5 ms·

Ag-gag laws are legitimized, crooked censorship. The meat processing industry is still extremely insulated, but let's hope this gets chipped away to reveal the

Ag-gag laws are legitimized, crooked censorship. The meat processing industry is still extremely insulated, but let's hope this gets chipped away to reveal their secrets. This is one of the reasons undocumented immigrant labor is exploited: they generally won't say anything. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/21/us/meatpackers-profits-hinge-on-pool-of-immigrant-labor.html http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/21/us/meatpackers-profits-hin... http://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/news_home/Business/2013/04/Journalist_goes_undercover_at.aspx?ID=%7BD8E5B081-04D6-4254-880C-7166E0587A61%7D&cck=1 http://www.meatpoultry.com/articles/news_home/Business/2013/... See also: SHowing Animals Respect and Kindness (SHARK) to see what happens to those whom film use drones to legally film live caged animal shoots and other embarrassing/horrible human-animal interactions. http://sharkonline.org/ http://sharkonline.org/

spraak 9y ago
Thanks for sharing, SHARK is amazing
rayiner 9y ago
> The meat processing industry is still extremely insulated, but let's hope this gets chipped away to reveal their secrets. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
- manicdee 9y ago
  There are few people outside the health care system who will not be traumatised by watching a surgery. There are few people outside abbatoirs (or indeed inside them) who can watch animals being slaughtered and butchered without emotional trauma. Sometimes things are hidden from us to protect us from harm.
- ch4s3 9y ago
  The meat industry isn't a person, it's an industry. It shouldn't be able to hide practices that endanger human health and safety. This isn't a privacy issue, this is about protecting the ability of whistleblowers to speak out.
  - ethbro 9y ago
    Devil's advocate from the other side: commercial farming and animal slaughter is a messy, ugly business to a lot of people. You could easily film an ethical operation and edit in such a way that people are shocked (shocked!!) that their steaks had eyes and felt pain. So even without "human health and safety concerns", there are valid reasons for not showing graphic details. That said, I absolutely think enforcing ethical animal treatment through public pressure on factory farming trumps right-not-to-know.
    - cageface 9y ago
      If people aren’t comfortable watching animals being slaughtered maybe they shouldn’t eat them.
      - riffraff 9y ago
        People should know how the meat industry works but this reasoning seems extreme. I am not comfortable watching women give birth, that doesn't mean I shouldn't have children.
        ch4s3 9y ago
        There might be a frequency issue here ;)
        mikeyouse 9y ago
        I think this is confusing the availability of video with the forced viewing of video. If you're not comfortable watching a woman give birth, you can choose to avoid the many thousands of available videos. You don't have that option with factory farming methods. Nobody wants to watch animals being slaughtered on an assembly line, but they should absolutely have the option to see what happens with their food. I don't think there's any moral room for "It would be disgusting and probably harm their business, so we shouldn't film it."
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]

spraak 9y ago

Thanks for sharing, SHARK is amazing

rayiner 9y ago

> The meat processing industry is still extremely insulated, but let's hope this gets chipped away to reveal their secrets. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

manicdee 9y ago
There are few people outside the health care system who will not be traumatised by watching a surgery. There are few people outside abbatoirs (or indeed inside them) who can watch animals being slaughtered and butchered without emotional trauma. Sometimes things are hidden from us to protect us from harm.
ch4s3 9y ago
The meat industry isn't a person, it's an industry. It shouldn't be able to hide practices that endanger human health and safety. This isn't a privacy issue, this is about protecting the ability of whistleblowers to speak out.
- ethbro 9y ago
  Devil's advocate from the other side: commercial farming and animal slaughter is a messy, ugly business to a lot of people. You could easily film an ethical operation and edit in such a way that people are shocked (shocked!!) that their steaks had eyes and felt pain. So even without "human health and safety concerns", there are valid reasons for not showing graphic details. That said, I absolutely think enforcing ethical animal treatment through public pressure on factory farming trumps right-not-to-know.
  - cageface 9y ago
    If people aren’t comfortable watching animals being slaughtered maybe they shouldn’t eat them.
    - riffraff 9y ago
      People should know how the meat industry works but this reasoning seems extreme. I am not comfortable watching women give birth, that doesn't mean I shouldn't have children.
      - ch4s3 9y ago
        There might be a frequency issue here ;)
      - mikeyouse 9y ago
        I think this is confusing the availability of video with the forced viewing of video. If you're not comfortable watching a woman give birth, you can choose to avoid the many thousands of available videos. You don't have that option with factory farming methods. Nobody wants to watch animals being slaughtered on an assembly line, but they should absolutely have the option to see what happens with their food. I don't think there's any moral room for "It would be disgusting and probably harm their business, so we shouldn't film it."
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]