Lobbying against compassion: a review of the ethics of persuasion when nonhuman animals suffering is involved

IF 0.2 Q4 SOCIOLOGY
Núria Almiron Roig, Olatz Aranceta-Reboredo
{"title":"Lobbying against compassion: a review of the ethics of persuasion when nonhuman animals suffering is involved","authors":"Núria Almiron Roig, Olatz Aranceta-Reboredo","doi":"10.17502/mrcs.v10i2.575","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper departs from a critical animal studies perspective—that is a perspective critical with speciesist anthropocentrism—in order to problematize public relations by industries harming other animals. To this end, it reviews the ethical and theoretical frameworks raised by critical public relations in order to adopt a critical stance towards what we call here “lobbying against compassion”—the practice of public relations, mainly lobbying, to justify the exploitation of nonhuman animals by some industries. We first examine the role of compassion as a strong motivator for prosocial behaviours as discussed by philosophy and social psychology. Second, we examine compassion towards animals from the lens of public relations and communication. Third, we conduct a literature review to identify the ethical frameworks raised by previous critical public relations literature, which can also be used to justify the cultivation of compassion toward other animals. Finally, we argue that an ethics of persuasion that incorporates compassion towards the suffering of other animals—and therefore avoids endorsing animal suffering—is unavoidable for public relations theory and practice to be ethically reinforced.","PeriodicalId":41104,"journal":{"name":"Methaodos-Revista de Ciencias Sociales","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methaodos-Revista de Ciencias Sociales","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17502/mrcs.v10i2.575","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper departs from a critical animal studies perspective—that is a perspective critical with speciesist anthropocentrism—in order to problematize public relations by industries harming other animals. To this end, it reviews the ethical and theoretical frameworks raised by critical public relations in order to adopt a critical stance towards what we call here “lobbying against compassion”—the practice of public relations, mainly lobbying, to justify the exploitation of nonhuman animals by some industries. We first examine the role of compassion as a strong motivator for prosocial behaviours as discussed by philosophy and social psychology. Second, we examine compassion towards animals from the lens of public relations and communication. Third, we conduct a literature review to identify the ethical frameworks raised by previous critical public relations literature, which can also be used to justify the cultivation of compassion toward other animals. Finally, we argue that an ethics of persuasion that incorporates compassion towards the suffering of other animals—and therefore avoids endorsing animal suffering—is unavoidable for public relations theory and practice to be ethically reinforced.
反对同情的游说:当涉及非人类动物的痛苦时,说服的伦理审查
本文从批判动物研究的角度出发——这是一种批判物种主义人类中心主义的角度——以便将工业伤害其他动物的公共关系问题化。为此,本书回顾了批判公共关系提出的伦理和理论框架,以便对我们在这里所说的“反对同情的游说”采取批判的立场——这种公共关系的做法,主要是游说,为某些行业对非人类动物的剥削辩护。我们首先考察了哲学和社会心理学所讨论的同情心作为亲社会行为的强烈动机的作用。其次,我们从公共关系和沟通的角度审视对动物的同情。第三,我们进行了文献综述,以确定以前重要的公共关系文献提出的伦理框架,这些框架也可以用来证明培养对其他动物的同情心是合理的。最后,我们认为,一种包含对其他动物的痛苦的同情的说服伦理——因此避免赞同动物的痛苦——对于公共关系理论和实践的伦理强化是不可避免的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信