top of page

Creativity Vs Compassion: Ethical And Legal Challenges In The Use Of Animals In Film And Television




Muskan Sangwan, Queen Mary University of London


ABSTRACT


This paper examines the ethical and legal tensions in using animals in film and television, pitting creative demands against welfare imperatives. It critiques historical exploitation, like the deaths in Ben-Hur (1925), current U.S. AHA certifications' flaws, and EU Directive 2010/63/EU inconsistencies, drawing on utilitarian, rights-based, and spectacle theories. Recommendations include mandatory audits, international standards, and CGI promotion to prioritize animal sentience while sustaining storytelling innovation.


INTRODUCTION


Long prominent in television and movies, animals represent symbolisms of untainted nature, loyalty, and emotional force. Animals are cultural icons and box office draws, from Lassie (1943), the collie as a symbol of family courage, to The Lion King (2019), a CGI feature picture grossing $1.6 billion worldwide. Usually, however, their presence comes with a price tag. As shown by the murder of approximately 100 horses during Ben-Hur's chariot scene (1925), a disaster that caused widespread condemnation but no legal consequence, the search for "authenticity in storytelling has never conflicted with the treatment of animals. Directors want the truth; audiences wish to spectacle, and legal systems fail to protect animal performers from injury. The present conflict is still there.


The American Humane Association's (AHA) "No Animals Were Harmed" certification is a significant protective measure within the U.S. industry, but it demonstrates notable flaws. While it monitors conditions on film sets, it lacks the authority to enforce rules. It fails to address psychological suffering, as illustrated by the case of A Dog's Purpose (2017), where a German shepherd showed apparent fear during a water scene yet was still certified. The European Union's Directive 2010/63/EU requires ethical evaluations for animals used in "artistic creation," prohibiting practices like featuring great apes in commercials. These contrasting policies reveal a worldwide inconsistency in the prioritisation of animal welfare.



Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research

Abbreviation: IJLLR

ISSN: 2582-8878

Website: www.ijllr.com

Accessibility: Open Access

License: Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript: Click here

Licensing: 

 

All research articles published in The Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJLLR or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJLLR.

bottom of page