Because it is eco-friendly to wear fur ". This is the sentence condemned on March 24 by the Jury d'Ethique Publicitaire (JEP), which declared the complaint published by the European Fur Breeders' Association (EFBA) in the Parliament Magazine, a magazine that illustrates the activities of the European institutions, to be misleading, ordering the modification or immediate withdrawal of advertising.
He is about to end up run over, his mother saves him
"Because it is eco-friendly to wear a fur coat". This is the sentence condemned on March 24 by the Advertising Ethics Jury (EHD), who declared the advertisement published by European Fur Breeders’ Association (EFBA) on Parliament Magazine, a magazine that illustrates the activities of the European institutions, ordering the modification or the immediate withdrawal of advertising.
In practice, with this advertisement, theEuropean association of fur animal breeders he wanted to get across the concept that wearing animal skin is green and eco-sustainable, as if skinning animals alive to make clothes had no environmental consequences. In fact, the Guarantor Authority justified its decision by saying that "the 'eco-friendly' statement is an absolute declaration that implicitly indicates that the product has no environmental impact at every stage of its life cycle, which in reality this is not the case with animal fur (as this product has a negative impact on the environment) ".
The denuncia al Jury of Advertising Ethics (JEP) era partita dall'Belgian association GAIA (Global Action in the Interest of Animal) component, together with LAV, of Fur Free Alliance, the international network that brings together about 40 animal rights organizations committed to fighting the exploitation of animals for the production of furs.
"The fur industry - said Simone Pavesi, head of LAV Fur sector - is using in order to market products that consumers have been trying to avoid for some time. misleading communication strategies which, also making use of a regulatory vacuum for which it is not mandatory today to label furs for what they are, leads consumers to make uninformed choices and, as in the case of EFBA advertising, misled by false declarations. Animal fur - added Pavesi - in addition to not being an ethical product, as it involves the exploitation and death of millions of animals, it is not even an ecological, sustainable and responsible product. The pronouncement of the Guarantor of Advertising has therefore emphasized even more how much animal fur has nothing natural ”.
