Broken silence

1530: 

Today, information doesn’t have to be restricted. There's no need for censorship on touchy issues like farm-animal abuse. It just needs the compliance of everyone concerned, who themselves have an interest in keeping 'unnecessary' information to a minimum.  If the individuals who make up the media all have the same interest in eating animal-based foods, you can be sure that there will be a silence in the media. Stories will be kept unreported, and in that way the journalists will keep their jobs (if not their integrity) and the public will be ‘protected’ from knowing about the routine attacks of animals on farms. With a spineless media, held captive by its advertisers and shareholders, there’s no way ordinary people can be kept properly informed - the effect of this silence gives people the impression that nothing bad is actually happening 'out there', because whatever is happening isn’t worth reporting on.

It might seem incredible that educated and otherwise well informed people know so little about cruelty to farm animals, but it isn’t that surprising when you think of how much conflicting information there is. How can anyone, by themselves, sort out what is true and what isn’t? Whether the cruelty they see examples of are isolated cases or routine on every farm? Without trustworthy reporting, how can anyone know whether the food we eat is safe or unhealthy? Most people eventually give up trying to find out, and revert to habit.

What we so badly need is one high profile, respected and brave journalist, who’ll reveal not only the scale of animal cruelty but the cover-up which, in itself, would be the bigger and more shocking story, because it involves the duping of the public on a massive scale and over a long period of time.

There have been stories published about specific atrocities such as the live export of animals, and there are many organisations who have 'outed' factory farming, but none have had the courage or resources to expose the much bigger problem concerning the entire animal industry. None ever attempt to comprehensively expose the cruelties, and combine it with warnings of the widespread health risks associated with consuming animal protein. The story is just too big. It would be considered too ambitious, to make such a broad condemnation. It wouldn't be approved for publication, nor would it have the support of the general community which makes so much use of so many animals. This is why, perhaps, the time is not yet ripe for such a writer to surface.

If and when the complete story is told, it might be a bombshell which most people wouldn't be able to handle. Fear keeps things under wraps, with no one wanting the truth to come out so completely, in case the whole supply chain is affected. As soon as the delicate balance between supply and consumption wobbles, prices go up and ordinary people are forced to pay more than they can afford for what they want, or they have to do without. Better not to rock the boat.

If the story were to be told, it might start with the disastrous health consequences of animal food. The latest World Health Organisation report, linking processed meat and red meat with cancer, is scary enough but it's likely to be soon forgotten. It will probably be argued out of existence, although for some, it will start them thinking seriously about the dangers, and will create some sort of impact. But I suspect the real impact of any story about food and cancer and animal abuse, if it ever gets to be told fully, will concern the scale of the cover-up, and therein the loss of faith in the people we've always relied on to keep us informed and keep us safe. It seems that even if they are capable of telling the whole story, they won't do so out of a fear for their own careers and their own lifestyle. Can you imagine the brave journalist writing the full truth, painting themself into a corner, and then having to abide by the conclusions of their own words?

I think it’s that which could ultimately outrage people - that they’d been kept in the dark for so long by the very people whose intentions had always been to continue misinforming the general public, with the intension to do so for many generations to come.