Michael Vick: “Vicktimized” by America’s double standard?
By: Dr. Samori Swygert
Thanksgiving morning I was watching the History Channel while breakfast was being prepared for the family. The channel was airing a marathon of a TV show called Swamp People. I typically view the History Channel for history, but the History Channel has lost its’ taste, and that’s a whole different story. However, the show basically focuses on these different families that navigate up and down bayous, canals, and river banks hunting Alligators and wild hogs with pistols and rifles.
This was reminiscently disturbing to me. I thought about what happened to Michael Vick. Immediately my mind went through the mental analysis of compare and contrast between Michael Vick and Swamp People.
Michael Vick was arrested for dog fighting that resulted in animals being harmed and sometimes shot and killed if severely hurt during a battle. The winning dog was not shot of course. The winning team did earn prize money for owning the victorious canine. Michael Vick was branded and vilified once the word spread throughout the entertainment, sports, and media industry. Ultimately, Michael Vick served time in jail. Since his release, he’s conducted animal rights campaigns across the country to redeem his image, vindicate his name, and to express genuine remorse.
Paradoxically, country families and hunting groups get to parade and gallivant up and down waterways brandishing firearms, and shooting DEFENSELESS alligators in the mouth at point blank range, while yahooing sounds of jubilee on the History Channel!
Michael Vick did jail time, BUT these individuals are rewarded with a nationally syndicated TV show? Some individuals may say, “They’re killing for food delicacy to sell, and Michael Vick did it for entertainment and profit at the loss of an animal’s life”. Okay I hear that, now hear me.
This is where their logical argument breaks down. Alligators and dogs are both animals. Both of these animals were shot and killed. Yes, the alligator may be sold for food, BUT, once you create a TV show where individuals get paid with a TV contract, you’ve just entered the entertainment industry. This may be hunting for the hunters, but it’s considered PAID ENTERTAINMENT TO THE TV VIEWERS, and is obviously a thrill kill to the hunters that scream with victory (just watch and see what I mean). What was initially hunting for food has now morphed into paid exploitation of the murder of innocent animals. If these hunters never caught one animal, would they have a TV show???? The answer is NO!! They are obviously paid for the amount of animals they slaughter for TV ratings.
Let’s go deeper. The History Channel is a cable show, thus viewers have to pay for a cable subscription to order the history channel to view this show. Every person that watches this show does not eat or hunt alligator, but just watch it for entertainment. So how do does this differ from what Michael Vick did?
Vick got paid to engage in an activity that was hazardous to animals and he made money. The individuals in this show are engaging in activity that is hazardous to animals and are profiteering money, receiving endorsements, and royalties from the show airing the shooting of hogs and alligators.
The true ethical decision should be to not air this on TV. These swamp hunters should just make money from selling the food they caught in the markets they serve without a paid televised forum of entertainment. However, this is a quadruple pay day exploitation of animal life because, 1) THEY MAKE MONEY AT THE POINT OF SALE IN THE MARKETPLACE FOR CONSUMPTION OF THEIR MEAT 2) THEY MAKE MONEY FROM THE TV SHOW CONTRACTS 3) THEY MAKE MONEY FROM SELLING SWAMP PEOPLE TV SHOW APPAREL, CLOTHING, AND GEAR 4) THE POTENTIAL FOR THE SELL OF ALLIGATOR HIDE IN THE FASHION INDUSTRY EXISTS. I SPECIFICALLY HEARD ONE OF THE HUNTERS SAY, “I DON’T WANT TO USE MY SHOTGUN BECAUSE IT WILL RUIN THE HIDE”. People don’t eat alligator hide, but they do use alligator hide for belts, purses, and shoes! Why was he so worried about not damaging the hide, unless they are selling it for uses other than the food industry?
They also give subliminal endorsements to the gun industry, because they will brag about the MAKE AND MODEL OF THE TYPE OF RIFLE OR PISTOL they are using to kill the animals with. You can have your own opinions about this, but you can’t have your own facts! These are facts!
The inconsistency and duplicitous application of justice is what bothers me. PETA, animal rights advocates, and other animal cruelty groups should be coming down on this type of entertainment in the same manner of vigilance they exacted on Mike Vick!
Maybe, it’s easier to focus attention on one or two individuals rather than a multimillion dollar network. However, “an injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere right”? Maybe lady justice is blind, because she doesn’t see the hypocritical application of law between these two scenarios!
Why is America now mute and mum, not even a mouse murmuring or mumbling about this? I don’t endorse animal cruelty, but I’ve elucidated the clear double standards. The take home point is that the killing of animal life for entertainment and financial gain is wrong, no matter if this is at your home or on a Television show. Who gets to dictate if a dog has more life value than an alligator, or any animal at that?
What are your thoughts?
