CNN has once again broken a major story: Whole Foods is expensive.
The article states that the market for 'green' items may have peaked. A combination of high prices and healthy (?) skepticism is turning American consumers away from organic grocers like the aforementioned Whole Foods.
And now, only 45% of consumers think that organic food is "good for them".
I guess Whole Foods forgot to buy ad space on CNN this month.
As all of us who shop organic know by now, Whole Foods is a behemoth evil chain capitalizing on the expendable dollars of hipsters and yuppies (and the poor folks who have no other nearby option for buying organic). Savvy organic buyers have long ago moved on to smaller organic grocers, farmers markets, and the Internet. The idea that because a gallon of milk at Whole Foods runs $7.00, the American consumer won't buy organic milk is like saying that because a Cadillac costs $60K, American consumers won't buy cars.
If folks are concerned about the high price of organic items, then do the responsible thing: buy them. It's a basic law of economics: the more people buy something, the lower the price will go. Local organic grocers have no interest in ripping people off. That's an easy way to go out of business. If organic grocers could sell their products for less, they would. But the demand has to be there.
If consumers would insist on organic goods and refrain from shopping at the local Safeway or Super Fresh or Food Lion or Wal Mart or whatever your local corporate mega-grocer happens to be, then the price would even out.
Don't let the dupes at CNN -- America's greatest source for selective reporting -- tell you otherwise.
Showing posts with label CNN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CNN. Show all posts
27 April 2008
24 July 2007
Politics and Food: the CNN / YouTube Debate
"What the mass media offers is not popular art, but entertainment which is intended to be consumed like food, forgotten, and replaced by a new dish." -- W.H. Auden
More than ever.
I watched the CNN/YouTube debate last night, and the similarities between it and the nation's fast-food were more than canny. First of all, by means of format, the fact that the questions in the debate came from 'average citizens' obscured how those questions were chosen. As I watched this infomercial-dressed-up-like-a-presidential-debate play out, I considered its likeness to the advertising put into fast-food.
Consider the 'Have it your way' campaign. Seriously now. Unless 'your way' includes the global mass production of standardized patties of cow slathered in American cheese on a stale bun, you'll probably soon come to the conclusion that you're really getting it 'their way'. You basically get to choose the condiments.
Hold the onions. There, that makes me feel in control. Makes me feel like my voice matters. I'm loving it.
Secondly, it impressed me to no end how much the nicety-patrol on Anderson Cooper's blog commended him for keeping the candidates to the thirty-second time limit set for answering questions that are purported to have reflected the feelings and fears of the common folk. Apparently CNN believes that any candidate should be able to respond serious on matters of policy and moral courage in the amount of time it takes to gulp a 64oz Mountain Dew.
Lastly, let's talk about the cynicism. Watching this debate through my occasionally failing old DSL, I couldn't help but think how happy the handlers of these professional politicians must have felt to have had this opportunity fall in their lap. I mean, the ability to take part in a historically hyper-promoted candidates' debate and not have to worry about any follow-up questions or rebuttals! Amazing. Everything about this debate was designed for the soundbite (go figure, but really this was just over-the-top). He or she with the best speech-writers and campaign managers came out on top, as usual. Those candidates marginalized by this format (including some very intelligent and experienced people... you know who they are) either go for laughs or become the brunt of them. The whole thing is a sham. And we all know this.
Deep down we know that this kind of commercialization of political discourse is poison. It may taste good while it's going down, but it's gonna be Tums for dessert.
More than ever.
I watched the CNN/YouTube debate last night, and the similarities between it and the nation's fast-food were more than canny. First of all, by means of format, the fact that the questions in the debate came from 'average citizens' obscured how those questions were chosen. As I watched this infomercial-dressed-up-like-a-presidential-debate play out, I considered its likeness to the advertising put into fast-food.
Consider the 'Have it your way' campaign. Seriously now. Unless 'your way' includes the global mass production of standardized patties of cow slathered in American cheese on a stale bun, you'll probably soon come to the conclusion that you're really getting it 'their way'. You basically get to choose the condiments.
Hold the onions. There, that makes me feel in control. Makes me feel like my voice matters. I'm loving it.
Secondly, it impressed me to no end how much the nicety-patrol on Anderson Cooper's blog commended him for keeping the candidates to the thirty-second time limit set for answering questions that are purported to have reflected the feelings and fears of the common folk. Apparently CNN believes that any candidate should be able to respond serious on matters of policy and moral courage in the amount of time it takes to gulp a 64oz Mountain Dew.
Lastly, let's talk about the cynicism. Watching this debate through my occasionally failing old DSL, I couldn't help but think how happy the handlers of these professional politicians must have felt to have had this opportunity fall in their lap. I mean, the ability to take part in a historically hyper-promoted candidates' debate and not have to worry about any follow-up questions or rebuttals! Amazing. Everything about this debate was designed for the soundbite (go figure, but really this was just over-the-top). He or she with the best speech-writers and campaign managers came out on top, as usual. Those candidates marginalized by this format (including some very intelligent and experienced people... you know who they are) either go for laughs or become the brunt of them. The whole thing is a sham. And we all know this.
Deep down we know that this kind of commercialization of political discourse is poison. It may taste good while it's going down, but it's gonna be Tums for dessert.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
