The concept of agenda-setting has been evolving since the early 1900s. Beyond just the role of the media in raising public awareness of different issues, agenda-setting refers to the ongoing struggle to ensure those issues are noticed and acted upon by decision-makers. Conflict is often part of this process as there are groups striving for change and groups fighting to maintain the status quo, thus competing to get their issues on the agenda or keep others’ issues off of it.

Rather than be daunted by the process, the authors of this brief suggest that an understanding of agenda-setting is essential for animal advocates to take part. They explain the strategic connection between advocacy, the media, the public, and politics and illustrate this with specific campaigns for farmed animals.

The media’s power to influence the public is backed up by decades of evidence. Given the media’s ability to set the public’s agenda, social change advocates often strive to first get their causes on the media’s agenda. The media can raise public awareness of a specific problem and policy solution or legitimize both in advance, helping to garner not only public support but also political receptiveness.

The authors caution that the media also has the power to jeopardize agenda-setting efforts. The media are interested in bringing to the public information that’s new and often controversial, which makes it difficult for social change organizations. They’re more likely to get news coverage if they stage a provocative event such as a protest, but in doing so, they also risk alienating the very same public they’re trying to reach. Advocates can also bypass traditional news media to influence the public agenda through social media, but the authors note that this kind of impact may be shorter-lived and less likely to reach the political sphere.

To reach the political sphere, and thus the policy agenda, the authors describe three “streams” that have to come together: problems, policy solutions, and politics. Firstly, the broad issue has to be narrowed down to a specific problem to tackle. Secondly, the policy solution presented must be realistic from several points of view (e.g., technically, politically, economically, and culturally). Thirdly, the political climate must be favorable to change by having enough decision-makers recognize the formulated problem and support the proposed solution.

The authors argue that these three streams can converge during various windows of opportunity:

• Predictable opportunities like government changes and budget planning;
• Unpredictable opportunities like outbreaks of swine or avian flu; or
• Deliberately created opportunities like a powerful exposé.

Taking advantage of external events is often the most feasible way for advocates to advance their issues.

To help advocates get farmed animals on the agenda, the authors illustrate the connection between farmed animal advocacy and agenda-setting with different case studies.

Cage-Free Eggs In The United States

In the last two decades, the subject of caging hens has moved from the public to the political sphere. Among the key aspects to achieving this result was the consistency of the PETA campaign focused on intensive housing conditions for laying hens. Together with other groups, PETA used a compelling narrative and visuals that were well-received by the public. The media also shared undercover investigations into egg farms, which helped to shift decisions around buying eggs from a personal preference to an ethical choice. Further evidence showed that consumers were not favorable to conventional housing practices and large organizations started to shift to cage-free eggs (e.g., McDonald’s).

Live Export In Australia

Only in the 1980s, when a ship carrying 40,000 sheep caught fire and sank, did live export start to be seen as an animal welfare issue, ultimately leading to the first national regulation in 2004. Among the key aspects for improved regulations over time were the creation of an online petition asking for a ban on live export and media images of animals in terrible situations (e.g., Middle Eastern and Southeast Asian slaughterhouses). The media’s contribution to public awareness, and subsequent public outrage, forced the issue onto the government’s agenda.

Pig Welfare In Brazil

Although pig welfare made it onto the government agenda in 2014, culminating in 2018 with proposed regulations to reduce the pain and suffering inflicted on pigs, it didn’t get to the decision stage. In response, animal protection organizations created a campaign to put the issue back on the government’s radar. By eliciting interest from the media and support from the public, they successfully pressured the government to adopt the regulations.

The authors observe three lessons from the Brazilian case:

• Getting an issue on the political agenda doesn’t mean the process will follow through to the decision stage;
• It’s crucial to maintain the attention of policymakers during the process; and
• Leveraging media attention helps to get the issue on the public agenda and further to the decision stage.

In these case studies, animal advocates were successful because they focused on highly tractable issues. The authors also suggest that animal advocates broaden stakeholders and multiply the places to get on the agenda — for instance, by moving from focusing solely on farmed animal suffering to focusing on fixing a broken food system. It’s a way of forming coalitions and fighting against industrial animal agriculture from different fronts, thus increasing the issue’s chances of getting onto public and political agendas.

Understanding agenda-setting is a valuable resource for advocates. Providing insights on key aspects to consider when planning interventions and making strategic decisions fosters progress for farmed animals and improves chances of getting them into the media, public, and political spheres.