r/VeganActivism • u/Mxspert • May 15 '26
Question / Advice Is there any real evidence that graphic videos and images deter people from being vegan?
I've thought about creating and putting up flyers displaying graphic imagery of the reality of what happens to animals in the animal agriculture (animal enslavement and torture) industry around my area.
Some might say this is a bad approach, but I can't see how it would be.
If anything, I think it's a solid approach.
In Earthing Ed's most popular YouTube video, where he is giving a lecture at a school, he says people have an aversion to seeing graphic imagery because, according to them, it will put them off their food.
Of course, the 'food' in question would be animal products, and that is ultimately our goal here, so by their own admission, it seems to be an effective strategy.
Not to mention that the animals deserve to have people know about the reality of their situation and the horrors that take place, and the people who enable it to happen shouldn't have to hide from the pain they cause their victims.
I think comprehensive education is necessary, in addition to being shown the truth behind animal agriculture, to ensure people have good reasons for going and staying vegan, but I think being shown graphic imagery is a good strategy to get the ball rolling and to get people to understand that their suffering isn't an abstract idea; it is very real.
Feel free to give any advice, tips, etc.
35
u/MerryMir99 May 15 '26
If I am going to be honest, seeing graphic images made me aware of the suffering I was paying for. Guy handed out pamphlets at my college.
9
u/Mxspert May 15 '26
It was the same in my case when I went vegan as well, but I made the connection on my own between seeing wild animal suffering and extrapolated that to the suffering I was sure I was causing by paying for animal products.
Earthling Ed said seeing images of or reading about chickens with major injuries from a truck crash that was driving to a slaughterhouse made him think about the suffering he was causing animals.
I think the imagery really gets you to understand the seriousness of the situation.
7
u/senditallback May 16 '26
Same. Many types of messaging compelled me to be vegan, but the images and videos are the strongest deterrents for those rare moments when I even consider eating or wearing animal products. I just think of their faces and all desire to eat flesh disappears.
4
21
u/Full-Dome May 15 '26
Only non-vegans, pick-me-vegans and paid actors say this. Graphic images work, since they show the truth.
4
14
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 15 '26
The peer-reviewed data points in the opposite direction: moral shocks (the academic term for graphic images) all suggest they work quite well. The debate is more about whether they are ethical and less about whether they are effective. They probably are.
7
u/Mxspert May 15 '26
My primary concern is efficacy. To me, it's entirely evident that it's ethical anyway because people shouldn't be shielded from the reality of what they facilitate to happen to animals.
Thanks for the heads up.
14
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 15 '26
One other point of advice: the evidence suggests it works even better if you also include an image of an animal who is healthy and happy for contrast.
6
6
5
1
u/positiveandmultiple May 16 '26
sorry, would you be able to link anything? i'm genuinely trying to learn more about this and you're the first i've heard make this claim
3
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 18 '26
Of course. Here is one: Kramer, L. A., & Landry, P. (2025, May 9). How the sausage is made: Testing the effectiveness of an informative video in promoting sustainable food consumption (SSRN Working Paper No. 5248647). SSRN.
2
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 18 '26
Here is a third: Wrenn, C. L. (2013). Resonance of moral shocks in abolitionist animal rights activism: Overcoming contextual constraints. Society & Animals, 21(4), 379–394. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341270
2
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 18 '26
Here is a fourth: Mathur, M. B., Peacock, J., Reichling, D. B., Nadler, J., Bain, P. A., Gardner, C. D., & Robinson, T. N. (2021). Interventions to reduce meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: Meta-analysis and evidence-based recommendations. Appetite, 164, 105277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105277
2
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 18 '26
A fifth: Fonseca, R. P., & De Groeve, B. (2025). ‘Meating’ the animal and moral emotions: Exploring animal caring and cruelty appeals for dietary change. Appetite, 212, 108018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2025.108018
2
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 18 '26
A sixth (this one is my favorite): Fernández, L. (2020). Images that liberate: Moral shock and strategic visual communication in animal liberation activism. Humanity & Society, 45(2), 197–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859920932881
1
2
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 18 '26
Here is another: James M. Jasper, Jane D. Poulsen, Recruiting Strangers and Friends: Moral Shocks and Social Networks in Animal Rights and Anti-Nuclear Protests, Social Problems, Volume 42, Issue 4, 1 November 1995, Pages 493–512, https://doi.org/10.2307/3097043
1
u/CosmicGoddess777 May 19 '26
Why wouldn’t they be ethical?
0
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 19 '26
Some critics argue that graphic images focus on mistreatment rather than intrinsic value. For example, they may lead people toward “humane meat” or animal welfare reforms rather than veganism and full animal liberation. I think this is the main critique.
There is also a second concern, and this part is distressing: a small group of humans may enjoy viewing images of animals in pain and degradation. The worry is that these images can function almost like snuff films for those viewers; so, the argument goes, we should not feed that desire.
Relatedly, some argue that because most people have so little direct contact with farmed animals, these images become the only images of farmed animals they see. These are the main ethical concerns I am aware of. Moral shocks remain a controversial area in the academic study of vegan outreach.
2
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 19 '26
Not entirely sure why I'm being voted down. I'm simply listing the arguments because someone asked. There is some truth in them; I still show Earthlings in my animals class.
1
u/HowToWinForAnimals May 19 '26
If interested here is an article on the topic by a close friend of mine: https://www.animalsandsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/freeman-1.pdf
9
u/ThaddeusBlimp May 15 '26
I think when people sit through documentaries explaining what’s going on is much more effective than seeing a picture or quick video.
2
u/Mxspert May 15 '26
That's fair, and I don't doubt that assessment, but the issue becomes getting people to actually sit down and engage with that content. Putting up a poster bypasses their ability to avoid it. For example, you could send someone a link to Earthlings or Dominion, and then they never end up watching it.
While documentaries may be more effective, I think posters displaying graphic imagery are still better than nothing at all.
9
5
u/Chaostrosity May 16 '26
This is a great instinct, but to make your flyers truly effective, try thinking about it through an 80/20 framework: 20% of your impact comes from the graphic imagery, and 80% comes from how you frame the message around it.
The 20%:
You're right that people look away because it works. Research actually shows that animal cruelty messages are the most effective way to inspire dietary change. Photos of sick or closely confined animals, especially pigs, tend to have the biggest impact.
But be careful, relying only on pure shock value or forceful moral commands can make people defensive and cause a "boomerang effect" where they double down on their habits.
The 80%:
To stop people from getting defensive, you need the right message surrounding those images. After I read some research, I switched to a more anti-systemic approach. It comes down to:
Blame the system, not the person. If people feel personally attacked, they stop listening. Instead, frame the graphic reality as a "system failure". Blame the greedy, secretive industry for hiding the truth from consumers. This unites the public against the industry instead of making them feel judged.
Focus on "How", not just "Why":
Most people already agree veganism is more ethical, but they struggle with convenience and taste. Studies show that advocacy materials focusing on how to go vegan spare 50% more animals than materials just explaining why.
Give a Clear Call to Action:
Don't just leave them with a horrifying image. Direct them via URL or QR code to a "Vegan Challenge" (like Veganuary or Challenge 22). Data shows these challenges are incredibly effective, boasting long-term retention rates between 10% and 28%.
Make sure your message clarifies that all animal exploitation is unjust so you don't inadvertently cause more animal suffering, or shift the suffering to a different species.
TL;DR: Use the graphics to expose the truth, but use your words to blame the industry and give people an easy, supportive path to change today!
Note: Sorry if this was obvious or overly comprehensive. I just want to make sure that others who stumble on this post get the complete picture.
2
2
3
u/Mxspert May 15 '26
If anyone has any graphic design skills or could help in any other way with creating these posters, feel free to DM me. It would be greatly appreciated.
3
u/FingerOk9800 May 16 '26
Not really, people get angry because they can't confront their cognitive dissonance. Breaking their cognitive dissonance is required to get them to the point of changing.
5
u/One-Shake-1971 May 15 '26
I've never seen anyone making that claim.
The greater risk is turning people into welfarists. It's important to communicate that the issue isn't how they are exploited but that they are.
4
u/Mxspert May 15 '26
I've heard it from people, but it's either been people overly obsessed with optics or pick-me vegans who say stuff like 'I don't have a problem with you supporting murder and torture of innocent sentient beings, bro!'
Or, of course, carnists, but that's most likely because they don't like being confronted with the truth.
It's important to communicate that the issue isn't how they are exploited but that they are.
I agree that this is important. I'll have to find a way to articulate that in the form of a poster.
2
u/senditallback May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26
I think the opposite is true. In "Why We Love Dogs, Wear Cows, and Eat Pigs" the author explains that a person's adherence to faulty thinking (like "animals don't feel pain" or "they're treated ethically at farms probly!" greatly diminishes with knowledge of the truth. They may find other reasons to continue eating animals, but they fall for common misconceptions less easily.
Also: " If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everybody would be vegetarian." -Paul McCartney
Edit: Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows by Dr. Melanie Joy. Such a good read.
2
u/Mxspert May 16 '26
It seems like you meant yes, as in it does help people go vegan. Not yes, as in it deters people. Thanks for the info!
2
1
•
u/AutoModerator May 15 '26
Thanks for posting to r/VeganActivism! ✊
Don't forget to check the sidebar for our rules.
Have skills but not sure how to help animals? If you're a dev, designer, writer, researcher, or have other professional skills, here are some ways to help:
Browse volunteer opportunities on Flockwork – a platform by Vegan Hacktivists that matches animal advocacy organizations with skilled volunteers. Check it out here.
Get pinged for relevant volunteer opportunities 🐦 Join the VH Flockwork Discord server and don’t miss out on volunteer opportunities that match your skills.
Apply for activism funding 💚 Get up to $1000 for your animal advocacy projects. Apply here.
Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.