Entry tags:

VegNews pisses off vegans everywhere
Thanks to a mouse at wank_report for this!

VegNews is "an award-winning vegan magazine and website packed with recipes, travel, news, food, reviews, and so much more."

"So much more" apparently means stock photos of meat used to illustrate vegan recipes. Comments are posted, comments are deleted, and users are banned when they point out that using photos of meat (some of them poorly photoshopped to remove bones) seems contrary to the tenets of the magazine.

“Thank you for your interest in VegNews. However, your inappropriate and mean-spirited commenting has violated the policy of VegNews, and we have and will continue to remove any future comments. Please know that we welcome constructive criticism from all viewpoints, and rarely unpublish comments from readers. Should you have any constructive feedback, feel free to email me directly. I’d love to hear from you.”

People are extremely not happy. (But their wanking is done in the most non-violent, humane way possible.)

VegNews posts a non-apology. Surprise, surprise, it doesn't go over well.

(Gothamist's closing line about this debacle is priceless: "Should VegNews change its name to CarnNews, was their apology enough, or is this all just much tofu about nothing?")

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	risha 2011-04-16 12:24 am UTC (link)
	The obvious question, of course, is what prompted them to pass such a law. A similar scandal? Keeping the chefs employed? Moral objections to mashed potato ice cream? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	the__ivorytower 2011-04-16 12:32 am UTC (link)
	I honestly don't know. I also know when we have parodied news, we have to have clear warnings that it is comedy, or it's after a certain time of day. We're weird. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	cmdr_zoom 2011-04-16 01:24 am UTC (link)
	That's just sensibly acknowledging Poe's Law - that without disclaimers, it would be very difficult if not impossible to tell the deliberate jokes from the actual jokes that pass for politics, etc. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	the__ivorytower 2011-04-16 01:25 am UTC (link)
	I know some people who think Colbert is serious. I don't know what to say. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sepiamagpie 2011-04-16 01:57 am UTC (link)
	Especially with Canadian politics. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sandglass 2011-04-16 11:24 pm UTC (link)
	Probably was just part of a truth in advertising law/group of laws. Which America really, really, really needs. Remember a while ago when the US wanted to make it illegal for dieting companies to lie about the results? They'd have to show the actual, typical results and not just say, "Results not typical". That sort of thing. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -