Simon Cowell Accused of Endorsing Animal Cruelty
Published on May 19, 2008 by Freelance Contributors · 4 CommentsAnimal group want answers from Simon Cowell and Amanda Holden over their support for animal ‘props’ in magic show
Lobby organisation Animal Defenders International (ADI) have spoken out in astonishment on distinctly un-animal-friendly decisions made by celebrities previously renowned for their compassion towards animal causes. ADI have sent an open letter to Simon Cowell and Amanda Holden expressing their grave concerns over the approval on the animal act, Animalique, on Britain’s Got Talent and the encouragement from the presenters for the act to use larger animals.
The letter reads as follows:
Dear Simon, Amanda and Piers,
Re. Accepting Animalique to the next stage of Britain’s Got Talent
Animal Defenders International (ADI) were dismayed last Saturday to see Simon and Amanda approve an animal act through to the next round on Britain’s Got Talent. As high-profile celebrities, that have been outspoken in the past about animal welfare, it seems at complete odds for you to encourage Animalique to increase the size of their act; even specifically requesting a bigger snake.
ADI greatly admire the careers of both Simon and Amanda, and your prior commitment to raising public awareness of animal cruelty. We are therefore asking that you immediately retract the acceptance of Animalique to the next stage of the competition on the grounds that animals have no place in entertainment.
ADI has been inundated with calls and emails from upset supporters, who are concerned over the welfare of the 51 animals Animalique claim to own. There is also the worrying question of what they are going to do next, and with what animals, to impress the BGT judges. It is irresponsible, as presenters, to spearhead a national television programme and fail to acknowledge the animal abuse that occurs so often to captive species in entertainment.
It is advocating animal cruelty to suggest a bigger act will be more successful for Animalique, and any increase in animal performance will be directly attributable to those encouraging words.
Animals suffer greatly in entertainment, with the stress of performance, handling and training. Many solitary species are forced to live in close confinement with one another in an unnatural and unstable environment. ADI has produced many scientific studies into the distressing welfare implications of life for animals in circuses and the pet trade. ADI has also rescued and re-homed tigers and lions from suffering as caged circus performers living in terrible, miserable conditions.
By suggesting they should emulate the act of Siegfried and Roy is a grave statement. Not singly for the encouragement and validation of large cats in entertainment, but also for the omission that Roy Horn is now permanently disabled due to an attack from one of his ‘trained’ cats. The innate behavioural instincts of wild animals can never be completely erased, no matter how hard trainers try to force domesticity upon them.
ADI would like to extend thanks to Piers Morgan for taking a stand and acknowledging there is nothing entertaining about using animals as props in a magic show. In the 21st Century there is the chance for exciting, creative, spectacular human performances that need not rely on the outdated use of animals.
Simon Cowell has been recognised in the past as an animal lover and has gone on record as saying he will leave his fortune to animals when he dies.
Highly Recommended: This could be the most important link you EVER click as far as your dog’s life is concerned – see why….!
Tags: Animal Welfare
I must agree with the above comments. I only caught the Judges comments, but even so I was amazed to hear Simon Cowell tell them that they needed larger animals and ask them if they had any. When the answer was a large dog it was met with a grimace. I was not happy when I saw the Eagle Owl on stage.
Simon Cowell is a nasty bit of work. First he promotes the RSPCA, an animal rights organisation. This in itself shows his poor judgment. He uses phrases like “cum on guys”. Then he promotes shameful acts, where animals have plainly been, at best, trained to do unnatural things. No senisble or decent person who believes in animal welfare would countenance this type of stuff. It shows that all he really cares about is self-promotion and money.
What were Animalique actually doing to the animals that compromised their welfare?
Simon Cowell may be Mr Cheese, but I do not think he is endorsing animal cruelty?
Was it him who taught the Dog Demonstration Team act dogs to run across the backs of all the dog handers when they were bending over?
Was it him who trained Ginn the collie to do the dog dancing that was one of the two acts in the semi-finals that got through to the final?
All the votes that got Ginn through to the final must all be endorsing animal cruelty too?
If Simon Cowell had said ‘I think you need an Elephant in your act’, he is merely saying that as what he thinks it needed.
When he said ‘you need a bigger animal’, the act themselves said they had a trained GSD?
All the other animal acts such as the ferret’s and the ‘pool playing’ dog were brought to the show by their owners, this has nothing to do with Simon Cowell endorsing animal cruelty.
Bunny huggers seem to exist to cleanse the world of people having the opportunity to own or interact with animals. The group PETA is a prime example of this.
Simon Cowell may indeed be ‘Mr Nasty’ and personally I do not like him, but he is not an animal abuser.
The name Animal Defenders International says it all, there is a cyclone in Burma/Myanmar, an earthquake in China, thousands if not millions of people need help and what are they, ADI more concerned about, Simon Cowell endorsing animal cruelty, which he did not?
Protecting animals is a noble cause, but keep things in perspective, get out to places like Thailand or the Phillipines and ‘defend’ animals in places like that!
As far as Simon Cowell being cruel to animals because he had them on some tv program or whatever it was, he is in good company. Take a trip to the circus, zoo, so called Sea Worlds.I abhor all of them. I am sick to death of hearing all the plaintive moaning about the trainer of the killer whale that was killed. Of course I didn’t wish harm to her and am very sorry about what happened.
Folks, here is a clue to why that happened. It is called a KILLER whale for one reasone. Do you really think those animals are there because they want to be? Do you really think the people that use wild animals are doing this to “educate” people on wild life? The quest for the almighty dollar has no limit. I don’t know Mr.Cowell. You call him cheesy. Maybe he is, but is he harming anyone? Has he physically injured any of the contestents on his tv productions? He may have hurt ther ego but I highly doubt he put a gun to teir head and made them perform. If they didn’t know how he conducts himself when he judges them they should have done their home work before entering the contest. Quite frankly most of his reviews are probably spot on. In all reality he is an actor. I guess a very
succesful one. I don’t know anything about Animalique or whatever it is called or even how it is spelled. If people go on this show or contest and he says get a bigger snake, dog or any other animal it is because he thinks it will enhance the persons chance of winning.That is what it is all about. Winning. Money is the reason most people go on these programs. Or could it be ego? Show the world how well they do whatever they do. Competition is a good thing, without it the world would be static. Maybe that would be a good thing,you decide.
I agree with the person that wrote in and said with all the horrid
problems in the world why make a big deal over Mr. Cowells advice to get a bigger snake, dog or any other animal that it pertained to.
Simply my opinion.