Interbev,
Inaporc,
Anvolthe
fictional… These acronyms may mean nothing to you. These are those of four representative organizations of the “meat” sector in France. Interprofessions for the first three – in the order of red meat, pork and poultry – and a professional organisation: the French Federation of Industrial Butchers and Caterers.
Lobbies, neither more nor less, which defend the interests of the “meat sectors” both in the political sphere, in an attempt to influence laws and regulations, and with the general public, via communication campaigns. Basically, nothing out of the ordinary. “These influence activities are the raison d’être of a lobby,” concedes Laure Duclos, agriculture project manager at
Greenpeace France. On the other hand, the NGO, which investigated the activities of these four lobbies for a year, denounces many influence techniques used by them. “And in particular the fact that they intervene from childhood and directly in the classroom”, deplores Laure Duclos, main author of the study, published on Tuesday and entitled “How the meat lobbies manipulate us”. She responds to 20 minutes.
What prompted Greenpeace to take an interest in meat lobbies for a year?
Greenpeace is not at all anti-meat, but defends peasant farming and advocates “less and better meat”. In this context, for four years, we have been introducing vegetarian menus in school canteens. And we realized that Interbev, the red meat lobby, was putting in place a lot of influence practices to oppose the introduction of vegetarian menus in canteens, both with parliamentarians, but also in the schools themselves. We wanted to study its influence in depth and, even if it meant trying to understand which were the different lobbies which, in France, seek to increase meat consumption to defend the interests of agro-industry. Scientists are clear, however: food in Western countries must evolve towards more plants, both for health and environmental issues.
However, this meat consumption has been falling in France since 1998…
Indeed, since that date, consumption of all meats combined has fallen in France to reach 84 kg carcass equivalent (Kgéc) per year and inhabitant. But in 98, this consumption had reached a peak (94 kgec) after having stopped increasing since the post-war period. In the 1960s, the consumption of the French population was only 76 kg. And even if consumption decreases, France remains in the upper range of large meat consumers. 84 kg is twice the world average. The meat lobbies repeat that it is not so serious since our farms are the most sustainable in the world. Their average height is indeed lower there than in many other countries, but this is above all because France is a small territory. This does not prevent high stocking densities. The trend, as elsewhere in Europe, is moreover towards the intensification and industrialization of livestock farming as the number of farms decreases. A dramatic development from a socio-economic point of view, but also deleterious in terms of animal well-being, loss of biodiversity, global warming… However, in their communication campaigns, lobbies completely ignore these negative externalities.
Why focus on these four lobbies?
From the data of the High Authority for Transparency in Public Life (HATVP), we have identified 25 professional and inter-professional organizations that defend the interests of the meat sectors in France. We looked at the links they had between them to then focus on the network nodes, that is to say the organizations that make the link between all the others. They are often also the ones with the largest lobbying and communication budgets. Interbev, for example, has an annual budget of between 35 and 45 million euros, two-thirds of which is dedicated to communication and lobbying. Inaporc is 9 million euros, 50% of which is dedicated to communication. These are budgets that allow them to act in many spheres of public and private life. With two main concerns therefore: to counter any desire to reduce meat consumption and to prevent any regulation of production. The FICT, for example, is lobbying intensely to prevent the ban on the use of nitrites in charcuterie, a compound that is nevertheless considered dangerous to health*.
In what ways are these “meat lobbies” manipulating us?
In the end, it is the classic techniques for influencing mentalities that the lobbies use. One of them is that of “science-washing”**. These organizations integrate and create many scientific networks, sponsor research work, or give their communications to the general public the appearance of scientific publications. This is the case, for example, of
“Let’s Talk About Pork”a general public campaign by Inaporc, supported by the European Union, which aims to dismantle the supposed intox on pork on the mode
“true/false”. Website
“Info-nitrites” of the FICT intends to do the same thing on nitrites in charcuterie. Another technique: the appropriation of controversies and work on semantics. This is at the heart of their strategy. These lobbies have, for example, fought to impose a definition of “flexitarian” that benefits them. Thus, a flexitarian is no longer the consumer who has greatly reduced his meat consumption, but who only eats quality meat, that is to say of French origin according to Interbev’s conception. This is the whole purpose of Interbev’s “Love meat, eat old” communication campaign in 2020 and which refers to the site
www.naturellement-flexitarians.fr, created by the interprofession although it is discreetly mentioned at the bottom of the page. It’s even more hidden on other sites. Like
“My plate My planet”, a platform of free resources and activities for teachers from primary to high school online since 2020. You have to go into “appropriateness” to understand that Interbev is behind this site. On the form it is very well done, a lot of money has been put into this showcase. But the vision is far from neutral. The contents present French breeding in its best light, ensure that we do not eat too much meat in France, give a definition of flexitarian which is suitable for the meat sector, etc. Any controversy over meats and breeding methods is erased.
Are children a privileged target of these lobbies?
This is what we denounce. These lobbies hope to prevent any questioning of our meat consumption, which makes children and adolescents such an important target. “My Plate My Planet” is just one example. From 2014, Interbev has also developed an edutainment universe “the planet, men, animals”, embodied by the Jolipre family declined in multiple media, from figurines to TV spots, through activity books and comics. These last two media were massively distributed in youth press magazines, via a partnership with Bayard, number 1 in the sector. That this comic is an advertisement is only mentioned in small print, which certainly escapes many children. Parents complained and the partnership was terminated. But Interbev is not limited to the youth press. It also multiplies, under the guise of educational workshops, communication operations
in school canteens relying, in particular, on the world of the Jolipré family. Between 2016 and 2019
this campaign “At the table with the Joliprés” has reached just over 500,000 children. The interprofession also creates kits for nurses and school doctors which present meat as essential for adolescents, but which ignores the quantities consumed and production models.
What are your recommendations for limiting the weight of meat lobbies?
We should already ban the entry of representatives of private interests into schools. Whether on meat, sugar or whatever. School should not be a place of influence for children. It is also urgent that the State provide teaching staff with the means to do their job correctly and to use the most scientifically neutral educational tools on farms. We also ask to make obligatory and perfectly visible the mention of the initiators of any communication to the service of private interest and, especially, to cease all granting of public financing of communication campaigns in favor of the consumption of meat. Subsidies must go much more to the establishment of an action plan to finance the transition of industrial farms.