SF Bay Guardian 'Veg Out ad & response....

April 6, 2006

A little over two weeks ago I posted an ad that I saw in the SF Bay

Guardian called " Veg Out " to this list that I thought was really out

of line. I was very pleased with the response that I got from other

SF Bay Veg members and we got to the bottom of the shameful ad.

Today, however, while I was pleased to see that the SF Bay Guardian

printed my original post here in their letter's to the editor

section I was very upset that they gave no explanation on why the

bizarre ad ran in the first place as Mat had discovered through his

investigation.

Here is what the SF Bay Guardian printed today 4/5/06:

LETTERS

Veggies feel no pain

Did anyone see the March 15, 2006, issue of the " Veg-Out " weekly

advertisement page? This is usually a collection of vegetarian-

friendly businesses such as Rainbow Grocery, Other Avenues, and

Ananda Fuara Restaurant.

And each week they usually have this " Did You Know... " feature,

where they talk about some aspect of vegetarianism.

The March 15 offering:

" Did you know ... that vegetables, fruits, even grains have recently

been shown to feel pain, and even 'scream' in frequencies inaudible

to human ears? Scientists now believe that the pain a potato feels

as it is slowly dissolved in stomach acid is 3 to 400 times greater

than a cow feels from a quick blow to the skull, and perhaps as much

as 2,000 times greater than a chicken killed using halaal Tabiha

methodology! "

I could not believe that an ad supposedly published to promote

vegetarianism would contain such a statement. I wonder

what " scientists " now believe that vegetables ... feel pain? What

study does this come from? Was this a joke?

Ira Hankin

Lafayette

EDITOR'S NOTE See " For the record " below.

For the record

An advertising feature called " Did You Know, " provided by Rainbow

Grocery, that ran in our March 15 issue may have confused and

offended some of our vegetarian readers. For the record, we do not

believe that, as the item stated, " vegetables, fruits, even grains

have recently been shown to feel pain " or that " the pain a potato

feels as it is slowly dissolved in stomach acid is 3 to 400 times

greater than a cow feels from a quick blow to the skull, and perhaps

as much as 2,000 times greater than a chicken killed using halaal

Tabiha metholdogy. " Whatever that is.

So basically the SF Bay Guardian did not apologize for their

mistake. They did not provide their readers the true reason that the

offending ad ran. Just incase you missed Mat's post from 3/31/06

let me copy it below:

Hello,

As some of you know, I am a writer for In Defense of Animals. Last

Wednesday

(Feb. 22nd), I was writing IDA's Bay Area Alert and had decided to

include

something about that weird Veg Out ad in the SF Bay Guardian. I too

was

appalled by it, and was going to suggest that people write to the

Guardian's Editor, but after further consideration I thought it

might

be

more appropriate and effective to contact their Advertising,

so I

called the Guardian to find out who was truly responsible for the

ad's

content.

After a couple of transfers, I was put in touch with a woman named

Jennifer.

I politely asserted that the ad's message was false and asked for

citations

to any studies whatsoever showing that plants feel pain. (I'd

already

done a

web search and didn't find anything that seemed even

remotely legitimate.) Jennifer was extremely apologetic, claiming

that

a

troublesome employee had " gone crazy " and published the ad

unbeknownst

to

anyone at the paper, and that it had accidentally slipped through

their

usually thorough editorial process. She assured me that the employee

had

been fired and that the Guardian sincerely regretted the ad's

appearance,

being that it was so obviously offensive to vegetarian readers.

When I told Jennifer that I'd read about the ad on the BAV

listserve,

she

said she would definitely post something explaining what happened and

apologizing for the incident. I provided her with signup info for

BAV,

and

expected to see a message from her, but it's been a week and a half,

so

I

guess she never followed up. I'm really surprised, because on the

phone

she

seemed so intent on clearing the Guardian's name with vegetarians.

Perhaps

they'll confirm that it was all a mistake in the next issue.

Anyway, that's the story of the bizarre Veg Out ad as I heard it,

straight

from the horse's mouth.

Mat.

Mat, thank you so much for your investigative work. Where do you

think we should take this next? Should we contact Rainbow Grocery,

they surely must have been upset with what ran in the paper back on

March 15th? Should we further petition the SF Bay Guardian to print

the truth? Should we write out an article on the Indybay website?

Since I am pretty upset with the Bay Guardian's response in hiding

the truth I would like your input/advice before making a decision in

haste.

Ira Hankin

iratemix

April 7, 2006

Hello again,

I have more strange news to report regarding the continuing saga of the SF Bay Guardian "Veg Out" ad that claimed plants feel more pain than animals. Odd as this series of events has been so far, it only seems to be getting weirder.

After reading Ira's post, I wrote to Jennifer at SFBG letting her know that there was some controversy among vegetarians/vegans about the paper's response to the ad. I pointed out that, to me at least, their explanation made it sound like Rainbow Grocery (the ad's sponsor and one of the veg-friendliest supermarkets in the Bay Area, if not the world) believes that plants feel more pain than animals. It seemed as if SFBG was offering some sort of disclaimer like those that some TV stations provide at the beginning of controversial shows (

i.e., " The views and opinions expressed in this program do not necessarily represent those of the X network " ). This seemed unfair to Rainbow, given that they'd paid for the ad and would now - through no fault of their own - surely experience some blowback from vegetarian and vegan customers.

Of course, I wrote this assuming that a subsequently terminated SFBG employee was responsible for slipping the ad past the editorial staff (as Jennifer had told me on February 22nd). Well, she called me back today after getting my e-mail and told that she'd been mistaken. As it turns out, SFBG had only assumed they were somehow at fault because the ad happened to coincide with their employee's departure, but that assumption eventually proved false. In the days following my initial conversation with Jennifer, SFBG staff traced their e-mail trail back and found that the ad had, in fact, come directly from Rainbow Grocery. The SFBG editorial staff regrets having failed to question and ultimately pull the ad from the paper, but all available evidence indicates that it came from an outside source.

Jennifer says that since then, SFBG has been trying to get in touch with their contact at Rainbow Grocery for an explanation, but so far received no response. However, she said that while no one seems to know yet why Rainbow submitted this ad for publication in their usual spot, Rainbow is upset about it. Perhaps it was a prank pulled by a rogue Rainbow employee or outside saboteur? We can only speculate at this point about what actually happened, as the ad's origins remain shrouded in mystery. Hopefully, Rainbow will at some point clear the air by providing the full story.

Mat.