It's been less than a week
and we have another example of violent imagery involving children from leftist environmentalists. This time its from a newly resurfaced slide show over at Treehugger.com
(h/t Adam Baldwin
), which is owned by Discovery, that rates environmental ads by how cool they are. Apparently hanging children is cool:
Yea. Real cool.
Discovery needs to answer for this despicable crap. Do they approve of this? Will they stand by what Treehugger has done here? Is this the kind of thinking we support when we turn on any of their networks?
UPDATE: Slublog works his magic and has an important question to ask you:
UPDATE: It appears that Chris Tackett, the social media editor for Treehugger.com, has responded to this post in the comments:
Hi, as a representative for TreeHugger, I wanted to point out a few things regarding this post. First, the post you're writing about is from June, 2009 and is therefore in no way related to the recent stories you mention. Second, while we may agree that the "coolest" headline does not seem appropriate for that lone image from ACT-Responsible, that poster was just one of 16 posters that the writer collectively deemed the "coolest". Like art, advertisements are subjective and these posters were meant to grab the viewer's attention regarding the important issue of climate change. Just as not everyone accepts the fact we are warming the planet and changing the climate, we understand not everyone will find a poster like this an appropriate way to convey the message that our inaction to fight climate change now will have dire consequences for future generations. I hope these points help clarify the context and timeline to this post. Thanks for your time and allowing me to comment here.
Well, to make it crystal clear, when I said in the beginning of this post that this was from a "newly resurfaced slide show" I was implying that while this was from 2009, as Chris says, it just came to light on the right side of the blogosphere yesterday. I also knew, as anybody who looked at the screen shot provided or visited the link provided, that this disgusting ad was part of a series of ads that Treehugger.com thinks are "cool" but I fail to see how that matters at all. This ad and Treehugger's enthusiastic celebration of it is objectively disturbing and connected to the 10/10 campaign's violent ad through their shared embrace of the reprehensible.