TO:                  Washington News Council

FROM:            Midway Meats, Inc. (Contact: William Sexsmith, owner/operator)

                        Washington State Beef Commission (Contact: Patti Brumbach, Executive Director)

                        Washington Dairy Products Commission (Contact: Blair Thompson, Communications Manager)

RE:                   KIRO-TV news stories concerning animal handling practices at Midway

                        Meats, Inc. (Chehalis, WA).  Date of broadcast:  10/31/02 (two stories)

and 11/1/02 (two stories).  Reporter:  Chris Halsne.

DATE:             March 28, 2003

I.          GRIEVANCE

The four news stories broadcast by KIRO-TV on 10/31/02 and 11/1/02 misled the public by misrepresenting animal handling practices at Midway Meats and mischaracterizing the inspection and oversight services of the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA).  In so doing, KIRO-TV damaged the reputations of Midway Meats, the USDA and the beef and dairy industries in Washington.

These negative impacts were sustained as the result of FACTUAL MISINFORMATION introduced into the stories and INAPPROPRIATE JOURNALISTIC PRACTICES exercised by KIRO-TV in the production of the stories.  These factual inaccuracies and non-standard journalistic practices sustained each other; had KIRO-TV followed accepted journalistic practices, most if not all of the inaccuracies contained in the finished stories could have been corrected prior to broadcast.

II.         FACTUAL MISINFORMATION

÷        KIRO-TV alleged that non-ambulatory ("downer") cattle are unsafe and unfit for introduction into the food supply.  In fact, non-ambulatory cattle are not the same as diseased cattle, as KIRO-TV repeatedly stated in its stories.  Under federal law, diseased cattle are not permitted for introduction into the food supply.  With certain exceptions and when inspected by the USDA, non-ambulatory cattle are perfectly appropriate for such use.  KIRO-TV could not demonstrate that the non-ambulatory cattle it portrayed in its stories were diseased or otherwise unfit for processing because, by its own admission, it did not have access to either the pre- or post-mortem examination reports on these animals at the time it produced and aired its stories.

÷        KIRO-TV alleged that consumers stand at increased risk of E. coli O157:H7 contamination due to the introduction of meat from non-ambulatory cattle into the food supply.  In fact, there is no correlation between the processing of non-ambulatory cattle for meat and contamination of humans with E. coli O157:H7 bacteria.  USDA reports indicate that the incidence of E. coli O157:H7 contamination in cull dairy cattle (the kind portrayed in KIRO-TV's stories) is no higher than it is among production cattle (please see Appendix A, "Letter from Dr. Thomas Besser DVM," attached).  Increased vigilance of such cattle by USDA under non-ambulatory inspection protocols ensures the safety of the beef supply.  Further, U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) statistics demonstrate a 21 percent decrease in E. coli O157:H7 illnesses among humans since 2000.  The introduction of E. coli O157:H7 into KIRO-TV's stories appears puzzling, given that the facts suggest it warrants no place there.  We are left with the impression that this story element was included to arouse a sense of fear among consumers.

÷        KIRO-TV alleged cruel and inhumane animal handing practices by Midway Meats, particularly in connection with the hauling and dragging of animals being off-loaded from trucks at Midway's Chehalis plant.  KIRO-TV repeatedly described these animals as alive, conscious, in pain and demonstrating their distress via certain bodily movements (especially leg movements).  In fact, according to the Washington State Veterinarian, Dr. Robert Mead DVM - a qualified animal behavior expert who reviewed KIRO-TV's stories - the animals portrayed in KIRO-TV's stories were already humanely stunned into unconsciousness at the time they were hauled or dragged (please see Appendix B, "Letter from Dr. Robert Mead DVM," attached).  The bodily movements referenced by individuals interviewed by KIRO-TV and included in the finished version of its stories were, in fact, involuntary "twitching" of limbs and/or musculature that is common among recently deceased or stunned animals.  While being hauled or dragged, these animals failed to perform certain instinctive bodily movements that would be normal and expected for sentient cattle in their positions (i.e., attempting to right themselves or pushing out with their legs in an effort to stand).  The absence of these instinctive movements indicates that they were either deceased or unconscious at the time they were hauled or dragged, as required by the federal Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA).

÷        One animal portrayed in KIRO-TV's stories appears to be both alive and conscious prior to being moved.  This animal is shown lying on the ground with its legs folded under its body.  The sequence of scenes depicting this animal is included in the finished version of KIRO-TV's stories several times, but with different editing.  Broadly speaking, there are two sequences of videotape included in the finished stories; one shows the animal's hindquarters protruding from behind a stationary trailer, while the other shows the animal's head protruding from behind the same stationary trailer.  KIRO-TV's voice-over described the animal as having been "dragged from the trailer into the parking lot," but this was not shown; neither was the animal shown as constrained by a hauling belt or other restraints in the accompanying videotape.  In the "hindquarter" sequence, the animal is shown kicking downward with its legs in an unsuccessful attempt to stand.  A representative of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) described the animal as "clearly still alive and suffering" at this point in the finished version of KIRO-TV's stories.  In fact, this animal was a "jumper" - an animal that unexpectedly jumped from the stationary trailer in which it had been transported onto the ground.  "Jumpers" are treated with special caution to avoid possible injury to company employees and USDA inspectors.  In one version of the sequence, a white-coated USDA inspector (who was not identified as such by KIRO-TV) was shown carefully walking around behind the animal; he disappeared behind the stationary trailer.  It is standard procedure for USDA inspectors to supervise the humane stunning of a "jumper" into unconsciousness as soon as it is clear that the animal poses no danger to the people present.  This action was not shown in the finished version of KIRO-TV's stories.  In some versions of the "jumper" sequence included in KIRO-TV's finished stories, the animal was last shown being hauled by its neck into the processing plant.  KIRO-TV's voice-over stated that the animal was "still kicking," and suggested it was conscious and in pain.  However, Dr. Mead's expert review of the videotape indicates this represented the normal reflex movement of a properly stunned animal.  Therefore, KIRO-TV's voice-over comments misrepresented the animal's state at the time it was hauled.

÷        KIRO-TV repeatedly used the word "inhumane" in describing the treatment of animals at Midway Meats and, along with the PETA spokesperson relied on for commentary, made allusions to violations of the HMSA by the company.  In fact, Dr. Mead, after reviewing all four of the finished stories, has stated that he can see no violations of the HMSA in the videotape broadcast by KIRO-TV.  Even the former USDA inspector relied on by the animal rights movement for expert opinion stated that he "isn't offended by the sight of unconscious animals hanging from their necks."  We underline his use of the word "unconscious."

÷        KIRO-TV repeatedly alleged that USDA inspectors were not present at Midway Meats when KIRO-TV videotaped operations there and that the agency routinely fails to enforce applicable laws and regulations governing the handling of animals.  KIRO-TV suggested that "looking the other way" is a common practice among USDA inspectors.  In fact, none of these assertions is true.  USDA inspectors were present at the time KIRO-TV videotaped operations at Midway.  USDA inspectors always supervise off-loading operations at Midway from a location that is not easily visible from those areas of the facility in which KIRO-TV's cameras were positioned.  KIRO-TV's voice-over suggested that the inspectors were not present or "unseen" when, in fact, they were actively overseeing the very operations KIRO-TV was then videotaping.  In those sequences where white-coated USDA inspectors did appear "on camera," KIRO-TV did not identify them as such.   KIRO-TV's use of camera positioning and voice-over created the factually incorrect impression that USDA was negligent in fulfilling its oversight duties at Midway Meats.  Further, KIRO-TV's assertion that USDA inspectors are routinely negligent in enforcing animal handling laws is incorrect.  Such assertions fly in the face of the well-established "adversarial relationship" that exists between the food industry and its government regulators.  USDA employees have no incentive to "look the other way" concerning improper animal handling procedures by meat packing firms; indeed, bringing to light any irregularities is their job.

III.       INAPPROPRIATE JOURNALISTIC PRACTICES

÷        KIRO-TV violated one of the basic tenants of accepted journalistic practice by building its stories based upon a set of sources who all share the same viewpoint.  KIRO-TV's primary sources for its stories included the following:

a)         Susan Michael, a representative of Pasado's Safe Haven (PSH), an animal rights advocacy group;

b)         Bruce Friedrich, a representative of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), an animal rights advocacy group;

c)         Lester Friedlander, a former USDA inspection trainer who today works as a consultant to animal rights advocacy groups; and

d)         Gaylis Linville, an anti-E. coli O157:H7 activist whose child became ill from E. coli O157:H7 in 1992.

These individuals all appeared on camera throughout the four stories; some individuals appeared repeatedly.  The former USDA trainer appeared the most frequently and delivered the main theme of the series - that USDA is failing to protect consumers from unsafe food.  The animal rights advocates alleged that the animal handling practices of meat-packing firms are cruel to animals.  The anti-E. coli O157:H7 activist supported the allegation that meat from non-ambulatory cattle increases the risk of E. coli O157:H7 contamination among humans.  KIRO-TV described the latter as "a consumer expert of sorts"; but provided no information on any scientific credentials or background that would substantiate that claim. Further, one opening segment for the stories was actually filmed at Pasado's Safe Haven.  This "hosting" of the media was touted by PSH on its web site (please see Appendix C, "Pasado's Safe Haven web site download," attached).  The web site also announced that PSH planned to petition the Washington state legislature to enact a law banning the processing of all non-ambulatory animals in Washington.  Further, the web site encouraged PSH's supporters to write to KIRO-TV to congratulate the station on airing the stories.  These consumer messages were then used by KIRO-TV, in its segment criticizing USDA, to demonstrate the tremendous response the station had received from viewers.

The following individuals presented a limited countervailing opinion in the finished stories:

a)         William Sexsmith, the owner/operator of Midway Meats; and

b)         Richard Van Dam, a dairy farmer with limited knowledge of the meat-packing business.

The owner/operator of Midway Meats, Mr. Sexsmith, made only two short appearances in the finished stories.  He was mainly shown denying any wrong-doing.  The dairy farmer, Mr. Van Dam, appeared only once to explain his decision-making process regarding the culling of cows.  In the finished version of its stories, KIRO-TV clearly allowed one side in the debate to enjoy the preponderant time to make its case.

÷        KIRO-TV violated one of the basic tenants of accepted journalistic practice by failing to seek input or commentary from those parties that were the targets of criticism in the stories:  USDA and the beef and dairy industries.  No spokespersons representing USDA, the Washington State Beef Commission, the Washington Dairy Products Commission or any other industry organization appeared in the finished stories or were asked to provide background or clarification.  KIRO-TV says that it attempted to contact USDA for input, but that its attempts were evaded by the agency.  It is our understanding that KIRO-TV refused to provide the agency with information that would help it to investigate the plant in question and provide a reasoned response.  After several unsuccessful attempts by USDA to gather information about the plant in question, KIRO-TV offered USDA the opportunity to view its videotapes.  But KIRO-TV attached a condition to this offer:  USDA spokespersons had to do so "on camera" so that KIRO-TV could videotape their first reactions.  In USDA's defense, to agree to this demand would have impeded a sound and reasoned response by USDA spokespersons.  The complex nature of the videotape requires several viewings to ascertain the true nature of the animal behavioral response and to determine which animal is being shown from different angles and from frame to frame. It is not always possible to determine with just one viewing whether an animal is exhibiting involuntary nerve spasms resulting from the stunning process or whether it is alive or dead.  For KIRO-TV to demand instant judgments and real-time commentary from USDA personnel was simply unfair.  It is hardly surprising that USDA declined to put its spokespersons in such a position.

÷        KIRO-TV exploited the large and complex organization of USDA to make its case and position the agency as uncooperative.  USDA's communications staff in Washington, D.C. - the only USDA employees empowered to speak to the media on the agency's behalf - would have little, if any, reason to suspect the existence of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) filing targeting another division of USDA, as was the case here (please see Appendix D, "KIRO-TV FOIA Request," attached).  Nor would they necessarily be aware of investigations in the field by local inspectors.  The Washington D.C. communications office would require clarifying information about the plant in question to provide a factual response to any allegations in the media.  But KIRO-TV's reporter, Mr. Chris Halsne, refused even to identify the meat-packing plant that was the subject of the stories to USDA until shortly before the stories aired.  This was true even though, according to Mr. Halsne's own admission, KIRO-TV had been working on the story "undercover" for about six months.  When USDA wrote a letter to KIRO-TV to protest the latter's lack of communication regarding the development of the stories - i.e., its failure to return USDA's phone calls - (please see Appendix E, "USDA Letter to KIRO-TV," attached) the station turned the letter into a weapon against the USDA:  KIRO-TV added a segment to that evening's installment of the stories in which Mr. Halsne displayed the FOIA request as a refutation of USDA's claim that it had not been communicated with.  He said that KIRO-TV had offered USDA the opportunity to review the tape, but that the latter had refused.  What KIRO-TV did not tell its viewers was that it had offered the videotape for viewing under conditions that invited an on-air confrontation and which would have made it impossible for USDA to provide a factual and reasoned response.

÷        The impression that KIRO-TV was seeking to exclude USDA from the development of the stories is reinforced by the fact that several of the people interviewed by Mr. Halsne have indicated that he told them he did not want to talk with anyone on "the government payroll."  These sources quote Mr. Halsne as saying that he "[wasn't] out to get them, he [was] out to get the USDA."  Mr. Sexsmith reports that Mr. Halsne repeatedly asked him to prove that his meat is safe.  When Mr. Sexsmith replied that he didn't need to because that is why USDA has inspectors operating in his plant, Mr. Halsne responded by saying, "Yes, but USDA cannot be trusted."  Similarly, KIRO-TV never made any attempt to contact either the Washington State Beef Commission or the Washington Dairy Products Commission, even though it knew that these state-chartered agencies employ the designated media spokespersons for their respective industries.  Instead, KIRO-TV relied upon Mr. Sexsmith, a small business operator, and Mr. Van Dam, a small family farmer, to provide a limited countervailing opinion in the finished stories. Neither Mr. Sexsmith nor Mr. Van Dam has experience in working with the media, and neither is trained to represent the beef or dairy industries in discussions of major issues of industry-wide import.  KIRO-TV never made any attempt to contact neutral, non-industry sources who could have offered informed commentary upon the subject of animal handling practices - such as the Washington State Dept. of Agriculture or the Washington State Veterinarian.  (While we understand that Mr. Halsne contacted the State Veterinarian to ascertain how to file a FOIA request, he did not communicate the direction of the story or seek Dr. Mead's expertise on humane slaughter or food safety issues.)  Nor were E. coli O157:H7 experts, such as qualified scientists at Washington State University who are currently performing research in this field, consulted by Mr. Halsne to assist in developing a factual and balanced story.

÷        KIRO-TV violated one of the basic tenants of accepted journalistic practice when it deliberately set out to create an unbalanced story designed to mislead the public.  Mr. Charles E. Powell, Public Information Officer for the College of Veterinary Medicine at Washington State University, reports that Mr. Halsne contacted him when the latter began work on the stories. According to Mr. Powell, Mr. Halsne repeated his desire not to talk to "anyone on the government payroll" in connection with the stories.  With this requirement in mind, Mr. Powell next referred Mr. Halsne to Dr. Mark Elliott, a retired Circuit Supervisor and Inspector with USDA who had frequently inspected Midway Meats while serving with the agency.  Mr. Elliott reports that Mr. Halsne contacted him and asked him to review the videotape KIRO-TV recorded at Midway Meats and comment upon Midway's animal handling practices.  Mr. Elliott told Mr. Halsne that he would review the videotape and provide expert opinion "as background" information.  He declined, however, to be interviewed on camera, advising Mr. Halsne that he would refer him to the appropriate individuals at USDA for comment upon what was shown in the videotape.  Mr. Elliott reports that Mr. Halsne never contacted him to follow up on this offer.  The reports of Mr. Powell and Mr. Elliott indicate that KIRO-TV commenced these stories with a clear objective in mind and that it avoided contacts with sources who might present it with information that would oblige it to alter the messages it intended to communicate in the stories.  While some may argue that the inclusion of Mr. Sexsmith and Mr. Van Dam in the finished stories constitutes an airing of the opposing viewpoint, in fact any such suggestion is ludicrous.  KIRO-TV's stories were created as a criticism of USDA, but KIRO-TV prevented any USDA representatives from answering those criticisms.  This indisputable fact is confirmed by the reports of Mr. Sexsmith and Mr. Van Dam that Mr. Halsne coaxed them before the camera with his assurances that he wasn't "out to get" either of them; rather, he was "going after" USDA.  Neither Mr. Sexsmith nor Mr. Van Dam represent USDA (indeed, they are subject to USDA regulation) and were not in a position to effectively answer many of the allegations against USDA made by KIRO-TV and its other sources for the story.

IV.              IMPACTS

÷        KIRO-TV's stories damaged the reputations of USDA; a small, family-owned business (Midway Meats); and a small, family-owned farm (Mr. Van Dam's dairy).  In addition, the stories eroded consumer confidence in the safety of the beef supply and damaged the livelihoods of 10,000 Washington beef producers by broadcasting information that was patently false or information that was presented so as to create a false impression in the minds of consumers.

÷        KIRO-TV's stories misled the public by:  (1) suggesting that consumers are at an elevated risk for E. coli O157:H7 contamination due to the introduction of meat from non-ambulatory cattle into the food supply; (2) suggesting that animal handling practices within the meat-packing industry are cruel and inhumane and constitute violations of the HMSA; and (3) suggesting that USDA is failing in its duty to protect public health by means of negligent inspection and intentionally deficient oversight at meat-packing facilities.  In fact, none of these allegations is true.

÷        KIRO-TV used its license to broadcast on the public's airwaves in such a way as to support proposed legislation designed to correct problems that

do not exist.  At certain points in its stories, KIRO-TV made mention of a proposed bill slated for introduction into the Washington state legislature that would ban the processing of non-ambulatory cattle in Washington.  This bill was drafted with the participation of Pasado's Safe Haven, an animal rights organization which also acted as a primary source of information for KIRO-TV's stories. PSH has been actively promoting this proposed legislation, and a PSH representative was included in the finished version of KIRO-TV's stories speaking about her belief that non-ambulatory cattle should be banned from processing for food.  KIRO-TV proactively encouraged its audience to contact lawmakers with a view to supporting such legislation.  In fact, since non-ambulatory cattle are not unsafe for human consumption and their processing is not cruel or inhumane, such legislation is unnecessary to protect public health or to protect the welfare of animals.  Its only effect would be to further the legislative aims of the animal rights movement and to demonstrate to the movement's financial contributors that it is making headway in its ultimate objective of ending the utilization of animals as a food resource for human beings.

÷        KIRO-TV's stories have had the ultimate effect of endangering public

health.  Before its stories went into production, Midway Meats was one of only two meat-packing facilities in Washington that accepted non-ambulatory cattle for processing under USDA rules and inspection procedures.  Even before KIRO-TV's stories were broadcast, Midway made the decision to stop accepting non-ambulatory cattle and implemented that decision before the stories were aired.  The other facility decided to stop accepting non-ambulatory cattle after KIRO-TV's stories aired.  Midway Meats' decision, according to Mr. Sexsmith, was based on a simple calculation of public image risk-avoidance.  Mr. Sexsmith calculated that if making perfectly safe meat available to the public at reasonable prices would bring so much scrutiny and criticism upon his firm, then the benefits would not outweigh the aggravation.  Therefore, today no meat packing facility in Washington accepts non-ambulatory cattle.  While this may appear to be a victory to some, in fact this development has had unintended negative consequences.  Ms. Linda Carpenter of USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services (APHIS) Veterinarian Services/Area Veterinarian in Charge for Washington, Alaska and Hawaii says that the decision of Washington's meat packing industry to stop accepting non-ambulatory cattle has eliminated an important surveillance tool for early detection of foreign animal diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) - commonly known as "mad cow disease" (please see Appendix F, "Statement from Dr. Linda Carpenter DVM," attached).  She explains that testing for BSE (which is always fatal in humans) and other animal diseases is conducted on tissue samples previously collected from non-ambulatory cattle at meat-packing facilities.  Accordingly, as a direct result of the negative publicity KIRO-TV brought to bear on Midway Meats, all systematic testing for BSE in Washington has now ceased.  This development will reduce the ability of public health agencies in the Pacific Northwest to protect the public and industry from such diseases.

V.        CONCLUSION

The slaughtering of an animal so that it can be processed into food is never a pretty sight.  But because the process is not edifying to watch does not mean that it is either inhumane or illegal.  The beef and dairy industries, in cooperation with federal and state authorities, have designed a system that protects both the animal from unnecessary suffering and the public from serious diseases.  Laws and regulations have been established to ensure that these two objectives are accomplished and a non-vested public agency - USDA - has been appointed to enforce the rules that sustain the system.  Consumers who understand neither animal behavior nor the system devised to protect their health may find much that appears distasteful in the slaughtering process.  We would hope, however, that the news media would accept a responsibility to look beyond surface appearances and ascertain the true facts before broadcasting a story with so much potentially negative impact on so many people.  Sadly, in the case of KIRO-TV's Midway Meats stories, we feel that this responsibility was ignored.

[END]