WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.779 Welcome to The Vegan Report, my name is Ryan 00:00:02.779 --> 00:00:06.440 and today we denounce the complicity of the media 00:00:06.440 --> 00:00:10.279 in animal exploitation, how they have accepted 00:00:10.279 --> 00:00:14.699 so much money to carry water for this cruel industry, 00:00:15.259 --> 00:00:19.160 promoting meat, dairy and egg, while perpetuating 00:00:19.160 --> 00:00:23.160 biased and deceitful anti -vegan beliefs. To 00:00:23.160 --> 00:00:26.120 discuss this topic, I have with me Donnie Moss, 00:00:26.539 --> 00:00:29.480 a lifelong animal rights activist who launched 00:00:29.480 --> 00:00:33.820 my new favorite activist project, Veg Media Watch. 00:00:34.460 --> 00:00:37.899 What Donnie does is scout through all mainstream 00:00:37.899 --> 00:00:41.380 media coverage of veganism or the animal cause 00:00:41.380 --> 00:00:44.939 and call out media organizations or journalists 00:00:44.939 --> 00:00:50.039 showing a clear anti -vegan bias. I asked Donnie, 00:00:50.299 --> 00:00:52.960 Who should we trust in this media landscape? 00:00:53.539 --> 00:00:56.659 Does he think our movement has been infiltrated 00:00:56.659 --> 00:01:00.579 by fake vegan media outlets or activists backed 00:01:00.579 --> 00:01:04.459 by Big Ag? Does political affiliation affect 00:01:04.459 --> 00:01:08.420 how we cover the animal industry? And much more. 00:01:09.099 --> 00:01:12.159 Visit the episode notes and follow the link to 00:01:12.159 --> 00:01:16.099 Veg Media Watch social media pages. It is so 00:01:16.099 --> 00:01:20.200 satisfying to see someone expose those outrageous 00:01:20.200 --> 00:01:24.579 anti -vegan stories we all come across. And as 00:01:24.579 --> 00:01:27.980 always, please help this podcast grow by sharing 00:01:27.980 --> 00:01:31.459 it with the vegans you know. You can also subscribe 00:01:31.459 --> 00:01:35.060 and leave a good review. Every gesture is appreciated. 00:01:35.560 --> 00:01:40.519 Thank you. My first question for you is, what 00:01:40.519 --> 00:01:45.280 is driving that anti -vegan bias? Maybe it's 00:01:45.280 --> 00:01:49.000 Big Ag funding that kind of content, pulling 00:01:49.000 --> 00:01:53.340 the strings, or is it just conditioning? I think 00:01:53.340 --> 00:01:55.359 it's a couple of things. I mean, if you look 00:01:55.359 --> 00:01:58.840 back to, was it about 10 years ago when Beyond 00:01:58.840 --> 00:02:01.500 Meat and Impossible Foods came onto the scene, 00:02:02.040 --> 00:02:05.019 and all of a sudden there was tremendous buzz 00:02:05.019 --> 00:02:09.599 about plant -based meats that really came very 00:02:09.599 --> 00:02:15.240 close to beef, you know, beef, you know, for 00:02:15.240 --> 00:02:17.280 a lot of people who would take a bite of a Beyond 00:02:17.280 --> 00:02:19.759 Burger or an Impossible Burger, especially someone 00:02:19.759 --> 00:02:22.439 like me who hadn't eaten meat in about 20 years, 00:02:23.340 --> 00:02:25.479 like it felt like I was eating a burger again. 00:02:25.719 --> 00:02:31.199 And so for good reason, the meat industry, especially 00:02:31.199 --> 00:02:35.259 the beef industry was afraid. And so, you know, 00:02:35.360 --> 00:02:42.120 they they launched a campaign and to to marginalize 00:02:42.120 --> 00:02:47.580 these plant -based burger alternatives and to 00:02:47.580 --> 00:02:50.000 scare people away from eating them. So all of 00:02:50.000 --> 00:02:52.379 a sudden, we started to see these news articles 00:02:52.379 --> 00:02:55.800 about ultra -processed foods. I don't think we 00:02:55.800 --> 00:02:58.689 had really heard that word before, at least I 00:02:58.689 --> 00:03:01.229 don't remember it. And all of a sudden plant 00:03:01.229 --> 00:03:03.469 -based food was not only ultra processed, but 00:03:03.469 --> 00:03:08.289 unnatural and artificial. And then meat was being 00:03:08.289 --> 00:03:12.949 rebranded as whole foods and simple and clean. 00:03:13.189 --> 00:03:15.270 And of course we know that's not true at all. 00:03:15.689 --> 00:03:18.750 Meats are highly processed. And so I think that 00:03:18.750 --> 00:03:24.090 was the biggest I think that's probably the main 00:03:24.090 --> 00:03:27.550 reason why we see so much anti -vegan bias in 00:03:27.550 --> 00:03:30.349 the mainstream media because these meat and dairy 00:03:30.349 --> 00:03:34.069 companies spend a fortune on advertising and 00:03:34.069 --> 00:03:36.210 I think to some extent these media outlets are 00:03:36.210 --> 00:03:40.740 beholden to these meat and dairy companies when 00:03:40.740 --> 00:03:43.319 their publicist call they pick up the phone because 00:03:43.319 --> 00:03:45.580 they're advertisers so they're spending money 00:03:45.580 --> 00:03:48.680 on advertising they're spending money on PR and 00:03:48.680 --> 00:03:51.560 they're also spending money on influencers all 00:03:51.560 --> 00:03:56.139 to spread this anti vegan pro meat propaganda 00:03:56.139 --> 00:03:59.680 and so that's what we're up against and also 00:03:59.680 --> 00:04:02.319 you just got media outlets maybe who aren't getting 00:04:02.319 --> 00:04:05.460 advertising dollars from big ag and maybe aren't 00:04:05.460 --> 00:04:09.259 being pitched by you know, publicists from Big 00:04:09.259 --> 00:04:13.960 Ag. But they post articles with clickbait titles. 00:04:14.180 --> 00:04:16.180 Vegan isn't healthy. Wait, I'm going to click 00:04:16.180 --> 00:04:18.540 on that. You know, these provocative clickbait 00:04:18.540 --> 00:04:23.180 titles that and those titles have consequences. 00:04:23.420 --> 00:04:26.259 You know, people, you know, I've seen many instances 00:04:26.259 --> 00:04:31.579 since I started Vegmedia Watch of these articles 00:04:31.579 --> 00:04:35.430 that are really scare people away from a plant 00:04:35.430 --> 00:04:38.129 based diet. And that's dangerous because that's 00:04:38.129 --> 00:04:40.449 leading people to eating more meat and dairy 00:04:40.449 --> 00:04:44.329 and other animal foods. That's a great point, 00:04:44.329 --> 00:04:47.350 because people are not reading the article. They're 00:04:47.350 --> 00:04:49.790 just reading the headline and they're getting 00:04:49.790 --> 00:04:52.829 what they want to get from it. And that's it. 00:04:53.269 --> 00:04:57.949 But going back to that anti vegan bias, it's 00:04:57.949 --> 00:05:01.129 funny because I was I had a conversation with 00:05:01.129 --> 00:05:04.589 a friend recently, and she told me about an organization 00:05:04.589 --> 00:05:08.269 called the Animal Agriculture Alliance. Do you 00:05:08.269 --> 00:05:13.129 know of them? I was at where they rebranded that 00:05:13.129 --> 00:05:15.990 use or that is that an industry organization? 00:05:16.449 --> 00:05:20.470 It is from Big Ac. Yes. Definitely sounds familiar. 00:05:20.709 --> 00:05:23.910 Yes. Well, they have some initiatives where they 00:05:24.170 --> 00:05:30.430 sponsor content creators to put out good content 00:05:30.430 --> 00:05:34.310 about meat. Well, my question is, how do we know 00:05:34.310 --> 00:05:38.709 who to trust? Where do we turn to? What are the 00:05:38.709 --> 00:05:42.069 media outlets that are on our side and which 00:05:42.069 --> 00:05:46.629 ones have chosen to go against veganism and the 00:05:46.629 --> 00:05:50.750 whole animal cause? So are there any signs to 00:05:50.750 --> 00:05:55.759 look for to see if the media outlets that we 00:05:55.759 --> 00:05:59.259 normally follow have been captured by Big Ac. 00:05:59.620 --> 00:06:02.480 Yeah, I think we need to look at not necessarily 00:06:02.480 --> 00:06:04.980 the media outlet as a whole, but each individual 00:06:04.980 --> 00:06:09.300 outlet, because you'll find that every media 00:06:09.300 --> 00:06:12.740 outlet might do, I shouldn't say everyone, but 00:06:12.740 --> 00:06:15.160 many media outlets will post both positive and 00:06:15.160 --> 00:06:19.189 negative stories. Um, and so I can't make any 00:06:19.189 --> 00:06:22.149 generalizations. What I will say is that, you 00:06:22.149 --> 00:06:24.709 know, as part of what I do at veg media outreach 00:06:24.709 --> 00:06:27.790 is roll up my sleeves and investigate what's 00:06:27.790 --> 00:06:31.509 behind a story. So there's one, uh, publication 00:06:31.509 --> 00:06:37.569 in India that w in which a doctor was, uh, was 00:06:37.569 --> 00:06:40.209 writing. So I guess as a guest, I don't know 00:06:40.209 --> 00:06:42.129 if she's not a journalist, but a doctor writing 00:06:42.129 --> 00:06:47.089 maybe op ed pieces, uh, disparaging plant -based 00:06:47.089 --> 00:06:50.949 diets, just attacking veganism, using the credibility 00:06:50.949 --> 00:06:53.610 of her medical degree to do so, and that makes 00:06:53.610 --> 00:06:57.110 it even more dangerous. But when I look into 00:06:57.110 --> 00:07:02.269 her affiliations, I saw, wait, she's tied to 00:07:02.269 --> 00:07:05.790 the beef industry. I don't remember that in that 00:07:05.790 --> 00:07:09.730 particular case, but often you have to follow 00:07:09.730 --> 00:07:14.930 the money to understand why. why an article is 00:07:14.930 --> 00:07:17.970 biased. But again, sometimes it's just as simple 00:07:17.970 --> 00:07:21.490 as plain old click bait. But yeah, it's a good 00:07:21.490 --> 00:07:27.019 question. How do you know? what's fair and what's 00:07:27.019 --> 00:07:30.079 truly biased. I mean, sometimes it's just so 00:07:30.079 --> 00:07:33.839 clear that it's an anti -vegan propaganda piece. 00:07:35.259 --> 00:07:38.060 But sometimes when they, you know, if they present 00:07:38.060 --> 00:07:40.120 both sides, sometimes we just have to accept 00:07:40.120 --> 00:07:43.139 that they've included the other side. And I can't 00:07:43.139 --> 00:07:45.759 really call that out because there's some fair 00:07:45.759 --> 00:07:49.139 balance. So I'm looking at each article on its 00:07:49.139 --> 00:07:51.920 own, not in the broader context of the media 00:07:51.920 --> 00:07:55.180 outlet. And I've seen that you focus a lot on 00:07:55.180 --> 00:07:58.779 traditional medias. And I was wondering, what 00:07:58.779 --> 00:08:02.319 is your opinion on them? Because for me, those 00:08:02.319 --> 00:08:05.959 are a dying breed. You know, we won't have them 00:08:05.959 --> 00:08:09.800 around in maybe 10 years. Who knows, I might 00:08:09.800 --> 00:08:13.139 be wrong. But I'm all about, you know, independent 00:08:13.139 --> 00:08:16.920 medias, like the one I'm building with this podcast. 00:08:17.839 --> 00:08:20.959 So what do you think about them? And of course, 00:08:21.180 --> 00:08:24.040 I should add the reason why they're dying out 00:08:24.040 --> 00:08:27.120 is because they have lost the trust of the public. 00:08:29.399 --> 00:08:32.720 Ed's Veg Media Watch, I can't go after everything. 00:08:33.039 --> 00:08:35.120 You know, I do see what you're referring to, 00:08:35.139 --> 00:08:37.759 these influencers who are using their platforms, 00:08:38.019 --> 00:08:40.279 and they might have hundreds of thousands, if 00:08:40.279 --> 00:08:42.539 not more followers, and they're posting this 00:08:42.539 --> 00:08:45.860 anti -vegan propaganda. And I do think we need 00:08:45.860 --> 00:08:50.360 to go after it. The problem is with these influencers, 00:08:50.600 --> 00:08:53.159 they don't have a boss. They're not accountable 00:08:53.159 --> 00:08:57.080 to anybody, except maybe their followers. Whereas 00:08:57.080 --> 00:09:04.379 in the main When I target, let's just say a particular 00:09:04.379 --> 00:09:08.159 reporter, and then I copy in a tweet, for example, 00:09:08.500 --> 00:09:12.600 the editors and call out the recklessness or 00:09:12.600 --> 00:09:16.059 the bias, then it's conceivable that the editors 00:09:16.059 --> 00:09:19.980 would go back to the reporter. um you know and 00:09:19.980 --> 00:09:21.759 say something or say maybe we have to be more 00:09:21.759 --> 00:09:24.279 careful about this there's more accountability 00:09:24.279 --> 00:09:26.700 you know there are many instances in which a 00:09:26.700 --> 00:09:29.320 reporter has written maybe a balanced article 00:09:29.320 --> 00:09:33.059 or even a favorable article but the editors who 00:09:33.059 --> 00:09:36.919 choose the the headline pick something provocative 00:09:36.919 --> 00:09:40.639 that has a negative sort of connotation and so 00:09:40.639 --> 00:09:43.820 sometimes i'll call that out and i'll say this 00:09:43.820 --> 00:09:46.980 it doesn't matter how fair balanced an article 00:09:46.980 --> 00:09:49.240 is if the headline, which is what more people 00:09:49.240 --> 00:09:53.720 are going to read, is anti vegan and unfair. 00:09:55.240 --> 00:09:57.039 There's just with the mainstream media, there's 00:09:57.039 --> 00:09:59.000 more accountability, there's more of a system 00:09:59.000 --> 00:10:03.000 in place to hold sort of decision makers accountable 00:10:03.000 --> 00:10:06.360 than there is on social media. But I agree with 00:10:06.360 --> 00:10:09.100 you, we're going to have to go after these influencers 00:10:09.100 --> 00:10:11.799 are probably being paid a lot of money by the 00:10:11.799 --> 00:10:16.210 meat industry. Spread pro -meat anti -vegan propaganda. 00:10:16.210 --> 00:10:19.190 But again, there's just there's less accountability 00:10:19.190 --> 00:10:21.789 there. There's less of a way to hold them accountable. 00:10:22.509 --> 00:10:26.769 That is very smart and insightful from you. Yes, 00:10:27.029 --> 00:10:31.509 definitely. I see it. I see the value in targeting 00:10:31.509 --> 00:10:36.529 them because also they are organizations that 00:10:36.529 --> 00:10:40.129 call themselves objective and, you know, following 00:10:40.129 --> 00:10:45.000 the truth and all of that. So yeah, we expect 00:10:45.000 --> 00:10:48.940 more from them. Yeah, also keep in mind that 00:10:48.940 --> 00:10:52.200 just because the mainstream media does seem like 00:10:52.200 --> 00:10:55.159 it's sort of a dying breed as is K or you know, 00:10:55.299 --> 00:10:58.919 cable cable networks, the mainstream media still 00:10:58.919 --> 00:11:03.620 uses social media to post its content. And there's 00:11:03.620 --> 00:11:07.620 still a lot of engagement there. So I do think 00:11:07.620 --> 00:11:10.940 there's value and targeting the mainstream media 00:11:10.940 --> 00:11:14.299 and there are a lot of people who are in their 00:11:14.299 --> 00:11:19.379 40s, 50s, 60s and over, who rely on the mainstream 00:11:19.379 --> 00:11:22.419 media. And of course, the older the population, 00:11:22.919 --> 00:11:26.759 the less likely they are to use social media. 00:11:27.899 --> 00:11:30.600 People like my parents don't use social media 00:11:30.600 --> 00:11:33.299 at all. They get all of their news from the mainstream 00:11:33.299 --> 00:11:36.519 media. And I want to be sure that the news that 00:11:36.519 --> 00:11:41.120 they're getting about veganism is fair and balanced. 00:11:41.470 --> 00:11:46.129 You know, I'm all about independent medias, but 00:11:46.129 --> 00:11:49.610 they're not at the point where they can break 00:11:49.610 --> 00:11:54.110 stories or send people in war zones to cover 00:11:54.110 --> 00:11:57.429 an international conflict or something like that. 00:11:58.090 --> 00:12:02.210 We're not at that level yet. And so their importance 00:12:02.210 --> 00:12:05.850 of mainstream media is still there. Now, if you 00:12:05.850 --> 00:12:11.289 had to rank them, Is there a mainstream media 00:12:11.289 --> 00:12:17.070 organization out there that does worse than others? 00:12:17.450 --> 00:12:21.710 And also, is there one that does better than 00:12:21.710 --> 00:12:25.330 others in terms of, I guess, fairly reporting 00:12:25.330 --> 00:12:29.269 on the vegan and animal cause? Well, I'll say 00:12:29.269 --> 00:12:33.590 that I'll often complain about the New York Times 00:12:33.590 --> 00:12:36.509 and the Washington Post when I see an article 00:12:37.070 --> 00:12:40.409 that it feels unfair, you know, and of course, 00:12:40.529 --> 00:12:43.090 we're hypersensitive because we know the stakes 00:12:43.090 --> 00:12:45.830 are so high with between the animals and the 00:12:45.830 --> 00:12:49.769 planet and human health. But I will say that 00:12:49.769 --> 00:12:54.250 both of those media outlets do have regular contributors 00:12:54.250 --> 00:12:59.649 who report on factory farming and the impact 00:12:59.649 --> 00:13:04.820 of animal agriculture on the planet. And so But 00:13:04.820 --> 00:13:07.860 after doing Veg Media Watch for a couple of months, 00:13:08.059 --> 00:13:11.620 I can't see that I've seen any trends. One might 00:13:11.620 --> 00:13:13.820 make certain assumptions about the New York Post, 00:13:13.840 --> 00:13:15.639 which is a more conservative media outlet, but 00:13:15.639 --> 00:13:18.279 then I'll see positive stories coming out of 00:13:18.279 --> 00:13:22.460 there about veganism and animals, and then negative 00:13:22.460 --> 00:13:25.600 stories coming out of publications or media outlets 00:13:25.600 --> 00:13:28.080 that we might think of as being more progressive. 00:13:28.960 --> 00:13:33.299 So sometimes I think we tend to think that animal 00:13:33.299 --> 00:13:35.620 rights and veganism is more of an issue on the 00:13:35.620 --> 00:13:40.279 left, but that's not always the case. And we 00:13:40.279 --> 00:13:43.379 shouldn't speak in such a way that it is because 00:13:43.379 --> 00:13:46.779 then we alienate people on the right who embrace 00:13:46.779 --> 00:13:52.059 the vegan ethic and believe that animals should 00:13:52.059 --> 00:13:58.039 have the right to live in peace. I second your 00:13:58.039 --> 00:14:01.299 point. I mean, let's remember that Matthew Scully, 00:14:01.559 --> 00:14:04.980 one of the most ardent defender of this cause. 00:14:05.200 --> 00:14:08.320 Now he has written two books, denouncing factory 00:14:08.320 --> 00:14:13.059 farming and promoting veganism is a was for a 00:14:13.059 --> 00:14:17.240 long time. I think chief editor of National Review, 00:14:17.759 --> 00:14:23.899 which is pretty, you know, right leading. Yeah, 00:14:23.899 --> 00:14:26.059 exactly. I mean, and we have people in the animal 00:14:26.059 --> 00:14:30.159 rights movement in New York City. who for years 00:14:30.159 --> 00:14:33.539 have leaned to the right politically and many 00:14:33.539 --> 00:14:37.159 of us have been quick to dismiss them. But we 00:14:37.159 --> 00:14:39.779 do that at our own peril. We can't afford to 00:14:39.779 --> 00:14:42.620 alienate people on the right or left or center. 00:14:42.720 --> 00:14:46.100 We need everybody who believes in this cause 00:14:46.100 --> 00:14:50.059 to join us and speak out. You know, it's interesting. 00:14:50.120 --> 00:14:54.340 Right now we have a mayoral race taking place 00:14:54.340 --> 00:14:57.860 in New York City. The primary just took place 00:14:57.860 --> 00:15:01.740 and the general election is in November, and 00:15:01.740 --> 00:15:04.299 there are four candidates. There's a Democrat, 00:15:05.259 --> 00:15:08.399 there are two independents, two candidates running 00:15:08.399 --> 00:15:11.000 on the independent line, and there's a Republican. 00:15:11.519 --> 00:15:18.419 And the Republican has a much better record on 00:15:18.419 --> 00:15:23.159 animal rights. than any of the other candidates 00:15:23.159 --> 00:15:27.159 to the left of him politically. And so in the 00:15:27.159 --> 00:15:30.340 past, I wouldn't have considered a Republican. 00:15:30.940 --> 00:15:33.519 But this particular Republican, his name is Curtis 00:15:33.519 --> 00:15:37.000 Sliwa, he accompanied me and another animal rights 00:15:37.000 --> 00:15:39.860 activist to live animal markets a few months 00:15:39.860 --> 00:15:42.799 ago when there were bird flu outbreaks at many 00:15:42.799 --> 00:15:44.879 of the live animal markets in New York City. 00:15:45.259 --> 00:15:48.460 and we wanted to go in and document the conditions 00:15:48.460 --> 00:15:51.019 and to show the public that despite the bird 00:15:51.019 --> 00:15:53.360 food outbreaks, these markets are still operating, 00:15:53.899 --> 00:15:55.679 that people, members of the public are still 00:15:55.679 --> 00:15:59.299 going inside of these markets with no PPE, no 00:15:59.299 --> 00:16:05.259 masks, nothing, and shopping in a area where 00:16:05.259 --> 00:16:07.940 there are absolutely birds who are carrying bird 00:16:07.940 --> 00:16:11.220 flu. And so because walking into these markets 00:16:11.220 --> 00:16:15.379 and filming is dangerous, and we know that the 00:16:15.379 --> 00:16:19.080 employees can get violent, Curtis Lee, the Republican 00:16:19.080 --> 00:16:21.139 running for on the you know, the guy running 00:16:21.139 --> 00:16:24.120 on the Republican ticket, accompanied us and 00:16:24.120 --> 00:16:28.519 used himself to shield us from the employees 00:16:28.519 --> 00:16:31.860 who were spraying hoses and getting physically 00:16:31.860 --> 00:16:35.480 violent. He's a big guy. There was no media there. 00:16:35.559 --> 00:16:37.059 There was no one to give him credit for what 00:16:37.059 --> 00:16:39.259 he was doing. He was just doing that because 00:16:39.259 --> 00:16:42.299 he believed and this is kept my during a campaign 00:16:42.299 --> 00:16:45.100 when he should have been out doing campaign events. 00:16:45.100 --> 00:16:48.639 He was with two animal rights activists helping 00:16:48.639 --> 00:16:52.539 us document conditions in a wet market and then 00:16:52.539 --> 00:16:55.039 saying to us after, you know, I can't believe 00:16:55.039 --> 00:16:58.120 I ever ate chicken. um you know because it's 00:16:58.120 --> 00:17:01.240 mostly chickens in those markets poultry and 00:17:01.240 --> 00:17:04.640 so yeah so you know i guess the point i'm trying 00:17:04.640 --> 00:17:06.460 to make is you just don't know where you're going 00:17:06.460 --> 00:17:08.579 to get support if it's from a right -leaning 00:17:08.579 --> 00:17:11.539 person or a left -leaning person and um as it 00:17:11.539 --> 00:17:13.319 turns out this particular hand it is moderate 00:17:13.319 --> 00:17:18.700 he's not a right wing anything um and so right 00:17:18.700 --> 00:17:20.759 as of now i'm planning to vote for this guy despite 00:17:20.759 --> 00:17:22.359 the fact that he's a republican i've never done 00:17:22.359 --> 00:17:26.500 that before That's a really interesting story. 00:17:26.960 --> 00:17:32.319 So I Guess the vegan candidate who was the mayor 00:17:32.319 --> 00:17:36.319 in right those past few years was a disappointment 00:17:36.319 --> 00:17:40.740 Yeah, you know, it's a good point I forgot. I 00:17:40.740 --> 00:17:43.480 mean, you know, Eric Adams, who is our mayor 00:17:43.480 --> 00:17:45.819 and is now running on an independent on the independent 00:17:45.819 --> 00:17:48.359 line, and who is not doing well in the polls 00:17:48.359 --> 00:17:51.859 and is really just going to be a spoiler. He 00:17:51.859 --> 00:17:55.200 came into office espousing a plant based diet, 00:17:55.640 --> 00:17:57.660 which is terrific. And I think he, you know, 00:17:57.740 --> 00:18:00.779 maybe introduced, you know, some meatless Fridays 00:18:00.779 --> 00:18:04.000 and, you know, and vegan options and hospitals 00:18:04.000 --> 00:18:06.200 and schools and all of that's great. You know, 00:18:06.200 --> 00:18:08.359 he wasn't You know, he didn't lead by example, 00:18:08.380 --> 00:18:10.519 really, because, you know, he'd be out in restaurants 00:18:10.519 --> 00:18:13.519 eating fish. And he wasn't an animal. He didn't 00:18:13.519 --> 00:18:16.039 subscribe to the vegan ethic that animals exist 00:18:16.039 --> 00:18:17.980 for their own purposes that they're not here 00:18:17.980 --> 00:18:20.619 for us are here with us. And they're entitled 00:18:20.619 --> 00:18:22.779 to live in peace with their families just like 00:18:22.779 --> 00:18:25.019 us. You know, he didn't subscribe to any of that. 00:18:25.299 --> 00:18:28.299 He was just plant based for his health. And so 00:18:28.299 --> 00:18:30.799 when there's no ethical mandate tied to it, then 00:18:30.799 --> 00:18:33.180 of course, you know, you'll add in fish and, 00:18:33.400 --> 00:18:35.859 you know, you know, we are vegan for ethical 00:18:35.859 --> 00:18:38.119 reasons. So we're not going to consume anybody. 00:18:39.019 --> 00:18:41.099 That's not the case with him. So he didn't set 00:18:41.099 --> 00:18:44.339 a great example. But I give him plenty of credit 00:18:44.339 --> 00:18:47.440 for talking about plant based diet, keeping it 00:18:47.440 --> 00:18:51.700 on people's radar screens, you know, but no, 00:18:51.920 --> 00:18:56.710 his his his You know, he was such a disappointing 00:18:56.710 --> 00:18:59.910 mayor for so many other reasons, the corruption, 00:19:00.410 --> 00:19:02.990 his ties to Donald Trump, you know, in order 00:19:02.990 --> 00:19:06.470 to get all the legal, you know, the legal work 00:19:06.470 --> 00:19:11.529 against him, you know, thrown away. So he's been 00:19:11.529 --> 00:19:13.250 a disappointment. He's not going to be our next 00:19:13.250 --> 00:19:17.589 mayor. And then the other two independent candidates, 00:19:18.049 --> 00:19:21.750 the Democrat has no real record on animal rights 00:19:21.750 --> 00:19:25.569 or veganism or anything like that. That's Mamdani. 00:19:25.910 --> 00:19:28.329 And then Andrew Cuomo doesn't have much of a 00:19:28.329 --> 00:19:32.819 record either on animal rights. You know, I used 00:19:32.819 --> 00:19:35.200 to criticize him on social media because he would 00:19:35.200 --> 00:19:38.599 post photos of himself with, you know, trophy 00:19:38.599 --> 00:19:41.160 fishing, you know, with these huge dead fish, 00:19:41.160 --> 00:19:44.680 you know, smiling. So that's to me, just trophy 00:19:44.680 --> 00:19:48.480 hunting in the water. So not not an animal person, 00:19:48.519 --> 00:19:53.480 but this the Republican is. Well, that's a really 00:19:53.480 --> 00:19:57.539 interesting take. And what a story, you know. 00:19:57.660 --> 00:20:01.240 If we put the media organizations on the side, 00:20:01.640 --> 00:20:05.220 what about the journalists, the reporters? Nowadays, 00:20:05.559 --> 00:20:09.140 I feel like journalists, reporters are not really 00:20:09.140 --> 00:20:12.660 committed to one media organization. They usually 00:20:12.660 --> 00:20:15.940 write articles for multiple media organizations. 00:20:16.160 --> 00:20:21.000 They are contributors for different media outlets. 00:20:22.960 --> 00:20:28.509 You do highlight through your initiative how 00:20:28.509 --> 00:20:31.750 some of those reporters have a tendency to hit 00:20:31.750 --> 00:20:38.670 on the animal cause and to negatively cover it. 00:20:39.670 --> 00:20:44.289 So are there some reporters worth mentioning 00:20:44.289 --> 00:20:50.410 in terms of really badly covering the animal 00:20:50.410 --> 00:20:56.670 cause or really putting a great light on the 00:20:56.670 --> 00:21:00.549 cause? Yeah, of course, I'm blanking out on names. 00:21:01.450 --> 00:21:05.089 But there's a New York Times op -ed writer who 00:21:05.089 --> 00:21:10.170 for years has been covering factory farms in 00:21:10.170 --> 00:21:16.069 depth. And he's terrific. Maybe his name will 00:21:16.069 --> 00:21:18.309 come to me. I've been reading him for years. 00:21:18.970 --> 00:21:22.630 And I'm so grateful every time I see his name 00:21:22.630 --> 00:21:25.250 come up in an article about factory farming, 00:21:25.430 --> 00:21:29.549 which is, you know, one of his beats. But, you 00:21:29.549 --> 00:21:32.769 know, I wonder with regard to reporters, and 00:21:32.769 --> 00:21:35.269 you said that some work for multiple media outlets, 00:21:35.369 --> 00:21:37.150 I mean, I think they probably get assignments. 00:21:37.690 --> 00:21:41.450 And then if assignment editor has a mandate from 00:21:41.450 --> 00:21:44.650 above to do a hit piece on plant based meats, 00:21:44.890 --> 00:21:47.569 which we've seen a lot of, then they're probably 00:21:47.569 --> 00:21:49.789 going to take take that on because it's money 00:21:49.789 --> 00:21:51.589 in their pocket, you know, they get an assignment 00:21:51.589 --> 00:21:54.859 and they want it. um and they probably know that 00:21:54.859 --> 00:21:56.680 an article like that will get a lot of clicks 00:21:56.680 --> 00:22:00.539 so uh and then there are probably there there 00:22:00.539 --> 00:22:03.839 as i said earlier there are some uh people who 00:22:03.839 --> 00:22:06.140 aren't necessarily journalists but they write 00:22:06.140 --> 00:22:09.460 they submit op -ed pieces using their credentials 00:22:09.460 --> 00:22:13.359 as a nutritionist or a physician um and they 00:22:13.359 --> 00:22:17.000 use those credentials and post and submit articles 00:22:17.000 --> 00:22:20.849 that trash uh veganism and promote meat and we 00:22:20.849 --> 00:22:23.450 know that they're employed by or supported by 00:22:23.450 --> 00:22:28.069 you know meat and dairy industry lobbying groups 00:22:28.069 --> 00:22:32.910 so it comes in all shapes of sizes sort of this 00:22:32.910 --> 00:22:35.690 the negative the negative these hit pieces come 00:22:35.690 --> 00:22:39.589 they arise for many different reasons for many 00:22:39.589 --> 00:22:42.170 different sources so i'm just looking at each 00:22:42.170 --> 00:22:44.210 one individually trying to figure out what what 00:22:44.210 --> 00:22:47.430 is that how did this one come about uh what was 00:22:47.430 --> 00:22:50.529 the Purpose of this the article is good, but 00:22:50.529 --> 00:22:52.849 the headline is bad Oh that just probably means 00:22:52.849 --> 00:22:55.829 that the editors who picked the headlines were 00:22:55.829 --> 00:22:59.930 looking for clickbait to get eyes, you know Maybe 00:22:59.930 --> 00:23:01.930 to get eyes on the article, but then the article 00:23:01.930 --> 00:23:04.509 might be good. So that's a good thing It really 00:23:04.509 --> 00:23:07.190 every article is is different. I'm sure over 00:23:07.190 --> 00:23:09.329 time I'm gonna really pick up trends, but this 00:23:09.329 --> 00:23:12.130 is I'm only a couple months into this So I'm 00:23:12.130 --> 00:23:14.589 still getting my feet wet, but I'm learning, 00:23:14.589 --> 00:23:19.670 you know that reporters do care, because in at 00:23:19.670 --> 00:23:23.430 least four occasions, they've responded to me, 00:23:23.569 --> 00:23:27.930 mostly defensively, but there's been an apology 00:23:27.930 --> 00:23:32.710 about for omitting something, omitting fair balance. 00:23:33.170 --> 00:23:35.549 So, so they're paying attention, despite the 00:23:35.549 --> 00:23:37.490 fact that I don't really have much of a following 00:23:37.490 --> 00:23:41.190 yet. You know, I thought once I have thousands 00:23:41.190 --> 00:23:44.869 of followers and more engagement than reporters 00:23:44.869 --> 00:23:49.990 and editors, the media outlets would be more 00:23:49.990 --> 00:23:55.150 sort of alarmed to see people amplifying what 00:23:55.150 --> 00:23:58.130 I'm putting out there. But that amplification 00:23:58.130 --> 00:24:01.660 didn't need to occur. for at least some reporters 00:24:01.660 --> 00:24:04.700 to get back to me and respond. And when they're 00:24:04.700 --> 00:24:06.940 responding defensively, you know you're getting 00:24:06.940 --> 00:24:09.319 to them and maybe they'll be more careful next 00:24:09.319 --> 00:24:11.440 time because they don't want this criticism. 00:24:11.940 --> 00:24:13.940 They don't want to be challenged from higher 00:24:13.940 --> 00:24:19.000 up. Reporters don't like to be in the spotlight 00:24:19.000 --> 00:24:21.880 in a negative way. I've learned speaking to reporters. 00:24:22.200 --> 00:24:24.920 And so they're vulnerable, as I said, more vulnerable 00:24:24.920 --> 00:24:27.839 than the influencers, though I do think we need 00:24:27.839 --> 00:24:31.529 to target them too. And let's make something 00:24:31.529 --> 00:24:34.890 clear. Are you covering any kind of negative 00:24:34.890 --> 00:24:39.490 coverage of the animal cause or are you really 00:24:39.490 --> 00:24:44.049 targeting unfair coverage of the animal cause 00:24:44.049 --> 00:24:48.490 that happens to be negative? Yeah, no, I'm covering 00:24:48.490 --> 00:24:54.269 what is clear bias and what is clear propaganda. 00:24:55.190 --> 00:25:00.940 If there's an article that is accurate and fair 00:25:00.940 --> 00:25:05.460 about an ingredient used in a plant -based food, 00:25:06.200 --> 00:25:09.799 and it's based on science, I'm probably not gonna 00:25:09.799 --> 00:25:12.099 call that out. If it really feels like it's a 00:25:12.099 --> 00:25:16.910 good faith... news or ever to report on news 00:25:16.910 --> 00:25:20.750 If I think it's just a hook to bash veganism 00:25:20.750 --> 00:25:23.410 if I can if I detect that then I'm gonna call 00:25:23.410 --> 00:25:27.269 it out Sometimes it's a judgment call Sometimes, 00:25:27.269 --> 00:25:29.089 you know, it's conceivable that you would see 00:25:29.089 --> 00:25:32.009 an article that is upsetting to you and would 00:25:32.009 --> 00:25:34.549 be upsetting to me But I feel like I can't really 00:25:34.549 --> 00:25:37.650 call it out because it doesn't really demonstrate 00:25:37.650 --> 00:25:42.200 bias Um, it's just information that we might 00:25:42.200 --> 00:25:45.859 not be happy about, but that's rare. More often 00:25:45.859 --> 00:25:49.099 than not, I'm finding that the negative articles 00:25:49.099 --> 00:25:52.819 don't have fair balance or they're just, you 00:25:52.819 --> 00:25:55.119 know, they're just straight out attack, you know, 00:25:55.259 --> 00:25:57.980 anti -vegan propaganda that feels like it's coming 00:25:57.980 --> 00:26:00.599 from the meat industry via the mainstream media. 00:26:00.980 --> 00:26:05.599 So you're just, you know, it's called VegeMedia 00:26:05.599 --> 00:26:09.599 Watch, but could have been called lies media 00:26:09.599 --> 00:26:12.900 watch, you know, you're you're actually just 00:26:12.900 --> 00:26:19.319 looking for dishonest media coverage. It's it's 00:26:19.319 --> 00:26:21.920 it's more than just dishonest. It's just it's 00:26:21.920 --> 00:26:27.000 you know, it's it's just clear bias. It's it's 00:26:27.000 --> 00:26:32.539 it's propaganda. It doesn't seem fair. And so 00:26:32.539 --> 00:26:36.680 that's what I'm calling out. And so I'm sure 00:26:36.680 --> 00:26:40.700 this will continue to evolve over time. I'm finding 00:26:40.700 --> 00:26:44.000 my voice, trying to figure out what works, trying 00:26:44.000 --> 00:26:47.160 to figure out what will engage people in the 00:26:47.160 --> 00:26:49.480 vegan community to take part in this, because 00:26:49.480 --> 00:26:52.420 there's power in numbers. Although, as I said, 00:26:52.920 --> 00:26:55.579 reporters are still responding despite how little 00:26:55.579 --> 00:27:00.920 engagement there is. So yeah, I think it'll continue 00:27:00.920 --> 00:27:05.319 to evolve. And maybe over time, mainstream media 00:27:05.319 --> 00:27:09.599 becomes less less relevant maybe I'll shift to 00:27:09.599 --> 00:27:12.420 influencers and social media or maybe more people 00:27:12.420 --> 00:27:14.940 will come on board you know I just do this as 00:27:14.940 --> 00:27:17.460 a volunteer it's not you know but maybe other 00:27:17.460 --> 00:27:20.539 people who care about this will help out and 00:27:20.539 --> 00:27:23.599 want to join me and calling out influencers or 00:27:23.599 --> 00:27:27.220 even mainstream media outlets who are spreading 00:27:27.220 --> 00:27:31.180 anti -vegan pro -meat you know propaganda What 00:27:31.180 --> 00:27:35.980 consequences in bad media coverage have on the 00:27:35.980 --> 00:27:39.680 progress of this cause? Well, just take a couple 00:27:39.680 --> 00:27:42.059 things. Just take what happened to Beyond Meat, 00:27:42.240 --> 00:27:44.259 which is a publicly traded company launched, 00:27:44.259 --> 00:27:48.880 you know, IPO with so much fanfare. The price 00:27:48.880 --> 00:27:51.230 shot up from I don't remember. what it came to 00:27:51.230 --> 00:27:53.910 market at, maybe $60 or something. I might be 00:27:53.910 --> 00:27:55.549 wrong about that. But at one point, it shot up 00:27:55.549 --> 00:27:59.289 to $250 and now it's at about $3. And that is 00:27:59.289 --> 00:28:04.089 absolutely a result of this campaign to attack 00:28:04.089 --> 00:28:09.130 Beyond Meat as an ultra processed unnatural food. 00:28:09.829 --> 00:28:13.250 Thankfully, a few days ago, CNN wrote a long 00:28:13.250 --> 00:28:16.619 piece saying that Just because something is ultra 00:28:16.619 --> 00:28:18.819 processed doesn't mean it's unhealthy. When you 00:28:18.819 --> 00:28:22.119 combine a bunch of healthy ingredients and process 00:28:22.119 --> 00:28:24.740 them together, that doesn't necessarily create 00:28:24.740 --> 00:28:27.599 an unhealthy product. In the case of Beyond Meat, 00:28:28.079 --> 00:28:30.160 which is probably made from pea protein and soy 00:28:30.160 --> 00:28:33.819 protein, and I'm not exactly sure, but plants 00:28:33.819 --> 00:28:36.579 and other healthy ingredients, it's not... You 00:28:36.579 --> 00:28:38.400 know, it's still a processed food, right? You're 00:28:38.400 --> 00:28:40.500 still better off eating a carrot stick than a 00:28:40.500 --> 00:28:43.240 Beyond Burger. But there is some nutritional 00:28:43.240 --> 00:28:47.079 value. And it's not nearly as bad a processed 00:28:47.079 --> 00:28:50.160 food as, let's say, a piece of bread, which is 00:28:50.160 --> 00:28:55.200 made from white flour, or potato chips, or cookies, 00:28:55.400 --> 00:28:58.619 or soda, or some salad dressings, or all of these 00:28:58.619 --> 00:29:01.859 other processed foods that people eat. But these 00:29:01.859 --> 00:29:04.849 articles this negative coverage is giving people 00:29:04.849 --> 00:29:09.450 a free pass to eat regular beef instead as if 00:29:09.450 --> 00:29:13.450 that's healthier than a plant -based alternative. 00:29:13.609 --> 00:29:16.789 It's not. It's dangerous. When I see these titles, 00:29:17.329 --> 00:29:21.349 vegan diet is unhealthy. Something is just egregious 00:29:21.349 --> 00:29:23.910 as that. And I've seen that. I think, boy, there 00:29:23.910 --> 00:29:27.130 are people who are going to just consume meat, 00:29:27.230 --> 00:29:32.619 dairy, eggs, and they think that not eating a 00:29:32.619 --> 00:29:34.940 healthy plant -based diet of fruits, vegetables, 00:29:35.099 --> 00:29:36.460 whole grains and legumes that they're going to 00:29:36.460 --> 00:29:38.460 think that's okay because the media told them 00:29:38.460 --> 00:29:43.660 that veganism is unhealthy. It just feels very 00:29:43.660 --> 00:29:50.359 dangerous. And I definitely call that out. I 00:29:50.359 --> 00:29:52.400 should add though, because we're only talking 00:29:52.400 --> 00:29:54.519 about calling out the negative articles, I'm 00:29:54.519 --> 00:29:57.140 definitely using Veg Media Watch to amplify the 00:29:57.140 --> 00:29:59.640 positive stories like the CNN story that I just 00:29:59.640 --> 00:30:03.410 mentioned. I mean, I was so grateful to see CNN 00:30:03.410 --> 00:30:06.930 acknowledge what we all know, that not all processed 00:30:06.930 --> 00:30:08.750 foods are created equal, and in some cases they 00:30:08.750 --> 00:30:11.630 might even be healthy. And also CNN acknowledged 00:30:11.630 --> 00:30:14.630 how much better a Beyond Burger is for the planet 00:30:14.630 --> 00:30:20.069 than a beef burger. And so we also need to encourage 00:30:20.069 --> 00:30:25.809 mainstream media outlets to publish stories promoting 00:30:25.809 --> 00:30:30.569 a healthy plant -based diet. Because if we encourage 00:30:30.569 --> 00:30:32.529 them to do it, and we share those stories, they'll 00:30:32.529 --> 00:30:35.430 continue to do it in the future. Because that'll 00:30:35.430 --> 00:30:37.390 bring in more ad dollars for them if people see 00:30:37.390 --> 00:30:40.890 all you know, if they can show engagement, and 00:30:40.890 --> 00:30:45.650 clicks. Yes, well, that's the thing, I feel like 00:30:45.650 --> 00:30:49.069 there's more power in denouncing, you know, the 00:30:49.069 --> 00:30:53.630 negative articles than promoting the positive 00:30:53.630 --> 00:31:00.359 ones. I think that for vegans, we want to see 00:31:00.359 --> 00:31:04.279 those, uh, this positive coverage and we want 00:31:04.279 --> 00:31:08.319 to see it being highlighted by, uh, veg, vegetarian 00:31:08.319 --> 00:31:14.140 watch or anyone. But what, what is liking, what 00:31:14.140 --> 00:31:18.400 was liking was the denunciation part of the negative 00:31:18.400 --> 00:31:23.019 coverage. Um, so I, I talked to one of the co 00:31:23.019 --> 00:31:27.619 -founders of beyond meat and he, he said they, 00:31:27.740 --> 00:31:34.539 invested lots of money in marketing campaigns 00:31:34.539 --> 00:31:39.460 to counteract that negative messaging. But now 00:31:39.460 --> 00:31:43.460 I'm realizing they did not invest money in denouncing 00:31:43.460 --> 00:31:49.480 that horrible coverage of their products. They 00:31:49.480 --> 00:31:53.259 kind of tried to promote back their product into 00:31:53.259 --> 00:32:00.410 existence. instead of, you know, denouncing the 00:32:00.410 --> 00:32:03.269 kind of coverage they received and complaining. 00:32:04.089 --> 00:32:06.910 So all of that to say they should pay you they 00:32:06.910 --> 00:32:10.750 should send money your way because you're really, 00:32:10.809 --> 00:32:14.630 you know, helping them out here. Yeah, you know, 00:32:15.210 --> 00:32:17.529 I read I have nothing to gain financially from 00:32:17.529 --> 00:32:19.269 any of this. I'm just, you know, volunteering 00:32:19.269 --> 00:32:23.650 my time to do this. But it might make sense for 00:32:23.650 --> 00:32:26.430 the plant -based community to come together and, 00:32:26.430 --> 00:32:29.089 you know, formalize, you know, Veg Media Watch 00:32:29.089 --> 00:32:31.849 and back it and we could get more people, you 00:32:31.849 --> 00:32:34.390 know, they have an army, the other side has an 00:32:34.390 --> 00:32:36.230 army of people. I mean, you hear about these 00:32:36.230 --> 00:32:39.730 war rooms of publicists and influencers who the 00:32:39.730 --> 00:32:43.109 media industry has hired to go after the plant 00:32:43.109 --> 00:32:44.829 -based food industry and to promote the meat 00:32:44.829 --> 00:32:47.650 industry. It would be nice if we had something 00:32:47.650 --> 00:32:52.970 like Veg Media Watch, but bigger, where we're 00:32:52.970 --> 00:32:57.210 fighting back on behalf of an ethical vegan company 00:32:57.210 --> 00:33:01.509 like Beyond Meat. We want those companies to 00:33:01.509 --> 00:33:07.630 survive for the planet, for our health, for the 00:33:07.630 --> 00:33:09.930 animals, for the people who work there doing 00:33:09.930 --> 00:33:13.990 good work. So yeah, I'm sad that they should 00:33:13.990 --> 00:33:16.700 even have to fight for themselves. in the court 00:33:16.700 --> 00:33:20.180 of public opinion and the media to defend against 00:33:20.180 --> 00:33:24.660 these attacks. Look, there are lots of communities 00:33:24.660 --> 00:33:28.200 that have watchdog groups. There's a gay and 00:33:28.200 --> 00:33:31.240 lesbian alliance against defamation where I volunteered 00:33:31.240 --> 00:33:34.109 many, many years ago. writing letters to the 00:33:34.109 --> 00:33:36.109 editor of newspapers, this was before the internet, 00:33:36.369 --> 00:33:38.170 writing letters to the editors of the newspaper 00:33:38.170 --> 00:33:40.950 when there would be sort of a hit piece on gay 00:33:40.950 --> 00:33:45.190 people. The Jewish community has the Anti -Defamation 00:33:45.190 --> 00:33:48.490 League to speak out against, you know, anti -Semitism. 00:33:49.130 --> 00:33:53.589 So likewise, we should have a group fighting 00:33:53.589 --> 00:33:57.569 against anti -vegan bias and supporting those. 00:33:57.720 --> 00:34:02.500 publications and people who promote veganism 00:34:02.500 --> 00:34:07.880 fairly and accurately. Let me find back my tinfold 00:34:07.880 --> 00:34:12.239 hat. And let me ask you, do you think that there 00:34:12.239 --> 00:34:19.199 are some vegan media outlets out there are vegan 00:34:19.199 --> 00:34:25.179 influencers that are just, you know, have been 00:34:25.179 --> 00:34:29.420 captured or are actually part of that big, you 00:34:29.420 --> 00:34:36.380 know, media campaign, sponsored by Big Ag, because 00:34:36.380 --> 00:34:40.139 I see them pop up all the time, you know, all 00:34:40.139 --> 00:34:44.699 sorts of media initiatives around veganism. And 00:34:44.699 --> 00:34:48.739 I often wonder, who are the people behind that, 00:34:48.860 --> 00:34:53.360 you know, sometimes I contact them and I get 00:34:53.360 --> 00:34:56.139 no answer, which makes me even more, you know, 00:34:56.300 --> 00:35:00.539 suspicious of of those initiatives. But is that 00:35:00.539 --> 00:35:03.820 something you ever wondered? Well, I mean, you 00:35:03.820 --> 00:35:07.219 know, I do set up Google alerts for vegan veganism, 00:35:07.480 --> 00:35:10.900 plant based. And every day I get in, seemingly 00:35:10.900 --> 00:35:14.559 every day I get an onslaught of of Articles that 00:35:14.559 --> 00:35:16.920 come through from an organization called veg 00:35:16.920 --> 00:35:21.199 out and the titles are appalling so it bills 00:35:21.199 --> 00:35:25.900 itself as a plant based lifestyle. Magazine online 00:35:25.900 --> 00:35:29.380 it's a website and the articles might be okay 00:35:29.380 --> 00:35:33.460 but the clickbait titles are are just you know 00:35:33.460 --> 00:35:38.460 are are awful really that would really. Would 00:35:38.460 --> 00:35:41.519 really turn people off from veganism why vegans 00:35:41.519 --> 00:35:43.980 are to eight ways how vegans are alienating their 00:35:43.980 --> 00:35:47.400 friends, you know It's one title after another 00:35:47.400 --> 00:35:50.119 so I call them out and I do wonder if all of 00:35:50.119 --> 00:35:54.139 those articles are Sort of AI generated because 00:35:54.139 --> 00:35:56.119 when I look on their website, I can't even really 00:35:56.119 --> 00:36:00.619 find real people And so it does feel like this 00:36:00.619 --> 00:36:06.900 particular website is exploiting us For exploiting 00:36:06.900 --> 00:36:09.780 the interest in plant -based lifestyle for clicks 00:36:09.780 --> 00:36:12.239 making money out off of it and sort of throwing 00:36:12.239 --> 00:36:15.440 us under the bus That's the only one that comes 00:36:15.440 --> 00:36:19.739 to mind that veg out magazine Is that what you 00:36:19.739 --> 00:36:22.579 were referring to? Well, yeah, I was thinking 00:36:22.579 --> 00:36:25.780 about that since you know, you you covered it 00:36:25.780 --> 00:36:31.500 That also bots on social media accounts that 00:36:31.500 --> 00:36:36.510 you know always disparage and and and say some 00:36:36.510 --> 00:36:43.590 anti -vegan stuff online or on Reddit. I've seen 00:36:43.590 --> 00:36:49.289 so many accounts on Reddit profiles labeling 00:36:49.289 --> 00:36:51.889 themselves as vegan, but then you wonder, are 00:36:51.889 --> 00:36:54.550 you really vegan? Why are you saying that kind 00:36:54.550 --> 00:36:58.500 of stuff? We need an army of people. I mean what 00:36:58.500 --> 00:37:01.360 you just described I mean I'm not on reddit and 00:37:01.360 --> 00:37:04.380 I don't spend a ton of time on social media because 00:37:04.380 --> 00:37:06.139 right now I'm focused on the mainstream media 00:37:06.139 --> 00:37:09.980 but The as as we've talked about the industry 00:37:09.980 --> 00:37:12.019 the meat and dairy industries are so big and 00:37:12.019 --> 00:37:15.179 so powerful and so wealthy That to content, you 00:37:15.179 --> 00:37:17.360 know to do justice and combat and then we need 00:37:17.360 --> 00:37:20.000 to be there needs to be more of us now granted 00:37:20.619 --> 00:37:23.119 You know even before i was doing veg media watch 00:37:23.119 --> 00:37:25.039 of course i would comment in an article that 00:37:25.039 --> 00:37:28.599 was negative or you know send a letter to the 00:37:28.599 --> 00:37:30.980 editor here there but and lots of people do that 00:37:30.980 --> 00:37:32.800 which is terrific which i just think we need 00:37:32.800 --> 00:37:35.480 to do it in a much bigger scale and in a more 00:37:35.480 --> 00:37:38.860 organized fashion like other communities do. 00:37:39.780 --> 00:37:43.219 You're right about that and i jokingly you know. 00:37:43.659 --> 00:37:47.360 talk about conspiracies and all of that. But 00:37:47.360 --> 00:37:51.320 we're not talking about aliens here. It's not 00:37:51.320 --> 00:37:55.800 really that much of a crazy conspiracy to believe 00:37:55.800 --> 00:37:59.320 in because we have so many examples out there 00:37:59.320 --> 00:38:03.780 of, for instance, foreign nations playing the 00:38:03.780 --> 00:38:08.440 cultural wars to get what they want. And, you 00:38:08.440 --> 00:38:11.440 know, we're capable of that, you know, in the 00:38:11.440 --> 00:38:14.309 US, in North America. It's just It's not just 00:38:14.309 --> 00:38:19.530 for a nation. For many years, I worked for in 00:38:19.530 --> 00:38:21.750 public relations. I worked for a big PR firm 00:38:21.750 --> 00:38:26.110 in New York and we had divisions. We had consumer 00:38:26.110 --> 00:38:30.849 tech, pharma. And so I'm sure I don't remember 00:38:30.849 --> 00:38:35.869 offhand if our company had any clients who were 00:38:35.869 --> 00:38:39.099 meat, dairy, egg, whatever companies. But I'm 00:38:39.099 --> 00:38:41.980 sure they would have if they had been and they 00:38:41.980 --> 00:38:45.219 would have probably been paid hundreds of thousands 00:38:45.219 --> 00:38:49.739 of dollars a year to do PR for them. That was 00:38:49.739 --> 00:38:53.539 a long time ago. Now they're PR agencies that 00:38:53.539 --> 00:38:57.960 probably just specialize in social media. The 00:38:57.960 --> 00:39:00.420 landscape has changed dramatically. But of course, 00:39:00.719 --> 00:39:03.599 the meat and dairy industries probably spend 00:39:03.599 --> 00:39:05.760 hundreds of millions of dollars on lobbying, 00:39:06.000 --> 00:39:10.139 advertising. a PR to get their messages out. 00:39:10.360 --> 00:39:12.619 And I have no doubt that there are publicists 00:39:12.619 --> 00:39:16.139 working at mainstream PR firms who are calling 00:39:16.139 --> 00:39:19.860 and pitching anti -vegan propaganda stories. 00:39:20.599 --> 00:39:23.500 Hey, we got a new bit of information about some 00:39:23.500 --> 00:39:29.369 ultra -processed meat. Will you run a story? 00:39:29.449 --> 00:39:32.170 And then if that media outlet knows that this 00:39:32.170 --> 00:39:35.230 company is advertising also, then maybe they 00:39:35.230 --> 00:39:37.510 might feel sort of an obligation to run a story. 00:39:37.769 --> 00:39:39.929 We don't know what goes on behind the scenes, 00:39:39.929 --> 00:39:42.929 but surely that kind of thing happens. They want 00:39:42.929 --> 00:39:46.090 to support their advertisers. But more than that, 00:39:46.090 --> 00:39:50.590 do you think they fuel, for instance, the infighting 00:39:50.590 --> 00:39:55.409 in the vegan movement? Because I see the state 00:39:55.409 --> 00:40:00.300 of this. community, so to speak. And I sometimes 00:40:00.300 --> 00:40:04.780 wonder, um, was that all designed to, to fail, 00:40:04.780 --> 00:40:08.760 you know, by, by someone, by a force? Um, and 00:40:08.760 --> 00:40:11.679 does that include, you know, um, a social media 00:40:11.679 --> 00:40:16.139 strategy to, to, to reach that goal, um, with 00:40:16.139 --> 00:40:21.599 big money from a big industry? Um, yeah. Yeah, 00:40:21.760 --> 00:40:24.489 it's, you know, I wouldn't be surprised. First 00:40:24.489 --> 00:40:26.889 of all, of course, we know that the meat industry 00:40:26.889 --> 00:40:32.010 and all of our all of the industries that we 00:40:32.010 --> 00:40:34.429 oppose, whether it's animals for food, clothing 00:40:34.429 --> 00:40:37.349 or entertainment, they must rejoice when they 00:40:37.349 --> 00:40:39.969 see infighting in our community in the same way 00:40:39.969 --> 00:40:43.150 that we would if we saw infighting and in their 00:40:43.150 --> 00:40:46.909 community, whether or not they actually produce 00:40:46.909 --> 00:40:50.750 campaigns that would that would trigger infighting 00:40:50.750 --> 00:40:54.460 among us and keep us all week or focused on something 00:40:54.460 --> 00:40:57.780 else, like issues outside of our world, I don't 00:40:57.780 --> 00:41:01.440 know, but I can tell you that there are all of 00:41:01.440 --> 00:41:05.079 these human causes that are unrelated to animal 00:41:05.079 --> 00:41:08.320 rights that take up a lot of the oxygen in the 00:41:08.320 --> 00:41:11.820 animal rights community, and that takes away 00:41:11.820 --> 00:41:14.679 so much desperately needed attention from the 00:41:14.679 --> 00:41:17.659 animals. I mean, I participate, you know, over 00:41:17.659 --> 00:41:20.219 the years, of course, I participated in gay rights. 00:41:20.400 --> 00:41:25.360 events, BLM events, and you know, there's never 00:41:25.360 --> 00:41:28.480 discussion about veganism or animal rights or 00:41:28.480 --> 00:41:30.800 anything. There's no consideration for animals 00:41:30.800 --> 00:41:34.840 at those events at all. But now there's an expectation 00:41:34.840 --> 00:41:37.960 among people in the animal rights and vegan movement 00:41:37.960 --> 00:41:41.239 that we focus on human issues and it just takes 00:41:41.239 --> 00:41:43.900 away, it tears us apart as a community because 00:41:43.900 --> 00:41:46.210 we don't all agree. We're not all on the same 00:41:46.210 --> 00:41:49.630 side of those human issues. Um, so, and it takes 00:41:49.630 --> 00:41:53.070 away so much attention from the animals who are 00:41:53.070 --> 00:41:55.670 not getting that attention and all of these other 00:41:55.670 --> 00:41:58.650 human rights causes. So I wish we would just 00:41:58.650 --> 00:42:01.210 stick to the animals. I wish we would use our 00:42:01.210 --> 00:42:06.429 animal rights platforms to focus on, uh, on animal 00:42:06.429 --> 00:42:09.349 liberation and not on all of these other causes. 00:42:11.130 --> 00:42:15.800 Do you know what I want? I want to an investigation 00:42:15.800 --> 00:42:23.340 on, you know, the state of this media vegan community 00:42:23.340 --> 00:42:29.559 and have an idea of, you know, the percentage 00:42:29.559 --> 00:42:34.380 of traffic driven by, you know, vegan discourse 00:42:34.380 --> 00:42:38.159 and all of that. What's the percentage of bots 00:42:38.159 --> 00:42:41.099 there? What's the percentage of people, you know, 00:42:41.139 --> 00:42:45.449 from Pakistan that and I'm taking just one random 00:42:45.449 --> 00:42:49.710 country, but that have been hired to pass themselves 00:42:49.710 --> 00:42:54.789 for vegan activist online and what kind of things 00:42:54.789 --> 00:42:59.190 they say. I really want to have some answers 00:42:59.190 --> 00:43:05.530 and some hard data. And you look at social media 00:43:05.530 --> 00:43:09.690 and the discourse online and you feel like sometimes 00:43:10.269 --> 00:43:14.730 the majority is against you or backing up something 00:43:14.730 --> 00:43:19.690 that you disagree with. But once you understand 00:43:19.690 --> 00:43:24.389 that 50 % of those likes, those, you know, comments 00:43:24.389 --> 00:43:28.670 came from bots or something like that, then you, 00:43:28.869 --> 00:43:31.670 you understand that this is not real, that really 00:43:31.670 --> 00:43:34.090 social media is not real, which is very cheesy 00:43:34.090 --> 00:43:38.730 to say, but yeah. You know, I It's interesting 00:43:38.730 --> 00:43:41.030 that you say that because I, you know, before 00:43:41.030 --> 00:43:43.489 I started Veg Media Watch, I was working on this 00:43:43.489 --> 00:43:45.849 Adidas kangaroo, you know, this kangaroos are 00:43:45.849 --> 00:43:48.730 not shoes campaign trying to compel sports for 00:43:48.730 --> 00:43:51.590 companies like Adidas and Nike to stop using 00:43:51.590 --> 00:43:54.849 kangaroo skin. And so the last target was Adidas. 00:43:54.969 --> 00:43:56.730 And thankfully, they announced, you know, a few 00:43:56.730 --> 00:43:58.530 months ago that they would stop using kangaroo 00:43:58.530 --> 00:44:02.369 skin and that campaign is largely over. But I 00:44:02.369 --> 00:44:05.860 would I would post videos I would I would post 00:44:05.860 --> 00:44:08.219 videos from the protests that I would organize 00:44:08.219 --> 00:44:12.300 and some of them had millions of views on TikTok 00:44:12.300 --> 00:44:16.840 literally and there would be thousands of comments 00:44:16.840 --> 00:44:20.340 and many of them would be the same and I had 00:44:20.340 --> 00:44:22.960 to wonder are these real people or are these 00:44:22.960 --> 00:44:27.639 bots and sort of you know language that people 00:44:27.639 --> 00:44:30.500 of my generation on 53, we don't language that 00:44:30.500 --> 00:44:32.760 we don't use in words that I had to look up. 00:44:33.059 --> 00:44:34.679 You know, this is gonna sound so stupid, but 00:44:34.679 --> 00:44:36.960 like, thousands of comments that would start 00:44:36.960 --> 00:44:41.860 with the word brah, B -U -R -H, you know, brah, 00:44:41.880 --> 00:44:46.039 I -D, you know, I don't, I don't give a fuck, 00:44:46.360 --> 00:44:48.619 I whatever the word initials are there. It was 00:44:48.619 --> 00:44:53.030 just, and so many of them were the same. Use 00:44:53.030 --> 00:44:55.369 the same language were these real people were 00:44:55.369 --> 00:44:58.389 these real like teenagers posting these comments 00:44:58.389 --> 00:45:04.650 I score bangers and I don't give So were those 00:45:04.650 --> 00:45:08.190 bots do you know, I don't even know Yeah, I think 00:45:08.190 --> 00:45:10.610 that we're putting our finger on the problem 00:45:10.610 --> 00:45:13.369 here. We don't know we don't know how much of 00:45:13.369 --> 00:45:17.429 that is real and I feel like your initiative 00:45:17.429 --> 00:45:21.199 is the first step towards having answers to those 00:45:21.199 --> 00:45:24.500 questions. I think that we have some homework 00:45:24.500 --> 00:45:27.440 to do. Yeah, you know, I haven't been looking 00:45:27.440 --> 00:45:32.179 so much at bots and comments on social media, 00:45:32.340 --> 00:45:34.880 because I've been so much more focused on going 00:45:34.880 --> 00:45:38.639 after the mainstream media for their coverage. 00:45:39.139 --> 00:45:41.360 But yeah, I agree, this is something that we 00:45:41.360 --> 00:45:45.019 need to understand too, because it's, you know, 00:45:45.139 --> 00:45:47.820 potentially tearing our community apart. And, 00:45:48.039 --> 00:45:52.230 and and moving people away from veganism. And 00:45:52.230 --> 00:45:53.809 at a time when it's more important than ever 00:45:53.809 --> 00:45:56.610 that more and more of us make the switch to a 00:45:56.610 --> 00:46:00.070 plant -based diet. I can't believe we haven't 00:46:00.070 --> 00:46:04.250 used the expression yet, but fake news is, I 00:46:04.250 --> 00:46:07.610 think, the technical terms for, you know, dishonest 00:46:07.610 --> 00:46:14.090 media bias. Although it has, you know, a political 00:46:14.090 --> 00:46:18.539 connotation to it, as you know. Right. Then, 00:46:18.659 --> 00:46:20.940 you know, the lines are blurred between news 00:46:20.940 --> 00:46:24.599 and opinion, right? I mean, it used to be, I 00:46:24.599 --> 00:46:27.300 can remember when I was younger, that it was 00:46:27.300 --> 00:46:30.519 clear what was on the news pages of, let's say, 00:46:30.679 --> 00:46:33.820 print media versus what was on the opinion pages. 00:46:33.860 --> 00:46:37.699 But that feels more blurred now. The bias is 00:46:37.699 --> 00:46:40.300 coming out in the news pages where it shouldn't 00:46:40.300 --> 00:46:42.840 be coming out. And of course, that's very true 00:46:42.840 --> 00:46:47.440 of the, you know, cable news networks like CNN 00:46:47.440 --> 00:46:52.039 and MSNBC and Fox, where so much of it is just 00:46:52.039 --> 00:46:55.219 sort of opinion, you know, you can kind of hear 00:46:55.219 --> 00:46:58.280 it in the anchors voice. No, they're still and 00:46:58.280 --> 00:47:00.679 maybe you're too young to remember this. But 00:47:00.679 --> 00:47:04.679 you know, in the 70s and 80s, and I guess the 00:47:04.679 --> 00:47:08.360 90s mean the main source of news for so many 00:47:08.360 --> 00:47:12.159 people was a 630 evening news on CBS, NBC and 00:47:12.159 --> 00:47:16.369 ABC. And you know those anchors would really 00:47:16.369 --> 00:47:18.570 just deliver the news there was never a hint 00:47:18.570 --> 00:47:22.230 of bias that i can recall but. And that could 00:47:22.230 --> 00:47:24.389 very well still be the case on the evening news 00:47:24.389 --> 00:47:28.110 at six thirty but. Apart from that it just feels 00:47:28.110 --> 00:47:30.809 like so many media outlets are you know the bias 00:47:30.809 --> 00:47:33.909 comes through on their news pages or words you 00:47:33.909 --> 00:47:36.809 know it should just be objective. That's very 00:47:36.809 --> 00:47:40.610 true the number of you know on youtube videos 00:47:40.610 --> 00:47:44.570 covering those. uh, people reading the scripts 00:47:44.570 --> 00:47:47.750 and you know, they're from different, um, media 00:47:47.750 --> 00:47:50.050 outlets, yet they're reading the same script 00:47:50.050 --> 00:47:53.630 about the same story. And there's this eerie 00:47:53.630 --> 00:47:56.829 feeling that, you know, this is propaganda and 00:47:56.829 --> 00:47:59.949 it's, this is not, you know, objective reporting 00:47:59.949 --> 00:48:02.969 of facts. Yeah. It makes it so much more difficult 00:48:02.969 --> 00:48:06.909 for us to know now what's true and what's not. 00:48:06.929 --> 00:48:09.610 And it didn't used to feel that way. And you 00:48:09.610 --> 00:48:13.199 used to believe the news. Now, even when I read 00:48:13.199 --> 00:48:17.420 the news and, you know, reputable media outlets 00:48:17.420 --> 00:48:19.400 like the Washington Post and the New York Times 00:48:19.400 --> 00:48:22.340 or the Wall Street Journal, I, you know, I second 00:48:22.340 --> 00:48:24.900 guess everything. You know, I guess years ago, 00:48:24.980 --> 00:48:27.219 when I worked on the I was really involved in 00:48:27.219 --> 00:48:28.900 the campaign to ban horse -drawn carriages, and 00:48:28.900 --> 00:48:30.900 I still am, by the way, in New York City. And 00:48:30.900 --> 00:48:33.139 I made this documentary film called Blinders 00:48:33.139 --> 00:48:36.280 about the plight of the horses and took viewers 00:48:36.280 --> 00:48:39.110 behind the scenes. So I had to learn a lot. I 00:48:39.110 --> 00:48:42.090 had to dig really deep on that one issue, and 00:48:42.090 --> 00:48:44.389 I learned a lot. And then I would see the reporting 00:48:44.389 --> 00:48:45.889 in the New York Times about the horse -drawn 00:48:45.889 --> 00:48:48.610 carriage issue and think, this is just factually 00:48:48.610 --> 00:48:51.110 incorrect. You know, what they're stating here 00:48:51.110 --> 00:48:53.949 is incorrect. And then when they would opine 00:48:53.949 --> 00:48:55.969 about the horse -drawn carriage industry on the 00:48:55.969 --> 00:49:00.369 editorial page, they got it wrong, too. You know, 00:49:00.369 --> 00:49:02.389 they just got it completely wrong. And I thought, 00:49:02.849 --> 00:49:04.690 if they're getting it wrong on this issue that 00:49:04.690 --> 00:49:06.829 I happen to know a lot about, then what else 00:49:06.829 --> 00:49:09.380 are... What else are they getting wrong? So I 00:49:09.380 --> 00:49:12.500 do feel like I read the news with more of a grain 00:49:12.500 --> 00:49:16.159 of salt now than I did in my, you know, when 00:49:16.159 --> 00:49:21.820 I was in my 20s, down 30s. Definitely. What do 00:49:21.820 --> 00:49:26.239 you make of the fact that now if you open the 00:49:26.239 --> 00:49:29.940 news app or think of a title of a media outlet, 00:49:30.659 --> 00:49:34.679 you get incredibly depressed. What is this about? 00:49:35.019 --> 00:49:38.710 Is this done on purpose? you know, because those 00:49:38.710 --> 00:49:42.230 negative emotions are drivers of engagement more 00:49:42.230 --> 00:49:46.070 than, you know, something more positive. What 00:49:46.070 --> 00:49:50.050 do you make of that? Well, I mean, the opposite 00:49:50.050 --> 00:49:53.849 could be true for other people who look open 00:49:53.849 --> 00:49:56.710 their feeds. And it's all stories about kittens 00:49:56.710 --> 00:49:59.750 and puppies, you know, frolicking. I mean, I 00:49:59.750 --> 00:50:02.250 think so much our feeds are curated now in a 00:50:02.250 --> 00:50:05.739 way that we were unimaginable, you know, maybe 00:50:05.739 --> 00:50:11.019 15 years ago. And so I think that we're being 00:50:11.019 --> 00:50:14.739 delivered what they think we're going to read. 00:50:15.420 --> 00:50:20.460 So for their advertising purposes. So, but yeah, 00:50:20.460 --> 00:50:24.059 they're capitalizing on our emotions and our 00:50:24.059 --> 00:50:26.860 interest to deliver us news that is going to 00:50:26.860 --> 00:50:29.420 make these outlets more the most money. It's 00:50:29.420 --> 00:50:32.679 definitely, it all feels manipulative and a little 00:50:32.679 --> 00:50:36.420 bit dangerous. Do you get depressed from doing 00:50:36.420 --> 00:50:43.360 this coverage of anti -vegan and also pro -vegan 00:50:43.360 --> 00:50:48.980 media coverage? I guess my first emotion would 00:50:48.980 --> 00:50:56.139 be frustrated to see the propaganda and to know 00:50:56.139 --> 00:51:01.440 what we're up against and then a far distant 00:51:01.440 --> 00:51:05.159 emotion is grateful for those who are doing it 00:51:05.159 --> 00:51:10.000 right and who are being fair and giving us a 00:51:10.000 --> 00:51:12.860 true shout out where we need it. And so those 00:51:12.860 --> 00:51:17.280 are the emotions. I wouldn't say depressed. Depressed 00:51:17.280 --> 00:51:22.159 is how I feel when I watch, you know, the video 00:51:22.159 --> 00:51:24.039 footage of what goes on inside of factory farms 00:51:24.039 --> 00:51:27.019 and slaughterhouses. But the news coverage itself 00:51:27.019 --> 00:51:32.800 is just making me frustrated. and angry. Well, 00:51:32.820 --> 00:51:37.099 it must feel good to, you know, have an initiative 00:51:37.099 --> 00:51:41.579 to, you know, vent, you know, on those on those 00:51:41.579 --> 00:51:46.079 issues. Must feels like must feel like journaling. 00:51:47.079 --> 00:51:49.639 Yeah, it feels like I'm doing something I'm fighting 00:51:49.639 --> 00:51:52.019 back. I know it's making a little bit of a difference, 00:51:52.019 --> 00:51:55.079 as I said, because some journalists have reply, 00:51:55.260 --> 00:51:57.940 despite the lack of engagement, you know, from 00:51:57.940 --> 00:52:01.619 our side. So it feels like, you know, something 00:52:01.619 --> 00:52:03.539 good could come of it. You know, look, we're 00:52:03.539 --> 00:52:06.159 all spokes in a wheel, the people who do undercover 00:52:06.159 --> 00:52:09.199 investigations, or open rescues, or the people 00:52:09.199 --> 00:52:10.960 who are out on the streets doing vegan outreach, 00:52:11.159 --> 00:52:14.139 education, websites, you know, campaigns, you 00:52:14.139 --> 00:52:17.159 know, street camp, we all have something to contribute 00:52:17.159 --> 00:52:20.340 here. This is just a very tiny spoke and a very 00:52:20.340 --> 00:52:23.699 big wheel. But if I find that, you know, continues 00:52:23.699 --> 00:52:25.280 to make a difference, if I feel like it's making 00:52:25.280 --> 00:52:27.400 a difference, I'll keep at it and, you know, 00:52:27.500 --> 00:52:30.659 and solicit people to help me and, you know, 00:52:30.719 --> 00:52:33.739 maybe eventually get funding and, and, and turn 00:52:33.739 --> 00:52:36.000 it into something, you know, an official entity. 00:52:36.340 --> 00:52:38.559 Right now, it's just sort of a social media platform 00:52:38.559 --> 00:52:41.119 on, you know, on all the platforms, basically, 00:52:41.320 --> 00:52:44.760 at Veg Media Watch, trying to demand accountability, 00:52:44.760 --> 00:52:49.719 and trying to augment, you know, and amplify 00:52:49.719 --> 00:52:54.659 the the pro vegan stories, and affair stories. 00:52:55.559 --> 00:52:58.739 Wonderful. Donnie, it's an amazing initiative. 00:52:58.960 --> 00:53:04.519 It really is. And it has great potential. I think, 00:53:04.599 --> 00:53:07.280 you know, you said we're all doing our own thing. 00:53:07.500 --> 00:53:11.260 But I feel like this, this is, you know, affecting 00:53:11.260 --> 00:53:15.400 everyone, and the efforts of everyone. So thank 00:53:15.400 --> 00:53:18.539 you for that. So, Donnie, did you want to add 00:53:18.539 --> 00:53:21.119 something before I stop the recording? Yeah, 00:53:21.119 --> 00:53:24.300 just that if people could please go to the veg 00:53:24.300 --> 00:53:27.380 media watch on Twitter and Instagram and Facebook 00:53:27.380 --> 00:53:30.960 Threads and you know LinkedIn veg media watches 00:53:30.960 --> 00:53:33.079 on all of those platforms and each one of them 00:53:33.079 --> 00:53:35.159 sort of the posts are a little bit different 00:53:35.159 --> 00:53:38.340 tailored to that platform Do you know if there 00:53:38.340 --> 00:53:40.519 are reporters who use some platforms more than 00:53:40.519 --> 00:53:43.260 others like I find out where they are and I target 00:53:43.260 --> 00:53:45.420 them and the editors and you know the media outlets 00:53:45.420 --> 00:53:48.880 so find me on the platforms that you use and 00:53:48.880 --> 00:53:52.780 you know share it, comment, like, engage in some 00:53:52.780 --> 00:53:56.139 way, because there's power in numbers. And so 00:53:56.139 --> 00:53:59.099 the more engagement we have, the more likely, 00:53:59.099 --> 00:54:02.400 you know, the bigger impact we'll have, I believe. 00:54:03.019 --> 00:54:06.480 Well said. Donnie, thank you so much for your 00:54:06.480 --> 00:54:09.599 great work. And thank you for having me. taking 00:54:09.599 --> 00:54:14.780 the time to answer my questions. Thanks for your 00:54:14.780 --> 00:54:17.679 interest and your support. Of course. Well, you're 00:54:17.679 --> 00:54:20.119 a returning guest of the show. I should have 00:54:20.119 --> 00:54:25.000 mentioned that, but I discovered Veg Media Watch, 00:54:25.320 --> 00:54:28.860 and I'm always pronouncing it veg, but it's Veg 00:54:28.860 --> 00:54:32.139 Media Watch through LinkedIn, and it was recommended 00:54:32.139 --> 00:54:36.730 to me by the algorithm. I thought this is amazing. 00:54:36.909 --> 00:54:39.369 I need to have the person behind this initiative 00:54:39.369 --> 00:54:42.809 on the podcast. And it happens to be you. So 00:54:42.809 --> 00:54:46.210 I'm really happy about that. You can't get rid 00:54:46.210 --> 00:54:52.269 of me. Well, for the best. Thank you so much. 00:54:52.469 --> 00:54:55.030 Thank you, Tony. Thank you, everyone, for listening. 00:54:55.670 --> 00:54:58.429 I kindly invite you to share this podcast with 00:54:58.429 --> 00:55:01.449 the vegans you know. Let's encourage more people 00:55:01.449 --> 00:55:05.110 to take action. Again, thank you so much for 00:55:05.110 --> 00:55:08.050 caring, and I will see you next Tuesday for a 00:55:08.050 --> 00:55:08.909 new episode.