Ïîïóëÿðíûå ñîîáùåíèÿ

вторник

Monday kicks off US VegWeek 2013, a campaign by Compassion Over Killing that invites people to go vegetarian for a week "to explore a wide variety of meat-free foods and discover the many benefits of vegetarian eating—for our health, the planet, and animals."

VegWeek got its start in 2009, with Maryland state Sen. Jamie Raskin (D) committing to a week of meat-free dining. This year dozens of other legislators and community leaders are following suit, with representatives from Arizona, Texas, and California, among others, making 7-day VegPledges to go veggie from April 22-28.

Sen. Raskin's week-long pledge has stretched to years, a move that he describes as aligning his morals with his menu. But achieving this alignment is a struggle for many omnivores. On the one hand, they don't enjoy harming animals. But on the other, they do enjoy the taste of meat. These inconsistent beliefs lead to what psychologists Steve Loughnan, Nick Haslam and Brock Bastian call a meat paradox: "people simultaneously dislike hurting animals and like eating meat."

One response to this paradox is that of Sen. Raskin: change your menu to match your morals by embracing a vegetarian or vegan diet. [Full disclosure: I'm also vegetarian.] But another response is to change your moral or factual beliefs in a way that renders meat eating less problematic. If you believe that cows are essentially mindless, for example, then eating them and supporting factory farming might not be quite so objectionable. Right?

In fact, a growing body of research suggests that people do adapt their morals to their menu, whether or not they realize they're doing so. In a 2010 study by Loughnan, Haslam and Bastian, for example, meat-eating university students were randomly assigned to consume either beef jerky or cashew nuts. In a subsequent task — presented as unrelated — participants indicated which of 27 animals (snails, cows, gorillas, etc.) they felt "morally obligated to show concern for."

The researchers reasoned that eating beef jerky would force participants to confront the meat paradox head on, leading to greater cognitive dissonance and the denial of moral status to non-human animals. That's precisely what they found. The beef-eaters identified an average of 13.5 of the 27 animals as worthy of moral concern; the cashew-eaters came in at a significantly higher 17.3.

Additional research has found that people ascribe a more impoverished mental life to cows and to sheep when they're told that they will later be eating beef or lamb. The same is true when people learn that particular cows and sheep will "be taken to an abattoir, killed, butchered, and sent to supermarkets as meat products for humans."

Researchers have also found that animals categorized as food are ascribed reduced capacity to suffer, whether or not humans are responsible for the killing. And that's not all. Another study reports that omnivores are less likely than vegetarians to attribute emotions like love, hope, and melancholy to (edible) pigs, but not to dogs.

Two of the leaders in this field of research, Nick Haslam and Brock Bastian, were kind enough to correspond with me by e-mail about their findings. Haslam explained how this work emerged from more general questions about human judgments and social groups:

My colleagues and I had been pursuing a line of research on dehumanization and were thinking about different groups that might be denied human qualities. We realized that this process of denial might occur with non-human targets. You couldn't say that a non-human animal had been "dehumanized", of course, but you could say that it had been distanced from humanity by a process that's directly analogous to dehumanization: denying that animal emotions, thoughts, and moral worth. Sure enough, we found that people were especially likely to deny human-like qualities to animals that they eat, and that they deny animals these qualities especially when they contemplate eating them or are in the process of eating them. This pattern is just what you see in the dehumanization of social groups: we view some other people as less than human and do this especially when we aggress against them.

While sales of existing homes dipped in March because of a tighter inventory, sales of newly built homes rose 1.5 percent from February and were up a whopping 18.5 percent from March 2012, the Census Bureau and Department of Housing and Urban Development say.

According to Bloomberg News, the March sales results for new homes caps "the best quarter for the industry since 2008." They're also "more evidence the housing recovery will be sustained."

Bloomberg adds that:

"A dearth of existing properties is encouraging builders to undertake new projects that will keep fueling the economy. Mortgage rates close to record lows, higher home values and rising household formation are helping lay the groundwork for increased buyer traffic in 2013."

понедельник

On Earth Day 2013, I'd like to draw your notice to a fantastic essay by Andrea Wulf in The New York Times Book Review. Wulf explains how information recorded by Henry David Thoreau in his famous treatise Walden is now informing modern climate-change research.

Environment

Understanding Climate Change, With Help From Thoreau

I'm going to out myself. I listen to the "oldies" station on my daily commute to and from NPR West in my banged-up ride, tailpipe barely hanging on. The station's tag-line is "back in the day hits," and my favorite feature is inappropriate relationship advice from a Mexican drag queen who goes by Kay Sedia (as in, quesadilla). The station's call letters are KDAY and it cuts in and out during my commute because its FM signal is weak. So I switch from listening intently to important news and information on my local NPR affiliate to rapping wildly to Snoop Dogg's hits from the 90s, "AINT NOTHIN' BUT A G THANG BABY! TWO LOC'D OUT G'S SO WE CRAZY!" The station plays Warren G, Dre, Tupac and just about anything with a Nate Dogg hook.

Yes, this is the oldies station of my generation. For now.

The company that owns KDAY, Magic Broadcasting, this month agreed to sell the station to RBC Communications for $19.5 million. RBC is 80 percent owned by Anthony Yuen — a Chinese-American investor — and the rest by Phoenix Satellite Television, a company based in the British Virgin Islands that operates six TV channels in China.

Right now there's a 25 percent cap on foreign ownership of radio and television stations (that might explain RBC's 80/20 split). Just last week, the National Association of Media Brokers — a business group that specializes in the sale of radio and TV stations — asked the Federal Communications Commission to ease its rules on foreign ownership. The group says American investors don't have access to enough capital to buy stations.

KDAY ranks 28th in LA's very competitive media market, so it's not like it's raking in the advertising revenue. Magic Broadcasting tried to sell the station for $35 million a couple of years ago, but the transfer never happened.

The National Association of Broadcasters, another industry group, also wants foreign companies to get in on the radio and television game. They say it helps broadcasters that serve ethnic minorities acquire sources of funding from their home countries especially in markets like Los Angeles, where KDAY is based, with large Mexican, Korean and Chinese populations.

Radio industry experts, like Lance Venta (I spoke with him over the phone about the sale) say if the FCC approves the deal, KDAY will, most likely, switch from Snoop D O Double G to Chinese-language programming and he said that could happen as early as this summer.

Downside: no more solo sing-alongs to "Summertime In the LBC" on the way to work.

Upside: Mandarin-language immersion?

Blog Archive