Media plot to conceal cow fart contribution to global warming?

JUNE 2, 2023 BY MERRITT CLIFTON: “ Did you know about it? If so, how? Did cow farts affect what you had for dinner?”

Media plot to conceal cow fart contribution to global warming?

JUNE 2, 2023 BY MERRITT CLIFTON

(Beth Clifton collage)

Did you know about it?  If so,  how?  Did cow farts affect what you had for dinner?

SEATTLE,  Washington––Is there a media conspiracy to suppress awareness of the contribution of animal agriculture to global warming?

Considering that there are more than 3,000 newsrooms in the U.S. alone,  with nearly 100 of those newsrooms reaching a million readers or viewers per day,  and more than 47,000 working journalists serving the 3,000 newsrooms,  the question is inherently preposterous.

No industry,  not even agribusiness,  could maintain a conspiracy of that magnitude,  especially among people whose obsession,  in many cases,  is exposing conspiracies.

(Beth Clifton collage)

The missing link?

Nonetheless,  the Brazilian-based vegan news web site Sentient Media and the Seattle-based nonprofit animal-related research firm Faunalytics on May 30,  2023 published a report entitled Animal Agriculture Is The Missing Piece In Climate Change Media Coverage which might incline readers to suspect the existence of such a conspiracy,  especially those who only look at the raw data without bringing to their analysis some inside knowledge about how most media work.

“Multiple studies,”  Sentient Media and Faunalytics opened,  “have affirmed that between 11.1 and 19.6% of global emissions come from meat and dairy production.”

(Beth Clifton collage)

Cows are killing the ozone layer

Specifically,  as ANIMALS 24-7 has been reporting for more than 30 years longer than either Sentient Media or Faunalytics has existed,  animal agriculture “is a leading cause of deforestation, responsible for significant biodiversity loss and pollution,  and emits large amounts of greenhouse gases,  particularly methane,  the cause of over 25% of global warming,”  Sentient Media and Faunalytics recited.

Preventing runaway global warming,  Sentient Media and Faunalytics said,  “would require that the average person would consume about 70% fewer animal products on a daily basis,  with the greatest reductions coming from red meat and chicken—92% less red meat and 81% less chicken.”

This,  though,  is not exactly screaming headline news,  and has not been for quite a long time.  ANIMALS 24-7 published similar estimates circa 25 years ago;  scientific media had produced the baseline numbers long before that.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Only 7% of climate articles mention animal agriculture”

Still,  Sentient Media and Faunalytics pointed out,  “According to a recent consumer study conducted by Purdue researchers:  ‘The belief that ‘eating less meat is better for the environment,’ which is strongly supported by many climate and environmental researchers,  is at an all-time low.’

“The reason for this disconnect is multifaceted,”  Sentient Media and Faunalytics acknowledged,  “but at least one factor is the information the public receives regarding the connection between animal agriculture and climate change.”

Surveying 1,000 recently published news articles,  the Sentient Media and Faunalytics team found that “Only 7% of climate articles mentioned animal agriculture and they rarely discussed its impact on climate change.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Plant-based diets presented as afterthought”

“Only a handful of stories reported in depth on the connection between consuming animal products and climate change,”  Sentient Media and Faunalytics complained.

“Most articles that mentioned animal agriculture failed to discuss the emissions and environmental degradation caused by the industry,  let alone the importance of reducing meat consumption or switching to a plant-based diet to fight climate change.

“When diets were discussed,”  Sentient Media and Faunalytics alleged,  “the effectiveness of plant-based diets was sometimes downplayed or,  more often than not,  presented almost as an afterthought,  rather than as a legitimate strategy to mitigate climate change.”

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Energy, transport get the spotlight”

Instead,  Sentient Media and Faunalytics noted,  “Multiple articles discussed how flooding, drought,  and heatwaves have caused livestock losses both in the U.S. and abroad,  and how this affects the livelihoods of farmers,  while failing to mention the role that the animal agriculture industry plays in the climate crisis.”

Further  Sentient Media and Faunalytics found,  “Energy,  transportation,  emissions,  and fossil fuels were given the spotlight in climate coverage.  These topics were mentioned in up to 68% of climate articles,  but were rarely tied to animal agriculture,”  even though “transportation is responsible for roughly the same amount of emissions as the animal agriculture industry.

“Cows mentioned in just 30% of animal agriculture articles”

“Just 8% of climate articles mentioning transportation also referenced animal agriculture,  Sentient Media and Faunalytics discovered.

“Cattle farming is responsible for about 62% of animal agriculture emissions,  yet cows were mentioned in just 30% of animal agriculture articles,”  Sentient Media and Faunalytics lamented. “Similarly,  methane came up in 22% of animal agriculture articles despite accounting for 54% of the sector’s emissions.”

(Beth Clifton collage)

Immediacy, novelty,  & proximity

No doubt true,  but irrelevant.

Not even once mentioned in the Sentient Media and Faunalytics analysis is that as every Journalism 1-A student either learns,  or finds out soon afterward on a news beat,  is that newsworthiness as measured by reader attention is determined almost entirely by just three factors:  immediacy,  novelty,  and proximity.

In other words,  news is news to most people only if it is new,  not what they already know,  and affects them or someone close to them.

(Beth Clifton collage)

Cattle flatulence was news in 1989

The contribution of cattle flatulence to destruction of the earth’s ozone layer,  for instance,  became big news in 1989,  and in fact was among the news topics that first drew public notice to the whole subject of global warming,  though global warming was already known to climate scientists for more than 35 years.

By 1990,  approaching the 20th anniversary of the first Earth Day celebration,  rising concern about global warming was part of why practically every newsroom in the U.S. added an environmental beat reporter,  leading rapidly to the formation of the Society of Environmental Journalists,  of which ANIMALS 24-7 was a charter member,  remaining involved for 30 years.

(See ANIMALS 24-7 resigns from the Society of Environmental Journalists.)

(See Cowspiracy: The Sustainability Secret.)

Why cow farts fell out of the news

Cow farts perforating the ozone layer was a new idea to most people,  had novelty,  and even had proximity for many news consumers,  because global warming does affect all of us.

But global warming does not affect most of us,  most of the time,  more than what is going on right now,  where we live,  involving our own families,  jobs,  assets,  friends,  neighbors,  community,  and even our local sports teams.

When the sense of immediacy and novelty wore off,  cow farts versus the ozone layer lost proximity as well.

(Beth Clifton collage)

Reporting the news only helps if people read & listen to it

Some journalists remained interested,  along with science geeks and environmentalists.

Yet merely producing articles mentioning the contributions of cattle and the consumption of animal products and byproducts to global warming,  as ANIMALS 24-7 did,  and still does,  accomplishes nothing if people are not inclined to read them.

When the advent of online media sapped paid circulation and advertising income out of print media,  and click-counting enabled publishers to see exactly who was reading what,  the environmental beat vanished in the early 21st century as rapidly as it had appeared.

The Society of Environmental Journalists descended into what appears to be a death spiral of declining membership and professional interest.

(Beth Clifton collage)

Local news & sports

Environmental news coverage and reporter assignments on diminishing news staffs were redistributed among the traditional beats,  gradually established over two centuries by reader attention and advertiser interest in reaching those readers.

Among these beats,  for most media,  are local news,  including crime,  education,  and weather;  state and national politics;  sports;  business,  finance,  and real estate;  food,  cooking,  and dining;  health and science;  entertainment;  style and fashion;  weather;  and automotive.

Smaller media,  with reporting staffs of fewer than half a dozen,  typically rely on syndicated articles for most coverage of everything that is not strictly local.

(Beth Clifton collage)

Climate coverage?

Where does climate coverage come in?  A little may pop up almost anywhere,  but among the 47,000 currently working journalists,  fewer than half of one percent are assigned to full-time environmental news beats.

All of the rest are juggling multiple news beats,  covering much else that is of greater immediacy,  novelty,  and proximity to practically all of the news audience than repeating old news about cow farts.

Sentient Media and Faunalytics proceeded to issue five recommendations for journalists,  most of them far out of touch with media reality,  whether the journalist works for major mass media or the hometown weekly shopper.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Lead with the consensus of scientific evidence.”

The first:  “Lead with the consensus of scientific evidence.”

There is neither immediacy,  novelty,  nor proximity in anything resembling a consensus on any subject.

Perhaps the reporter getting the opportunity to squeeze into the day’s news lineup some coverage of global warming knows what “the consensus of scientific evidence” is.

Bear in mind,  though,  that most reporters have neither the time nor the background knowledge to develop scientific expertise on the fly between deadlines.

Charles Darwin & friend.
(Beth Clifton collage)

Hardwired by evolution

Further,  leading with anything except conflict and human interest is a surefire way to not be read,  or not be listened to.

Humans,  including news consumers,  are hardwired by evolution to pay attention to conflict ahead of all else,  because a raised voice suggests an immediate threat,  nearby.

A scientist droning on about the ozone layer does not,  even if damage to the ozone layer is a greater threat than whatever some nitwit is shouting about.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“We don’t need no stinking reporting guides”

Also part of the first Sentient Media and Faunalytics recommendation is that “Because the food-climate beat is a rather narrow one,  the media industry needs to create and follow more accurate reporting guides for this coverage area.”

There is no “food-climate beat,”  to begin with,  for most news media,  and after 55 years in the news racket,  in all branches of print,  electronic,  and online media,  ANIMALS 24-7 has yet to see any “reporting guides” issued by “the media industry” on any subject,  other than just “Don’t get sued.”

“Reporting guides” may exist in authoritarian nations,  but ANIMALS 24-7 has not seen any in reporting from inside police states,  either.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Every story is a climate story”

The second Sentient Media and Faunalytics recommendation is somewhat closer to reality:

“Every story is a climate story—look for opportunities to expand coverage.  All food and farming stories are an opportunity to inform readers about how what we eat drives climate change.”

Maybe.  But the typical mass media journalist currently is expected to produce two 500-word articles or one 1,000-word article per day.

(ANIMALS 24-7 typically produces 1,500 words plus per day).

Herodotus with pyramid of cats.
(Beth Clifton collage)

News pyramid

Within those space limitations it is often difficult for our mass media counterparts to fully cover the basics of who,  what,  where,  and when,  let alone the why and how parts of the news pyramid that might include something “about how what we eat drives climate change.”

ANIMALS 24-7 has the luxury of providing expansive coverage of “why and how” as part of every article,  including this one,  because ANIMALS 24-7 is not mass media.  Readers who want the “why and how” come to us to get it.

Most news consumers,  though,  if even one sentence seems tired,  old,  or not of personal concern,  move quickly on to something of greater immediacy,  novelty,  and/or proximity

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Show readers the connection between what we eat and climate emergencies.”

The third Sentient Media and Faunalytics recommendation asks that journalists “Show readers the connection between what we eat and climate emergencies.”

Video of bloated dead cattle and pigs in floodwaters and collapsed poultry barns with a few surviving hens among the wreckage more-or-less make the point,  but again,  explaining how the very existence of those cattle,  pigs,  and poultry,  raised for slaughter,  contributed to their demise through natural disaster instead runs the risk of losing the elements of immediacy,  novelty,  and proximity.

Delivering a science lecture amid disaster coverage will usually prompt the viewer,  who wants to know what happened to whom,  where,  to change the channel.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Avoid framing the issues in a way that pits one sector against another.”

The fourth Sentient Media and Faunalytics recommendation is to “Avoid framing the issues in a way that pits one sector against another,”  because “Whether we should worry more about cattle ranches or air travel is a distraction. Climate researchers agree that we need to be reducing emissions from all sectors.”

But again,  conflict is what prompts interest.  Beyond that,  on both a personal and public policy level,  people and society as a whole must make choices in priorities.

Whether eating hamburgers or driving a gas-guzzling car contributes more to global warming is of vital concern to millions of Americans who want to do what they can to help,  even if they don’t want to become climate fanatics who upend their whole lives and lose all their friends,  to have minimal personal influence on the greater situation.

(Beth Clifton collage)

“Treat food and farming like a science.”

Finally,  Sentient Media and Faunalytics recommends that reporters should “Treat food and farming like a science.”

But most news consumers took any electives in school except science,  watch sports on television rather than the science channel,  and do not really want to think about science unless a reporter can give the subject immediacy,  novelty,  and proximity in 500 words or less.

Beth Clifton collage)

Supermarket science

Here is a scoop for Sentient Media and Faunalytics:  most Americans get more science education from supermarket signage and product labeling than from all of their news consumption combined.

Of course supermarket signage and product labeling is not peer-reviewed,  nor is it published in scientific journals,  or reflective of a consensus about anything,  since each product is in competition with myriad others,  even on the same shelf.

But supermarket signage and product labeling is immediate,  often novel,  and proximate to every shopper’s interests in eating,  feeding family and pets,  keeping clean,  and staying healthy.

Karen Davis & friend.

“(Why) Would the Media Want Plant-Based Meats to Fail?”

The Sentient Media and Faunalytics report Animal Agriculture Is The Missing Piece In Climate Change Media Coverage appeared six days after Karen Davis,  Ph.D.  Founder of United Poultry Concerns and a frequent ANIMALS 24-7 guest columnist,  posted an essay to her own web site asking “(Why) Would the Media Want Plant-Based Meats to Fail?”

Wrote Davis,  “It is my impression that mainstream media organizations may actively be sabotaging the effort to replace slaughter-based food products with plant-based,  animal-free alternatives.

(Beth Clifton collage)

The Washington Pest

“A recent,  glaring example of how the mainstream media seems bent on preventing society’s transition to plant-based food,”  Davis offered,  “is an opinion published on May 12 and again on May 15 by the editorial board of The Washington Post:  Fake meat failed. There’s a better way.”

Asked Davis,  “Why would the Post’s editorial board use its bully pulpit to try to get people to reject plant-based alternatives to animal products?  I will speculate:  the Post gets a lot of money from animal agribusiness through advertising and perhaps less conspicuous sources as well.”

(Beth Clifton collage)

Boom-&-bust

Whether the Washington Post editorial board’s perspective was actually based on anything other than misreading the typical cycle of boom-and-bust associated with the introduction of new companies to the major stock exchanges may be debated;  but that phenomenon,  widely noted and discussed in food industry media,  seems to have been the whole of the Washington Post argument:  plant-based food stocks are bouncing,  while plant-based alternatives to meat products enjoy some successes with the public and some failures,  the same as breakfast cereals.

Meanwhile,  the larger the news medium,  the less important food industry advertising is to it,  whereas at the bottom of the media pyramid,  specifically small local newspapers and free “throwaways,”  supermarket advertising is practically the whole economic base,  with meat advertisements the most competitive portion thereof.

(Beth Clifton collage)

Supermarket ads

Really big news media,  whether print,  electronic,  or online,  do not carry supermarket ads at all,  since their circulation reach tends to go well beyond the customer radius of any grocery store.

Such news media often do not carry much “food image” advertising from national advertisers such as fast food chains,  either,  whose advertising buy goes mostly to entertainment programing with audiences including more of their younger generation target consumers.

Food industry advertising,  including advertising of animal products and byproducts,  is vitally important to most U.S. local news media,  which almost by definition publishes the news of most immediacy,  novelty,  and proximity to most people,  most of the time.

The food sector spent $1.79 billion on news media advertising in 2021,  70% of the total food industry ad buy,  and is expected to spend $2.26 billion on news media advertising in 2023.

(Beth Clifton collage)

Food vs. automotive

Food industry advertising accounts for anywhere from 11% to 29% of total news media advertising income,  less than ad spending from the retail,  finance,  technology,  and automotive sectors,  but only the biggest mass media get much of the finance,  technology,  and automotive ad buy,  leaving food industry advertising either first or second (just barely) to retail advertising in importance to local news media.

Cumulatively,  this gives animal agriculture quite a lot of influence,  albeit indirect influence,  over local news media in particular.

(Beth Clifton collage)

The news has shifted to what’s for dinner

At the same time,  it is key to realize that most supermarket space is already devoted to plant-based foods.  Produce departments have been as large,  or larger,  than meat departments for as long as supermarkets have existed,  even though meat departments have generated much more revenue per square foot of floor space.

As plant-based alternatives to animal products and byproducts gain market share,  as they have been rapidly accomplishing since circa 1990,  they are gaining news media coverage as well,  in ways that emphasize immediacy,  novelty,  and proximity.

Beth & Merritt Clifton.

The news about diet,  health,  and global warming is no longer just about cow farts.  It’s about what’s for dinner besides beef,  and when the choice favors a plant-based product,  whether cow farts enter into the consumer’s decision is immaterial.