Listen to the article
Climate Misinformation Campaigns Shift Focus to Food Production
Information warfare around climate issues has expanded beyond traditional debates about carbon emissions to target food systems, particularly meat and dairy alternatives, according to new research from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue and Changing Markets.
“We have reached a very interesting juncture where the end goals or objectives of information warfare around climate are no longer exclusively about the process of decarbonisation,” said Jennie King, head of climate research and policy at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue. These campaigns are effectively “weakening the public mandate for action” on climate issues, she added.
A comprehensive analysis by Changing Markets revealed that while pro-meat and dairy narratives dominate social media conversations, researchers could not conclusively determine whether major industry companies are orchestrating these discussions.
The report identified several high-profile examples of misleading content, including a May 2023 tweet from Donald Trump Jr. to his 10 million followers claiming: “We must ban fake meat to save the planet!!! Lab-Grown Meat Produces Up To 25 Times More CO2, Study Reveals.” The post referenced a non-peer-reviewed study that only showed such high emissions in worst-case scenarios.
John Lynch, a University of Oxford researcher specializing in agriculture and climate, noted that scientists lack a “clear picture” of scaled-up lab-grown meat production, though it would likely become more energy-efficient with development. Despite its preliminary nature, the study received extensive coverage in scientific and mainstream media.
The influence of such content extends beyond social media. In July, Italian senator Giorgio Maria Bergesio cited the study in parliament, describing lab-grown meat as “Frankenstein products” contradicting Italian identity. This month, Italy banned the production, sale, and import of lab-grown meat, with agriculture minister Francesco Lollobrigida claiming such products “[do] not guarantee quality, well-being and the protection of the Italian food and wine culture and tradition.”
Changing Markets’ analysis of posts across X (formerly Twitter), Reddit, and blogs categorized misleading content into two groups: those enhancing the benefits of animal products (20%) and those disparaging alternatives (80%).
Notable figures spreading such content included anti-vaccination advocate Dr. Anastasia Maria Loupis, who posted to her one million followers: “There is no such thing as ‘man made climate change’ so why does the World Economic Forum want people to eat bugs, micro plastics, fake meat, seed oils, and air proteins?”
Republican congressman Thomas Massie, who has previously compared public health experts to “witch doctors,” posted tweets linking lab-grown meat with cancer cells and warning of “an expanding corporate-government alliance” seeking “absolute control of people.”
“Conspiracy theories about powerful elites are used to advance the argument that any suggestions that we should reduce meat and dairy consumption and production – even in line with healthy diet guidance – is an attack on personal freedoms,” explained Maddy Haughton-Boakes, senior campaigner at Changing Markets.
The research identified more than 400,000 accounts spreading misinformation, but remarkably, just 50 users received about half the total engagement. These “attention-grabber” accounts included right-wing personalities such as Cabot Phillips from the Daily Wire and vlogger Peter Imanuelsen (known as Peter Sweden), who rejected allegations about spreading false information when contacted by reporters.
Social media platforms face increasing pressure to address climate misinformation. While some companies like Pinterest have banned such content, X was ranked the worst platform for climate misinformation in a September assessment by the Climate Action Against Disinformation Coalition.
“Misinformation on social media doesn’t happen in a vacuum,” Haughton-Boakes warned. “It seeps into the real world and has real-world implications for policy debates.” She emphasized the need for evidence-based policy discussions, noting that “this is a much broader issue than just meat and dairy.”
Trump Jr., Massie, Phillips, and Loupis did not respond to requests for comment.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
16 Comments
This research sheds light on the evolving tactics of information warfare around climate change. Targeting food systems is a concerning development that deserves close scrutiny.
The report’s findings on the meat and dairy industry’s potential role in spreading misinformation are quite troubling. We need to be vigilant about holding all stakeholders accountable when it comes to climate action.
Interesting research on the spread of misinformation around meat and dairy alternatives. Curious to see if the industry has a hand in these social media campaigns, as the report suggests. Could have important implications for climate action.
I agree, the allegations of industry involvement in these campaigns are quite concerning. Transparency and factual information are crucial on such an important issue.
This is a worrying trend, with the meat and dairy industry seemingly trying to undermine climate action by spreading misinformation. We need to be vigilant and fact-check claims carefully.
Interesting research on how information warfare around climate change has expanded to target food systems. It’s crucial to scrutinize the sources and motives behind such misinformation campaigns.
I agree. We need to be especially wary of claims that seem to protect certain industry interests, rather than prioritize evidence-based solutions to urgent environmental challenges.
This highlights the complex dynamics of information warfare around climate change. Targeting food systems seems like a strategic move to undermine climate action. It’s important to scrutinize claims from all sides on these topics.
Absolutely. Disinformation can come from various vested interests, not just the usual suspects. A balanced, evidence-based approach is needed to cut through the noise.
It’s worrying to see the meat and dairy industry potentially spreading misinformation to protect their interests. We need to be vigilant about fact-checking claims, especially on sensitive environmental issues.
I agree, fact-checking is crucial. With so much at stake, we can’t afford to let misinformation cloud the debate on solutions to climate change.
The alleged involvement of the meat and dairy industry in spreading misinformation is concerning. We need to demand transparency and accountability to ensure climate action is not undermined by vested interests.
The report’s findings on the meat and dairy industry’s potential role in spreading misinformation are quite troubling. Transparency and accountability are essential to ensure meaningful climate action.
Absolutely. We need to demand integrity and honesty from all stakeholders, regardless of their industry or agenda, when it comes to such critical environmental issues.
This research highlights the evolving tactics of information warfare around climate change. Targeting food systems is a worrying development that deserves close scrutiny to separate fact from fiction.
Absolutely. With so much at stake, we can’t afford to let misinformation cloud the debate. Rigorous fact-checking and evidence-based policymaking are essential.