Numbing the pain or diffusing the pressure? The co‐optation of Peta's “naming and shaming” campaign against mulesing

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6090230
AutoresLev Bromberg (0000-0001-9871-1430, Melbourne Law School University of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia, autor correspondente)
Ano2021
Volume43
Fascículo3
Páginas285-313
Data de publicação2021-07-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoLaw & Policy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0265-8240 • E-ISSN: 1467-9930
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/lapo.12172
OpenAlexW3185210850
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas2
Referências citadas44

This article examines a high‐profile “naming and shaming” campaign launched by the activist group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals targeting the controversial sheep husbandry practice of mulesing. This campaign led to important changes to the “rules of the game” governing global merino wool production. This article suggests that contests between activists and other stakeholders over the framing of the policy problem and activists' choice of strategy can result in co‐optation of activist ideas by corporate actors. The possibility of co‐optation of ostensibly successful social movement campaigns highlights the importance of considering such campaigns in light of movements' values and longer‐term goals

Advertising · Business · Framing (construction · Media studies · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Social movement · Sociology · Engineering · Geographies of human-animal interactions · Law · Public Administration