by Michael dEstries
Categories: Animals
Tags: .

Last weekend, Ellen DeGeneres hosted a star-studded event in Hollywood raising cash and support for Proposition 2 — a ballot initiative in California that would outlaw confining crates and cages used in the factory farming of hens, veal calves and pregnant pigs. “I think no one goes out of their way to hurt an animal,” DeGeneres told the LA Times. “This isn’t even taking care of them,” She added. “It’s just making things a little better for them.” Ecorazzi was there and we’ll have a full video report later, but brings up an interesting point regarding DeGeneres’s love of animals and her new gig plugging makeup for CoverGirl.

A couple weeks ago, Ellen announced that she was the new face of Covergirl. “It’s a very cool thing I’m honored and the photo shoot was ‘easy, breezy, beautiful CoverGirl,” she quipped. The campaign is set to launch in January. But here’s the problem…

Under their parent company Procter & Gamble, CoverGirl is one of the largest companies conducting animal testing in the United States — even though P&G says they’ve discontinued animal testing on 80% of their products. Do the remaining 20% of animals not have a voice then?

Frankly, this is pretty dissappointing for a someone like DeGeneres to throw her support behind CoverGirl one week and then say she “loves animals” the next at a giant fundraiser. Which one is it — or are we to believe that a paycheck makes those 20% suffering more tolerable to ignore?

About Michael dEstries

Michael has been blogging since 2005 on issues such as sustainability, renewable energy, philanthropy, and healthy living. He regularly contributes to a slew of publications, as well as consulting with companies looking to make an impact using the web and social media. He lives in Ithaca, NY with his family on an apple farm.

View all posts by Michael dEstries →
  • VeggieTart

    It’s quite possible she doesn’t realize Cover Girl is a P&G brand. Maybe someone should educate her.

    The way companies take over other companies and/or start new product chains, it’s sometimes hard to realize that one company is owned by another that conducts animal testing. And some brands may do no testing but are layers away from the corporate parent that does.

    • sumac

      Hasn’t anybody noticed that the ecorazzi Ellen/Cover Girl article also contains three google ads promoting Cover Girl products? I’m guessing that ecorazzi is making money on those ads. Shame on you! Practice what you preach!!!

      • Andi

        Actually, here is how the google ads work. Google has it’s own network, as a website you subscribe to that network, and yes you get a small amount of money from the ads placed on your site. BUT…when you are a small site and part of the network, you have no say of what ads are served on your site. So Ecorazzi doesn’t choose to have covergirl ads on their site, they are just served to them as part of the Google network.

      • Jessica Sharpe

        L’oreal also tests on animals. But it’s easy to know, if she’s as big of an animal activist as Ellen says she is then she should already know about Proctor and Gamble, at that point it’s just a matter of looking on the back of the container and seeing if it’s Reckit Beckinser or Proctor and Gamble -which both are huge animal testing comapnies and Lysol is put out by Comp #2 of the afformentioned- and putting it back or saying no.

        Revlon no longer tests on animals, Wet n Wild does not, M.A.C does not, Physicials Formula does not, Clinique does not but does buy from companies that test on animals so it’s indirectly for them, that’s something you need to be carefu with. These are mostly drugstore brands except for M.A.C. and clinique Chanel tests on animals too. I use PETA- This has been my guide to not using animal tested hair products either


        Garnei- Tests
        Organix- No Testing
        Paul Mitchel- No Testing
        Neutragena- Tests

        As for the Ads here, I’m a fellow blogger, with blogger, i know I go through a few steps that say I approve of ads on my blog, at that point I know I don’t have a choice for what ads are on my page. I think it’s the same with youtube. So if their are ads here supporting covergirl, than the person who created this website/blog may not have a choice on which ads are put up here.

  • michael

    Agree. I mean, P&G has owned CoverGirl since 1989 though — you’d think Ellen’s PR people would be better homework.

    I know Ellen has done tremendous work to help animals — sincere work — so this seems like an accident. Still, should she then apologize or make an effort to educate on others on animal testing as a result?

  • Holly

    True, but P&G has owned CoverGirl for nearly 20 years. They have always tested on animals. And wouldn’t you expect the first thing any animal-rights activist would ask a cosmetics company BEFORE they signed the spokeswoman paperwork is whether the company tested on animals?

  • Maria Loi

    This is totally ridiculus to judge her when it is 80%. 80% is an “A” do you have “A”s all the time. Please be real, not jealous of her wellbeing. She is only one and she is doing her best, stupid!
    Judging will clog your spirit particularly to a good person! Stop this stupid comment and examine yourself before you write about her. No human being is prefect on this planet earth!
    May the God of kindness shower you with love and kindness and that will override your jealousy of her well being!
    Maria Loi

    • Chris


      I think Ellen is great but she should use her love of animals and her celebrity to change the cosmetic industry’s cruel testing on these caged, tortured, horrified, wet, cold, poisoned, scared, depressed, starved living in eternal hell until death innocent animals. She has so much clout, if she would address it, she could very well make a huge dent in the dirty secret behind 90% of the products we buy. No one is jealous of her Cover Girl photo shoots, we are just dying for her to make a stand as she has done with so many other issues. People listen to Ellen, make Cover Girl listen too!

    • http://? Charlene

      “Your “God” thing is really messed up”! Comments like this make me realize how ignorant people really are to what is happening to Animals not only here in America, but all around the world!!!! Maybe you should go to the PETA website and watch hours and hours of animal testing and abuse!!!
      I feel that Ellen is in the wrong here. Sending out mixed messages. It would be like telling your child to stop before they cross the street and look both ways and then telling them to just go without looking!!!!! Confusing for the child. You are confused and I am very sad that Ellen is doing this. She HAS supported animal rights…but why not now? Cover Girl does animal testing and they need to be boycotted…so I gues that means Ellen also! I enjoy Ellen very much, but she is a public figure and that holds alot of responsibility with it unfortunately. I know who animal test’s and who doesn’t, I educate myself and I am not swayed in any way by “who” is the sponsor for a product! Get over your holier than thou issue and maybe get educated.

    • CK

      You can resent hypocricy without being jealous. She is not doing her best, she is helping to promote animal testing, and not to feed her hungry family. Who’s stupid here? The one calling names?

    • http://ecorazzi Thaisa

      As someone who has been protesting outside one of the labs
      where Proctor and Gamble does their most HIDEOUS testing in Michigan and seen the secret photos taken by activists who were under cover there. By the way, the death toll alone at that lab is 50,000 animals per year, many, pets stolen by bunchers. I can assure you all that if Ellen could use her celeb to help even one of the dogs who are so dehydrated their stool is completely white after the oral gavage tests (where “researchers” force products like Tide and Dawn down animals throats) …she would be making a difference and perhaps truly deserve to be credited with the title of someone who loves animals. However, then I’m sure she’d have a little less money to buy 40 million dollar estates but at least it wouldn’t be blood money from P&G.

    • annette sonnenberg

      I don’t think “the god of kindness” would want us to torture animals so we can look prettier.

  • erin

    Maria Loi,

    Sorry but I think your analogy is bullshit. Plain and simple. I don’t swear too much on this site but it is NOT the same as getting an 80% on a test. And the school where I went 80% was a C. NOT an A. (It’s a very low B at most schools) Maybe yours was different? But that’s not the point.

    The point is *I* have even known since I was a kid back in 89′ that P&G uses deplorable methods with their testing. And I don’t even know that I believe they really cut down testing by 80%! I only use products from companies that have cut it out 100% (or never did any to begin with!)

    Procter and Gabmle has a long sick history of their tests. They also own Iams which A)had tainted food sold to people whose pets died (pets *I* knew!) and B) does sick tests .. i mean SICK!.. on the pets they test. like the sweet hush puppies they did their muscle tests for their “muscle formula” which is BS anyway) where they cut their legs open and left them lying on the floor. The whole thing was exposed but even that coupled with the tainted food wasn’t enough to get people to stop buying Iams OR Eukenuba (also owned by the evil P&G)

    Check this site out to see what they do

    For nearly 20 years they have been the worst in the industry.

    Some believe the CEO is sick and likes to screw with animals. I’m not kidding. Why the hell can’t they just quit the testing? This is not to cure cancer folks (which I don’t think is going to happen with animals anyway) but this is for your chemical laden toothpastes and makeup. Do yourself the environment and the ANIMALS a favor and go organic!!

    Here’s an awesome list of caring consumer animal test free products.

    and not unexpectedly they also tend to rate the best for low to no carcinogens while with many of P&G’s products you might as well just ask for cancer with the stuff you’re rubbing/scrubbing/brushing onto your body.

    Hope that helps.

    ANd yes it’s a shame Ellen didn’t research the fact her company she is promoting is one of the worst when it comes to animals AND when it comes to chemicals.

    Bottom line why do things ass backwards and make products FULL of chemicals that are tested on innocent bunnies and what not when you can make chemical free products that are organic (whether it be food OR make up) that doesn’t have to be tested on anyone?

    Oh and I don’t have much goin for me but my skin is the best – ever since I switched to organic…

    Notice Cover Girl comes in dead last for healthy products. I hope someone writes a letter to Ellen….


  • Chrissy

    E – Thanks for the insight/links. I never knew all the brands P&G absorbed. What a bummer…

  • Daniela

    Ellen is a great asset to the animal rights and LGBT community and perhaps she weighed out her options and decided new coverage in CoverGirl would help the LGBT cause. It’s not Ellen’s fault CoverGirl sucks, but rather than complain, it’s best to be friendly when we educate her and the public about cosmetic animal testing.

    • http://? Charlene

      Ellen knows!

    • Moses The Cat

      No one here is saying that it’s Ellen’s fault. geeeeeeeeeeeeeee What everyone is saying that we need to band together to get her attenton and let her know that you can not claim to be an animal activist and be the face of a company that continues to practice barbaric methods.


  • Nicole

    P&G is the absolute worst company out there! I am always encouraging my friends and family not to purchase their products and always educate on how cruel they are!

  • Pingback: Ellen DeGeneres Fights Animal Cruelty But Plugs CoverGirl?()

  • Rico


    Ellen is about as honest with people as Richard Nixon. She banks on the fact that people who love her are ignorant, and the fact that she is still successful is proof that she is correct.

    Get real people – Ellen has less integrity than the top feeders in cooperate America. She needs to go.

    • Moses The Cat

      I agree. But I think that people are so afraid of saying what they are really feeling or anything agains ELLEN, because it’s ELLEN will not listen. I think
      moes the cat

  • Sally

    Oh Michael, I had to read the title 20 times to figure out what “but plugs” had to do with Ellen. Bet you’ll get some interesting search engine hits from this one!

  • Pingback: It’s Official, ELLEN DEGENERES HAS FINALLY GONE VEGAN! // Archives // :: the latest in green gossip()

  • Crunchbird

    The “they stopped testing on 80% of their products, but what about the other 20% of animals” statement has to be one of the most ridiculous examples of mathematical ignorance I’ve ever seen. Talk about comparing apples to oranges . . .

    Besides, the overwhelming majority of cosmetics companies that don’t test their products on animals only do so because they use ingredients and formulations that have already been approved as safe due to some other company’s testing in the past.

  • michael

    @Crunchbird — you’re right, that was a pretty inane statement on my part.

    What I should have said was that they stopped testing on 80% of their products, but what about the other 20%?

    Isn’t it time to stop all testing? Aren’t there enough natural ingredients available that we do not need to test on animals?

  • michael

    @Sally — Hahah, I didn’t even realize it read that way.

    @Daniela — I agree. Ellen is a huge supporter of animal rights. I think this was something that slipped through; I just wonder how…

    Might be time for a letter.

  • Pingback: Living Without Meat » Blog Archive » Ellen DeGeneres Comes Out of the Vegan Closet()

  • Charlotte S.

    Ellen is well aware of P&G and that they test on animals. I made sure of it.
    Also…they don’t just torture animals, they put animals in their so called “products”. I’m ill over this & have vowed never to watch or tivo ellen again. I let her know this, & frankly they didn’t bother to respond to any of me emails. Ellen is NOT VEGAN!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • frank a. rogers

    isn’t she a bit to old to be covergirl? sales will plummet! she is wrong example to spoke-person items marketed toward teens. she stands for all the wrong things. this is sooooo sad.

  • Suzi Kotler

    I just stumbled upon this while researching Cover Girl. I am surprised that Ellen would knowingly promote a line of products that still participate in the cruel and unnecessary practice of animal testing. Maybe she is just unaware, although I am surprised that no one researched it. So, has she been made aware since September when this started and if not, how do we “educate ” her or her people?

  • Sim

    Veganism is not strictly just a diet – it emcompasses every action you make and your lifestyle, and your morals, and mindset. By promoting a company she knows tests on animals (every animal rights supporter does their research before buying products – we all do it – She claims to be vegan thus she does her background research as well as the rest of us) she is going against the very foundations of veganism. By promoting others to use cruelty-based products, she is not a vegan by definition. Her actions quite frankly shocked me, I can’t understand her motive behind supporting covergirl, and ultimately P & G. Why not support a more undercover company that’s vegan? This would not just promote her morals, but being a celebrity she would educate the public and lead them to think twice about the companies they buy from. Don’t give me the excuse money – she has plenty of that. Mind boggling really.

  • Louche

    Folks, cut the arrogance. Please. I’m vegan, and the computer I’m using tested on animals for all I know. I eat in a dining hall that serves dead animals. Most vegans I know eat in restaurants that serve dead animals. Therefore, you are supporting a place that sells dead animals!!! Guess you’re not vegan!! Please. I love Ellen. She and her wife are such a wonderful asset to the vegan movement, and she speaks so eloquently on behalf of animals. Donald Watson and the very first vegan organization that ever existed accepted people who followed the vegan philosophy but not necessarily the lifestyle (yet). The single most important thing about veganism is the philosophy, not the diet. Therefore, if you want to whine about how someone is not vegan, find someone who only consumes plant products but doesn’t follow the philosophy…

    Ellen is smart enough to know this without my saying it. There is nothing superior about eating in a restaurant that serves meat or milk than there is about being on the face of Cover Girl. If you have a complaint, make it a complaint about Cover Girl, not a vegan who actually shares your and my philosophy. That is only detrimental to people who are trying to do their best, which all vegans are.

    • Moses The Cat

      So then maybe Ellen should continue to be te face of Cover girl but with no million dollar salary that comes with it. Therefor, if I dine out in a place and have a buger, I have to pay Idont get a cut of the gross incime they bring in. You my friend are not seeing the big picture. We are talking about animal testing.

  • s

    louche–eating at a place that serves animals when there is nowhere else to eat is one thing. it is a very different thing to (knowingly?) become the face of one of the cruelest, unenvironmental companies on the face of the planet.
    and i agree with erin (E). “most” isn’t the same as all, and if it isn’t COMPLETELY CRUELTY FREE, it isn’t good enough.

  • Ashley

    Louche is right, much love to him/her. You guys call Ellen a ‘fake’ vegan for doing CoverGirl? You don’t know Ellen, stop acting like you can get inside her head.
    What if i told you I was a vegan and I work at Burger King? Would you call me a hypocrite when you don’t even know my life story? Sorry, I can’t get a job at some super fancy vegan coffee shop so screw off, no wonder everyone assumes all vegans are elitist pieces of shit…It’s because most are. Most are so quick to call people out instead of defending them, and helping them. What a nice ‘community’ we have here. I hope I don’t have to encounter any of you harsher people in real life; You probably spit in my face becuase I’m not good enough.

    • Lina

      You are so right.
      All they do is sit here and criticize.
      One mistake, and everyone forgets all the good she has done.

  • herwin

    louche, eating in a dining hall that serves dead animals is something else than actively promoting and / or supporting animal cruel companies.
    and ashley, i hope you can find a nicer job.

  • herwin

    on the other hand she is just promoting some dumb magazine, its not like she is promoting meat or fur or animal tested products.
    if she would be promoting mcshit or murder king yeah THAN i would be upset about it.

  • Ashley

    Thanks herwin.
    I reread what I wrote and geez, I was so having a bad day when I wrote that, lol.
    There’s not much employment opportunies for teens here but I’m keeping my head up :]

  • Elizabeth

    You have no idea how thrilled I am that you put up this post as I have been wondering the exact same thing for months!! And you have got to be an idiot to think that P&G isn’t he parent company. Just look on the back of the makeup!! L’Oreal too!

  • http://P&G Adri

    P&G is bad, but they did invest a lot of money in animal testing alternatives, and allows other companies to use the methods it develops. P&G finances all sort of animal test alternative research. Not excusing what they do, but something to keep in mind nonetheless.

    • Moses The Cat

      You either paint the wall or not. You don’t try and paint the wall. So then you either test on animals or you don’t there is no such thing as half way. Do you not think P and G does not have a few billion dollars to invest in 100 perscen in alternative testing. Maybe, we instead of buying any CG we send the money to PG to give them funds to find alternative testing methods



  • Marilyn

    I’ve been wondering when the P&G issue would come to surface in light of such a famous animal lover advertising Cover Girl- I’d love to know what Ellen’s response is to the issue of this company’s animal testing policies.

  • Adam

    The idea that a vegan, who is passionate about animal rights and consistently opposes animal cruelty, would advertise such a barbaric industry, sounds highly hypocritical. However, I think Ellen opposes it, but idiotically goes out of her way to advertise for the company, so I don’t think it is hypocritical. But it’s sickening to think that she would do this.

  • Jessica

    I absolutely love Ellen…she has an amazing gift of humor and such a great outlook on life. I think that is why everyone likes her…its hard not to. I have been involved in animal rights since I was in 6th grade (I am now 30) and have written many letters to P&G about alternatives to animal testing yet this company as many corporate amercan companies will forsake everything for the almighty profit and try to conveniently hide their ignorance and arrogance by stating “we only now test on 20%”. It is truly sad. I think if anyone could have an impact on Cover Girl/ P&G, it is Ellen. I would love to see Ellen give them some pressure to eliminate ALL animall testing. Imagine getting acid and other chemicals shot into your eyes as you are strapped in a rotating table with your mouth gagged….thats Cover Girl for you. So anytime you make the choice to purchase Cover Girl or any other company that tests (Neutrogena, Rimmel, Oil of Olay to name a few) think about that. offers an updated list as to what companies do and dont test on animals. Let me say that from the time when I was 11 til now the list has changed drastically for the better…thanks to PRESSURE and bringing this disturbing practice to light. So I hope Ellen sees the light and makes a behind the stage deal to only continue being a cover girl if they stop testingon innoscent animals.

  • Pingback: Minnie Driver Joins P&G To “Save Wildlife” // :: the latest in green gossip()

  • Olivia

    okay, this doesn’t make any sense. if proctor and gamble spend oh sooo much money on finding animal testing alternatives, why dont they USE them?? i mean, first of all, why dont they take a gander at the compnaies that already use cruelty free testing methods? there are a lot of faster, less expensive, and more efficient ways to test products…why is proctor and geamble continuing to research something that already exists? and all there research is wasted if they won’t even use it. i like ellen, she’s funny and is trying to help, but this was a stupid mistake on her part. if she had promoted a cruelty free company, say, revlon or almay, it would have made a better impression.

  • William

    Sadly it doesn’t the wonderful Ellen takes Animal Rights seriously.

    If Ellen cares so much about Animals she would know what company she is promoting and if they test on animals.

  • Christine Emery

    This is not a comment pertaining to animal rights, but I am very distressed over Ellen’s new commercial where she states “inner beauty is not nearly as important as outer beauty”. Even if this is meant as a sarcastic comment, as I’m sure it is, it is a terrible message to send to all those young girls suffering from anorexia or bulemia. I am really so appauled by the commercial, I am no longer buying Cover Girl or Oil of Olay products. As I used to often buy them, I’m hoping this message will no longer be aired. I have seen an alternative message that Ellen is in and I think that is much better. I rarely comment about these things but I felt I just needed to state my feelings on this message. Thank you!

  • kiki

    I think she is just a hypocrite. I like her show but when you make statements publicly about animal cruelty and then go and support one of the most cruel companies??? Don’t be fooled – she knew exactly what she was getting into. I guess profit always wins!!!

    I am disappointed in her because she is one of the very few public faces who could have taken a stand against animal testing instead of promoting the brands who are the worst culprits!!!

  • Greta

    Sadly, since few options exist, we vegans are faced with difficult choices. If you are seriously ill, you might have to take medicine that is not vegan, or that has been tested on animals. And, despite our best research efforts, most likely many of the products that we use have hidden animal byproducts (such as adhesives). We have to do the best (the very best) that we can.

    But, as much as I adore Ellen and deeply appreciate the education that she provides on her show (more and more, now) about veganism and respect for animals…

    The Cover Girl endorsement is deeply troubling. I mean, it goes beyond using a product made with animal byproducts, it is PROMOTING a product made of animal products AND tested on animals. And, it isn’t a necessity item, as is medicine!

    Lovely animals should not have to die so that anyone can look ageless.

    As others, I tend to feel (hope) that she got into this contract before becoming vegan (although, even so the animal testing should have been a big red flag) and has a contractural obligation to promote the product. IF she had hoped to use her influence to sway P&G’s animal testing policies, I think that she should make a public statement about that.

    I anxiously await her actions when that contract terminates. Would be great if she and Portia would create a line of vegan cosmetics. The pickings are very slim there.

  • Carolyn Breen

    Ellen knows EXACTLY what and who she is promoting! Not impressed with her ‘qualified’ love of animals.

  • Erin

    on covergirls website on the faq it says they don’t test on animals.

    • MES

      Please check with or “beauty without cruelty”. They give all the companies that do and do not test on animals. P&G is a big offender. Also, when she started her ad campaign, I did e-mail her “people” and never got a response. She promotes Olay & Cover Girl which test on these poor beautiful creatures. She does such a great job with her HALO animal line, so it’s quite perplexing. I am not judging her as she does a lot of good for a lot of people, she should just make sure which side of the fence she wants to be on. Respect all God’s living creatures. There are great beauty products that do NOT test on animals.

      • Moses The Cat

        I don’t think she wants to know what side of the fence she is on. She is to busy watching which side her bread is buttered on

    • Moses The Cat

      Well I don’t think they want to have a dead rabbit either, not good for businesss. sorry

  • kent80082006

    Money is surely not a contributing factor to why she supported the brand ’cause she’s already a wealthy person. Forbes estimated Ellen’s net worth as US$65 million in 2007, there’s no way she’ll act for the sake of money. I guess she’s already been reassured by the brand before signing the contract that they’re not conducting any animal testing at all, either that is the truth or she’s simply being fooled by the brand, there’s no doubt she’s one well respected woman.

  • sasha

    ok this is rediculous! i mean theres a whole list of companies that dont test on animals, and there are so many other options! its so inhumaine! COME ON PEOPLE! STEP IT UP ALITTLE! MAKE IT ILIGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  • Una Rose

    Maria Loi,

    Your analogy is just plain ignorant but really shows how most people think about animal testing. Getting a A or f on a test means one thing. If you get A or f it’s good or bad news. It doesn’t mean either life or a a slow agonizing death by torture and deprevation. When you talk about animal testing that is what you are talking about. 80% is a fail as far as I am concerned. Only when 100% of all animals are safe from the horror pain and suffering of animal testing can P and G or any company “pass” in this regard.

    • Jarod

      Exactly! Animal testing is plain unacceptable and we dont have an acceptable casualty rate or threshold for animal suffering for the same reason we dont have similair standards regarding human slavery, sex trafficking or abuse. Each individuals life and experience is precious regardless of what specie they are so even one innocent animal suffering is one too many. Especially when you consider the purpose of inflicting such horrendous pain and suffering on the animal is to make our skin look good. And when their are companies who’v done away with testing alltogether, often because it was the right thing to do, its unnacceptable for Cover Girl to amorally disreagrd animal lives, suffering and rights just to further their bottom line. It means its nothing more than a cold, nihstilic corporation

  • Pingback: Ellen On Being Vegan - Vegetarian and Vegan Food - City-Data Forum()

  • Ehany

    I really do love Ellen, but I agree that she should not have become a covergirl because Cover Girl (Proctor and Gamble) test and torture cats, dogs, rabbits, and other small animals. They often cut their vocal cords so they can make noice and scream from the pain of the aweful tests that often cause their eyes to bleed and cause them to go blind.

    May dogs go insane from being in their small, cold cages and being pulled out just for testing.

    Shame on covergirl and Proctor and Gamble for still torturing little helpless animals. The law does NOT require it, and there are other methods of testing that does not require torture.

    Ellen, please leave covergirl and move to Revlon.

    You’re one of my fav’s Ellen, but this time you highly dissapoint. Shame on you Ellen. I would rather die than support a company that does what they do. I would have thought you’d have felt the same way.

    Obviously not.

  • Ehany

    I love Ellen, but what a let down. This goes against everything she ‘appears’ to stand for.

    Ellen, they are torturing animals and they DON’T have to. It’s not the
    law, and there are so many other humane ways to test products.

    Ellen, I’m ashamed of you. You should have known better.

  • Corrie

    There are plenty of cosmetic companies in the market that do not test, never tested, stop testing, are thinking of stopping, may never stop. Pick who you want to support, put your money into that company cuz money talks and that is all any large company will ever listen to. Emails, worthless, money, all powerful, sadly.

  • Jarod

    Im also thinking she’s oblivious to Cover Girls policies regarding animal testing. Or at least she was at some point. Im guessing someone might have pointed this out to her after she signed the legally binding contract.

    Hopefully she can find some way out of this and be all the more contientous and informed because of it. Maybe she can ditch Cover Girl and lend her support to the Body Shop(Yes Im well aware they are now owned by Loreal)

    But why would she even represent a make-up company. She doesnt strike me as yet another typical heterosexual girly girl who has any desire to meet conventional standards of female beauty. The fact Cover Girl would approach her suggests ignorance on their part towards her identity and unique character as a lesbian woman.

  • Diane Bass

    Ellen’s pet food company Halo does animal testing too!

  • Carolina Blanchard

    This issue with Ellen is the same as America’s Next Top Model. They too use faux furs and promote animal cruelty is a big no for Tyra and them yet always they contract with Cover Girl.

    Again, why? And what’s it worth to these celebrities?

  • Jackie

    I agree with the article and feel it is making some great points, but I find that Ecorazzi is also being hypocritical. I found one of the advertisements on this website promoting the sale of a new Olay product, which is owned by P&G.

    Websites like Ecorazzi are important to spreading the world about animal cruelty, but I think that Ecorazzi needs to be more thorough with their advertising if they wants to promote themselves as green and against animal cruelty.

  • Lillystomper

    ive been wondering that for long time!!! you cannot love animals and hurt them at the same time.

  • Candynite

    Yes I am so disappointed in her. She makes a comment how they should test make up on murderers and rapist instead of innocent bunnies and then advertises for a product produced by an evil company like P & G. Is she that stupid???

  • Daniela

    i’ve got more bad news…pink is now a cover girl too!!!! my two favorite celebrities that i love so much for fighting aninal cruelty… :( disappointed

  • Gina Rafkind

    I buy Halo and their site says they do not ever test on animals…………where did you see otherwise? just curious bc I use that product for my pup…thx

  • Nora

    Hypocrite. Not watching her anymore. If you represent something, stand by it. Pure vanity and money related decision by Ellen. Respect for her just… gone.

    • carol

      Ellen, is a hypocrite.All the money and products she gives away on her show are from sponsors who get free adverising.she uses other people to make her famous,always has phoney celebrities on her show. All ahe cares about is her show and her ratings.Eveything about her is phoney.I liked her

      for her humor but it is worn out now.She doesn’t give a

      crap for animals it is used to boost her career.It’s all about the money she has enough money to stop the aniaml testing and she has the media to help.i will not watch her show again and my respect for her is gone down the drain .Your a phoney hypocrite ellen and i hope more people catch on to you..

  • LawGeekNYC

    Revlon was a cruelty-free company for many years while Cover Girl and P&G never gave the slightest thought to animals. Now, Revlon has entered the Chinese market where animal testing is required by law. PeTA has added them to it’s list of companies since they (fairly) assumed that this meant they’re conducting animal testing again.

    However, to equate a company that decides to enter the Chinese market rather than take a stand against animal testing (which sucks) to Cover Girl who has always tested on animals for NO DAMN REASON is not exactly fair. Ehany probably made that statement because Revlon was cruelty free for many years and has only recently become suspected of losing that status. But even so, I don’t think they are the moral equivalent.