The Price of "Pink Slime?"
The “pink slime” debate isn’t about meat.
It’s about culture. We are all so busy looking at how exactly this “lean, finely textured beef” is made that most of us haven’t really talked about much besides the process.
We haven’t talked about how this is one more indication of how so many Americans have little understanding of farms and agricultural business.
And it leaves me wondering if some bloggers and some media outlets are leading the public astray as they report on agriculture, constantly throwing out vaguely defined terms (with the corresponding negative connotations) like “corporate farm” and “industrial farming.” Most let their audience assume this type of farming is representative of all modern agriculture, except for the inclusion of one or two token “good” farmers who haul their produce to farmers markets every week.
They don’t clarify that not all big farms are owned by corporations. Many of the large ones are family-run. Or, even if they are corporations, they might be family-only corporations. And not all small, family farms are well run. The size of the farm tells you nothing about how well the livestock or land is cared for. Many of these terms are meaningless if not defined, but the use of them by in the media can have an economic impact on all kinds of farms when the commodity prices slide as a result.
In reality, 98 percent of U.S. farms are family farms, set up in a variety of legal arrangements (yes, even including family corporations). And 92 percent of U.S. farms are considered small, meaning they have annual sales of less than $250,000. But you wouldn’t know it from most national conversations about agriculture.
I wrote this a week ago Sunday in my central Iowa home, having just cleaned up from an Easter visit from nearly 20 relatives. My mom and dad were among the first to leave, heading out around 4 p.m. Dad had to get home to take care of the evening chores. The cattle needed to be fed. Plus, it’s calving season. There were likely newborn calves lying in the fresh spring grass of my parents’ farm pastures. Dad would drive or stroll the pastures, checking the newest calves to make sure they were healthy, place them in a sling to lift them by hand to weigh them. He’d mark their birth date and weight in the “calving book” he carries around in his breast pocket as the calf ran off with its mother. Dad has done this every spring since I can remember.
On that Saturday, The Des Moines Register - see it here - had an article, featuring Dave Nichols, a cattle guy my dad knows well. They have both raised “seedstock” cattle (the primary product is bulls and females that other cattle ranchers buy to build their own herds) in western Iowa’s rolling hills for decades, staying with it when others quit to transform their pastures into cornfields or soybean fields.
In the article, Nichols was quoted as saying: “After hearing everything so bad about beef and livestock, I wonder why I’m such a bad guy. Some days, I feel like a tobacco farmer.”
I can’t speak for Nichols, but I suspect he, like my dad, isn’t active on Twitter or Facebook. They talk to the traditional media, but they aren’t out fighting the public relations battle on social media, explaining how they farm and why they do the things they do.
I remember my dad telling me when I was younger that farmers needed to be sure to listen to the customer. If they wanted leaner beef, cattle should be raised to be leaner. If they wanted consistency when buying beef (and if the grocery stores and restaurant chains demanded it, as a result) you bred your herd with that goal of having the cattle very similar in build and breed. But some day I wonder if that responsiveness helped or hurt the ag industry?
The public demanded cheaper food. So beef scraps were used to make this finely ground hamburger, going back to the 1970s. The public also demanded safer food; they didn’t want their families to face any unnecessary risk of getting sick. So, more than a decade ago, some in the beef industry added an ammonia rinse to kill potentially harmful bacteria. Now, we see a public backlash against the meat industry for producing the type of product the public’s buying decisions and wishes led to. People in other Iowa cities have been going home in recent weeks to tell their families they have been laid off because someone used the term “pink slime,” others spread it, and all poisoned the impression of a product that the public sought (through an interest in affordable, safe food) in the first place.
Another example: The public tends to buy chicken breasts far more than other chicken cuts so chicken producers bred chickens to have larger breasts (since this was the desired cut). Then the public (in part due to the documentary, Food Inc.) went on attack against those who responded to consumers' buying habits. Are you now buying whole chickens to help send a different message?
I see great value in some of the “new” ideas farmers are asked to pursue (even though many farmers never abandoned these ideas) – feeding animals on grass, avoiding unnecessary medication – but what I dislike is how we don’t blame ourselves for how agriculture has changed. A few bloggers, however, have started pointing out that we need to look in the mirror more often. We let ourselves off the hook too easily, and blame the food industry for listening to us.
This whole “pink slime” discussion breaks my heart because I know how this will end. I know who will lose the public relations war. People like my dad and Dave Nichols. These are farmers who haven’t promoted themselves as “sustainable” or “family farms” because it seemed silly to do so when they have been – at times - surrounded by others who work the same way.
Some of you might be in a position to resolve this disconnect between the farmers and the consumers. First, there are the high-quality journalists. For example, check out the "Food Machine" episode on a new PBS program called America Revealed; it’s a great piece of journalism looking at the challenges facing American agriculture. It can be found here. There are others doing this kind of great reporting. Pay attention to them.
Secondly, there are those who are not only very interested in where their food comes from but are also very informed about farming and agriculture. They have been wise enough to realize that if they are going to lead the country’s thinking when it comes to agriculture and food production, they better really know all there is to know about it. They might call themselves organic farmer, gardener, acreage owner or just a “foodie.” But they might also have the nation’s ear, unlike so many of today’s family farms (though there are notable exceptions). They might be able to tell the consumers what they really need to know: these farmers aren’t your enemy.
Someone needs to bridge the gap. Are you the one?
Our new project, SkewTutor, will look at how - intentionally or unintentionally - news coverage can become slanted or influenced by preconceived notions. For now, "like" our new Facebook page to hear updates as we prepare to launch the project this summer. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Skew-Tu...
It’s about culture. We are all so busy looking at how exactly this “lean, finely textured beef” is made that most of us haven’t really talked about much besides the process.
We haven’t talked about how this is one more indication of how so many Americans have little understanding of farms and agricultural business.
And it leaves me wondering if some bloggers and some media outlets are leading the public astray as they report on agriculture, constantly throwing out vaguely defined terms (with the corresponding negative connotations) like “corporate farm” and “industrial farming.” Most let their audience assume this type of farming is representative of all modern agriculture, except for the inclusion of one or two token “good” farmers who haul their produce to farmers markets every week.
They don’t clarify that not all big farms are owned by corporations. Many of the large ones are family-run. Or, even if they are corporations, they might be family-only corporations. And not all small, family farms are well run. The size of the farm tells you nothing about how well the livestock or land is cared for. Many of these terms are meaningless if not defined, but the use of them by in the media can have an economic impact on all kinds of farms when the commodity prices slide as a result.
In reality, 98 percent of U.S. farms are family farms, set up in a variety of legal arrangements (yes, even including family corporations). And 92 percent of U.S. farms are considered small, meaning they have annual sales of less than $250,000. But you wouldn’t know it from most national conversations about agriculture.
I wrote this a week ago Sunday in my central Iowa home, having just cleaned up from an Easter visit from nearly 20 relatives. My mom and dad were among the first to leave, heading out around 4 p.m. Dad had to get home to take care of the evening chores. The cattle needed to be fed. Plus, it’s calving season. There were likely newborn calves lying in the fresh spring grass of my parents’ farm pastures. Dad would drive or stroll the pastures, checking the newest calves to make sure they were healthy, place them in a sling to lift them by hand to weigh them. He’d mark their birth date and weight in the “calving book” he carries around in his breast pocket as the calf ran off with its mother. Dad has done this every spring since I can remember.
On that Saturday, The Des Moines Register - see it here - had an article, featuring Dave Nichols, a cattle guy my dad knows well. They have both raised “seedstock” cattle (the primary product is bulls and females that other cattle ranchers buy to build their own herds) in western Iowa’s rolling hills for decades, staying with it when others quit to transform their pastures into cornfields or soybean fields.
In the article, Nichols was quoted as saying: “After hearing everything so bad about beef and livestock, I wonder why I’m such a bad guy. Some days, I feel like a tobacco farmer.”
I can’t speak for Nichols, but I suspect he, like my dad, isn’t active on Twitter or Facebook. They talk to the traditional media, but they aren’t out fighting the public relations battle on social media, explaining how they farm and why they do the things they do.
I remember my dad telling me when I was younger that farmers needed to be sure to listen to the customer. If they wanted leaner beef, cattle should be raised to be leaner. If they wanted consistency when buying beef (and if the grocery stores and restaurant chains demanded it, as a result) you bred your herd with that goal of having the cattle very similar in build and breed. But some day I wonder if that responsiveness helped or hurt the ag industry?
The public demanded cheaper food. So beef scraps were used to make this finely ground hamburger, going back to the 1970s. The public also demanded safer food; they didn’t want their families to face any unnecessary risk of getting sick. So, more than a decade ago, some in the beef industry added an ammonia rinse to kill potentially harmful bacteria. Now, we see a public backlash against the meat industry for producing the type of product the public’s buying decisions and wishes led to. People in other Iowa cities have been going home in recent weeks to tell their families they have been laid off because someone used the term “pink slime,” others spread it, and all poisoned the impression of a product that the public sought (through an interest in affordable, safe food) in the first place.
Another example: The public tends to buy chicken breasts far more than other chicken cuts so chicken producers bred chickens to have larger breasts (since this was the desired cut). Then the public (in part due to the documentary, Food Inc.) went on attack against those who responded to consumers' buying habits. Are you now buying whole chickens to help send a different message?
I see great value in some of the “new” ideas farmers are asked to pursue (even though many farmers never abandoned these ideas) – feeding animals on grass, avoiding unnecessary medication – but what I dislike is how we don’t blame ourselves for how agriculture has changed. A few bloggers, however, have started pointing out that we need to look in the mirror more often. We let ourselves off the hook too easily, and blame the food industry for listening to us.
This whole “pink slime” discussion breaks my heart because I know how this will end. I know who will lose the public relations war. People like my dad and Dave Nichols. These are farmers who haven’t promoted themselves as “sustainable” or “family farms” because it seemed silly to do so when they have been – at times - surrounded by others who work the same way.
Some of you might be in a position to resolve this disconnect between the farmers and the consumers. First, there are the high-quality journalists. For example, check out the "Food Machine" episode on a new PBS program called America Revealed; it’s a great piece of journalism looking at the challenges facing American agriculture. It can be found here. There are others doing this kind of great reporting. Pay attention to them.
Secondly, there are those who are not only very interested in where their food comes from but are also very informed about farming and agriculture. They have been wise enough to realize that if they are going to lead the country’s thinking when it comes to agriculture and food production, they better really know all there is to know about it. They might call themselves organic farmer, gardener, acreage owner or just a “foodie.” But they might also have the nation’s ear, unlike so many of today’s family farms (though there are notable exceptions). They might be able to tell the consumers what they really need to know: these farmers aren’t your enemy.
Someone needs to bridge the gap. Are you the one?
Our new project, SkewTutor, will look at how - intentionally or unintentionally - news coverage can become slanted or influenced by preconceived notions. For now, "like" our new Facebook page to hear updates as we prepare to launch the project this summer. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Skew-Tu...
No comments have been added yet.
