Via Shirley Thistlewaite at YesBiscuit! (one of the best watchdog blogs on animal policy issues and shelter reform -- if you're not reading it, fix that now), John Sibley outsmarts the Philadelphia Eagles, who apparently weren't too happy to have dog lovers contacting their corporate sponors and complaining that they had signed an unrepentant dog killer and torturer to the team:
Oddly enough, the Eagles seem to have removed the list of corporate sponsors from their website. Fortunately... teh Google, I haz it. Let's get straight to the festivities using the current information from the Eagles' website. Links go to contact information/form whenever possible.
You can read the whole thing here, and use John's handy contact information to suggest to the Eagles' sponsors that you'll be giving your dog-loving pennies to someone else as long as they give their corporate bucks to any team that includes Michael Vick.
Or, as Shirley so succinctly put it: game on, bitchez.
Gah, Dunkin Donuts....and SPLENDA are the hardest for me. Well, people have lived without more important things. My office mate and I are getting a bit of flak for opting out of the football pool this year, too. Who knew a choice not to spend $1 a week would make us the subject of office gossip.
Posted by: Original Lori | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Teva Pharmaceuticals? The same company that makes generic propofol and other veterinary drugs that Christie mentioned recently as being in trouble with the FDA?
How truly fitting they'd be a sponsor for the Eagles.
Posted by: Anne T | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Pepsi wrote me back, saying that they are confident that the NFL will handle things appropriately. I let them know that Pepsi products are not going to be in my house as long as they support the Eagles/Vick. I was polite and told them that I knew they had no input on the decision, but I can't in good conscience buy their products.
I wrote to others, too - haven't heard back yet, but keep those letters coming, folks.
Posted by: mikken | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
What Vick did was despicable and vile, but blaming the Eagles for signing him is silly in my opinion. The NFL reinstated him, blame them.
Posted by: Steve | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
My husband and I both wrote every sponsor of the Philidelphia Eagles stating that we will no longer purchase their products (I don't drink soda and I don't drink beer which helps in those two areas) while Michael Vick is a member of the Philadelphia Eagles. I wrote the Eagles franchise and also the NFL. Hopefully, someone will get the picture that we are tired of sports figures being above the law in human decentcy.
Posted by: Chris Vanby | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Oh, darn. We don't patronize any of the sponsors, except for watching SF Giants games on Comcast Sportsnet. But we don't pay for that, so I guess I'm off the hook, right? ;0)
Posted by: Susan Fox | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Just sent this to Taco Bell:
Dear Taco Bell:
I love your food and have probably spent an average of $10 a week at Taco Bell over the last 40 years.
However, it has come to my attention that Taco Bell is a sponsor of the Philadelphia Eagles, who just signed Michael Vick. Taco Bell's decision to lend financial support to an organization whose greed is such that it will sign a sadistic unrepentant torturer of dogs because he has football skills has lost you my business.
Should Taco Bell drop its sponsorship, I'll be back. But as long a you give money to the team who gives money to Michael Vick, there will be no more Taco Bell at my house, much as it pains me to give it up. I'm not going to be complicit in Vick's crimes by virtue of my food choices.
Thank you.
Mary Eisenhart
Posted by: Mary Eisenhart | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Yeah, the only one I patronize at all is Taco Bell, and it's really going to hurt to give up my runs to the border, but it's a small price to pay to avoid collusion in this obscenity.
Posted by: Mary Eisenhart | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Therese has a bunch of them listed on her blog also. Anyone in this area getting tired of seeing sick Vick get so much airtime on the news ? If I have see that evil smirk of his as he says he's sorry once more I'm probably going to throw something through the tv !
Posted by: Leslie K | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Hm, actually, I think it would be a swell idea to hold the Red Cross's feet to the fire on this also, as they seem to be a sponsor.
Posted by: Mary Eisenhart | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
It doesnt really always matter that you do not buy from them, however the letters can make as much of a difference... I sent letters to each company giving my stance and I most definitely do not buy from them, but I informed them I would no longer be making any purchases...
Posted by: Cindy | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
They should have had a filter that keeps out search engines.
Of course, that would've required careful consideration of the facts, which is something they didn't do when they signed Mr. Vick.
I'm getting a kick out of him telling about his experiences in prison-- he was crying and all. Well, sometimes people make terrible choices, and there are consequences. Sometimes these consequences take away privileges for life. In many states, you can't vote if you're a felon,and I think in just about all of them, you can't carry a gun. I don't see why it's so bad that one of the consequences of Vick's actions is that he would no longer have the opportunity to become a football star.
I hope there is redemption for someone like him. I'm sure he didn't have the best childhood, and I'm sure that he did work hard to achieve what he has. And he through that all away. However we should not simply forget his transgressions.
Posted by: retrieverman | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
I LOVE you guys! I wrote to all the sponsors that I use from the list the first night it came out. So far the only one who has answered is Miller/Coors. It was a nice letter and told me they are looking into it. #byebyeGeico #byebyePepsi #byebyeBudweiser #byebyeDunkin Donuts and I will miss you most #Bestbuy.
Posted by: Nancy Freedman-Smith CPDT | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Sorry Steve, the NFL can reinstate him, doesn't mean someone has to take him. Imagine if he was reinstated and no one touched him - wouldn't that help get the message across that the teams don't want monsters in their lineups?
The Eagles made a choice. It was a bad one. No excuses for them.
Posted by: mikken | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Pet Connection is the best - thanks for all the info - I will write my letters as well - also I read the article regarding the Vickster by Houlihan on Raised by Wolves - great writer that one -
Posted by: mary francis | 18 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
YES! That completely and utterly tasteless shirt. I just threw up in my mouth again.
Posted by: Nancy Freedman-Smith CPDT | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Anything to make a buck, I guess . . . it shows exactly what's important to the NFL! Guess morals and integrity aren't it!
Posted by: catmom5 | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
As a school teacher, I can't help but think what kind of example this sets for our young people who tend to idolize sports figures. Makes me sick to my stomach thinking of the lessons they are learning!
Posted by: Verde | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Of course they do. The same ones in a rush to forgive him so he can play since "he didn't do anything wrong".
Posted by: The OTHER Pat | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Letters and email written - with great joy! smile....
Posted by: Liz Palika | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
My brother says they're talking about that shirt on sports talk radio. A lot of sports fans think it's "funny."
Posted by: Gina Spadafori | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
You mean... this t-shirt?
http://tinyurl.com/la3o36
Completely and utterly tasteless.
Thanks for the link, Christie!
Posted by: John | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
At the moment, Dick's Sporting Goods is not selling Vick jerseys:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9961314/Dick%27s-won%27t-stock-Vick-jerseys?GT1=39002
It's good that they're not selling the jerseys, but they're not exactly taking an ironclad stand. From the article:
"Right now we don't know how much of a demand there is for" the jersey, Dick's chief marketing officer, Jeff Hennion, said in a prepared statement. "If there is a demand for it, we'll sell it."
And then further down we see the effect of the laundering job done by the HSUS:
"But just to have Michael Vick's name on the back is not an issue," Aiello said. "Vick is working with the Humane Society and speaking out for the proper treatment of animals, so we don't see a problem."
It's not the first place I've seen someone comment something along the lines of "But everything's okay now - he's working with the HUMANE Society!"
Yuck!
Posted by: The OTHER Pat | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Someone on twitter posted an NFL link for a $39.95 dog football Vick Eagles shirt. I can't find it again, so i am not sure if it really was NFL, if it is....
Posted by: Nancy Freedman-Smith CPDT | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Just to be cleear, the dog was wearing it
Posted by: Nancy Freedman-Smith CPDT | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Don't forget to tweet about these sponsors too & the Eagles & NFL. That way more people will start sending letters.
Posted by: Leslie K | 19 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Eagles are playing on Fox right now. Might be a good time to write the network . . .
Posted by: straybaby | 20 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
In addition to writing the corporate offices, it might be a good idea to write/email as many corporate directors or board members as you can uncover. The hacks in the PR office are unlikely to have any real authority in the matter. It's a pain but it might bear more fruit.
Posted by: Melanie McGowan | 20 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Good point Kim. Hopefully they will let the Eagles & the NFL know they aren't happy about this & neither are their customers.
Posted by: Leslie K | 23 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
“But just to have Michael Vick’s name on the back is not an issue,” Aiello said. “Vick is working with the Humane Society and speaking out for the proper treatment of animals, so we don’t see a problem.”
According to that logic, should we put post-prison pedophiles to work for Child Welfare? Excuse me while I puke.
Posted by: Suze | 23 August 2009 at 08:00 PM
Got the following letter from 7-eleven:
We thank you for contacting 7-Eleven regarding your concerns about the news story that recently aired. 7-Eleven, Inc. entered into a five-year sponsorship agreement with the Philadelphia Eagles in 2007 in an effort to raise awareness of the 7-Eleven® brand of convenience retailing and to connect with local sports fans. 7-Eleven’s sponsorship of the Philadelphia Eagles should not be construed in any way to mean that 7-Eleven condones or agrees with Mr. Vick’s prior comments, views or actions that led to his conviction on federal dog fighting charges.
Sincerely,
Janey Camacho
Manager, Consumer Affairs
I wonder how many other sponsors are in the same position... are under contract and are unable to pull their side of things....
Posted by: Kim | 23 August 2009 at 08:00 PM