Danette Amstein is correct in advocating that the meat industry get out in front of public opinion battles. As she notes, consumer trust of meat processors has gone underwater during the pandemic, decreasing from 62% favorable to 44% favorable. Amstein’s solutions include being proactive and increasing transparency. These are all good ideas. In politics or market, it’s better to define yourself before your opponents do it for you. But these tactics have limited effectiveness unless you also reduce trust in those spreading misinformation.

Consider how recent COVID-related issues fit into the bigger picture. The loss of consumer trust in processors is driven by news of packer shutdowns and community virus outbreaks. That trust deficit has been amplified through opportunistic attacks on industry. PETA has taken out ads in major newspapers and used social media to push a narrative that “Tofu never caused a pandemic.” The Humane Society of the United States has seized on the pandemic to push political policies including a “shift the global food industry focus to plant-based proteins.” Direct Action Everywhere has publicized footage of hog depopulations as a way of kicking producers when they’re already down.

PETA and HSUS have combined budgets of more than $150 million a year. Add to that the hundreds of millions invested in startups for synthetic meat alternatives or cell-cultured meat, which gain market share by claiming they are healthier than real meat.

The fake meat companies have found opportunities in the pandemic by increasing their availability at retail. According to a new survey by the International Food Information Council, 25% of adults have increased their consumption of synthetic meat proteins during the pandemic. While this can be partially attributed to fake meat becoming more price-competitive, it’s winning a perception battle: Beyond Meat has released its first TV ad this month. It’s safe to say it has a substantial marketing budget.

Despite the lack of evidence, many consumers believe “plant-based” equals “healthier than real meat.” They also wrongly assume a group with the name “People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals” is a credible source. These assumptions need to be challenged. As Dr. Frank Mitloehner of UC-Davis has noted, the ingredient label on plant-based meat is practically indistinguishable from dog food. Dietitians and nutritionists have said that fake meat products have higher sodium content than real meat, are highly processed and are not healthier.

Meatingplace readers need no introduction as to why PETA is nuts, but many consumers are unaware. PETA has 5.5 million followers on Facebook and 1 million on Twitter. PETA gets more than a billion video views on social media every year. That’s scary. It’s safe to say this number would be a mere fraction of those totals if people knew PETA opposes pet ownership and is intent on creating a worldwide vegan culture.

The facts are on our side, but our opponents are putting serious dollars into strategic communications. They are in the “marketing of ideas” industry. Few producers and packers have yet to establish a line item budget for this threat. Nearly one-quarter of PETA’s Facebook followers are under the age of 25. PETA for years has targeted youth because it wants to “normalize” not eating meat for future generations.

Consider also the spread of Meatless Monday campaigns in major school systems including LA and NYC. What started at schools is now expanding. This month San Francisco passed an ordinance requiring city-owned jails and hospitals to reduce their meat purchases. The city’s intent is to set a national precedent. One board of supervisors member commented: “People will look back in 20 years and say, ‘Wow, I can’t believe that we were eating all this meat.’”

Playing episodic defense invites your opponents to continually engage in offense. And as in sports, defense loses over time. The end of the COVID situation can’t come soon enough. But when it does come, we will still labor under a communications deficit with a loss of market share.

When we look back in 20 years, will we have regrets at not being more aggressive?

What we do today defines the future

Join for free* to continue reading.