Long before "being green" was trendy, agriculture was the original sustainable industry. "Conservation?" "Pollution reduction?" "Solar power?" "Recycling?" "Clean Air and Water?" Nothing new. Farms have been dedicated to those priorities for thousands of years. This site is dedicated to better clarity about issues that impact Missouri beef producers, which threaten an ongoing supply of high-quality beef and other safe and nutritious foods.
Given HSUS uses religion-based attacks on animal agriculture, what can industry do? Wes Jamison, associate professor of communication at Palm Beach Atlantic University in West Palm Beach, Fla., recommends using similar faith-based themes, and having producers, not industry, leading the charge.
Jamison explains that farmers must be out front; today the industry has little legitimacy. “It has to be the farmers who deal with activist attacks because the industry has no credibility on the issue,” Jamison says. He recommends using messages such as this example, with key words highlighted here for emphasis:
“Consumers trust us to bring animals from farm to family: We farmers take that sacred trust very seriously.”
Jamison says we must ”re-consecrate the act of using animals” to disarm opponent arguments that animals are a mere commodity. How should agriculture do that? By re-framing the view of animal agriculture around respect and thankfulness, Jamison says. Here’s an example of that sort of message:
“We acknowledge the sacrifice that animals make for us. We treat them with respect and thankfulness. Animal agriculture provides national food security and a way for our children to go to college.”
Jamison suggests that industry try new communications approaches. For example, creating “I love meat” T-shirts for fraternity members to wear on college campuses would beat activists at their own game. Another example: Propose “Vegetable Free Fridays” in response to Meatless Mondays.
Jamison says the key is to reframe the discussion to position meat eaters as “normal” and position opponents as “kooks.”
Here’s another example of religious programming that attacks animal agriculture. This GN magazine video quotes scripture to attack pork. Missouri producers in all animal agriculture sectors are at risk from activists who use religion to attack modern farming and consumer food preferences.
Here’s part one of a series of posts on how the HSUS is so effective at attacking animal agriculture. This series will help educate Missouri farmers on the true nature of the threat from HSUS and other activist organizations. The ideas discussed here were developed by Wes Jamison, Ph.D., associate professor of communication at Palm Beach Atlantic University.
Jamison says one of the ways that HSUS is so successful in attacking animal agriculture is because it uses very effective communications techniques to get people to think differently about their food. Using religious themes to gain funding and political support is at their heart of their effort.
Here’s how the HSUS faith-based communications approach works:
Step 1 — Target pet owners and use their feelings about companion animals to undermine animal agriculture. People who love their cat or dog are made to feel bad about having one animal as a “family member” while eating other animals. In other words, people are encouraged to view production agriculture animals in the same way they view their pets.
Step 2 — Tell pet owners that eating animals is cruel and morally wrong.
Step 3 — Make people feel guilty for using animals as food.
Step 4 — Don’t ask people to change and actually stop eating meat. Instead ask them to “help stop/reduce the suffering” by contributing money or giving political support to HSUS.
You can read more about how the HSUS is using religion as a rallying point by clicking here to visit the HSUS “Faith Outreach” Web site.
Check back over the next few days for some YouTube videos showing how popular preachers who reach millions of consumers are talking about animal agriculture.
Livestock producers in many states including Missouri are keeping a close eye on Ohio, where agriculture leaders recently reached a compromise with the Humane Society of the United States.
A recent article by the Dayton Daily news seems to indicate that not all livestock producers there are comfortable with the compromise. According to the article, some farmers are now considering egg and hog farm locations just over Ohio’s borders in Indiana and Pennsylvania. Those states and many others don’t allow citizens to place animal welfare and other issues on the ballot for voters to decide.
Facebook
Flickr
YouTube
Twitter
An error has occurred, which probably means the feed is down. Try again later.
