That word – drones – fueled some serious outrage, especially from farmers, who don’t like government powers reserved for watching terrorists being applied to producers in the heartland.

What followed was louder criticism from members of Congress, cable news commentators and a litany of conspiracy theorists.

But as quickly as the controversy flared up, the bureaucrats worked just as quickly to extinguish it. The EPA responded to a barrage of emails by clarifying that it uses manned airplanes – not unmanned drones – to do its spying on feedlots and farms.

And with that, the national media went quickly to work to take up the EPA’s banner.

A followup story by The Washington Post made lengthy efforts to defend the merits of the surveillance program.

The Supreme Court had long ago upheld government’s ability to do aircraft inspections, the report said, and the program saves a good chunk of taxpayer money. Regular inspections cost $10,000, according to the Post, while air inspections run around $1,000 to $2,500.

But it was the proliferation of the word “drones” that seemed to disturb mainstream media the most. So much so, that the Post pushed to know who started this “hubbub over nonexistent drones.”

One source they asked was Nebraska Cattlemen, but those producers explained they never uttered the words drones in their criticism of the EPA. “But obviously the word ‘drone’ is a very sexy word,” a Nebraska Cattlemen member told the Post.

In other words, when an inflammatory label (drones!) is used to criticize a practice (airborne surveillance) which is fully sanctioned by the government (Supreme Court) and is cost-efficient to the public, it warrants immediate defense from national media and a full effort to dispel rumors and myths surrounding it.

My question: Why wasn’t the same aggressive approach taken with lean finely textured beef?

In that instance, an inflammatory label (pink slime!) was used to criticize a practice (ammoniated beef) which is fully sanctioned by government (USDA) and is cost-efficient to the public – yet it warrants immediate attack from national media and a full effort to attract rumors and myths surrounding it.

Let this be another lesson to us, that the media will target whatever they choose.

Like Jonathan Swift wrote, “Falsehood flies and the truth comes limping after it.” The next time a controversy erupts that can damage the beef industry, we need to shoot down the flock of lies and myths ourselves – and do it quickly. 

David Cooper
Editor
Progressive Cattleman magazine