HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >
What have you made lately? Tell us about it
TELL US

VegNews Caught Using "Meat" in Cover Photos

Servorg Apr 19, 2011 09:47 AM

Hard to believe I'm the first one to post about this little "brouhaha" here? In any case one of the better known Vegan/Vegetarian publications was called out for using photographs of food that actually contained meat in the food shown. You can read a bit more about it here on the Slash Food site courtesy of a link in the Huffington Post: http://www.slashfood.com/2011/04/14/v...

I guess my point would be, even if you ate the photo of the food containing meat by chewing up pieces of the magazine pages one would still not "actually" be eating meat.

I guess this is what passes for "breaking news" these days on the Internet... ;-D>

  1. dave_c Apr 19, 2011 10:00 AM

    The magazine just demonstrated that they're in it for the money and what they represent is just a marketing gimmick.

    I think it's very interesting that a vegan/vegetarian publication would use enticing meat photos to show their recipes.

    Also, how do vegans feel about this? Vegans don't use leather or anything that contains animals. I would think they'd be outraged about using meat photos.

    1. onceadaylily Apr 19, 2011 09:59 AM

      What would be more upsetting to me than the use of meat (though that did raise an eyebrow), is the use of 'stock footage'. It makes me wonder if anyone at the publication has actually made the recipe that they are promoting. Naive of me to think they should, I suppose.

      1. n
        ninrn Apr 19, 2011 09:58 AM

        Agreed. Totally non-news. But I guess if the magazine is saying you can make vegan burger at home and it will look like this, and they're using stock pictures of full-on beef patties, tinted, say, to look a little more tempeh-colored (which is the sort of thing the story says they routinely do), it's not so much bad vegan ethics as bad recipe ethics.

        5 Replies
        1. re: ninrn
          jmckee Apr 19, 2011 10:45 AM

          Not agreed at all. If a Vegetarian / Vegan publication uses meat photos, that's news. Just as it would be if a magazine for AA members served beer at lunch or if Weight Watchers used photos of actual high-calorie, high-fat dessert on its frozen dessert boxes.

          1. re: jmckee
            n
            ninrn Apr 19, 2011 10:38 PM

            But that's the thing, and why I felt like this wasn't a big deal news story. Almost all food photos in ads and packaging are not of what's in the box/can/bag/book. It's all touched up and enhanced and often not even food. Milk is glue, the nice char on the steak is shoe polish, and in the label photo, under the much larger chunks than you will ever find in the can of Chunky Soup, there are a cup and a half of marbles... The pics on Weight Watchers frozen dinners are always of better (and probably more fattening) cuts of meat, gooier cheeses and creamier frostings than are inside. And I think it's only comparable to an AA magazine staff serving beer at lunch if they actually made a meat hamburger to take pictures of. It seems like t they're just not making the dishes at all, as Onceadaylily points out, and just photoshopping images together that they think make reasonable facsimiles of what the recipes will produce. Again, bad recipe/editorial ethics, but nothing new or particularly non-vegan.

            1. re: ninrn
              p
              piccola Apr 20, 2011 10:30 AM

              I think the outrage comes from the fact that veganism is supposed to be all about ethics and not supporting industries that promotes meat, leather and other animal products. So for a vegan magazine to publish photos of meat dishes, it's almost as if they had leather couches in the their office. It seems hypocritical.

              1. re: piccola
                s
                sommrluv Apr 20, 2011 11:54 AM

                I agree with this statement. If someone is opposed to meat/animal products in all forms, I imagine supporting a publication that even PAID for stock photos of meat would be pretty outrageous.

                1. re: sommrluv
                  jmckee Apr 21, 2011 08:46 AM

                  I agree. My point is that, unlike Ninrn's assertion, this isn't just "food styling" -- making stuff look pretty for food pictures. It's a direct violation of what vegetarians and vegans state as their core values: The concept that meat for consumption is ethically wrong or unhealthful or both. THAT's why this is newsworthy.

        Show Hidden Posts