Is ARZone a Platform for Neo-welfarists?

It is suggested that the interactive social movement networking site, Animal Rights Zone, is simply a place where new welfarists can disseminate their views on human-nonhuman relations – and do so largely or wholly unchallenged.

First, ARZone’s policy is to invite (not promote) a range of people from within (and without) the animal advocacy movement to explain their vision of human-nonhuman relations and to answer questions about that, and about issues that arise within the animal movement.  Some of these questions ARZone members submit are straightforward inquiries about how long someone has been vegan or what their favourite vegan meal may be.  Other questions are far more probing, asking, for example, whether people are vegan and if not, why not.  As a general matter, most guests are asked about their published works, their activities, and their position on what’s best in terms of helping nonhuman animals.

Second, the range of guests covers pretty much the whole spectrum of people to be found in the “animal rights movement.”  Previous ARZone chat guests have been extremely well known, like Bruce Friedrich of PeTA and conservationist Captain Paul Watson, while others are lesser-known grassroots activists such as Jordan Wyatt, Jo Charlebois, Barbara DeGrande, Cameron Blewett and Minku Sharma.  Others still are the theoretical writers of the movement, or commentators on the movement, while some are the activists involved in forms of militant direct action.  Some guests have been involved in animal advocacy for many years, like ALF co-founder Ronnie Lee, while others are relatively new to campaigning.

Not all of these people can successfully have the label “new welfarist” attached to them – but that does not matter anyway, since all guests are subject to being questioned about their stance on human-nonhuman relations, animal advocacy, and topics like the use of violence or single-issue campaigns.

A recent claim suggests that the views and opinions of ARZone chat guests cannot be adequately questioned because of the very format of the guest interviews conducted in the site’s chat room (see previous blog entry).  This criticism is misplaced.  For example, in the run-up to a guest’s appearance on ARZone, its members are asked to submit the questions that form the pre-registered part of every chat.  Members can submit multiple questions, and often individuals get to ask two or three in this first section of a chat.  For each question they have the opportunity of writing a spontaneous follow-up question – all they do is write in the chat room something like, “can I have a follow-up on that please?” and then people wait for them to consider what they want to ask.  The same people can also take part in the open session which follows the pre-registered part of the chats.

This means that one individual – in one chat – can ask 4, 5, 6 questions.   

Furthermore, along with all ARZone members, the same person can comment on the guest interview once the transcript is published.[1]  Moreover, if they choose, they same individuals can write a blog entry on ARZone about something in the transcript and they can write something in the forum section of the site.  For those not familiar with ARZone (like many of its critics it seems), the chat transcripts are not presented fleetingly on the site – they are permanent features and can be commented on, or referred to, weeks, months or even years after the event.  If members visit the ARZone chat room at times when the guest chats are not running, they can start of live conversation about the content of a transcript or something that was said in an interview.

Does that sound like ARZone is merely “a platform” for new welfarists?

[1] I notice more and more that people send internet links to others about an article or feature they may have seen.  However, it is not necessarily the article itself that concerns them, it is often some of the comments that follow. They may alert their friends and colleagues to particular comments, while virtually ignoring the original article. This is what can occur in ARZone too. There is no reason, in other words, to think that what’s written in a chat transcript is more important, or more educative, than what is written in the comments following a guest interview. Over time, ARZone has become an archived resource for animal advocates who can see what people stand for – and what their critics make of what they stand for. I cannot understand why anyone fails to see that ARZone is but a very useful educational tool which, moreover, they can actively contribute to and ensure that their views are heard. ARZone tries very hard not to censor anyone’s opinion – and certainly not because of a mere disagreement with a particular view. Those with the best ideas surely need not fear others with different ones.

The Operation of the Animal Rights Zone Chats.

The Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) interactive guest interviews (known as ARZone chats) have several features and elements. Due to some confusion about how they operate – and indeed, why they exist – the ARZone administrative team, Carolyn Bailey, Tim Gier, Kate Go Vegan, Jason Ward and I have issued the following statement.



Animal Rights Zone (ARZone) is a social movement networking site committed to rational discussion and facilitating an exchange of views among members of the animal advocacy movement. ARZone allows membership interaction via forum posts, blog entries and transcripts of the guest interviews. In addition, ARZone runs a 24-hour live “chat room” which its almost 1600 members are free to use to make contact with each other and exchange news and information.


ARZone understands that individual members of all social movements tend to hold some competing ideas and differing values. Therefore, the site attempts to foster an atmosphere of tolerance and acceptance – we are opposed to banning people merely because they express views other than our own. We are not threatened by difference and diversity.


These values are reflected in the regular ARZone chats which feature members of the animal advocacy movement who hold a divergence of views about how best to help nonhuman animals. We are also prepared to interview people from outside of the movement, including people who are in favour of using nonhuman animals for human ends. For a list of previous ARZone guests, see ARZone on Wikipedia.


In the week prior to a chat, we announce who the guest will be and request that members submit questions for them. This allows time for members to research details about the guest and thereby ask informed questions. These pre-registered questions form a part of the chat interviews. In advance of the interviews, the guests are sent the pre-registered questions so that they, in turn, have time to consider their response and, if necessary, research their answer. This means that detailed questions, for example, about company accounts and particular journal articles or blog posts, or things said in videos and podcasts, have been asked and answered.


During the actual interview, which is transcribed live as it happens, the pre-registered questions are asked in order, preferably by the writer of the question, but they can also be asked by a member of ARZone’s admin team if the question writer cannot attend. We very much prefer questioners to ask their own questions since they are all afforded the opportunity to ask a follow-up question after considering the response to the pre-registered one. An “open session” occurs at the end of the pre-registered session when members are asked to contact the admin team by the “private message” facility built into the ARZone site. This results in the formation of a second list of questions for the guest and, once again, the questioner can ask a follow-up question (in fact, some have asked several follow-ups in this less formal part of the chat.)


In summary, an ARZone interview transcript contains the results of the following procedure.

1. Announcement of guest (this announcement is supplemented by the release of materials about or by the guest on the ARZone web site.)

2. The gathering in of the pre-registered questions.

3. The interactive guest interview in the ARZone chat room featuring pre-registered questions, the opportunity for follow-ups, an open session for questions and follow-ups (no guest has refused to make themselves available for the open session). At the end of each chat, ARZone members are reminded that they are encouraged to comment on the interview in the “comments” box which is situated under each transcript and is maintained as a database of the discussions arising from the chats. This reminder is also published several times per day in ARZone member’s 24/7 live chat room.

4. The publication of the interview transcript (usually within 12-15 hours after the chat).

ARZone regards its chats as the beginning of something and not the end of something. The site has several features that allow members to comment on the guest interviews after the event, so even those who where not present can assess both the questions and the answers. Members can comment at the end of a transcript, can begin a forum thread about what a guest has said or write a blog entry about issues raised in chats. ARZone also publish individual questions and answers in a special Q&A web site, Words to Inspire Debate from the Animal Rights Zone Guest Transcipts, which provides "bite-sized portions" of the interviews and links back to the full transcripts.


The evolution of ARZone.

The ARZone admin team and members are constantly exploring better ways to encourage useful dialogue in the animal advocacy movement and beyond. For example, at times when guests are generally unavailable, such as at Christmas and New Year, we have begun a series of “‘Members Only’ Live Open Forums” in which ARZone members meet in the chat room to discuss a number of current issues in the animal movement. We are also considering holding the chats on a fortnightly basis to better facilitate members digesting and discussing the issues raised by the interviews. Therefore, in the weeks between the chats, we would run member’s discussion sessions focused on the issues raised in the previous week’s chat.

Criticism of ARZone chats.

There have been a number of points raised about the ARZone chats which we think are worth considering. For example, it has been suggested that the chat interviews and the chat announcements “promote” the guests, and even that ARZone is too friendly towards them. It seems to us a rather odd accusation that we are too nice to our guests, and we reject the view that many of those who witness the chat announcements but not the chat itself take away the idea that ARZone endorse the opinions of the guest. A read of the chat transcripts shows that ARZone does not act to promote a guest’s work and members have challenged guests many times on various subjects, such as sexism in campaigns, salaries, and support for harmful forms of direct action. Anyone who knows ARZone is aware that this is not the place in which guests are necessarily given an “easy ride.” At the same time, we try to maintain a respectful posture in the chats (something which we have sometimes slipped up on!)


We also disagree with a suggestion made that people in general are not bright enough to be exposed to different viewpoints or to decide for themselves what to think. We think this is an elitist position which we cannot countenance. We believe that members of the animal advocacy movement are quite capable of receiving varied information and working out for themselves what to think about it. The very reason ARZone exists is to promote rational discourse. If we thought that people were incapable of understanding different points of view, then ARZone may as well close down.


It has been suggested that the ARZone chats are a poor way of gaining information from guest interviewees and, indeed, that guests can reject questions in two ways; either by telling ARZone that they will not answer particular questions, or by avoiding the question on the day. The first option is not available to ARZone guests and we have had very few objections to the pre-registered questions asked. It is, of course, as with any interview, possible for guests to answer a question in ways in which the audience are not happy with and which seem to dodge the question completely. However, we think that the facility of the follow-up questions and the open sessions mean it is less likely that a guest can totally escape answering a point at least to some degree. We submit that an unanswered question reflects badly on the guest and not the questioner, as it tends to when politicians evade questions. It has been put to us that a detailed one-on-one debate would negate this problem but we do not see how this would alter the situation significantly. If someone is intent on avoiding a question, simply repeating of it is unlikely to provide a remedy and what’s left is likely to be the traditional pantomime exchange of “oh no you didn’t” and “oh yes I did.” ARZone is happy to facilitate debates and have done so in the past. For example, when the co-founder of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), Ronnie Lee, was a guest of ARZone, he and Gary Francione engaged in a 12-minute debate-style exchange prior to Ronnie’s chat interview – this led to Ronnie appearing on this podcast in subsequent weeks. We have suggested debates to several people over the last year and will continue to do so. However, we do not see that format as capable of eliminating the issue of guests avoiding questions, as critics have suggested it must.



Conclusion

As is true in all human endeavors, ARZone is not perfect and we will always be seeking to improve it. But as part of the broader social movement for the rights of nonhuman animals, and in opposition to ideology of speciesism, ARZone is doing it’s best to provide it’s members with a valuable resource. The discussions held there, before, during and after the chats, among the members and with the guests, can be the foundation of a deeper understanding of human-nonhuman relations. That is our goal, and that is what we are working for.

I Wonder if Pigeons Mourn Their Dead?

I had occasion to go to my local post office recently.  On the way I saw a group of pigeons noisily contesting pieces of bread that had been thrown out onto the side of the road.  I then realised that, a little removed, one pigeon was dead - but it seemed that none of the others had noticed, or that it meant nothing at all to them.

I thought I had better move the body elsewhere - maybe into a nearby hedge way; somewhere out of the roadside at least.  However, I decided to head to the post office first since it was close to closing time.  I returned less than ten minutes later and the noisy pigeons had gone - or so I thought.

I noticed that the dead pigeon was still lying near the curb and much of the bread had been left uneaten.  I assumed that the group of pigeons had flown off but then I noticed a telegraph wire above the scene and there they were, each of the pigeons who had been keenly battling for bread a few minutes earlier.  They were perched on the wire, all in the line, and totally silent.  They seemed to be looking down at the dead pigeon in some sort of quiet reflection.

Now, I know many people go potty at this sort of suggestion - but it looked for all the world to me that they were paying their respects in some fashion.

Vegan "Cook-off" in Dublin.

Approximately 130 people attended a Vegan Cook-off in Dublin city centre.

 All those who attended were given a voting card on which they entered their votes for the best 1,2,3 of the savoury and sweet dishes and items.  This fun event was in aid of the Dublin Simon Community.

Getting ready to eat!

Those attending seemed to be a mixed group, including curious flesh eaters, vegetarians who had been advised to ditch the dairy by the doctor and, of course, members of Vegan Ireland: The Vegan Society of Ireland.

The winner of the sweet section, the ever-popular vegan cupcake.

Leaflets from the Irish Animal Education Trust were distributed and attendees also took about 40 or 50 of Gary Francione's leaflets - we had them available in about 6 languages.

For Dublin this event was a great success - let's hope there are many more to come.

One of the organisers, Fiona Hannon (right) with a rep from the Simon Community

A Paris Vegan Day Interview

With thanks to Rafi Nöiburger, who did his best to liberate me from a small cupboard at the Paris Vegan Day venue.

LINK: vegan . ch Podcast Episode 45: Roger Yates.

"This podcast is an interview in English (with a German introduction) and took place in France. Rafi took the opportunity during Paris Vegan Day to interview one of the most prominent abolitionists from Ireland, the sociologist Dr. Roger Yates. We discuss the purpose of events such as the Paris Vegan Day, the necessity to talk to welfare groups and the vegan and abolitionist movement in general."