The animal welfare situation strikes me as more complex than the tobacco policy analogue. Companies will often flock to the least demanding standard, and it’s questionable that most consumers will treat competing certifications as much more than acceptable vs. illegitimate. So one could worry that giving legitimacy to a McWelfare proposal would have undermined the attractiveness of the BCC for companies and consumers.
It strikes me as considerably less likely that consumers would fail to distinguish between full-harm tobacco, lower-harm tobacco, and abstinence. They are pretty self-evidently different in germane ways, minimizing the risk of consumer confusion or companies being able to pass off higher-harm interventions via safetywashing.
I think there’s some complexity (and a lot of confusion) in the tobacco story as well. The industry did try to trick consumers and regulators in the 1970′s that light cigarettes were less harmful when they themselves had evidence that that wasn’t the case. And now, the opposite is happening as misinformation has resulted in majorities of doctors believing nicotine causes cancer and majorities of consumers believing vaping is as harmful or more harmful than smoking.
The animal welfare situation strikes me as more complex than the tobacco policy analogue. Companies will often flock to the least demanding standard, and it’s questionable that most consumers will treat competing certifications as much more than acceptable vs. illegitimate. So one could worry that giving legitimacy to a McWelfare proposal would have undermined the attractiveness of the BCC for companies and consumers.
It strikes me as considerably less likely that consumers would fail to distinguish between full-harm tobacco, lower-harm tobacco, and abstinence. They are pretty self-evidently different in germane ways, minimizing the risk of consumer confusion or companies being able to pass off higher-harm interventions via safetywashing.
I think there’s some complexity (and a lot of confusion) in the tobacco story as well. The industry did try to trick consumers and regulators in the 1970′s that light cigarettes were less harmful when they themselves had evidence that that wasn’t the case. And now, the opposite is happening as misinformation has resulted in majorities of doctors believing nicotine causes cancer and majorities of consumers believing vaping is as harmful or more harmful than smoking.