Analyzing Vegan Advocacy Strategies On Indian Social Media
While India has a long history of vegetarianism, the production and consumption of animal products are rising rapidly. Between 2007 and 2017, milk production increased by 63%, and chicken production surged by 114%. Furthermore, the number of men who’ve never eaten meat dropped by five percentage points between 2017 and 2021. These trends pose significant challenges for animal protection, environmental sustainability, and public health.
In India, dietary choices are deeply intertwined with religion, caste, and national identity. Veganism is often misperceived as an extension of upper-caste Hindu vegetarianism, which can alienate minority communities. Additionally, dairy holds a sacrosanct status in Indian culture, often viewed as a sacred elixir from a nurturing mother cow. For many in India, milk is considered natural, normal, necessary, and nice, paralleling how meat is viewed in Western countries.
This study, the second in a three-part series (see also part one), analyzed how veganism is currently framed and promoted on social media within India’s unique socio-cultural framework. By understanding these strategies, researchers aimed to provide advocates with data-driven insights to design more effective and culturally resonant campaigns.
The data collection for the study took place between January and May 2021. The researchers identified 23 key vegan advocates in India, including large organizations like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India and the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organizations (FIAPO), as well as influential individual activists. They analyzed over 500 pieces of social media content posted on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitter between January 2018 and January 2021.
From this dataset, the team selected 24 specific campaigns for in-depth case studies based on their reach and diversity of approach. The analysis categorized content into five primary frames:
- Animal rights and welfare;
- Health;
- Environmental sustainability;
- Religion and spirituality; and
- Vegan adoption (practical content on nutrition, alternatives, and recipes).
Viewership levels were determined by measuring quantitative metrics from social media platforms, specifically focusing on video views and post likes or reactions. These metrics were then organized into categories: content with fewer than 500 views or 100 likes was labeled as “very low,” while “high” viewership referred to content reaching over 30,000 views or 1,000 likes. Content exceeding one million views was classified as “very high.”
The researchers also applied the Transtheoretical Model, also known as the Stages of Change model, to identify which phase of behavior change each campaign addressed. This framework maps how individuals modify behaviors through incremental, cyclical steps rather than immediate shifts. It identifies five key phases: pre-contemplation, where a person is unaware of a problem; contemplation, where they recognize it; and the subsequent stages of preparation, action, and long-term maintenance, where they make a change to address the problem and attempt to sustain it.
Campaign Reach And Framing
The study found that the reach of most vegan advocacy in India is currently low. Over two-thirds (68%) of the content examined had very low or low viewership, with only around 14% reaching a high or very high viewership.
Content with higher engagement typically combined detailed arguments with emotive cues, such as investigative journalism or storytelling. Notable exceptions to the low reach included activists Arvind Kannan and Robin Singh, whose followings rival major commercial brands.
Animal rights was the most common frame, used in nine of the 24 campaign case studies. This was followed by environmental sustainability, which was found in five campaigns. Religion and vegan adoption each appeared in four campaigns, while only two campaigns focused primarily on health. However, previous research suggests that health and environment often outrank animal rights as primary motivators for people who currently eat meat to consider a plant-based diet.
Advocates also made a concerted effort to Indianize their messaging. For example, the Vegan India Movement (VIM) modeled its “Satyagraha 2.0” campaign after India’s historical non-violent freedom movement. PETA India’s “Save the Boy Child” campaign subverted the government’s well-known “Save the Girl Child” slogan to highlight the slaughter of male calves and chicks.
Challenging The “Grand Narrative” Of Dairy
A significant portion of advocacy (17 of 24 campaigns) focused on demolishing the cultural status of milk. Campaigners worked to expose the hidden violence of the dairy industry, such as artificial insemination, forced pregnancies, and the separation of calves from their mothers, to create cognitive dissonance in a public that views milk as benign.
The Role Of Influencers
Using celebrities for social modeling was a widespread strategy, leveraging India’s fascination with cricket and cinema. Campaigns featured stars like cricketer Virat Kohli and Bollywood star John Abraham to normalize veg*nism and make it feel aspirational. However, the researchers warned that this can sometimes imbue veganism with a sense of elitism or glamor that feels disconnected from everyday life. Furthermore, several celebrities projected a vegan image but were later seen endorsing animal products, which can damage the movement’s credibility.
Using Campaigns To Support Change
The analysis revealed that most advocacy focuses on the early phases of behavior change, namely pre-contemplation and contemplation. This means they focus on raising awareness of animal suffering — the “why” — rather than providing practical “how-to” information for the later action and maintenance stages. Therefore, individuals who are already convinced by the ethical arguments might lack the knowledge to change their daily habits, preventing them from moving through the later stages of change.
Effective Advocacy In India
This research was restricted to social media content and didn’t evaluate offline news or policy advocacy. Crucially, the study didn’t measure the actual impact of these campaigns on individual behavior change — high viewership doesn’t necessarily equate to dietary shifts. Additionally, many of the theoretical models used are based on Western research, and their exact relevance to the Indian context has yet to be fully established.
Despite these limitations, the report still provides a strong foundation for advocates to build more effective campaigns. The researchers offer a number of recommendations to help strengthen these efforts based on their findings.
- Focus on the how-to: Because many campaigns stop at raising awareness, there’s a gap in support for those ready to change. Advocates should provide more practical content, including recipes for substituting animal products, nutritional advice to address vitamin deficiencies and other health concerns, and guidance on vegan cooking.
- Diversify the framing: To reach audiences beyond animal rights circles, campaigners should amplify the use of health and environmental frames. Health appeals are particularly effective for reaching older age groups.
- Involve minority voices: Including advocates from diverse religious and caste backgrounds can help frame veganism as a universal ethical issue rather than an extension of majoritarian Hindu ideologies.
- Invest in strategic marketing: Creating content is only the first step. Advocates need to invest in strategic boosting, coordinated hashtags, and video formats to reach new audiences beyond their existing followers.
- Exercise cultural sensitivity: Avoid targeting the dietary practices of marginalized groups, which could be perceived as insensitive to issues of malnutrition and the right to food and nutrition. Instead, maintain the focus on dominant industries (like dairy) and populations with the privilege to make dietary choices.
This summary was drafted by a large language model (LLM) and closely edited by our Research Library Manager for clarity and accuracy. As per our AI policy, Faunalytics only uses LLMs to summarize very long reports (50+ pages) that are not appropriate to assign to volunteers, as well as studies that contain graphic descriptions of animal cruelty or animal industries. We remain committed to bringing you reliable data, which is why any AI-generated work will always be reviewed by a human.
