CBS Bows to Beef Industry and Animal Ag in Lieu of Objectivity

Alternate title: CBS Sells Part of Its Journalistic Soul for Ad Dollars and Burgers

Most weekends, I watch CBS's Sunday Morning; it's a relaxing tradition I inherited from my dad. When I tuned in this morning, I was excited to see that the top story was going to be about firefighter Rip Esselstyn and the plant-based Engine 2 Diet (and Rip's book of the same name)--and I was hoping that my bacon-loving father with family history of serious heart disease was watching too.

Then the story got underway and did include much to praise. But CBS also showed itself to be ultimately more committed to advertising dollars and playing nice with powerful animal ag than to objective reporting--or, for that matter, to its viewers' health and well-being. Or do any of us really believe that the nutritionist CBS featured and essentially vouched for--who has been paid $1 million by the beef, dairy, and egg industries--is unbiased?

-Read on after the jump-

My first frustration was that the story was introduced by images of chickens, pigs, and cows wandering around open green spaces, with narration implying that this, of course, is where meat, dairy, and eggs come from ("great flocks of chickens, acres of hogs and herds of beef cattle moving across an open range"); surely someone, if not everyone, at CBS involved in the production of this piece knew that the notion that this is the norm is a myth. CBS is a news organization. It has a responsibilty to represent truth and reality, even if ugly, rather than feel-good fantasy.

But first, before I get into the biggest problem with the program, let me say that there was much good about the story. After that annoying lead-in, I was initially quite pleased with the way the story presented Rip, the other firefighters, and the healthy, compassionate diet they eat. The portrayal of the firefighters and their food choices overall was quite positive, and there was even brief coverage of the fact that a plant-based diet does not have to be bland and can be wonderfully complex, flavorful, and varied.

Similarly, Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn, Rip's father, was given time and deserved respect as he described his important but not-much-talked-about (not in the mainstream at least) research into the remarkable effects of a plant-based diet on health, in particular heart and artery health; Dr. Esselstyn has shown clearly how heart disease can be stopped and even reversed through diet. It was wonderful to see him given the opportunity to discuss these matters.

But then CBS did something that all but stripped them of their credibility as an objective source of information--when they decided to bring on a nutritionist to comment on the Esselstyns' and the firefighters' diet, whom did they choose? A nutritionist whose research is funded by the beef industry.

Nancy Rodriguez's ties to Big Beef were mentioned in passing (a little online research shows that she's also had her research funded by USDA, the National Dairy Council, and the American Egg Board), and then for the rest of the program, her opinions were treated as those of an expert, unbiased nutritionist. They were anything but. Had CBS had the courage and self-respect to invite one of the countless expert nutritionists not tied to and paid by animal agriculture, even in addition to rather than instead of the industry rep, the comments made by the beef industry lackey would have been promptly rebuffed.

Rodriguez's insistence that not eating animal flesh deprives the body of necessary nutrients is laughable; it's been well-known for years that vegan and vegetarian diets are perfectly healthy and can provide all the necessary nutrients for people of all ages. Organizations as mainstream as the American Dietetic Association have confirmed this unequivocally again and again--and Rodriguez, as a nutritionist with years of experience and as a member of the organization, undoubtedly knows this inconvenient fact. Yet she was allowed to make her remarks about the supposedly inadequate nutrition provided by plant-based diets as if they were gospel truth and her opinion as a nutritionist rather than a paid mouthpiece. And just how "paid" is Rodriguez? In the last 10 years, she's been granted at least more than $560,000 by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, more than $260,000 from the dairy and egg industries, and more than $86,000 from the USDA--nearly $1 million in total. In other words, as an objective source, she's a joke.

Furthermore, right at the end of the story, Rodriguez was practically given the last word, as she lamented how unpleasurable life would be without "good-quality proteins" and roasting the body of a dead bird and how we shouldn't deprive ourselves of such joys. I naively expected a cut to one of the Esselstyns then, explaining how all the joys and pleasures of flavors of eating can still be had on a plant-based diet, how most people who become vegans find that they eat more varied, flavorful diets once they've cut out flesh, dairy, and eggs and started exploring all the wonderful foods out there. No such luck. The story ended with Rip Esselstyn gently debating with interviewer Tracy Smith over whether she could give up her beloved bacon.

I'm glad that CBS covered and interviewed Esselstyn and the Engine 2 Diet. I'm glad they portrayed both in a mostly positive light. I'm glad they gave Dr. Esselstyn the opportunity to talk about his research. But I'm livid that CBS thought it had to simultaneously cater to animal ag and host false propaganda as unbiased truth; objective commentary by an objective nutritionist would have been understandable--but that's not what this was. So shame on you, CBS. This was blatant, inexcusable pandering to the animal agriculture lobby. There's no valid reason for your inclusion of someone like Rodriguez as an unbiased expert. And by including her, of all people, as your expert and by not challenging her clearly biased and even false statements, you sold a piece of your journalistic soul.

This is yet another example of how damn near impossible it is to find real, non-sugar-coated criticism of animal agriculture and animal-based diets via mainstream venues. When animal ag and the food industry control so much of the advertising dollars, they control the message too, and even stories that initially seem like they're going to break away from being controlled by those advertising dollars still pull backpedaling stunts such as this.

Links:
The Engine 2 Diet
Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn: Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease