Art has long held a prophetic voice in society—a voice that does not merely echo the status quo, but challenges it. Through brushstrokes, sculpture, song, or spoken word, art has the potential to pierce the veil of everyday life and reveal the deeper truths often obscured by power, tradition, or economic interest.
One artist doing precisely that is Philip McCulloch-Downs, whose work Marketing Myths strips away the cheery façade of the meat industry to expose the haunting reality of animal suffering. By highlighting how marketing campaigns distort our understanding of the animals we consume, McCulloch-Downs calls us to see the world—and our relationship with animals—with unclouded eyes and compassionate hearts.
In a world saturated with advertising and slogans, how can we recognise truth from fiction? And what role does faith, ethics, and empathy play in our response? This article explores these questions, using Marketing Myths as a lens through which to examine how art can awaken conscience and challenge cultural conditioning.
The Power of Art in the Fight for Justice
Art has always played a central role in social change. From Picasso’s Guernica to Banksy’s politically charged murals, creative works disrupt the normal flow of things. They interrupt. They make us look again. Art is particularly powerful when it doesn’t just present truth but translates it into symbols and stories that evoke feeling and demand attention (Lambert & Duncombe, 2018).
Marketing Myths does exactly that. With bold, satirical strokes, McCulloch-Downs deconstructs the smiling mascots, idyllic farm imagery, and cheerful packaging found in the meat aisle. He exposes how these visuals are not harmless branding decisions but deeply ideological tools. They obscure reality. They comfort our conscience.
The pieces invites viewers to ask: Have I fallen for this deception? Have I allowed myself to believe that suffering can look like a laughing cow or a jolly hen?
Understanding the Meat Paradox
To comprehend why such art is both disturbing and necessary, we need to consider the psychological phenomenon known as the meat paradox. This term, coined by psychologists Brock Bastian and Steve Loughnan, refers to the cognitive dissonance people experience when they care about animals yet continue to eat them (Shaw, 2019). Whilst most people recoil at the thought of animal suffering, in many cultures, meat consumption is considered normal and pleasurable.
To resolve this inner conflict, people often change their perception of what meat is. The most effective way to suppress empathy is not to become cruel, but simply to forget—to avoid making the connection between the living, feeling animal and the sanitised piece of meat on the plate.
This is where marketing comes in. Far from being neutral, advertising campaigns are designed to soothe our conscience. They reframe animal consumption not as an act of harm but as a celebration—something fun, tasty, wholesome, and even nostalgic.
From Animal to Object: The Role of Language and Imagery
Feminist scholar Carol J. Adams argues that the meat industry deliberately disguises its violence, both in language and imagery. In her influential work The Pornography of Meat, Adams notes that body parts are renamed to obscure the fact they belonged to once-living beings. We don’t eat legs—we eat drumsticks. We don’t speak of pigs, but of pork; not cows, but beef; not calves, but veal (Adams, 2004).
This linguistic camouflage is reinforced visually. Packaging frequently uses cartoon animals, rustic fonts, and smiling farmers to create an idealised fantasy world—a world where animals are contented participants in their own slaughter. This illusion, though absurd, is stunningly effective.
It is here that McCulloch-Downs’ artwork delivers a jolt. In Marketing Myths, the artist smashes together the cheerful fiction of happy farm animals with the grim truth of their lived experience.
The dissonance is deliberate. It prompts an emotional reaction—a sense of betrayal, perhaps even grief. The viewer is invited not only to see differently but to feel differently. This is no small feat in a culture that numbs us to violence through repetition and marketing spin.
The Problem of Cuteification
Sociologist Liz Grauerholz coined the term cuteification to describe how meat advertisements make animals appear sweet, innocent, and harmless—as a way to reduce consumer discomfort. In her study of commercial imagery, she shows how animals are anthropomorphised into lovable characters, designed to elicit affection, not ethical concern (Grauerholz, 2007).
Think of brands like “Laughing Cow,” “Happy Egg Co,” or “The Jolly Hog.” These are not fictional examples. These are real, commercially successful brands that depend on this emotional manipulation. Grauerholz argues that these portrayals create a moral smokescreen. By making animals seem like willing accomplices in their own exploitation, we are relieved of responsibility. We are not asked to consider their suffering. Instead, we are encouraged to laugh, enjoy, and consume without reflection.
The result is a kind of moral anaesthesia. And it is precisely this spell that Marketing Myths attempts to break.
Artivism: The Intersection of Art and Activism
The use of art to drive political or ethical change is often called artivism. Artivists create work that is not only aesthetically engaging but also educational and provocative. They want you to walk away changed.
But artivism, no matter how brilliant, cannot work alone.
For art to be a meaningful driver of change, it must be part of a wider movement. Art can awaken us—but change comes when we translate that awakening into action. That means coupling art with education, community organising, and policy reform (Lambert & Duncombe, 2018).
McCulloch-Downs’ work is powerful. But compared to the colossal budgets of meat corporations—Tyson Foods alone spent over $339 million on advertising in 2023 (Shahbandeh, 2023)—the reach of an artwork like Marketing Myths is modest. It may appear in galleries, social media posts, or vegan advocacy campaigns, but it’s unlikely to rival a Super Bowl ad.
That’s why it is vital for communities—especially faith communities—to lift up and amplify such work. If mainstream media is not ready to tell the truth, we must find other platforms. Churches, websites, newsletters, schools, and conferences can become spaces of transformation where these truths are heard, seen, and discussed.
A Christian Response to Marketing Myths
For Christian readers, there is an added layer to this conversation. The call to truth-telling is not merely a political act—it is a spiritual one. Throughout Scripture, we find repeated denunciations of those who distort the truth for personal gain, who “call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20). Jesus himself was known for lifting the veil, for calling out hypocrisy and restoring sight—both physical and moral.
To live truthfully in a world of illusion is, in many ways, a form of discipleship.
Marketing campaigns that deceive the public into ignoring animal suffering are not just morally suspect; they are incompatible with the Christian vision of creation. In Genesis, animals are described as “living souls” (Hebrew: nephesh chaya)—beings cherished by God and called good. Jesus speaks tenderly of animals, likening himself to a protective hen and declaring that not a single sparrow falls without the Father knowing (Luke 13:34; Matthew 10:29).
If our culture teaches us to view animals as commodities—cute cartoon mascots or economic units—then Christian ethics must offer a counter-narrative. One that sees animals as fellow creatures, beloved by God and worthy of care and compassion.
Telling a New Story
The challenge, then, is not simply to critique false stories, but to tell better ones. If the meat industry uses fantasy to justify exploitation, animal advocates must use truth to inspire justice.
That doesn’t mean bombarding people with horror or shaming them into submission. It means, as Marketing Myths does, helping people to see clearly. It means showing the beauty of animals, the depth of their experience, and the cruelty of systems that profit from their pain. It means pointing to a better way—one that honours animals as part of God’s good creation.
Vegan and plant-based living offer a tangible step towards that better way. But the deeper goal is not dietary perfection. It’s spiritual integrity. It’s refusing to let the love of convenience outweigh the love of creation.
Moving from Awareness to Action
So how can we move from awareness to action?
Here are a few ways individuals and churches can respond:
- Engage with art – Explore the work of artists like Philip McCulloch-Downs and others who use creativity to spark conscience.
- Educate your community – Host discussions, talks, or workshops on ethical eating and the treatment of animals in agriculture.
- Audit your choices – Reflect on what you consume and why. What stories do your choices uphold?
- Support alternatives – Choose plant-based meals, support ethical businesses, and share resources with friends and family.
- Advocate for change – Get involved in campaigns that challenge factory farming and promote sustainable, compassionate food systems.
Conclusion: The Truth Will Set You Free
In a world of marketing myths, truth is revolutionary. The images we are sold each day are not neutral—they shape how we think, feel, and act. But the good news is this: we are not powerless.
Art, when joined with faith and action, becomes a powerful tool for liberation. Marketing Myths dares us to see differently. It invites us to reimagine our relationship with animals—not as consumers of cuteness, but as caretakers of creation.
As Jesus said, “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32). Free from illusions. Free from the deadening of compassion. Free to live in a way that reflects the heart of God—who cares even for every sparrow.
Learn more about Philip McCulloch-Downs and see his work at philipdownsart.co.uk
Further Reading and References
- Adams, C. J. (2004). The Pornography of Meat. Bloomsbury.
- Grauerholz, L. (2007). Cute Enough to Eat: The Transformation of Animals into Meat for Human Consumption in Commercialized Images. Humanity & Society, 334–354.
- Lambert, S., & Duncombe, S. (2018). Artistic Activism. In G. Meikle, The Routledge Companion to Media and Activism.
- Shahbandeh, M. (2023). Advertising expenditure of Tyson Foods. Statista.
- Shaw, J. (2019). Making Evil: The Science Behind Humanity’s Dark Side. Canongate.
