Poultry communities support less regulations on poultry farms despite donor funded activism from big city newspapers

Over the past several weeks, we’ve focused intensely on the importance of poultry farmers to North Carolina’s rural counties. We highlighted the difference about how poultry communities really feel about farmers, compared to McClatchy’s donor-funded “advocacy dressed up as news reporting.”

McClatchy’s series of hit pieces tried to substitute the paper’s big city interests for the clear desires of those who live near, and rely upon, the poultry farmers.

It’s yet another glaring example of a certain class presuming to know what’s best for others. The condescension is made all the worse by the fact that secretive donor interests sponsored the series, which selected certain individuals who agreed with their agenda to misrepresent the views of poultry communities.

It’s part of what’s so wrong with today’s media environment.

The big city papers purport to play savior to “backward” rural counties by pressing for more regulation and new laws, when in fact, the majority of people do not trust them or want to hear what they have to say.

We already shared that massive majorities in North Carolina’s 23 top poultry-producing counties think poultry farmers have a positive impact on their communities (57%agree – 26% disagree).

Unlike McClatchy, we actually asked a large number of residents for their opinion on increased poultry regulation. By a 26-point margin, people in poultry counties view more regulation as a net negative:

By a 55%-31% margin, residents of poultry counties agree that “North Carolina’s poultry farms are already closely regulated by the state, and there is no need for additional regulations.”
 
Shouldn’t the people who live in these areas have the best perspectives on what happens in their own communities? The McClatchy hit pieces barely made an effort to offer these types of perspectives, probably because balance wasn’t the point.
 
Instead, the goal seemed to be political action and news award nominations rather than objective truth-telling.
 
In the months following McClatchy’s hit pieces, the outlet won three “awards,” pursued (but lost) a Pulitzer Prize, and generated a proposed state law and a frivolous, federal Title VI complaint against the poultry farmers.
 
To summarize what we’re up against: A big city newspaper, funded by a secretive network of climate activists, parachuted into rural North Carolina pretending to play savior by bashing farmers that rural residents actually like and support. Their end goal appears to be more regulation and new laws that residents in poultry-producing counties don’t want and, in fact, would actively oppose.
 
This is why the North Carolina Ag Partnership exists. A sophisticated long-game play occurred, and we immediately went to work exposing it, generating national media interest in the process.
 
What’s at stake if we don’t push back? More regulation and new laws crafted, directly or indirectly, in the interest of secretive donor networks and urban media conglomerates, not the regular North Carolinians who would suffer the effects.
 
We don’t know who the next target will be, but we’ve written the playbook for how to fight back.