Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Food Inc. Prezi

AG 401 Presentation

Taylor Zumstein

on 13 March 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Food Inc. Prezi

Ethical Dilemma #2: Orchestrated Clucks Ethical Dilemma #1"What's up with my food?" Eric Schlosser starts the documentary, Food, Inc., with the idea that corporations advertise their foods using the agrarian image, when in reality most of the food is now mass produced.
Vince, a chicken farmer with a contract with Tyson, offered the film crew an opportunity to video tape inside the chicken houses, but Tyson refused Vince and the film crew that privilege.
The above examples show big food corporations attempt in hiding certain facts about their food from the public.
What are the ethical reason that support and/or undermine the conduct of the big corporations in the food industry in regards to communicating the truth to their consumers about their food? The mass production of chickens by growing them in chicken houses has benefited the farmer in terms of more profits, and the consumer in terms of a cheap product.
However, the mass production of chickens has its down sides; for example, chickens now grow bigger within a short time period often to the point where they cannot support their own weight.
How is the mass production of chickens ethically justified and/or unjust?
In regards to cattle, how is the mass production of cattle through concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) justified and/or unjust? Food, Inc. touches on the subject of food corporations affecting the consumers food choices, particularly concerning with fast food and its negative health impacts.
Fast food corporations blame health problems connected to fast food on the consumer, since they made the choice to consume their fast food.
On the other hand, consumers blame fast food corporations on sort of guiding their choices towards cheap food through their constant food advertisements.
Which side is right ethically speaking? Ethical Dilemma #3 Why Food Inc.? The film Food Inc. is a documentary examining our nation's food industry
Robert Kenner made the film Food Inc. to find out where our food was coming from and how it has changed
Keener wanted to make a film that made us think about where our food comes from and to think about out how we could develop a system that would sustainable.
The key things Kenner is trying to convey in the film is how the whole food system is being taken over by the industrialization of our food and the fact that we are being denied the right to know what's in our food and discouraged from talking about it Food Inc. It is divided into 3 segments covering issues that are under concern in the industry:
1) industrial production of meat
2) industrial production of grains and vegetables
3) Economic and legal power Food Inc. Dir. PBS. Perf. David Brancaccio and Robert
Kenner. PBS. PBS, 5 June 2009. Web. 09 Mar. 2013.
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/523/index.html. References Ethical Egoism •Morality is about making oneself better off, one’s duty is
to maximize self-interest (Shafer-Landau, 2012)
•Major food production companies most likely advertise
their products through an agricultural point of view
because it’s in their best interest.
•These businesses hide information about mass
production and how they raise livestock from consumers
in order to keep a certain image.
•Big food corporations know that they’re better off hiding
certain aspects of production from the public in order to
keep a steady income from customers.
•“Many farmers and ranchers would welcome a moral
theory that permits them to do what is best for them and
their operation without regard for anyone else or
anything else.” (Zimdahl, 2012) Utilitarianism •“The goal humans share no matter what they do…is to avoid pain and secure
pleasure” (Zimdahl, 2012)
•Big corporations can justify mass production of chicken and cattle because it’s a
utilitarian method of feeding the country.
~ Farmers benefit from mass production in terms of income.
~ Consumers benefit by having a readily available supply
of rather inexpensive meat in grocery stores constantly.
•Mass production may not be the right method of food production, but it’s currently
a method that continues to benefit the producers and consumers. Social Contract Theory •Due to the increasing population, we have developed somewhat of a contract with
big food production businesses.
•Consumers will keep buying the food, providing that it is always available at decent
•Mass production of livestock is the method farmers are using in order to keep up
with consumer demand. Kantian Ethics •Kantian ethics state that actions can be morally
justified if they’re done for the sake of duty.
(Farias, 2013c)
•A person’s duty is to provide for their family,
sometimes a dollar menu is the cheapest way for
a person to feed their family.
•On the other hand, the duty of fast food
companies is to advertise and sell cheap,
convenient meals to meet consumers’ demand.
•Ethically speaking, it is not right for either fast
food producers or consumers to put blame on
each other for health problems because both
producers and consumers are just trying to fulfill
their duties. Zimdahl, R. L. (2012). Agriculture's ethical horizon. (2nd ed.). Waltham,
MA: Elsevier Inc.
Shafer-Landau, R. (2012). The fundamentals of ethics. (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press Inc.
Farias, D. (2013c). Kantian Ethics [Powerpoint slides]. Retrieved from
https://blackboard.csupomona.edu Impact of the Topic
From the Consumer's Perspective...

•By watching this movie, viewers may learn new "information" regarding their food.
•Viewers may feel a call to action through the use scare tactics in the movie.
ie changing their diet and/ or joining a movement
•Product labeling demand is awoken - Belief that one person can make a difference
•May spark additional research regarding the agriculture industry (strongly recommended)
•Shines light on the numerous ethical dilemmas that consumers and farmers have to make
•This movie may affect viewers differently depending on personal background and agricultural knowledge

http://www.safefoodinc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=11 From the Farmer’s Perspective…

•Made out to be “the bad guys”
•Niche markets do not produce a lot of income – can be easily run off by larger corporations if you do not have the money to defend yourself
•Demand is too high to solely run small organic farms
•Not a large dent in the demand of food products after the movie came out (didn't effect farmers very much)
•Prop 37 demanded for food labeling (due to consumer awareness?) Impact of the Topic Continued http://www.monsanto.com/food-inc/Pages/default.aspx What influences your appetite? Method? Advertisements? Price? GMO Food Labeling Agribusiness weekly: Mean and dairy prices continue to rise. (2012). [Web
Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.thecitywire.com/node/24299
Untitled photograph of broilers in a large tunnel ventilated shed. (2013).
[Web Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.poultryhub.org/production/husbandry-management/housing-environment/climate-in-poultry-houses/
Untitled clip art of the accusing arrows. (2012). [Web Drawing]. Retrieved
from http://amonika.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Own-Your-Life.jpg
Untitled image of food labeling stamps. (2012). [Web Graphic]. Retrieved from
Who we are. (2013). [Web Graphic]. Retrieved from
http://www.monsanto.com/whoweare/Pages/default.aspx Katie Mullikin Taylor Zumstein Cortni Albritton Gustavo Velasquez Jose Garcia
Full transcript