Oh. I find this negative and personally upsetting.
Effective altruism brought to animal advocacy a strong norm of collaboration and this feels like undermining years of work. I wrote about it some time ago:
Back in the days, the movement was constantly infighting and spending significant time attacking and criticizing each other. There were a lot of personal attacks, hostile takeovers, and constant attempts to bring individuals down.
In this post I won’t get into details, but many ambitious projects stopped due to this culture, and I suspect many people have drifted away from the movement because of it.
This campaign seems like a well made one, but I think it contributes to polarization and I worry of alienating potential talent that is motivated by helping animals. It feels off to use a name for campaign that uses other charity’s name in a negative sense—feels like an attack. Finally, very adversarial tone toward plant based choices undermines some of the charities’ work recommended by FarmKind, like Dansk Vegetarisk Forening.
So, overall it feels like optimizing for bringing money at the expense of collaborativeness and at the expense of other factors that contribute to the impact of the movement, like alienating talent.
I hope I’m wrong and that I’m missing some considerations, but I think effective altruists should have moral guardrails that make them unlikely to engage in certain behaviors and, to me, collaborativeness is one of the virtues that should not be discarded easily.
If anything, it feels a bit like a missed opportunity for some collab with Veganuary, but maybe FarmKind had reached out to Veganuary.
This seems right to me. The Telegraph article had a quote from Veganuary that was critical of the campaign. My understanding is that FK has been keeping Vegnaury informed throughout the process ,which is good, but it does not seem to be the case that this was a collaboration between the two.
Veganuary seeming against it is part of the bit. These media outlets hate Veganuary and wouldn’t cover it if they thought it was what they wanted. We (FarmKind) have an announcement coming tomorrow explaining the context behind this campaign but the TL;DR is that it is not encouraging meat eating, it’s encouraging donating as another option for people who aren’t willing to change their diet, and generating coverage for Veganuary who have a harder time getting in the media each year without a new hook
Thank you, that’s good to know! If the campaign isn’t encouraging meat-eating, why does it feature competitive meat eating? Are you concerned that it’s been reported as a “meat-eating campaign” in several outlets?
Thanks for engaging Aidan. Things may be clearer once we see any follow up I guess, but this strategy seems like it could come across as duplicitous, and rather risky not just for the organisations involved but also the wider EA movement, given the desire to seem trustworthy after the events of the past couple of years.
I get the good intentions here but it looks to have backfired badly. Obviously I’m not deep in this but I hope that withdrawing the campaign and a quick apology is on the table for you guys at least. All the best figuring it out!
Oh. I find this negative and personally upsetting.
Effective altruism brought to animal advocacy a strong norm of collaboration and this feels like undermining years of work. I wrote about it some time ago:
This campaign seems like a well made one, but I think it contributes to polarization and I worry of alienating potential talent that is motivated by helping animals. It feels off to use a name for campaign that uses other charity’s name in a negative sense—feels like an attack. Finally, very adversarial tone toward plant based choices undermines some of the charities’ work recommended by FarmKind, like Dansk Vegetarisk Forening.
So, overall it feels like optimizing for bringing money at the expense of collaborativeness and at the expense of other factors that contribute to the impact of the movement, like alienating talent.
I hope I’m wrong and that I’m missing some considerations, but I think effective altruists should have moral guardrails that make them unlikely to engage in certain behaviors and, to me, collaborativeness is one of the virtues that should not be discarded easily.
If anything, it feels a bit like a missed opportunity for some collab with Veganuary, but maybe FarmKind had reached out to Veganuary.
Edit: See Aidan’s comment below!
-
This seems right to me. The Telegraph article had a quote from Veganuary that was critical of the campaign. My understanding is that FK has been keeping Vegnaury informed throughout the process ,which is good, but it does not seem to be the case that this was a collaboration between the two.
Veganuary seeming against it is part of the bit. These media outlets hate Veganuary and wouldn’t cover it if they thought it was what they wanted. We (FarmKind) have an announcement coming tomorrow explaining the context behind this campaign but the TL;DR is that it is not encouraging meat eating, it’s encouraging donating as another option for people who aren’t willing to change their diet, and generating coverage for Veganuary who have a harder time getting in the media each year without a new hook
So this is . . . . ~EA kayfabe? (That term refers to “the portrayal of staged elements within professional wrestling . . . . as legitimate or real.”).
Haha kayfabe is exactly right. Let’s not spoil it for the fans
Thank you, that’s good to know! If the campaign isn’t encouraging meat-eating, why does it feature competitive meat eating? Are you concerned that it’s been reported as a “meat-eating campaign” in several outlets?
Thanks for engaging Aidan. Things may be clearer once we see any follow up I guess, but this strategy seems like it could come across as duplicitous, and rather risky not just for the organisations involved but also the wider EA movement, given the desire to seem trustworthy after the events of the past couple of years.
I get the good intentions here but it looks to have backfired badly. Obviously I’m not deep in this but I hope that withdrawing the campaign and a quick apology is on the table for you guys at least. All the best figuring it out!