Death on a Factory Farm

In exposing animal cruelty, Death on a Factory Farm inspires your outrage, a first step toward changing weak laws.

Death on a Factory Farm

Airtime: Monday, 10pm ET
Cast: "Pete," Bradley Miller, Frank Forchione, Ken Wiles, Joe Wiles, Dusty Stroud, Jr.
MPAA rating: N/A
Network: HBO
US release date: 2009-03-16
This job becomes you. You eat it, you breathe it, you sleep it.

-- Pete

"Pete" lives in scare quotes. He doesn't go by his real name, and has changed his legal name more than once, to protect his family and hide his past from current acquaintances. He spends his time on the road and alone, living in motels and working crap jobs. Specifically, he works undercover at places where animals are abused, an investigator equipped with a hidden camera and a sense of mission. "There's a lot of different evils in the world," observes "Pete." "But to animals, it happens on a mass scale."

Pete appears in a minimalist disguise -- facial hair, trucker's cap, and sunglasses -- and speaks earnestly, his outrage contained but obvious. Death on a Factory Farm, a documentary by Sarah Teale and Tom Simon, tracks Pete's efforts to produce evidence of abuse at the Wiles Hog Farm in Creston, Ohio. He's sent in by the Humane Farming association (HFA), a group that monitors and tries to make legal cases against abusers. "More than 10 billion animals are raised for consumption in the U.S. every year," reads an explanatory title card at the start of the film. "Most on sprawling, industrialized 'factory farms.'"

The Wiles operation is both typical and shocking. As Pete says more than once during his assignment, he's instructed to obtain footage of an especially heinous practice -- hanging downed sows to death, by chains on forklifts -- as this constitutes the best hope of HFA and their attorneys to convict the Wiles of animal cruelty. "It's definitely one of the most cruel things I've done in my life" Pete says when the animals are killed. "And I will never forget it, but to the rest of these guys, it seemed to be not a big fucking deal" footage shows them smiling and joking, their grins ugly.

When he gets these images, his camera low and the dying animals screaming, the painful mission seems accomplished: "It was the best day for the investigation because I got what I was there to get, but it was a bad day." He and the original tipster to HFA, a worker on the farm named Ingrid, watch the footage on his laptop. She cries. He's quiet as she burbles, "That pig wants to live, just like everybody else."

The problem is that farmers don't see pigs as anywhere near "like everybody else." The framers see their livestock as just that -- commodities to be produced and sold. This premise, Pete surmises, allows them to toss the pigs like sacks into bins and against walls, pile them on top of one another, keep sows in breeding and farrowing crates for months, such that the animals cannot move and develop sores from rubbing against crate walls and suffering the unstoppable demands of their hungry litters. As Pete says on his first day of the assignment, listing the maltreatments, "This stuff looks really nasty, pigs cannibalizing each other and beating little piglets over the head, that kind of shit... I think this is gonna be some nasty nasty work."

It is that and worse Much like his previous work for Dealing Dogs, another HBO documentary, on the horrors inflicted by "Class B" dealers of animals to veterinary schools and research labs, this film showcases the undercover footage -- usually accompanied by plaintive piano and strings. It further frames and directs your horrified responses to such imagery through Pete's personal story, his sacrifice, commitment, and anger. A photo of Pete with his childhood best friend, his dog (Pete's eyes blurred, like the suspects on Cops), he explains, "I have made a conscious decision that I put the animals before myself... It is a lonely fuckin' life. You're either out in the middle of nowhere somewhere, working with a bunch of people that you hate, or even if you do make friends out there and some people treat you well, that's it. You're not gonna be able to keep in touch with them and say, 'Hey it's me, this is what I was really doing, this is why I had to lie to you.' You just fuckin' split, and that piece of your life is gone. It is gone forever and you're never gonna get it back."

Repressing his emotions in order to do the job, Pete says he's too much of "an asshole" to sustain a relationship. Instead, as the film shows, he sacrifices himself to the cause -- appearing in court and enduring humiliations, seeing video evidence re-read to seem "ambiguous," or not quite proof of cruelty. If one veterinarian called by the prosecution of the Wiles (father Ken, son Joe) asserts the sow hanging is "animal cruelty" and not in line with Ohio's vague "protocols on swine euthanasia," the defense brings in another vet to say, "I can't tell if the pig is suffering. Tell me what the pig was before it came to this state."

The film has set up the courtroom scenes so your emotion runs with HFA and Pete. The defendants look snidely, their lawyers wily, and their fellow farmers, who understandably resent such investigations, seem ignorant ("I don't think we can have these types of people come in here and destroy our business," offers one dairy farmer outside the courtroom). The over-used piano, the personal melodrama, and the sheer horrors exposed here don't detract from the central point, however. And that is, that the farmers don't come up with their cruelties in vacuums and they're not "bad apples." While many do follow humane practice guidelines -- even if, as the film points out, "Virtually no federal laws mandate the humane treatment of farm animals. Most state laws are weak and rarely enforced" -- many others treat their commodities as such. In exposing this behavior, both viscerally and sentimentally, Death on a Factory Farm inspires your outrage, a first step toward changing those laws.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.