Talk:Tyson Foods/Archive 1

POV
Just noticed this: in the "Tyson Renewable Energy and the Environment" section, the linked footnote is from the tyson corporate intranet (not accessible from outside)! that pretty much proves that the poster,, is a Tyson employee.

So almost all content on this page has been created by tyson itself out of its own PR resources. I have posted a complaint to the COI (confilct of interest) board for resolution. BradB 19:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as documenting the source of the information this evidence is pretty damning. The phrase " the world’s largest processor and marketer of chicken, beef, and pork" from paragraph one is found almost 300 times on the corporate website; check google: search for phrase on tyson.com. In paragraph two, the phrase "The company produces a wide variety of protein-based and prepared food products" is also a staple of Tyson press releases and occurs on their website a like number of times: search for phrase on tyson.com. The phrase "value-added chicken, beef and pork" is a tyson corporate coinage that occurs nowhere on the net except for in tyson press releases or a few articles based on them.

The charity section comes pretty much ver batim from a Dec. 4, 2006 press release from the company, availble on the corporate website at (captioned as a "news release" using the current vogue of corporately produced fake news).

The Sustainability section simply links to a tyson produced report rebutting the widespread allogations of enironmental abuses.

And the "controversy" section has been polluted by scare quotes and other interventions of Ederdn, the probable Tyson employee. The final insult is the last paragraph which lauds Tysons treatment of animals; the source of these sentences are the tyson press release of october 5, 2006, available at their website at

Basically, the entire page is corporate propaganda and probably should be deleted and rewritten from scratch. -- BradB 00:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

A check of the IP 199.66.3.5 confirms that it is in fact from inside of tyson foods corp; a traceroute goes through tyson-foods-inc-1105186.cust-rtr.swbell.net. So as suspected, this pages is monitered and edited by Tyson itself, against the polilcy of Wikipedia. A new user,  Ederdn (talk • contribs) has made subsequent changes many of which are suspiciously of the same type and is also probably from inside Tyson. BradB 00:02, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Also innappropriate is the use of quotation marks around "investigator" - I don't know who's been editing this page but it also fails to mention the company being included in Fast Food Nation (which is noteworthy) and needs a more fair-minded approach. This is an example of people taking advantage of wiki. It should definitely be assessed for neutrality. Cold December 23:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Much of this material seems to be taken directly from the corporate website, press releases, etc, and it seems to be monitored by the company itself, which deletes critical material. It contains inappropriate POV, phrases like: "Tyson is proud to be a partner." And the controversy section doesn't include information on the human rights abuses, union struggles, environmental polution, and other trouble that has been attributed to the corporation. A cursery look at the history seems to indicate that mayn of these controversies had been documented in the past, but were deleted. The current state of the page looks more like corporate PR than encyclopedia article. BradB 15:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Tyson is th largest donator of food in the world and had spent millions to research to better kill the meat we eat. this fact should be known! I don't know who put the Tyson facts on the page, but PETA almost certainly put their facts on the page. cody.valleymotors@hotmail.com

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.66.3.5 (talk • contribs).

The previous assertion is not sufficient grounds for removing the POV tag unilaterally. It has been restored. There should be some consensus regarding the satus of the article. The tag does not say that the article is definitively POV (a different tag does that), it only asserts that there are reasons to believe that it is (outlined above). User 199.66.3.5 removed the phrase "is proud", but it doesn't change the fact that the source of the material is verbatim taken from Tyson press releases and unquoted and unattributed.

I live in a Tysons growing area and just found a live chicken on the road that fell off a Tysons truck. Its feet are all scabbed from having to walk in its own ammonia-filled feces in the Tyson chicken houses, its feathers are half fallen and worn off, and it is just an atrocious sight. I say this as someone who just cooked and ate turkey for Christmas, so me and the folks at PETA aren't exactly going steady -- yet, I am still pretty appalled by the shape of this chicken. I find it odd to log on to Wikipedia in researching chickens (now that I have one) only to find a lot of "Tyson cares about its chickens" propaganda.

Please see | Neutral Point of View, POV, POV Check.

Also 199.66.3.5 (see 199.66.3.5 contribs)looks suspiciously like an interested party given the articles that the user has contributed to, including the one on the location of Tyson, Springdale Arkansas, and likely should not be contributing to the article at all.BradB 18:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I will admit, I am a Tyson employee (BTW, I am NOT 199.66.3.5). I work in Maintenance in a plant, so I am not in management, and I see firsthand what goes on inside the plant from many angles. I do have to say, in OUR plant (I cannot speak for any other plants), there are serious efforts taken to maintain the humane treatment of the birds. There are monitored cameras present in the live hang area (where the birds are hung on the line), as well as cameras all throughout the kill room, and the picking room, where the bird is scalded and its fathers removed after its death. However, I have heard some horrific stories from other plants as well, so I cannot say that they are all up to such standards. Upon reading this article, I saw many familiar phrases. It is true how much we produce and about the size of hte company. But, this article is VERY limited in its scope and neutrality. Personally, I think a section should be written on the impacts that a Tyson complex has on its local community, good and bad. Our complex includes a Hatchery, Feedmill, Plant, and Wastewater facility. There have been many positive impacts, most notably jobs with good benefits; however, there are VERY negative impacts. The plant uses an ammonia refrigeration system, which presents a potential for a hazardous material release. Also, our plant does tend to release quite a bit of Carbon Dioxide, and we use HUGE amounts of water. Also, when the plant was built, a lot of hispanic immigrants were brought in to run it, severely limiting job opportunities for locals. (Nothing against hispanics, but the area had a high jobless rate)

This article is jsut not well-rounded. There are so many things left out of it that one cannot get an accurate image of the company. 65.114.125.169 23:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I haven't seen any mention of Tyson's indictment by the Justice Dept for smuggling undocumented workers to work at 15 of their plants! It's not only animals Tyson is exploiting to keep a hold on the market (see work of Steve Striffler 2005 for a detailed account) 128.223.227.160 04:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

other discussion
the link to john tyson, the ceo on the right side of the page, goes to some guy who is a judge...fyi

Removed the line: Tyson Foods uses chicken parts in its feed, and sends it to its farms, to feed its chicks leftover chicken. (Fast Food Nation, Page 287) This does not belong in the summery. If you want to add it, create a section on business practices and be sure to include that other poultry companies do the same. --Walzmyn 11:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I posted a controversy section detailing an undercover investigation at a Tyson plant. It contained factual information, and is relevant to this subject. I will try and post it again. If removed again, please give a reason why. --Cra7223

Why was the controversy page taken off?????????????????? it really happened