This is kind of a nitpick, but I wish articles like this specified somehow that Costco buys _dead_ chickens, and dismembered to boot. I know everybody reading it knows that, but I don't like euphemisms/language games that divorce consumers from the choice to eat an animal that was killed for you.
I'm not seeing any euphemisms or language games. In English, chicken both means the animal and the meat, so there is no game in calling dead chickens just chickens.
Anybody who knows what Costco is knows what these chickens are for - for eating. What else could they be for - recreating all Hollywood movies with all-chicken cast? I thing demanding that media would push anti-meat propaganda into every article mentioning animal-derived food is a bit too far. I mean, you have the right to your opinions and your consumer behavior, but nobody is obliged to share them and propagandize them for you.
Responsible or sustainable animal agriculture is a pipe dream at this point. With 7+ billion people on a planet facing environmental destruction it’s irresponsible to advocate for the consumption of meat.
