So a Danish DJ decided to talk about beating a nine-week-old bunny named Allan to death and cook it for a meal on live radio. Unsurprising, his listeners were not impressed.
A petition followed to have the DJ fired, and in defence of their employee, Radio24syv released a statement in English, claiming that Allan was murdered intentionally to bring awareness to the issue of animal cruelty and the hypocrisy that surrounds the issue.
To take the life of an animal brings about strong emotional response in vast segments of the public.
“We anticipated strong reactions. To take the life of an animal brings about strong emotional response in vast segments of the public. It was important to us that the rabbit would not suffer unnecessarily, and was put down accordingly to careful instructions by a professional animal caretaker from a Danish Zoo.
We knew that we would be accused of provocation. And yes, we indeed wanted to provoke the public and to stir a debate about the hypocrisy when it comes to perceptions of cruelty towards animals.
But it is not an empty provocation; the presenters of the program ate the animal after killing it.
Consumers generally do not kill animals themselves, but we buy and eat animals, that have [led] sad lives. We just don’t see it, and don’t consider the animals ‘cute’ as the rabbit.”
In short, Allan was killed so that the station could help to highlight the hypocrisy when it comes to fighting for the rights of pet animals like rabbits, as well as to showcase the cruelty and horror that animals are subjected to for many Danish meals.
Did this campaign miss the point or were they just being brutally honest?