I've come across several examples recently of large campaigning groups who seem to me to be tailoring their messages to suit their membership and ignoring what they consider to be inconvenient truths.

It is becoming apparent to anyone who is interested that there is a deep link between what we eat (particularly in the west) and the rapid degradation of the planet we all live on. The UN report 'Livestock's Long Shadow' tells us that the worldwide meat and dairy industry is responsible for a lot more carbon emissions than global transport (18% as opposed to 13%). The press picked up on this and there have been various informative items across the media. Coupled with CO2 emissions is the gross inefficiency of meat and dairy production. For example it takes roughly 100 times as much water to produce a kg of beef compared to a kilo of grain and the space required to raise cattle etc is hugely out of proportion to what is needed for food crops. In short meat and dairy farming in its present form is simply unsustainable. Even the government, in the form of DEFRA is saying that the biggest single action an individual can take to help combat climate change is change to a plant based (vegan) diet.

Various groups have launched campaigns to raise awareness of the issue. Naturally The Vegan Society and Viva! are fully endorsing the message. But not all 'the usual suspects' are really pushing the message home. The Vegetarian Society, whilst encouraging more people to go veggie, don't even suggest a re-think about how much dairy they eat. And Friends of the Earth, despite its membership voting at its AGM to 'promote a plant based diet' say nothing at all about this in their latest magazine 'Earthmatters'.

Why is this? Are those in charge for some reason frightened that such 'radical' ideas might upset their membership? Or are they just not prepared to campaign outside of their 'comfort zones'? Maybe someone could explain...