For decades, the animal agriculture industry has employed a sophisticated disinformation campaign to sustain the consumption of animal products. This report, summarized by Simon Zschieschang and based on a study by Carter (2024), delves into the tactics used by the industry and proposes solutions to counteract these deceptive practices.
Disinformation, distinct from misinformation by its deliberate intent to deceive, has become a significant issue, especially with the rise of social media. The animal agriculture industry has been adept at launching disinformation campaigns to hinder the shift towards plant-based diets. The report outlines the industry’s main strategies, which include denying, derailing, delaying, deflecting, and distracting from the facts about the environmental and health impacts of meat and dairy consumption.
Examples of these tactics are plentiful. The industry denies the environmental impact of methane emissions from livestock, derails scientific discussions by introducing unrelated topics, delays action by calling for more research despite existing consensus, deflects criticism by blaming other industries, and distracts the public by exaggerating the negative effects of transitioning to plant-based systems. These strategies are supported by substantial financial resources, with the report noting that in the U.S., funding for lobbying in favor of meat far exceeds that for plant-based diets.
To combat this disinformation, the report suggests several solutions. Governments can play a crucial role by promoting media literacy, phasing out subsidies for industrial animal farming, and supporting farmers in transitioning to plant-based agriculture. Technological advancements, such as artificial intelligence, can also aid in identifying and reporting false information. By implementing these measures, it is possible to counteract the disinformation spread by the animal agriculture industry and promote a more sustainable and ethical food system.
Summary By: Simon Zschieschang | Original Study By: Carter, N. (2024) | Published: August 7, 2024
For decades, the animal agriculture industry has spread disinformation in order to maintain animal product consumption. This report summarizes their tactics and suggests solutions.
Disinformation is the deliberate act of creating and spreading inaccurate information with the explicit purpose of deceiving or manipulating. A clear distinction between disinformation and misinformation is intent — misinformation involves spreading false information unwittingly, usually due to honest mistakes or misunderstandings; disinformation is explicit in its intention to deceive and manipulate public opinion. Disinformation campaigns are a known issue, especially in the era of social media. In this report, the author highlights how disinformation campaigns are launched by the animal agriculture industry to prevent the transition towards plant-based foods. The report describes the industry’s strategies and proposes solutions to tackle them.
Disinformation Strategies And Examples
According to the report, the main disinformation strategies of the animal agriculture industry are to deny, derail, delay, deflect, and distract.
Denying facts about the climate and health impacts of meat and dairy makes it seem like there is no scientific consensus. An example of this tactic is denying the environmental impact of cow methane emissions. Industry representatives treat methane emissions as if they don’t contribute to global warming by using their own, non-scientific metric to calculate the global warming potential of meat and dairy.
Introducing new or unrelated topics derails studies and debates. It shifts the attention away from the actual problem. As an example, when a group of world-leading scientists recommended a shift towards plant-based diets in the EAT Lancet Commission report,” the UC Davis CLEAR Center — an organization funded by a livestock feed group — coordinated a counter-campaign. They promoted the hashtag #Yes2Meat, which dominated online discussion platforms and successfully stirred up doubt about the report a week before it was even published.
Industry representatives often try to delay decisions and actions for a transition towards plant-based food systems. They argue that more research is needed and thereby undermine the existing scientific consensus. These arguments are supported by industry-funded research with biased outcomes. On top of that, the researchers systematically do not disclose their conflict of interest.
Another strategy is to blame other industries for more urgent problems. This is a tactic to downplay the industry’s own impacts. It deflects criticism and the attention of the public. At the same time, the animal agriculture industry often portrays itself as the victim to gain sympathy. The world’s largest meat producer, JBS, did this by attacking the methodology of a report that highlighted their significant contribution to climate change. They claimed that it was an unfair assessment that didn’t give them a chance to respond, thereby gaining public sympathy and deflecting criticism.
Last, industry representatives like to distract from the advantages of shifting towards plant-based food systems. Negative effects of the shift, such as job losses, are exaggerated and distorted to make people afraid and resistant to change.
To execute these strategies the animal agriculture industry spends tremendous amounts of resources. The report claims that in the U.S., 190 times more funding is spent on lobbying for meat compared to lobbying for plant-based diets.
Solutions To Tackle Disinformation
The author suggests many ways to fight disinformation from the animal agriculture industry.
First, governments play a role in numerous ways. They could help their citizens handle disinformation by teaching media literacy and critical thinking in school. Further, they could phase out subsidies for industrial animal farming. At the same time, they should help animal farmers to move towards plant farming with buyouts and incentives, as seen in the Netherlands and Ireland. Cities could join initiatives to promote plant-based agriculture, such as “Plant-powered Fridays” in New York City.
According to the author, modern technologies can be powerful tools against disinformation. Artificial intelligence could potentially help find and report false information in online platforms and food-specific fact-checking websites could help to further weaken disinformation campaigns. Satellite images can show large-scale illegal fishing or deforestation, and aerial images over dairy feedlots could show how much methane is produced by the meat and dairy industry.
The report points out that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and individual advocates can also play key roles in fighting disinformation. NGOs could urge governments to hold those companies accountable that spread disinformation and promote legal consequences against them. The report emphasizes the need for an agribusiness representative database — a centralized database that tracks disinformation among companies. NGOs and individuals can address disinformation in many ways, such as fact-checking, launching education campaigns, lobbying for a shift towards plant-based, supporting plant-based alternatives, engaging in the media, creating a collaborative network between academics and industry, and many more.
Finally, the author believes that the animal agriculture industry will soon face legal and financial consequences. Threats to the industry come from exploited employees reporting on their working conditions, funders that demand accountability, protesting student groups, animal advocates, and technology that monitors environmental damage.
It’s important for animal advocates to know the disinformation strategies of the animal agriculture industry in order to counter them. By understanding these tactics, advocates can effectively counter false narratives and educate the public with accurate information. Awareness of the methods used to manipulate public opinion can help advocates better strategize their campaigns, mobilize support, and push for policies that encourage more sustainable and ethical food systems.
Notice: This content was initially published on Faunalytics.org and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Humane Foundation.
