Beef industry sees red over Smithsonian Magazine article

Vegetarian Times, June, 1997 by Pat Wechsler

As Bart Simpson might put it, don't have a cow, man. But it seems the beef industry and a few of its lawmaker friends couldn't help themselves. They went ballistic after catching a glimpse of the cover of a Smithsonian Institution-sponsored and therefore at least partially federally funded children's magazine boasting the photo of a sad-eyed bovine accompanied by the plaintive caption "Please don't eat me!"

It was Muse magazine's March issue on vegetarianism -- according to the editors, a rapidly growing trend among youngsters -- and the message was simple: Eating vegetables makes you healthier, and "the hamburger on your plate is some dead cow's muscle." Inside were a variety of testimonials from kids who had given up meat, usually because they didn't want to hurt animals, although there were scattered interviews with adolescent carnivores as well.

Whatever it was about the magazine feature -- and according to one congressional aide, it was just about everything -- Muse editors were subjected to the full wrath of the powerful meat lobby once the issue was released. At least 15 lawmakers from farm states, including Texas Republican Sens. Phil Gramm and Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Rep. Bill Archer, the chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, signed a letter to Smithsonian Secretary I. Michael Heyman chastising the federally funded institution for supporting "a publication promoting such controversial views, especially for children." For the Smithsonian to assume such a posture, the letter continued, is "absolutely unacceptable."

The National Cattlemen's Association heaped on the criticism as well. However, it was the congressional response, which included the name of Rep. Sam Johnson, another Republican from Texas and one of the congressionally appointed Smithsonian regents, that struck fear into the budget crunchers at the museum. The implications of the vociferous missive were clear: keep it up and we'll cut your funding.

Despite the fact that Smithsonian officials had reviewed the text that accompanied the issue, they claim not to have seen the provocative graphics. As a result of the furor, several staffers lost their jobs. Heads rolled, including that of A.W. Carus, the editor of Chicago-based Muse. Fortunately for Carus, he is a member of the family that owns the publishing company so he was merely assigned new duties on another publication. Museum executives also profusely apologized and criticized the magazine for publishing such an "unbalanced" report.

In the April issue, Muse ran a letter from Heyman. "The problem was that [the article] mainly told you only one side of the story and that was wrong," the Smithsonian secretly told its young readers. "When you do something wrong you should apologize, and as the boss of the Smithsonian, I'm sorry for not making sure you got to see both sides of the story equally presented."

But the author of the article, Judy Krizmanic, takes exception to Heyman's, backpedaling. "This was an issue about eating vegetarian, offering kids an alternative to meat. Of course, we would be primarily speaking with kids who had made that choice," says Krizmanic, author of A Teen's Guide to Going Vegetarian (Viking/Penguin, 1994). "What makes the beef industry so nervous is that so many kids are beginning to do just that."

Krizmanic also points out that children are overwhelmed with pro-meat messages, particularly in school and from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). "The majority of nutritional information for children comes from the USDA," she points out. "But how can it put out an unbiased message when one of its stated missions is to protect the interests of the agriculture industry? When it must defend the beef and dairy industry, how can the USDA tell people to eat less fat and cholesterol?"

The postmortem at Muse? Staff members said there were a number of meetings with the Smithsonian to go over editorial policy and what the officials felt were appropriate subjects for the magazine to tackle. "Let's put it this way, we're looking for a new editor," one staff member said. "And we won't be doing issues like this one again."

However, those remaining at the magazine say they were overwhelmed with letters, many of which appeared in the April issue. "Most of the letters were from angry adults who criticized the issue," one editor reported, "but the ones from kids ran two-to-one in favor of the coverage."

The National Cattlemen's Association put together an angry response from children of ranchers who sent Muse pictures of their favorite farm animals to show that they gave their cows, pigs, chickens and lambs love before sending them to the slaughterhouse. There is even confusion on the ranch, it seems, if this message off Muse's web site is to be considered. "My dad ranches, and we make our living off those animals," a boy named Allen writes. "I eat chicken. But some of the cattle are my friends. I hope to be a rancher too. But is it wrong to ranch if you eat vegetarian?"