My good friend Tobias just put up this great talk (which has many parallels to this draft talk (below) that I just put up for comments). His follow-up talk is even better! I can't remember the last time I was so impressed by talks. (Bravo, Tobias — truly outstanding!)
Although the information in his talk is important, I found Tobias' answer to one question (at about 47 minutes) even more compelling (he makes the point explicitly in the second talk). The questioner said we are selling out our ethics if we ask for anything short of veganism. Tobias rightly notes that veganism isn't an end, but rather a means — a means to a cruelty-free world.
The bottom line isn't veganism, but reducing cruelty to animals. Don't worry about vegan, worry about why veganism matters — individuals like Bean and Pedro and Reba. And if we know that a certain non-vegan message is more likely to convince more people to take steps that reduce more cruelty to animals, then we aren't selling out our values by using the more compelling message. Rather, we are staying true to what we really want.
To look at it another way, it would be immoral to use the less compelling (but dogmatically "pure") message, because doing so would lead to more suffering in the world than if we had used a message that is more attractive and compelling.