What do modern evangelical Christians and animal cruelty groups have in common? They both pass out a great number of leaflets in hopes of persuading people to adopt a different way of thinking. The former tries to change people’s religious beliefs, while the latter aims to convince people that the existing methods of animal treatment are inhumane and detrimental to society.
Leafleting is a tested marketing strategy that yields an approximately 1% response rate. The logic is that if a flyer can get a person to visit the local supermarket, it must also be able to change a person’s key core beliefs. Leaflets aim to “inform,” regardless of whether it is “God’s word” they contain or facts on factory farming. I have yet to encounter religious leaflets on the Princeton campus, but I’ve had at least three Vegan Outreach pamphlets thrust into my hands as I’ve rushed past Frist Campus Center on my way to class.
As someone who believes in the goals of Vegan Outreach as an organization, I flip through the pictures of desolate pigs behind bars and malformed chickens in battery cages, feeling all the outrage that I’m meant to feel. I can’t help but agree that conditions need to change for the poor animals. If I could, I would convert to vegetarianism all over again. But my own bias makes it hard for me to comment on how effective the leaflets truly are.
When I’ve been handed slips of papers forecasting the end of the world and promising redemption, I’ve only scoffed. Therefore, it makes sense to me that the people around me would treat the Vegan Outreach leaflets I now consider to be incredibly factual and informative with that same disdain.
I heard the following comments right after a whole group of people walked by Frist and picked up (or, in one case, didn’t pick up) a leaflet:
“Why are they trying so hard to appeal to emotions? Like animal suffering, we all get it.”
“Why don’t they focus on the real issues? Like how factory farming is causing global warming?”
“The animal cruelty person asked me if I liked animals and handed me the pamphlet. I smiled, said yes, and handed back the leaflet.”
Reactions were negative because people don’t like being told that what they are doing is wrong. They feel attacked and they jump immediately to their own defense. Certainly, the leaflets contain factual information, but they also contain messages meant to evoke guilt. A picture of a purple, scalded chicken with the headline “An Agonizing Death” is meant to make people question their eating choices.
The overwhelming response is to ignore or to disparage the animal activists for wasting their time worrying about cruelty towards animals when there are much bigger fish to fry. Still, the people who pass out leaflets anticipate this response. In fact, the philosophy of organizations like Vegan Outreach is not to maximize conversions of the passersby to vegetarianism, but rather to get just enough people to convert so that some proportion of animals can be saved. Their favorite statistic is “50 animals … spared for every 100 booklets.” This translates to about two in every 100 people who will be even slightly swayed by the booklets.
It is easy to ridicule these activists for not juxtaposing the opportunity cost of leafleting (time, money, transportation, etc.) with the number of converts, but their philosophy uses animals saved as a measurement of gains.
Historically, leaflets have been used to promote social issues and to inform the public. Animal cruelty is a current social issue that activist organizations are addressing. There are truly some horrible facts about factory farming and some great benefits of going vegetarian that aren’t widely known. Outreach organizations want to make this information available, while also swaying people towards vegetarianism or veganism.
Our own campus has been very receptive to animal activist student organizations like PAWS, which have advocated for more meatless options in the dining halls. The current abundance of vegan and vegetarian options is a direct result of student demand. Along the way, student organizations have also tried to educate fellow students about the effects of factory farming and to promote a decrease in meat-consumption. Publicity promoting “meatless Mondays” has been absorbed into the Princeton culture.
Still, strangers handing out didactic leaflets in front of the Frist Campus Center can seem aggressive, and the negative reactions to their leaflets have far outweighed the positive reactions.
That does not mean Vegan Outreach’s activities are futile. They are bringing a debate to our campus about animal cruelty and its implications. The leaflets spark conversations in our student body. These organizations are trying to address an economic externality in our society –the suffering of animals and the harms to the environment aren’t neatly minimized by the invisible hand of the market. Part of the reason why people aren’t doing more to protect animals or combat the effects of factory farming on our environment is that we all assume that someone else will fix the broken system.
As students of an institution of higher learning, we are responsible for fixing the chinks in our society. It’s easy to get caught up in the herd mentality that urges us to sit back while someone else works on addressing these issues. But how will we figure out what we need to fix if we feel threatened by a leaflet?
Consider just taking the leaflet and perusing it, without immediately writing it off. Maybe reading such pamphlets will leave us more informed and equipped to enact some social change or, at the very least, they will leave us more amused. Thanks to some informative leaflets, I won’t be completely shocked when hell rises and zombies walk the Earth.Bhaamati Borkhetaria is a freshman fromJersey City, New Jersey. She can be reached atbhaamati@princeton.edu.
Read More
Why student protests shouldn’t use ‘intifada’ as a rallying cry
Sydney Eck“As we actively criticize Princeton, media focus on the happenings of elite college campuses amplifies our voices. As our words are carried further from McCosh courtyard, the risk that our words are truncated, distorted, and used for hate grows.”
“As we actively criticize Princeton, media focus on the happenings of elite college campuses amplifies our voices. As our words are carried further from McCosh courtyard, the risk that our words are truncated, distorted, and used for hate grows.”
For the record, video cameras at CPUC meetings must not go
Alex Norbrook“The right to video record is essential as a tool of accountability. Video allows journalists, activists, and spectators to capture a moment beyond what is said — it can record how someone speaks, or how someone reacts to speech.”
“The right to video record is essential as a tool of accountability. Video allows journalists, activists, and spectators to capture a moment beyond what is said — it can record how someone speaks, or how someone reacts to speech.”
We need to keep breaking the glass ceiling of the ivory tower
Maria Luisa Vieira Parada“At Princeton, that means ensuring that there is upward career growth available for women. Women make up only 33 percent of tenured and tenure-track faculty, the people who could be potentially in line for higher administrative leadership at the University.”
“At Princeton, that means ensuring that there is upward career growth available for women. Women make up only 33 percent of tenured and tenure-track faculty, the people who could be potentially in line for higher administrative leadership at the University.”
