PETA should listen to Welling, but won't

At the conclusion of her piece Ecoporn: On the Limits of Visualizing the Nonhuman, Welling argues that, "Environmentalism needs to keep 'rethinking the human place in nature' and revisualizing its visual practices accordingly. In short, it needs [to attempt] to imagine a world that truly looks back" (Welling 69). Throughout the piece, Welling makes it clear that the subjects of ecoporn cannot "look back," and this is part of what contributes to ecoporn. PETA capitalizes on this idea. Animals cannot "look back" and they can't fight back -- they are purely innocent victims of human destruction. While Welling might argue that PETA is exploiting the animals, PETA might say that it is what is necessary to cause change. Thus, I'm finding it hard to reconcile Welling's advice about ensuring that animals are given the chance to "look back" and PETA's whole campaign vision. What can PETA do to ensure that animals are able to "look back?" I am not saying that PETA should go on its merry way continuing to contribute to ecoporn. I have evidence that doing so is actually counterproductive to their cause. I have many vegetarian friends who call PETA "too radical," and certainly this is much related to the ads they circulate. The first picture on the slideshow of the cow's head is brutal and disgusting. In the case of my vegetarian friends, this type of ad turns them away from PETA instead of encouraging them to join their organization. PETA relies on making meat eaters feel shameful and guilty, and for some people this has the opposite affect and makes them turn away from PETA. Given this, it seems that Welling makes a sound argument that PETA should consider. If they were not so abrasive, were more honest, and not so reliant on ecoporn, perhaps they would reach a larger audience, and that should be their major goal. I doubt PETA would consider such an argument, however. They seem to love shock value even if that is at the cost of more vegetarians at their side.