They switched phrasing between questions. This is not data visualization this is a good lesson in survey manipulation.
By associating the question with the ten "inhumane" they bias their audience against a positive answer because the first part links the farms to their own consumption.
I.e. it's a subtle way of planting "are you inhumane to animals?" into the question. Sly.
All of that said, personal opinion: Burn em down, is my opinion. And to make sure that everyone knows that it's about animals in principle and not those individuals make it a barbecue to enrage everyone - as long as those "factories" are not built up again.
The point is that people are very detached from the consumption actually means. People use that same language to themselves to detach from the industry
This is nonsense. If you ask people if they buy meat from "inhumane farms", of course they're going to say "no". In fact, since it shows 20%, I wonder what the wording of the question actually was.
Asking people "Do you buy meat from factory farms?", then proceeding from there with truthful education about what factory farms are, and finally expressing your opinion would be a better approach. Starting from disgust and outrage will get you nowhere.
As I said to another commenter, the point here is the disconnect. Providing that information is measuring a different, though useful, thing entirely. The exact wording of the question was
The animal-based foods I purchase (meat, dairy, and/or eggs) usually come from animals that are treated humanely. For example, the animals are given enough space and kept in good health.
Global data is limited, but it's almost certainly has gotten worse. The industry only gotten more and more consolidated
There is 2022 data for the US which was the following:
We estimate that 99% of US farmed animals are living in factory farms at present. By species, we estimate that 74.9% of cows, 98.6% of pigs, 99.8% of turkeys, 98.3% of chickens raised for eggs, and over 99.9% of chickens raised for meat are living in factory farms
They switched phrasing between questions. This is not data visualization this is a good lesson in survey manipulation.
By associating the question with the ten "inhumane" they bias their audience against a positive answer because the first part links the farms to their own consumption.
I.e. it's a subtle way of planting "are you inhumane to animals?" into the question. Sly.
All of that said, personal opinion: Burn em down, is my opinion. And to make sure that everyone knows that it's about animals in principle and not those individuals make it a barbecue to enrage everyone - as long as those "factories" are not built up again.
The point is that people are very detached from the consumption actually means. People use that same language to themselves to detach from the industry
This is nonsense. If you ask people if they buy meat from "inhumane farms", of course they're going to say "no". In fact, since it shows 20%, I wonder what the wording of the question actually was.
Asking people "Do you buy meat from factory farms?", then proceeding from there with truthful education about what factory farms are, and finally expressing your opinion would be a better approach. Starting from disgust and outrage will get you nowhere.
As I said to another commenter, the point here is the disconnect. Providing that information is measuring a different, though useful, thing entirely. The exact wording of the question was
https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/animal-farming-attitudes-survey-2017
Source 2017? Wonder how that stacks up now almost a decade later.
Global data is limited, but it's almost certainly has gotten worse. The industry only gotten more and more consolidated
There is 2022 data for the US which was the following:
https://www.sentienceinstitute.org/us-factory-farming-estimates