4 of 11

Write now Article Tools

How often do we think about the treatment of animals in the process of becoming the take-away food we eat? Convenience food at convenient prices may be great for us, but what does it cost the animals that are bred to become our take-away meals?

Kentucky Fried Chicken, a fast food outlet that is owned by Yum Brands, uses around 850 million chickens a year in its food products. Although KFC does not actually rear or process the chickens themselves, with most being supplied by organisations such as Pilgrim's Pride, they do, or should under current regulations, have a significant amount of control regarding the way these birds are treated.

It is this process, and the abuses that PETA have evidenced on camera, that has led to the "Kentucky Fried Cruelty" campaign being launched. The list of abuses committed is quite appalling. In the particular incidence that PETA recorded production workers were seen kicking, stamping on and even throwing live chickens against the wall. Although the company in question has since fired eleven of its workers over the incidence, what guarantee is there that this will not be repeated?

However, as if that is not bad enough, the processing firms are also accused of keeping the birds in health destroying conditions, using feed to fatten their bodies so much that often the birds legs and wings are broken because they cannot take the weight and also of throwing birds that are still live into scalding water to de-feather them.

KFC say that they have set up an Animal Welfare Committee to police this situation. But according to two former employees of the company, this may appear to be just a publicity stunt. A former member of that committee told the Chicago Tribune "they never had any meetings. They never asked any advice." Furthermore a leading expert on bird welfare, Dr Ian Duncan said, "progress was extremely slow, which was why I resigned I suspect that upper management didn't really think that animal welfare was important."

Rightfully, the above campaign has been launched to try and stop these disgusting abuses to the birds from taking place. However, it is a long process and, following on the back of the support that PETA have received from celebrities such as Sir Paul McCartney and Richard Prior, one of the most effective methods must be to try and convince people to stop buying the products. Nevertheless, there will need to be more action than this, preferably from the government's food and health and safety departments. In addition, perhaps closer attention ought to also be paid to the actions of Pilgrim's Pride, which is one of the largest food processing organisations in the US. Surely, with their level of responsibility regarding the issue, it is important that they feel the displeasure of the buying public as well.

Kentucky Fried Cruelty is a worthwhile campaign against the international food giant and its aims and objectives should be supported. However, for the reasons stated earlier, perhaps the scope of those organisations being targeted should be increased to include the other culprits, namely the processors themselves.

Learn more about this author, Paul Lines.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about About PETA's "Kentucky Fried Cruelty" campaign?
We want to hear your view. Write now!