it just say that in its adds, too? Probably because HSUS knows it won't get as much money.
I'd like the HSUS to explain why they have so many ways of hiding assets and expenses.
"HSUS is a multinational conglomerate with regional staff operating in 33 states and a special Hollywood Office that promotes and monitors the media’s coverage of animal-rights issues. It includes a huge web of organizations, affiliates, and subsidiaries. Some are nonprofit, tax-exempt “charities,” while others are for-profit taxable corporations, which don’t have to divulge anything about their financial dealings.
This unusually complex structure means that HSUS can hide expenses where the public would never think to look. For instance, one HSUS-affiliated organization called the HSUS Wildlife Land Trust collected $21.1 million between 1998 and 2003. During the same period, it spent $15.7 million on fundraising expenses, most of which directly benefited HSUS. This arrangement allowed HSUS to bury millions in direct-mail and other fundraising costs in its affiliate’s budget, giving the public (and charity watchdog groups) the false impression that its own fundraising costs were relatively low."
http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm...
HSUS detractors might still complain that the statement is not bold enough but that complaint ring hollow if HSUS were more upfront about their agenda.
The CCF would then actually become the joke that HSUS makes them out to be. If HSUS put out an ad with Pacelle, which said, in no uncertain terms someting like "Yes we give some of our funds to local shelters, but make no mistake, WE ARE AVOCATES FOR THE LARGER ANIMAL WELEFARE CAUSE. WE LOBBY GOVERNMENTS, (LOCAL, STATE, AND NATIONAL) TO PASS LAWS FOR HOW WE THINK ANIMALS SHOULD BE RAISED AND CARED FOR. WE ARE NOT YOUR LOCAL ANIMAL SHELTER! IF YOU AGREE AND WOULD LIKE TO HELP, DONATE TODAY!
If they did this, the majority of their critics would be slienced. In any case I would have more respect for them, for at least being honest.
Yeah, I adopted my dog from a local city pet shelter. I don't know if it was a kill shelter or not, but he was pretty well socialized, and has been nothing but a sweetheart for the two years we've had him. Shelter pets are the way to go, because they realize you rescued them. They know it, and they're forever grateful to be part of your family.
It was like that for my family when I was a teenager, too. They wanted to do a background check and everything. It was ridiculous, so we picked up a dog from a family that had to give theirs up, and she was wonderful. We had her for 12 years, until the day she died. She's buried in my parents' backyard. When I wanted a dog of my own, I didn't even bother trying the Humane Society again, I just went straight to a local shelter and adopted one from them. The only question they asked me was if I wanted to take him home that day, or if I wanted to come back in a few days to pick him up.
I couldn't agree more. We have 6 dogs and 4 cat, all rescues in one way or another. We also have 14 horses and a donkey, most of whom are rescues too.
"I will take issue with your suggestion that HSUS is an animal rights organization: it most definitely is NOT."
In 1980, HSUS officially began to change its focus from animal welfare to animal rights. After a vote was taken at the group’s San Francisco national conference, it was formally resolved that HSUS would “pursue on all fronts the clear articulation and establishment of the rights of all animals within the full range of American life and culture.”
In Animal Rights and Human Obligations, the published proceedings of this conference, HSUS stated unequivocally that “there is no rational basis for maintaining a moral distinction between the treatment of humans and other animals.” It’s no surprise, then, that a 2003 HSUS fundraising mailer boasted that the group has been working toward “putting an end to killing animals for nearly half a century.”
In 1986 John McArdle, then-HSUS’s Director of Laboratory Animal Welfare, told Washingtonian magazine that HSUS was “definitely shifting in the direction of animal rights faster than anyone would realize from our literature.”
The group completed its animal-rights transformation during the 1990s, changing its personnel in the process. HSUS assimilated dozens of staffers from PETA and other animal-rights groups, even employing John “J.P.” Goodwin, a former Animal Liberation Front member and spokesman with a lengthy arrest record and a history of promoting arson to accomplish animal liberation. http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm...
"Does Pacelle get paid? Of course he does, just as the CEO of every major charity in North America does. And his compensation is right in line with comparable charities (and frequently a good deal less). And he certainly doesn't get paid 92% of the donations to the HSUS, that's for sure."
What does HSUS actually do then with the millions it raises using the furry faces of Fido an Fluffy? For one thing, HSUS believes in taking care of itself. In 2008, it spent nearly$38 million on salaries and benefits for its staff of 555 employees. Worse, HSUS employees have complained to the press that their organization wastes its resources on fundraising expenses and high salaries for its chief executives. Since Pacelle took over in 2004, HSUS has spent $8.5 million on just the executive pension fund. And according to its 2008 annual report, HSUS spent $27.5 million on fundraising and over $28 million on “campaigns, litigations and investigations.” Robert Baker, an HSUS consultant and former chief investigator, told U.S. News & World Report: “The Humane Society should be worried about protecting animals from cruelty. It’s not doing that. The place is all about power and money.” http://activistcash.com/organization_overview.cfm...
Cardilover… we JUST finished discussing how CCF lies its collective ass off, and you respond by copying and pasting discredited propaganda from CCF's own website. You're not much of a debater, but you make a wonderful sock puppet.
————————-
ActivistCash.com is a web site affiliated with the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), a front group for the restaurant, alcohol and tobacco industries. ActivistCash.com was launched in November 2001.
ActivistCash.com was created by Berman & Co., a public affairs firm owned by lobbyist Rick Berman. Based in Washington, DC, Berman & Co. represents the tobacco industry as well as hotels, beer distributors, taverns, and restaurant chains.
In a 1999 interview with the Chain Leader, a trade publication for restaurant chains, Berman boasted that he attacks activists more aggressively than other lobbyists. "We always have a knife in our teeth," he said. Since activists "drive consumer behavior on meat, alcohol, fat, sugar, tobacco and caffeine," his strategy is "to shoot the messenger. … We've got to attack their credibility as spokespersons."
ActivistCash.com was established for precisely this purpose. It attempts to discredit activists by suggesting that there is something disreputable about the money they have received from foundations.
So, prove what they say isn't true. Prove it.
Larry, I'm not convinced that it's appropriate or necessary for an organization to state what they DON'T do. The ad is very forthright about donations being used to fight animal cruelty.
Specifically, it says:
"For just $19 a month, you can join the Humane Society of the United States in our fight to eliminate animal abuse everywhere… The Humane Society of the United States is the nation's most effective animal protection organization, rescuing tens of thousands of animals every year [this said while pictures of Hurricane Ike rescue operations are displayed] and fighting against animal cruelty wherever it exists [displaying footage of 'downer' cattle being rammed with forklifts]."
There is nothing in the imagery, in the text, or in the ad that implies that it's solely a shelter funding organization. I understand your point, though: a prominent disclaimer would eliminate confusion (that shouldn't exist in the first place), but it's piss-poor marketing.
So, if they're not actively encouraging confusion, and there's nothing inherently confusing in the ad, does the HSUS have an obligation to educate the misinformed? Would this strengthen trust in the HSUS, or weaken it by giving their detractors something new to distort? You know that CCF would immediately respond by crowing "Look! We made them back down! They're guilty!"
So whose interests are really being served by a voluntary disclaimer?
Say, didn't Carrie Lightner (spelling prob inc) get a dwi? did she have to have one of those blow staters on her car? Are there really any "no kill" shelters? Surely they get overloaded. So some cuddley pets are put down when they need to be. They are just animals, as long as they are put down humanly who cares? Everyone should have to put down their own pets or don't get them.
Cardilover, that's a common CCF tactic: throw out a dozen unsubstantiated claims and make your opponent waste their time and resources disproving them — especially when the claims are simplistic caricatures of complex issues.
Tell you what: YOU prove they are true. The burden of proof is typically on the accuser, not the accused.
Show me the full text of the quotes mentioned above, so I can see them in context and without bias.
Then explain how a quote from THIRTY years ago, the opinion of one man from 24 years ago, or a philosophy renounced by a man 15 years ago has any relevance to the operations and philosophy of the HSUS today.
I will be happy to rebut your points in a logical and courteous manner when you do so.
I provided the links. The financials come from the documents submitted by HSUS. You say it's false. The links are there. CCF has not been sued and found guilty of slander or character assassination.
Complex issues? I'll say. How many groups are hiding under HSUS's big umbrella, hmmm? Why do they make their financial dealings so complex, hmmmm? Why the deceptive advertising, hmmm? Why?
[...] » Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane Society Of the United States &… [...]
Wow, I'm so impressed. You must have a lot of property to your name! I applaud you doing that kind of work. I've been tempted to get a second dog, or maybe a cat or something, but my dog's jealous enough that it wouldn't be a good idea. He makes sure everybody knows that he's mine, and nobody else gets to horn in on his action. =)
A brilliant put-down of a corrupt process: measured, funny, tongue-in-cheek, un-angry. Well done!
We have 12 acres in Middle TN. Most of the horses are PMUs, and a few local rescues. Only a couple of them are "I WANT THAT HORSE!!" Three of the dogs were dumped in the area, and two of the cats are from shelters (the other 2 are from the feral cats that were here when we got here). Over all some of it is on purpose and some of it is happenstance.
Check out PETA Kills Animals to see what the liberals do support.
Hey, these guys can't be bad. They're linked to on PetaKillsAnimals.com
It is appropriate simply because there is confusion about their "product". If not then we wouldn't be having this debate.
If HSUS were truly on the up and up, then why not. I realize that they are not in a court of law but they are in the court of public opinion.
They are using a tactic that Reagan used many times where you go to a hospital opening or whatever and announce that you are going to cut funding for hospitals. People loose that message because of the venue you happen to be at.
By the same token HSUS may state what they state, but displaying the images and the sad music implys that the funds will actually go to the dogs or cats or whatever that are pictured. Not to a larger animal rights/welfare cause.
What's more, is that HSUS knows this otherwise they wouldn't run these ads in the first place. They are practicing indifference. They don't care if the person making the donation thinks it's going to his local shelter, as long as they get the donation.
I agree that people should research an organization prior to making a donation. It's stupid to do otherwise. But you can bet that people do donate thinking that their $20.00 a month will go to their local shelter because they share similar names. A fact that HSUS does not go out of it's way to clarify.
"displaying the images and the sad music implys that the funds will actually go to the dogs or cats or whatever…"
But that's exactly where the funds do go! Every one of those sad images were taken from HSUS-staffed rescue operations, none of them were taken from shelters. It would be deceptive if they showed nothing but shelter dogs and cats, but they don't — they show representations of animal suffering "in all its forms", including factory-farming cruelty, animal abuse, dogfighting, disasters, etc.
But yes, yes, I see your point. If there's confusion, regardless of who is to blame, it should be sorted out.
The question (a rhetorical one) is one of responsibility: is HSUS is responsible for educating the world about the independent nature of animal shelters in an advertisement that HSUS is solely funding?
I don't think they bear that obligation. But I acknowledge that it would eliminate any confusion, to the harm of the charity.
[...] » Puppies, Kittens and NYT Pushback: The Truth About the Humane … [...]
"Seems to be no end to the lengths the left will go to advance their agenda thru obfuscation, half-truths, and sleight of hand."
If you had no moral compass and a winning strategy, would YOU change?
GF
But how do they live with themselves?
Answer: Broken moral compass and "Urbanites" who can't read but can watch the MSM TV…
You must be logged in to post a comment.