Possible Ingestion of Contaminated Beef - Coursework Example

Censored News Story: Bacteria in Beef Mother Jones and Newser both highlight the censored story under analysis. It is about the possibleingestion of contaminated beef by unsuspecting consumers. Zhang (2012) reports that in the past, rare stake was hardly considered a health hazard because E.Coli bacteria only resided on the top of the meat. Therefore, simply grilling the meat was enough to get rid of any dangerous microorganisms. However, the Mother Jones reporter warns that a new industrialization process called mechanical tenderization has introduced the bacteria into deeper parts of the meat. Several beef makers use the process in order to make it tender. They rely on blades and needles to separate the meet fibers from one another. Unknowingly, this routine also creates new pathways for bacteria to travel deep into the animal tissue. Health authorities have done little to control the hazard as meat plants are left to oversee their own processes. This is particularly alarming since 90% of firms rely on the process. Additionally, hygiene practices in some large meat-packing plants are wanting. A number of them leave feces on meat thus exposing consumers to the most obvious source of E.Coli bacteria. Consumers are in danger of falling sick and even dying from the bacteria if the practice is left unchecked. Gastaldo (2012) believes that meat labeling may help. It could warn customers about the need for higher temperatures during cooking. However, this will still not assist most consumers who may not understand the implications of a mechanical tenderization process. The most effective approach would be to implement rigorous health and safety programs in meat plants and ensure that no fecal matter is left on meat. Analysis Corporate conglomerates may not want individuals to know the truth about the products they are consuming because this truth may prevent them from buying it. Food companies are part of the capitalist machinery and have successfully managed to outcompete and even eliminate small-scale producers (Pollan, 2006). Most of the agricultural products in modern society grow faster, at a cheaper rate and have been made bigger than usual. If a farmer finds a method of growing corn that will take half the amount of time that a traditional plant would, then the former method carries the day. This propensity for cheaper, faster and bigger products increases profits for commercial enterprises but may not necessarily be in the public’s interests. A number of individuals may express dissent against this domination through the media. However, industries are already aware of this possibility and are making it almost illegal to make visual illustrations of real food operations. They are also relying on federal authorities to protect themselves by pushing for laws that camouflage their inadequacies (Pollan, 2006). The lack of labeling for tenderized meats is one example of how they achieve it. Since the media relies on a number of these corporate bodies for sponsorship, it is unlikely to criticize them. The story has been censored, and can only be found on independent human rights or democracy websites such as Mother Jones. The story is thus of interest because of three key ideologies found in media studies: *hegemony*, *consumerism* and media manipulation. *Semiotic analysis* may be defined as the process by which meaning is created through signs that could be cultural, verbal or non verbal. In order to make sense of any news report, it pays to look into the codes that may demystify their meaning. Media manipulation can take place owing to a number of ideologies. Owners of media houses are inclined towards predominant ideologies that preserve the status quo and regenerate continuous income for them. The issue under analysis should merit particular attention because its discussion has direct implications on media credibility as well as predominant ideologies that control consumers. The story talks about how a chief sector in the economy; that is food, engages in irresponsible, unethical and unprofessional behavior. Discussions on both articles delineate two primary parties; the public as ‘us’ and the corporate industrial complex as ‘them’. It appears as though readers are being urged to rebel against domination of the latter. Media houses may have stayed away from such calls to action because they depend on the industrial complex to sustain them. Media manipulation can arise out of a need to perpetuate the status quo. In this case, the story shows that certain rebellious articles are unlikely to show up on the radar of mainstream channels (Huff and Roth, 2013). *Hegemony* can be understood as “The dominance that one social group holds over others”. Dines and Humes, 2010, p. 33). This ideology may also be used to analyze the text in the article. This domination does not occur through force; it disguises itself as a consent-seeking contract even though the masses really have no control over it. The ruling class defines limits within which others can live. Citizens then come to accept the dominant class’s laws and principles as the norm. They believe that these principles serve their best interest, so they perpetuate the status quo. Most time, these norms may harm them, but because such rules are deeply engrained in them, many of them rarely question them. The article is an indication of how hegemony prevails in western society. The dominant class has a high stake in the food industry. They have thus used the media to make it seem like their production choices are in the best interest of consumers. Buyers have come to accept that meat must come from an assembly line. They also believe that the authorities use food regulations and other mechanisms to curtail health risks. However, the censored news story indicates that not everything large institutions churn out is in the best interest of the consumer. Dines and Humez (2010) define *consumerism* as a culture in which individuals are persuaded to acquire goods and services perpetually regardless of their needs and wants. They seem to never be satisfied with their standard of living and are constantly reaching out for more. It is for this reason that even a rise in the national average income will not solve people’s financial woes. They will still be under constant pressure to spend. The above authors point out to a new type of consumerism in which consumer desires differ substantially from their means. In the past, advertisements, the media and producers of consumer goods encouraged audiences to compare themselves to their neighbors. People sought to acquire commodities so that they could look like others within their income bracket. However, over the past four decades, a new consumerism has arose in which the media overemphasizes elite lifestyles. Consumers now have a skewed understanding of what their peers have. They hold aspirations that are impractical given the amount of income they possess. Several buyers simply purchase commodities for luxury rather than comfort. The censored article highlights the dangers of such excessive consumerism. Many US meat eaters expect their beef to be tender. The immense pressure to spend causes households to work longer hours and put in more effort. Families constantly struggle to maintain a middle class lifestyle in which luxuries are a must (Dines and Humez, 2010). They thus have little time to indulge in bonding activities like home-cooking. People order take-out or pre-cooked merchandise from the supermarket. It does not concern them that the processes used to sell them that convenience (tender, pre-cooked meat) will cost them their health. Industries that prepare these foods do not care about such matters because they are already far down the food-chain. The media has too much to loose if it rocks this consumerism boat, since so many other players depend on it. Only independent watchdogs are likely to criticize such food producers. Reaction This censored story incensed me. I came to realize that the powers that be have more control over us than I would like to imagine. Many of them simply think of cutting costs. They sell poor, low grade or potentially hazardous products in order to make some money. This seems like the epitome of greed among stakeholders. I also realized that regulations may not always be effective since corporations find ways of evading them. They most effective line of attack would be to be vigilant about the messages one receives from the media, and to look out for such warning signs. It is disturbing that a sector, which numerous people have come to trust in their kitchens, would violate this trust. In the future, I will be keen on getting beyond any news report as there is always another angle. So many things do not get reported, yet it is the public that suffers. Independent watch group sites like Mother Jones are crucial in dealing with these shortcomings. References Dines, G. and Humez, J. (2010). Gender, race and class in media: A critical reader. NY: Sage. Gastaldo, E. (2012). This steak may have fecal matter inside. Retrieved from http://www.newser.com/story/159140/this-steak-may-have-fecal-matter-inside.html Huff, M. and Roth, A. (2013). Censored 2014: Fearless speech in fateful times: The top censored stories and media analysis of 2012-2013. NY: Seven Stories Press. Pollan, M. (2006). Omnivore’s dilemma. NY: Penguin press. Zhang, S. (2012). Grosser than pink slime: Poop-contaminated, mechanically tenderized beef. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/12/e-coli-mechanically-tenderized-beef Read More