Jack_Quack, no offense, but don't you think that the views of PETA can be biased too? They are an organization that oppose any animal mistreatments, and I totally support that, and oppose animal abuse (of course, I don't think having an appropriate amount of meat in our diet should be classified as animal abuse). However, they cannot avoid biased remarks in their videos, stats, and articles, and whatever they have published. They have a purpose and they will to do everything to get you to believe in them. They could have taken minor but graphic examples of animal mistreatments, and accumulated them together to cause more sympathy and make it more convincing - I am not saying this is what happens, but it's a possibility. It's like one of those documentary films about Africa's animal kingdom. They sometimes give you the wrong impression of certain issues that could be nowhere near the actual reality (like how media is talking about the situations in iraq) Some biased sources do not reflect the reality, but only selectively reveal part of the reality. I admit that there are certain people on this planet who are cruel enough to abuse animals, but I think that these people are still in the minority. Assuming that this is true, it is very possible that PETA ignores the majority of people who are non-abusive to animals, and only focuses on these rare animal-abusing people, magnifying them so the organization can attract more attention (this is speculation only).
Of course, I am not saying to ignore everything PETA says, but pay more close attention to objective perspectives. Because there is only one direct purpose of whatever video or statistics from the PETA organization, and that is to convince you that they are right, to make you believe in them.
So be careful when analyzing and taking in info from external sources, make sure they are supported by solid evidence and are relatively objective.