Chayakorn Lotongkum/iStock via Getty Images

An overwhelming majority of Americans say they’re concerned about the treatment of animals raised for meat, and many believe they can help by simply selecting from one of the many brands that advertise their chicken or pork as “humane.” 

But nearly all farmed animals in the US live on mega factory farms, where they’re mutilated without pain relief and fattened up in dark, overcrowded warehouses before being shipped off to the slaughterhouse. Only a tiny sliver of livestock are actually reared on the small, higher-welfare farms that many companies conjure on their packaging  — and even those operations can be rife with animal suffering.

This summer, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) had an opportunity to fix the false advertising problem pervasive in the meat aisle when it published updated guidelines that companies must follow when making animal welfare claims on their labels.

Instead, its new guidance barely changed anything.

The nonprofit Animal Welfare Institute called the change “insufficient to combat misleading label claims used to market meat and poultry products,” allowing companies “to essentially make up their own definitions with no repercussions.” 

Here’s how the USDA’s guidelines work: If a meat company wants to make an animal welfare or environment-related claim on its packaging, it must fill out a form with an illustration of its label and an explanation as to how the animals are raised to justify the claim; how the company will ensure the claim is valid from birth to slaughter to sale; and whether an independent, third-party organization certified the claim, which is optional. The USDA never conducts surprise audits, or any audits at all, to verify the company is telling the truth. It is, in essence, an honor system.

The USDA also has an incredibly low bar for what passes as humane treatment.

For example, a chicken company can use the term “humanely raised” if it feeds its birds an all-vegetarian diet, which has virtually no bearing on their welfare (chickens are omnivores).

Similarly, the agency says pork can be labeled “humanely raised” if the company provides its pigs with “proper shelter and rest areas.”  

“I think that a lot of this is out of touch with what consumers are really thinking these claims mean,” P. Renée Wicklund, co-founder of Richman Law & Policy — a law firm that takes meat, dairy, and egg companies to court over false claims — told me.

The USDA declined an interview request for this story and didn’t directly respond to numerous detailed questions. Instead, it sent a statement that read in part: “USDA continues to deliver on its commitment to fairness and choice for both farmers and consumers, and that means supporting transparency and high-quality standards.”

To be fair,  the agency doesn’t have the authority to conduct on-farm audits, which would require an act of Congress. But it does have authority to define animal welfare claims — an authority it rarely exercises. Instead, it allows companies to define animal welfare claims themselves.

The USDA also added that it “strongly encourages” companies to validate animal welfare claims using third-party certifiers — private organizations that audit conditions on farms and license the use of their own humane labels. But a recent undercover investigation into one of the nation’s biggest “humane-certified” poultry companies shows how low third-party certification standards can be.

Foster Farms, the 11th largest chicken company in the US, advertises meat from animals raised with supposedly “better care.” On its packaging, chickens are shown roaming free on pasture. On its website, Foster Farms says its farming is “safe, sustainable, and humane” — that its chickens are “raised on local West Coast farms” with “strenuous, high standards.” 

This summer, an undercover investigator with the animal rights group Animal Outlook worked for a month on the company’s catch crew, a job that entails grabbing chickens on farms, stuffing them into crates, and loading them onto trucks bound for the slaughterhouse.

Over the course of more than a dozen shifts at multiple Foster Farms facilities, the investigator — who requested anonymity due to the covert nature of undercover investigations — documented workers slamming birds into crates, kicking and hitting chickens, and numerous instances of forklift drivers running over birds. 

“From a veterinary perspective, some of the things are just horrific,”  veterinarian Gail Hansen told Vox. 

After Animal Outlook released its investigation last month, Foster Farms fired several employees and reported them to county law enforcement. In a statement to a chicken industry news site, the company said it would also hire for more roles focused on animal welfare, retrain employees on animal welfare, and conduct more audits. Foster Farms did not respond to Vox’s multiple requests for comment.

Foster Farms’ announced reforms in response to Animal Outlook’s latest investigation are unlikely to do much to improve overall conditions, said Cheryl Leahy, who was executive director of Animal Outlook when the investigation was released but has since left the organization. It took similar actions — penalizing workers and increasing training — in the wake of previous investigations. More importantly, the company’s animal welfare standards are already at rock bottom, in line with the rest of the chicken industry.

But you wouldn’t know that from its marketing or its “American Humane” certification.

For years, Foster Farms has bolstered its humane image through a certification from the nonprofit American Humane — the kind of third-party organization that the USDA “strongly encourages” meat companies making humane claims to work with. 

Animal advocacy groups like Animal Outlook argue that American Humane’s standards largely mirror that of the typical chicken factory farm, not the higher-welfare conditions a consumer would reasonably expect.

American Humane did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

A 2015 class action lawsuit, alleging that Foster Farms misleads consumers with its American Humane Certified label, demonstrates how the USDA’s low standards enable such deception: In a 2018 decision, a three-judge panel rejected an appeal in part because the USDA had already approved the label.

“The Foster Farms of the world can say, ‘Look, this was approved by a government agency,’” said Wicklund. (Wicklund’s law firm, Richman Law & Policy, has represented and co-counseled with Animal Outlook in meat labeling lawsuits; earlier this year, it filed a legal complaint against Foster Farms over its animal welfare claims, which is ongoing.) 

While some animal certification programs do set standards above the industry norm, what makes especially weak third-party certifications like American Humane’s so fundamentally inadequate — and deceptive — is that they permit the worst systemic abuses of poultry farming: cruel breeding practices, overcrowding, and especially inhumane slaughter methods. 

Currently, chickens and other poultry birds have zero federal legal protections while on the farm or in the slaughterhouse, and third-party certification programs make an exceptionally weak substitute for this legal gap. If we wanted truly “humanely raised” chicken, we’d have to fundamentally change how chickens are farmed, which would require significant anti-cruelty legislation from Congress. 

But the USDA, the poultry giants, and the dubious third-party certification schemes would like us to believe otherwise — that wholesome marketing and hollow honor systems can fix the horrific reality of what it is to be a farmed animal in the US.

Correction: Yesterday’s newsletter featured a miscalculation of the number of pedestrian fatalities on Roosevelt Boulevard in 2022. There were 59 city-wide.

Sign up for Processing Meat

Enjoyed this story?  This biweekly newsletter from Future Perfect’s Kenny Torrella  and Marina Bolotnikova  breaks down the impact of Big Meat on human and animal lives. 

Ho Ming Law/Getty Images

A radical educational institution: We tend to undervalue them culturally, but libraries are incredible knowledge havens, helmed by skilled experts with master’s degrees and subsidized by taxes. Here’s a brief explainer on what it takes to be a librarian and for public libraries to operate in America.

Can Trump actually close the Department of Education? Technically, yes. The president-elect has threatened to dismantle the DOE, claiming that it is  “indoctrinating young people with inappropriate racial, sexual, and political material.” Congress, however, would have to get involved, and the likelihood of Democratic senators supporting the closure is almost nonexistent.

Americans voted for change —  consequences be damned: The reelection of former President Donald Trump represents a societal frustration with the system, but while  many voters are hoping it will dismantle the status quo from the top down, the dangers might outweigh any of the possible benefits. 

The ugly origins of “Your body, my choice”: In the days following the election, the phrase has gone viral on social media and in schools, where girls are hearing the misogynistic threat from fellow students. Where did the term — an attack on women’s autonomy and, at worst, a threat of rape — come from? 

Why deplatforming Trump failed: Despite aligning himself with radical extremists, Donald Trump won the election. It’s clear now that he and other once-fringe figures on the right can’t be criticized into defeat — and their critics need a new strategy.

Inflation on the rise: Inflation in the US has risen 2.6 percent, signaling continued high consumer prices in the next six months. The Federal Reserve is expected to cut rates next month for the third time this year. [CBS News]

The story of SBF is coming to the big screen: Lena Dunham is set to adapt a book about failed FTX founder and convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried for Apple and A24. [Deadline]

Familiar faces in the flurry of cabinet nominations: The president-elect announced several key cabinet nominations on Wednesday, including Florida Sen. Marco Rubio for secretary of state, former presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard for director of national intelligence and — in a surprise — Rep. Matt Gaetz as attorney general. They’ll have to go through a Senate confirmation process. [New York Times] 

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Getty Images

“Amid political tumult, [John] Krasinski is ultimately a 'safe,' fairly inoffensive option, a celebrity that millennials obsessed with The Office have a level of affinity for. Despite questions about his political affiliation, he hasn't been mired in any real controversy.”

—Culture reporter Kyndall Cunningham on People's baffling pick 

Are you enjoying the Today, Explained newsletter? Forward it to a friend; they can sign up for it right here. 

And as always, we want to know what you think. Specifically: If there is a topic you want us to explain or a story you’re curious to learn more about, let us know by filling out this form or just replying to this email. 

Today’s edition was produced and edited by senior editor Lavanya Ramanathan, with contributions from staff editor Melinda Fakuade. We'll see you tomorrow!

Become a member to support fearless, independent journalism.

This email was sent to you. Manage your email preferences or unsubscribe. If you value Vox’s unique explanatory journalism, support our work with a one-time or recurring contribution.

View our Privacy Notice and our Terms of Service.

Vox Media, 1701 Rhode Island. NW, Washington, DC 20036.
Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved.