Food Injustice

Food Inc. is an excellent example of a documentary combining elements of pathos and logos; director Robert Kenner uses emotional arguments to persuade the viewer into taking action, and at the same time presents multiple facts to strengthen his message. While there are many points being made over the course of the film that inspire me to be more pro-active about investigating the origins of my food, two in particular strike me as unfair. The manner in which the farmer who showed her chicken farm was fired after the release of the film, and the lawsuit Monsanto filed against the farmer for conspiring to keep the seeds he had grown.

Early on in the film, it was explained to the viewer that manufacturers of chicken could be narrowed down to a select small group of companies. One farmer of chickens for the Tyson company had agreed to show the operations of his farm, but following a visit from Tyson representatives, decided against showing it to cameras. The only farmer that makers of Food Inc. could find to show their farm was a woman who had decided that enough was enough, and the American public deserved to see the manner in which their food is prepared. What was shown could be considered disgusting, and grotesque. Chickens collapsing under the weight of their hormone-pumped bodies, chickens spending entire days surrounded by feces, several injured chickens being taken out and thrown into a mass outdoor pit for other animals unfit to be selected for slaughter. While it's understandable how a company such as Tyson wouldn't want this to be shown, it still angers me that an employee could be fired for merely showing the honest operations of how a typical chicken farm is run. There was nothing slanderous shown, and her dismissal asks the question of how morally bankrupt these companies are. Sure, they would almost certainly lose customers and investors with this knowledge of operations being widespread, but doesn't America deserve to see the origin of their livestock production? I would argue that it should be illegal not to show these farm operations, but to prevent the general public from seeing just how this business is being run.

Additionally, the story of the elderly farmer being sued by Monsanto for withholding seeds (and eventually profit) from the company was eye opening. This man who was merely trying to maintain his business free of corporate influence was eliminated by Monsanto as a competitor in the blink of an eye. While he managed to escape with no legal charges filed against him, the system in which the lawsuit took place could hardly be considered fair. With Monsanto's vast amount of financial resources, exceptional lawyers could be hired with no damage done to the company. The farmer being sued by Monsanto didn't have nearly the same financial situation as his opposition, so he had to settle the case out of court, admitting he was wrong while still believing in his heart that he was innocent. It frightens me that America needs to rely on Monsanto, a company that by many accounts seems to use intimidation tactics with both their employees and legal opponents. While they produce genetically manufactured seed that is necessary for much of the world's food, their frame of mind as a company is irrational and unnecessarily cruel to their clientele.