Factory farming is a heartless practice that prioritizes profit over the well-being of animals and the environment. According to the Humane League, routine aspects of factory farming include “various bodily mutilations, extremely tight and crowded confinement and lives spent entirely indoors.” Additionally, animals at factory farms are raised to grow quickly in order to be turned into products faster. Animals are hurt in all stages of these practices. Factory farms almost always get away with this behavior, and workers face no charges thanks to the laws protecting this inhumane industry.

So, why does factory farming still exist? Well, the invisibility of the problem makes it almost impossible to solve. There are regulations called “ag-gag laws” that protect these terrifying conditions by making it illegal to expose such behavior. After Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle” exposed the unsafe meatpacking industry in 1906, workers and owners in the factory farming industry became worried about whistleblowers following in Sinclair’s footsteps. Between this uprising and the rise in activism, ag-gag laws were born. These laws make it legal to both punish any activist that reveals footage of factory farming conditions and silence whistleblowers. Many citizens are unaware of such animal abuse occurring since there is such an effort to hide the practice. Of course, criticism of harmful habitat conditions circulates regularly, but until the specifics of factory farming are researched, most individuals are blind to how bad it really is.

Animals’ physical and mental well-being must be accounted for and they should have the right to certain freedoms, which are undermined by ag-gag laws. In 1966, the Animal Welfare Act was passed to regulate the treatment of animals used in practices such as research, exhibition, transport and other routines. The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958 requires proper treatment and slaughtering of the animals involved. However, according to Alicia Prygoski of Michigan State University College of Law, modern-day or post-2011 ag-gag laws were presented in response to undercover activists concerned with the treatment of animals in general. She explained the debate over the real reason — “Proponents argue that they are a safeguard to protect well-meaning farmers against animal protection organizations who present the footage in a misleading way, while opponents argue ag-gag laws are meant to hide animal abuse from the public and that these laws allow industrialized farming operations to put profit ahead of farmed animal welfare.” With ag-gag laws in place, animals will never get justice for the way they are harmed and workers will keep getting away with it.

Factory farming allows companies to produce meat more cheaply and faster. However, factory farming’s benefits are not as glorious as they sound. The speed of production and careless approach to maximizing profit ignore most health and safety regulations in an environmental sense and in terms of food safety and workers’ well-being.

Since ag-gag laws are modern, the regulations only attack the sharing or possession of recorded audio or video proof, not necessarily written text. Knowing there are loopholes, how can the public stop them? Joining support organizations like the Animal Legal Defense Funds, who oppose anti-whistleblower bills, and share evidence of poor farm and living conditions — whether that be telling friends or sharing facts online — to help raise awareness of this hidden problem. Additionally, legislation that protects animal welfare should be lobbied for. If the public can push factory farming corporations to overcome the selfish ignorance they have toward safety regulations, ag-gag laws can finally be recognized as problematic.

To conclude, ag-gag laws are an insult to the public voice and are unconstitutional. Not only is undercover reporting critical for certain investigations, but ag-gag laws encroach first amendment rights. The public cannot practice freedom of speech if ag-gag laws prevent activists from speaking the truth about animal abuse. This is why undercover investigations are so useful in cases like this — there is no way around the lies of the industry. The regulations also stomp on any form of justice that animals deserve. Punishing an activist intending to raise awareness instead of the people committing the violent act is a direct attempt to silence the public. These laws are currently active in six states and are itching to be passed in many more. The prevention of passing these laws is now more crucial than ever, especially considering that the laws also have harmful effects outside the scope of animal welfare, such as the surrounding environment, workers’ health and food safety. With this being said, protection laws are risking way too much to benefit the economy. It’s a selfish approach that trades off more than it receives in return.

Alexis Fischer is a junior double-majoring in English and environmental science.