Jill: I believe you when you report that Mr. Anton is sincere. I do love the campaign. Socially responsible marketing is the way to go. I wish more companies subscribed to this approach. Kudos to Pedigree, if the point wasn't clear through the blurriness of snark.

Nonetheless, I cannot agree that Pedigree and other foods involved in the pet food recall should be let off the hook so easily. They cannot be compared to the tomato industry's foibles. After all, buying ingredients from lowest common denominator sources to raise profits can't be compared to the "mistake" of having workers take a dump in the field (though some might argue his point).

Moreover, when it comes to human foods the FDA gets involved rapidly and gives companies no "out" when it comes to banning their product from supermarkets and Subway sandwich shops.

Not so for pet foods. The FDA left it up to the individual companies to handle. As a result, it took the pet food companies way too long to admit to their products' problems. They obfuscated, lied and failed to get out the information. Mars was not exempt from this treason.

I won't get over it quickly. I don't see why I should. After all, they continue to reject greater oversight of their product while playing up the human animal bond in their marketing campaigns.

I may like their marketing campaigns and would happily accept their money if it means placing more dogs and cats in loving homes, but the hypocrisy still astounds me.

Seems to me that no one is considering what happens to most of the shelter dogs (and cats, by the way) who are not adopted! Isn't it a lot better to get these animals into homes and then try to educate the owners about the better food choices? I, for one, appreciate their efforts to get these animals out of the shelters and into homes! And, with a cat who was affected by the toxic food, I do know what it's like to deal with poison food and all of the pain and misery that goes with it. I don't feed Pedigree, nor am I likely to, but I will always promote the adoption of shelter animals.

I hope with their ad campaign a lot of pets will soon find their new home specially this holiday season!  Since holiday is just around the corner, here's an e-card for everyone, http://www.petcentric.com/crittercarols/?DCMP=RAC-PETC-DogTm-Carol08&HQS=Blog  Happy Holidays!

While I don't feed Pedigree, and am not likely to anytime soon, I will vouch they do more than the ads. NorCal Bulldog Rescue, the group I belong with, submitted a modest grant proposal to buy runs for foster volunteers. We'd pretty much forgotten it but then an email and a check came. With it we will be picking up 4-6 small runs  and igloos to help our foster homes. It can be very difficult for a working person fostering a dog which has never been in a home or a crate, or needs quarantine from existing pets, and a small run set up indoors or out can really help facilitate the transition to house dog life.

@Moira - this ad campaign was in the works long before the recall.

I've spoken with John Anton in person and he is truly sincere about helping rescue dogs, as is Mars/Pedigree.  They're headquartered in Nashville and do a tremendous amount of work financially for our shelters in Nashville, along with other non-profit agencies.  I really do believe they are doing their part as a corporate citizen. 

I know they've lost some trust with the public, but so did the tomato industry there for a while.  We all haven't stopped eating tomatoes.  Ford screwed up the Pinto, but many of us are driving Ford vehicles today.  Pedigree food may have tragically been bad for a few batches, but they didn't want it to happen and they certainly don't want it to happen again.  They can't stay in business if something like that continues.

I think people are too hard on big corporations just because of negative stereotypes that aren't always accurate.

I have a few followup comments: with the huge advertising budget of Pedigree, why not take a hefty percentage off the top & donate to shelters and advertise how the corp. was able to do that, along with promotion of adoption, as stated above.

Patrick, yes any pet can exist on any brand of dog food. People are becoming more discerning of ingredients for a variety of reasons.

It was not even a 6 months ago, that "shelters" in various parts of the country including New England, were 'importing' adoptees from poorer areas of the country to fill "a need". What was that need? Apparently "breeders" in the classifieds, etc. weren't pumping out enough pups?

My gripe is it was "perpetuating a problem", instead of addressing what should have happened, which was low or no cost s/n program availability. Now the economy "tanks" and how many of these same dogs plus some are ending up back into shelters?

My question still goes back to the seemingly "fallout" of cooperation between shelters, breed club sponsored rescue groups, large organizations, in the mid-late 90's! Oh yes, things may/may not change on that avenue in this current 'crisis'.

ok, I'll take the "hit", it is my belief that $$$ had something to do with everything!
B. Albright

Not to mention, Pedigree's salmonella recall 3 short months ago. http://www.emaxhealth.com/1/117/24691.html

The timing always makes me wonder if it is all PR to cleanse the name by the appearance of a *new* ad campaign.

I would venture to make a few comments.

1) There are PLENTY of purebred dogs in shelters, particularly when it comes to breeds which are overbred for one reason or another, the breed rescues are often full and cannot take them all, particularly the older ones. Especially larger breeds like german shepherds, dalmatians, rottweilers but also cocker spaniels, poodles, dachshunds and other small breeds. Especially true given the economic crisis.

2) Most shelter systems, especially government-run ones, don't have the money to produce slick advertising campaigns and in my local area the Pedigree ads are just about the ONLY ads you will ever see drawing attention to dog overpopulation and shelter animals. And they would not be worth much if they didn't tug at your heartstrings, that's the whole point. Emotions bring about awareness and action much better than statistics or logical arguments. I think the ads are really important.

3) I don't think the ads or the Pedigree products are aimed at the folks reading this blog. We are already aware and moved by the situation of shelter dogs, and we are probably feeding our pets a better quality food. But there are people who aren't really aware of the homeless pet situation and there is food at every quality and price point, both for humans and for pets, and I think Pedigree knows it's market. I don't buy their food but I don't begrudge them selling it to the people who need to feed their pets on a tight budget.

I worked in advertising for several years, including owning my own advertising-related business. I can say the goal of such campaigns can be very subtle. Of course a company is hoping for increased sales (and, in this case, are probably getting it since, even though "we" all tend to steer owners gently in the direction of super-premium foods, clearly millions are still buying their dog food from grocery stores). But they're also hoping for the perception of 'good will'. When a company can achieve the perception of being a good corporate neighbour, it bodes well for future business, in many regards, not solely product sales.

Although I have not seen any recent ads, I do remember some form a while ago (last year maybe). The ads don't inspire me to buy their product just to 'save' shelter animals or help them find a home. I am not going to sacrifice the health of my dogs for the idea that I am helping shelter dogs. As I live in Canada, I highly doubt any of the money goes to a shelter near me. I would much rather buy a food that I like, is good for the dogs, and doesn't have nasty ingredients (animal digest, yum) and donate money to a local rescue where I know that the money I give will help the dogs. Not just $1 per bag. Better yet, I could volunteer with a rescue and foster a dog who needs it. Then I can help a dog, a rescue and not have to buy a crappy food.

I do wonder if how much they actually donate is more or less than the cost of advertising the campaign. Imagine the diffecnce they could make by donating the $15 million to shelters instead of using it for ads. What rescues/shelters does the money go to anyway?

Pedigree does give a lot of food, for free, to rescue groups, if they ask for it and can use a pallet-full at a time quantities. Most shelters that are county funded have a stupid rule that they can't ask/take free stuff. It has to be done through a foundation or friends group, which may not work with Pedigree's policies (it may not receive a tax credit that way, which I have no problem agreeing with).

While their food isn't the best, it's also not as bad as Ol' Roy, and a huge number of dogs have lived decently with it as their food source. Yeah, they might live a little longer, and be a bit healthier, but then again, the best food alone will not guarantee that a dog lives a perfect life to die of old age.

Even worse are the commercials with Sarah McLachlan holding the shelter pup with "In the Arms of the Angel" playing in the background...makes me cry like a baby if I don't change the channel fast enough!

I'd rather buy what I consider to be better food and then donate money directly to a local shelter. But I can definitely see people remembering those advertisements when they go shopping for food, and if they're the type that alternates between different grocery store brands anyways, they might just pick up that bag of Pedigree this time.

I think those of us who are a little more educated in terms of pet health tend to be a little more critical of such pet advertising, regardless of the product.

Patrick: "More nutritious" is indeed a misnomer if you consider the sad state of pet nutrition research. "More wholesome" is more accurate given the definition of "wholesome," which denotes healthy ingredients and connotes openness and honesty in the manufacturer's dealings.

Is a brand that purports to offer a "low filler" diet better? Dunno. Depends on what you consider fillers. Do we really know what's best for our pets? It's true, we don't. But I do know who's left me feeling cheated in the past. Subjective? Some. But it's all I got to work with for now.

What's your definition of "more nutritious"?

I have yet to see ANY dog food study that makes sense, and I have yet to seen even one that has actually been produced by anyone with a degree in canine nutrition who is actually using either numbers, science or logic.

The simple truth is that ANY dog food will satisfy the needs of most stay-at-home dogs, and that is true for most most "working dogs" too (I say this as someone with woring dogs).

The single biggest health threat to dogs in this country is not malnutrition -- it's too much nutrition; food loaded with calories and vitamins that leads to overweight dogs that grow too fast.

The same can be said for humans too.


Patrick

Barbara: In their newest ad--the one I saw in WSJ this AM--the dog was a cleaned-up scraggly mixed breed. At least there's some truth in that one.

btw, I looked it up again and Pedigree's ad budget alone was over $32 million last year. The marketing mudget overall must be huge (imagine those salaries, etc.).

The ad shows purebred dogs behind "bars" with collars on, isn't that misleading?

I'd like to know what happened between shelters and purebred rescue groups in the late 90's. There was once a feeling of "cooperation and working together"; and while some shelters still hold to that, many changed their protocol and no longer contacted the rescue groups. What happened and why?

It was the club or purebred rescue groups better equipped to screen, foster, and rehab dogs for placement and hopefully allow the shelters to have space for the mix-bred or purebreds without near resources.

Actually, I'm starting to resent so-called large scale advertising connected to a charitable cause. It is not the cause that I resent or don't support---just the large "in front" corporation.

Barbara A. Albright

One of the Pedigree commercials makes me cry every time. But that doesn't translate into purchases.

I guess that puts me in the 'Cry but NO Buy" segment of their viewing audience.

Posey: Supposedly, 1/2 of their marketing budget is tied to this campaign. That's likely to be a $15 million proposition, according to WSJ. This is a PR campaign. It works by financing these ads and then trying to hook up potential owners with shelters sort of like PetFinder does. Here's the site for their adoption drive. It doesn't look like they fund the shelters directly.

I have a question:

Is Pedigree actually doing anything to help shelters/ shelter animals besides advertising the need to adopt from shelters? The use of shelter animals implies that they support shelters ($$), but not sure if that's true.

Ark Lady: It's not "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." It's more like "take what you can get and run," as long as you're not asked to sacrifice your soul in the bargain.

See any ads here? Not yet. I'm holding out for someone who doesn't ask for something editorial in return.That's a tough sell in this market, believe it or not.

But then...everyone's got a price. THAT, I believe. It's just a matter of how high.

Every type of advertising has a hook so if this helps place animals--good.

Today's advertising plays on the emotions and if you keep track of all the advertising tyou'll notice that even non-animal oriented products or services now include animals as prominant figures in them .

The ad agencies are paying attention to the demographics of pets in US households.

More subtle, but along the same lines, are the companies that partner with veterinarians and breeders to promote their products.

I don't particularly think those brands are great but the sales department seems to do well by getting their products into pet households early and unless pet professionals educate their clients on the other end--they are likely to stay with it.

Mars also now owns Nutro (big on the West coast) and I've watched that brand go down the tubes since it first arrived on the scene many years ago. This year has been the worst with formula changes, bag size changes, etc.

I think those of us who have influence over the pet owning population can influence the choices of our clients.

The question is, do we sell out for sponsors or profits if companies whose products we don't like fund our efforts to implement change?

*sigh*

I'd really be interested in your opinion on this.

Back to educating clients--I look at diet closely because it does influence behavior. However,  because of the level of trust and influence I am able to share that many brands spend lots of money on advertising (perhaps more than on quality ingredients) and that I prefer those foods and treats without fillers, dyes, and other tactics that take the focus off of quality of the product.

Find me blogging at Ark Animals

I'd rather they spend their money making better dog food, making sure they have quality ingredients, and inspecting suppliers. Maybe even contributing money to independant dog food research.

I suspect advertising this would go over better with the audience here. . .but Dr. Khuly is right probably would not hit the same spot with the general population.

Personally I have to turn those Pedigree ads off. . .they make me feel guilty for only having one shelter dog and not 2, 3 or 4!

If their campaign helps promote pets finding homes, I'm all for it. Here in Canada, the foreclosure crisis hasn't hit as strongly as it has our US neighbours (yet). I can't imagine how awful it must be for families to lose their homes and have to make decisions about their pets. I can't personally imagine ever walking away from a pet - but thankfully have never been in that situation.

As far as pet food is concerned, we switched to a very high quality brand recently; and while I feel better about feeding them a quality product, I can honestly say that they don't seem thrilled about it. They seemed to prefer their old food (not Pedigree, but also not a top tier brand). I have no problem paying an increased price for good food, but it sure would be nice to see them enjoy it more!