The problem, though, is that the Times blew it. The story - as reported by Stephanie Strom and Sabrina Tavernise - spends more time questioning the use of undercover video footage than highlighting the brutality of its content. Ironically, while the article implicitly challenges the legitimacy of Direct Action Everywhere's undercover images, it evidently has no problem including (without critical commentary) promotional material from Petaluma Farms (such as a link to its Facebook page with videos on it, now dead.)
Most of the Times piece is dedicated to allowing the industry to defend itself rather than driving home the details of the video, which it calls "disturbing" in its lead, but never indicates why. Before offering any of the video's content - which, as you can see for yourself, is horrific - the article instead focuses on this point: "The hens in the video belong to Petaluma Farms, whose owners assert that the group is distorting and exaggerating the conditions under which its organic and conventional eggs are raised." With that, the tables are turned and the investigation is under scrutiny.