Meat vs Eat: The Dynamics of an Industry-Orchestrated Online Backlash

The Changing Markets Foundation identifies a coordinated network of 'mis-influencers'—including scientists, doctors, and journalists—who amplified industry-led hashtags like #Yes2Meat to discredit the EAT-Lancet planetary health diet. The report reveals that a small group of 100 accounts drove nearly 50% of the backlash posts and over 90% of engagement, with some individuals receiving direct industry funding or using the campaign to fundraise. Evidence from leaked documents suggests PR agencies and industry-funded centers, such as the UC Davis CLEAR Center, played key roles in this effort. The report warns that the meat industry is preparing a new communications drive to maintain its 'social licence' and derail action on climate and health science before the launch of EAT-Lancet 2.0.

• A small, coordinated network of 'mis-influencers' drove the vast majority of the online backlash against the 2019 EAT-Lancet report. Specifically, 100 accounts were responsible for nearly 50% of the posts and over 90% of total engagement on Twitter. Within this group, a subset of 33 accounts exhibited hallmarks of a coordinated campaign, consistently sharing each other's content and using identical wording.
• The meat industry utilized specific hashtags and PR strategies to pre-emptively discredit the EAT-Lancet findings. The hashtags #Yes2Meat and #ClimateFoodFacts were amplified by pro-meat influencers and scientists. Evidence suggests the PR agency Red Flag, likely acting for the Animal Agriculture Alliance (AAA), was involved in these efforts.
• Industry-funded academic figures played central roles in the backlash to maintain the industry's social licence. Frank Mitloehner of the UC Davis CLEAR Center is credited with launching an 'academic opposition' of 40 scientists to coincide with the #Yes2Meat campaign, using this success to fundraise from industry sponsors. Additionally, the 2024 Denver conference was identified as a public relations exercise designed to plan an 'urgent' communications drive.
• The backlash had tangible real-world consequences, including political pressure and personal harm to researchers. In March 2019, the World Health Organization withdrew sponsorship of an event promoting the report following pressure from the Italian government. Commission scientists also reported mental health impacts and career damage resulting from personal attacks.

APA

Changing Markets Foundation (2025). Meat vs Eat: The Dynamics of an Industry-Orchestrated Online Backlash. https://changingmarkets.org/report/meat-vs-eat-lancet-the-dynamics-of-an-industry-orchestrated-online-backlash/

Chicago

Changing Markets Foundation. Meat vs Eat: The Dynamics of an Industry-Orchestrated Online Backlash. 2025. https://changingmarkets.org/report/meat-vs-eat-lancet-the-dynamics-of-an-industry-orchestrated-online-backlash/.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Changing Markets Foundation |title=Meat vs Eat: The Dynamics of an Industry-Orchestrated Online Backlash |date=23 September 2025 |url=https://changingmarkets.org/report/meat-vs-eat-lancet-the-dynamics-of-an-industry-orchestrated-online-backlash/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{changingmarketsfoundation2025meat, author = {{Changing Markets Foundation}}, title = {{Meat vs Eat: The Dynamics of an Industry-Orchestrated Online Backlash}}, institution = {Changing Markets Foundation}, year = {2025}, month = sep, url = {https://changingmarkets.org/report/meat-vs-eat-lancet-the-dynamics-of-an-industry-orchestrated-online-backlash/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }