Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Lisa Kramer

GET UPDATES FROM Lisa Kramer
 

Don't Have a Cow: Subway Riders Challenged on Meat-Eating

Posted: 12/06/11 05:44 PM ET

Public transit riders in Toronto have been coming face-to-face with farm animals thanks to an ad campaign that asks "Why love one but eat the other?" The 1,000 poster-sized ads juxtapose pictures of pets such as cats and dogs with images of animals most people equate with food, namely chickens, pigs, and cows.

I am co-coordinator of this campaign, with friend and fellow animal advocate Kimberly Carroll. Together we conceived of and mounted the campaign to encourage thought and discussion, along with support from the Toronto Vegetarian Association and a whole community of people concerned about animals.

We expected strong reactions to the campaign and we got them. Some accused us of mounting a propaganda campaign, although all of the information we provide is factual. Some asserted that people need to eat animals to survive, although it has been medically proven they do not. The American Dietetics Association and the Dietitians of Canada have both endorsed a well-planned vegetarian diet as perfectly healthy. Some accused us of promoting false teachings according to the Bible or compared us to Muslim extremists, all in spite of the fact that the campaign makes no mention of religion.

One might ask why an ad on a subway is capable of eliciting such strong reactions. In my day job, I am a professor who specializes in behavioural finance, or how economic decisions are influenced by human psychology. Our ad campaign borrows a concept from this field of study: cognitive dissonance. When a random transit rider sees the images of cows, pigs, kittens, chicks, and dogs on our posters, his immediate impulse is likely to think "Aww, how cute! I love animals!" As his attention shifts lower down the poster, he is confronted with horrifying photographs of common practices on factory farms: for instance tail docking, beak cutting, and teeth clipping without anesthetic, cows with inflamed udders due to mastitis, pigs in stalls so small they cannot turn, and chickens stuffed so tightly into cages that they cannot spread their wings. Standard treatment of cows, pigs, and chickens in the Canadian agricultural industry would be illegal is applied to a cat or dog.

So the transit rider is confronted with two conflicting thoughts: "I love these cute animals!" and "When I eat animals, I am complicit in their cruel treatment!" This is cognitive dissonance -- simultaneously holding two conflicting thoughts in one's head. A common and sensible way for an individual to resolve cognitive dissonance is to change his actions. Extensive feedback on this campaign (in the form of video testimonials, emails, tweets, and Facebook comments) suggests many Canadians have decided to resolve their internal conflict by becoming vegetarian and vegan. We have scores of testimonials from people who have decided to stop participating in the exploitation of sentient beings after seeing the ads. Of course the campaign has its detractors as well, with some folks choosing to resolve their cognitive dissonance by adopting or maintaining the mistaken belief that cows, pigs, and chickens are somehow different from other animals and therefore unworthy of compassion. Our past experience with people transitioning to a vegetarian diet suggests that many of these folks will continue to ruminate over the conflicting thoughts and may eventually decide that changing their actions will lead to greater mental comfort than attempting to maintain a belief that flies in the face of the documented facts about animals and factory farming.

A different ad campaign might have invoked cognitive dissonance using a different set of facts, for instance by highlighting the adverse environmental or health consequences of eating animals. Our planet suffers greatly as a consequence of factory farming. Additionally, medical research strongly suggests that meat-eaters can face a significantly higher risk of life-threatening conditions such as heart disease, obesity, diabetes, stroke, and cancer.

Overall, this campaign demonstrates the role behavioural economics and human psychology can play in shaping important decisions that ultimately help people, animals, and the environment. And what about the fact that the campaign unexpectedly led to us being called a few names? We won't let that ruffle our feathers.

You can learn more about the subway ad campaign, which runs through to the beginning of 2012, by checking out the campaign web site www.BeVeg.ca or the campaign video.

 

Follow Lisa Kramer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ProfLisaK

Public transit riders in Toronto have been coming face-to-face with farm animals thanks to an ad campaign that asks "Why love one but eat the other?" The 1,000 poster-sized ads juxtapose pictures of ...
Public transit riders in Toronto have been coming face-to-face with farm animals thanks to an ad campaign that asks "Why love one but eat the other?" The 1,000 poster-sized ads juxtapose pictures of ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 42
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joshua MG
02:59 PM on 01/11/2012
Can't we just eat the vegans/vegetarians?
Grain fed. Air chilled. Must taste good with all that megalomania in their veins. Thats the stuff that makes chinese food taste so good, right?
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
11:27 PM on 02/03/2012
Nah...I'm afraid we're too tough, lean, and muscular.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joshua MG
02:51 PM on 01/11/2012
I am just glad I dont take the TTC anymore so I am not subjected to this new breed of hate speech through advertising media. As already stated, the ADA "data" is from a biased source. You people make me sick (vegetarianazis) with your adgendas to make people stop eating meat because YOU disagree with it. Sure, there are a LOT of problems in our society's agricultural processes and the double standards of ethical treatment for animals; but that is a symptom of a larger disease perpetuated by mega corporations and the canadian government (bye bye wheat board, hey egg board, you're next pal!) that we constantly strive to live out of living sustainability in our surroundings.

Sure, you can live without eating meat. Why would you want to? We are omnivorous creatures. Deal with it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
07:47 PM on 12/30/2011
You're welcome to buy ads for your POV, but you can't use bad science to 'prove' it. 

You are aware that fetuses and growing children require DHA, complete proteins and essential amino acids for proper development?

Do you want to impose your diet on them? You do realize how much you turn people off with your certitude? Vegetarians literally come across as cultish and judgmental in their speech. You'd get a lot more traction if you argued for humane farming practices, a lot more people might support you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joshua MG
03:15 PM on 01/11/2012
Thumbs up for sanity.
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
05:45 PM on 12/07/2011
The following is from Worldwatch Institute regarding CAFO's:

"Much of the growing demand for animal products worldwide is being met by concen­trated animal feeding operations, or factory farms. Worldwide, some 56 billion animals are raised and slaughtered for food each year. Factory farms account for 67 percent of poultry meat production, 50 percent of egg production, and 42 percent of pork production. These facilities rely on commercial breeds of livestock, usually pigs and chickens, that have been bred to gain weight quickly on high-protein feeds. Factory farms are also very crowded, confining animals closely together-many of the world's 17 billion hens and meat chickens each live in an area that is less than the size of a sheet of paper. Cattle in feedlots often stand knee-high in manure and arrive at slaughterhouses covered in feces."

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5443
photo
intolleft
ObamaTAX...getting you shovel ready
02:56 PM on 12/07/2011
"when I was your age, no dogs could vote" --- Jerry Seinfeld.

Give it time Jerry....give it time.
02:23 PM on 12/07/2011
Excellent article. Thank you for creating a campaign to increase awareness of the cruelty involved in modern day factory farming. Too many consumers are either unaware or in denial of the facts - the more times they have the realities in their faces, the more likely they are to stop eating meat. Those who are not simply have no conscience.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
04:04 PM on 12/07/2011
You don't have to stop eating meat altogether in order to stop supporting "factory farms."
11:02 PM on 12/07/2011
Agree - the only problem is, it is very difficult to find meat that isn't factory farmed, or that you know for a fact is not factory farmed. I prefer to just go with meat alternatives to be 100% sure.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spriddler
12:25 PM on 12/07/2011
Because pets are great companions and farm animals are delicious and nutritious.
12:23 PM on 12/07/2011
Vegetables are food that food eats. I'll have mine medium rare, please.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Steve Karmazenuk
Author, Freelance Journalist, Curmudgeon
10:13 AM on 12/07/2011
Nothing's going to get me to stop eating meat; I enjoy it far too much.
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
09:57 AM on 12/07/2011
The ADA has most certainly endorsed a well-planned vegetarian diet. Below is the press release regarding their updated position wherein they say--

"ADA’s position, published in the July [2009] issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, represents the Association’s official stance on vegetarian diets:

It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life-cycle including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood and adolescence and for athletes."

http://www.eatright.org/Media/content.aspx?id=1233
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
11:52 AM on 12/07/2011
This is not "the ADA's position." It's the position of the "vegetarian wing" of the ADA. As FaunaAndFlora pointed out, the particular paper you're referring to received a rather lukewarm reception when it was reviewed by the ADA's Evidence Analysis Project. The fact that the "eatright" website called it "the ADA's position" doesn't make it so.
Bianca S
You can't go trick-or-treating. Ever. For a week
03:31 PM on 12/07/2011
I also find it amusing that the doctor who wrote the paper, Winston Craig, cites himself as his "source" in his own papers that have been published anonymously! Not to mention, Craig (an SDA himself) works at a SDA university whose mission statement is "to affirm the Adventist lifestyle, including the vegetarian diet...” and believes “the original diet given to humans in Genesis One is a plant-based diet. After the permission to eat flesh food the longevity of people was greatly shortened.” (?!)
Nope, not biased at all and so much for the author of this article not "promoting false teachings according to the Bible".

http://www.andrews.edu/cas/nutrition/about/mission_statement.html
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
03:36 PM on 12/07/2011
Actually, because the eatright website says it is so, that makes it so. Eatright.org is the official website for the ADA. The link above is a press release from the ADA, so this is the ADA's official position on vegetarian diets.
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
10:59 PM on 12/07/2011
Here is the entire position paper.
http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/2009_ADA_position_paper.pdf

By the way, the ADA recommends that vegetarians and vegans work with a dietician to make sure they're getting all their nutrients. Based on some of their other statements, it seems that they don't believe a vegetarian or a vegan diet are optimal diets but encouraging (or at least not discouraging) more people to adopt these diets could be good for business.
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
09:55 AM on 12/08/2011
I've already linked to the entire position paper--the pdf from the association's peer-reviewed journal. The ADA recommends that everybody eat a healthy, nutrient-rich diet whether they're vegetarian or not.
09:55 AM on 12/07/2011
Factory farming is the problem, not consumption of animal products.

A healthy vegan diet is only possible for the most affluent of individuals integrated into a fully globalized free-trade consumer-based economy. You know, the very politico-economic system which is in the process of ravaging the entire planet of all it's natural resources.

So I live in New England. Say I want to eat healthy and vegan. Almost none of the staple foods I would need come from my region. I need hempseed from Canada, apples during early winter from Washington state, apples during late winter from New Zealand, bananas from Brazil, coffee from Cape Verde, algae oil from the middle of the ocean, coconut oil from the Phillipenes, olive oil from Italy, rice
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
see-ellen2001
08:23 AM on 12/07/2011
A good campaign. I commend your organization that the campaign is straightforward and does not rely on sexual images or sensationalism as does a prominent US based organization. I am vegetarian but do not have issue with humane raising and slaughter. However, in our 'low cost no matter what the cost' society, packing as much product (ie chickens) as possible into a space and creating the product the people want (ie tender veal) is the norm. The only things the same in 'family' farming and 'factory' farming are the first two letters.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Curtis Echols
PawPaw
05:10 AM on 12/07/2011
problem with that is simply weak minded. (Or was raised with a unhealthy point of veiw.) I love animals,I love to eat animals,I love to hunt animals I love to eat. No mental problem,I was raised on a farm,where you were taught to keep your feelings in their proper place. Everyone wasn't,and it showes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joshua MG
02:57 PM on 01/11/2012
here here! Curtis Echols for PM!!!
I for one did not get raised on a farm, but I did work on a few farms throughout my life for the EXPERIENCE and EDUCATION that it brings. Hell, even in gradeschool we'd take trips to farms to learn about farm animals and agriculture... I'd like to know if there's even a (real)farm close enough to toronto for kids to go get some REAL education.
I love my cat, I loved my pet pig, I loved my dogs, my chickens... I'd still eat them, in the case of the chickens and pig, I did. I loved the moose I shot, killed, cleaned and ate.

Being in tune with nature, killing and eating your own prey and UNDERSTANDING them does not equate to disrespecting said animals. I've loved every animal I've ever consumed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Curtis Echols
PawPaw
04:59 AM on 12/07/2011
I don't agree with some farming practices,some are downright cruel. Others are a needed to protect the flock from itself.(Such as beak trimming.) I love animals,and they taste good. Not a problem for me.Trying to sycoanalize it is easy,I think that anyone who has a
photo
FaunaAndFlora
Daughter of Pan
12:27 AM on 12/07/2011
First, the ADA (American Dietetics Association) didn't endorse a vegetarian diet. It merely allowed two vegetarian members to write and publish a position paper. This paper was submitted to the ADA's Evidence Analysis Process which graded the conclusion statements as Good, Fair, Limited, Expert Opinion Only and Not Assignable (because there is no evidence to support or refute the conclusion). Only one conclusion statement was graded as Good. Another was graded as Fair. Five were graded as Limited and the rest were Not Assignable. That is not an endorsement.

Likewise, the Oxford-Cornell-China Project (aka "The China Study") was an observational study. It is impossible to prove causality with such a study. The most you can do is look for correlations that may or may not warrant further study. For what it's worth, the raw data from this study doesn't support the claims that T. Colin Campbell made in his book.

And finally, a controlled intervention study in Kenya found that supplementing the diets of children between the ages of 6 and 9 with meat improved their growth rate, physical activity, cognitive function and leadership abilities.