RSCPA Complain About ‘Abused’ Dog in Volkswagen TV Advert - Let’s Get Our Priorities Right Shall We?
A television advert for Volkswagen has caught the attention of the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals who have claimed a dog used in the commercial is “abused”.
Over 200 people are reported to have complained about the ad (below) on the basis that the dog in the car was not wearing a seatbelt and the dog depicted as being ‘less confident’ looks to be nervous.
You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
The 30 second advert for the Polo model shows a dog, a digitally enhanced Jack Russell Terrier, to appear as though singing in the front of a car and then cuts to a scene where a dog is shown as timid and withdrawn.
The RSPCA are quoted: “Our concern is how they got the dog to behave in that way. Its tail is between its legs, which are shivering, and its head is lowered. This is classic abused animal behaviour which appears to be real.
“We’re also concerned why you need to show an ‘abused’ dog to sell cars.”
But a spokesperson for VW cars hit back: “The dog was trained to behave in that way. It was not harmed.
“The owner was just out of shot and a vet was on hand at all times.”
But the RSPCA are still not convinced:
“We have asked how it was filmed and have been told the dog was acting. But we are very disappointed that Volkswagen feel it necessary to portray a dog suffering to sell cars, whether it was genuine or staged.”
Volkswagen have no plans to pull the ad, saying: “The dogs are highly trained. They can do almost anything. They can shake if they are happy or excited - they were not scared,” a spokeswoman said.
“There is a fantasy element to the advert. We would hope that just as when people see the dog singing, they know it’s not real, when they see it shaking, they know it is not really scared.”
The advert is certainly eye catching and memorable. But there is a worry. A deep concern. Something troubling us.
No, it’s not the ‘abused’ dog. It’s the RSPCA.
What on earth leads them to be able to conclude this dog is in any way, shape or form “abused”, when all they’ve seen is a 30 second piece of television trickery?
How worrying that the organisation who’s objective is to identify and act upon cases of genuinely “abused” animals can reach the conclusion that this highly trained animal actor was “abused”.
Having seen various highly trained animals who work on TV or movie sets, I have only ever witnessed superb levels of care and attention. I absolutely know for certain that the amount of people, rules and regulations covering the work of TV/movie animals is stringent and I also know for a fact that it is certainly possibly to train an animal to act out a particular emotion on command. In the case of this particular breed, the Jack Russell, I’ve encountered many who will stand and ’shiver’ when they are eating or at other times where they are perfectly unperturbed emotionally.
It is a genuine and real concern that the RSPCA saw fit to label this dog as “abused”. It surely raises questions about credibility in the eyes of other cases where a dog may genuinely have been abused. It smacks of bandwagon jumping and doesn’t reflect well on an organisation who do some fantastic, outstanding animal welfare work. It is also very difficult to marry up when factored against the adverts the RSPCA and other animal welfare groups run themselves, often showing horrendously upsetting scenes of abused dogs, dead animals or dogs simply looking very sad and upset.
So, come on RSPCA, let’s try and get our priorities right shall we. VW TV adverts showing trained animal actors are not “abusing” dogs. If this IS abuse, it really waters down the power of the description. There are plenty of travesties of animal justice going on all around us and we have an ongoing battle to combat them. Describing the shaky JRT as an abused dog does a disservice to the credibility of animal welfare campaigners everywhere.
