Skip to main content

Campbell's Label- Brilliant Strategy

Many of the folks excited about food labels that indicate ingredients produced by a genetically engineered plants are taking a victory lap. 




We've seen the tweets about Campbell's decision, and it makes me genuinely curious.  Why are they so excited?  This is not a mandatory label.  This is a voluntary label, something I've always supported, and think is the best solution. 



"Partially produced with genetic engineering." I can live with that, which is why I don't think the activists will. 


Campbell's is rather brilliant.  They did this for one reason, and that's to do the experiment.  



  •  Now that Campbell's has satisfied the "right to know" will that be sufficient? 
  • Will there now be calls to ban or boycott Campbell's products?

Essentially they must have drawn the short straw at the Grocery Manufacturers of America Secret Conspiracy Meeting and they get to take the first step.  If nothing changes, then the activists were correct, nobody will care, information flows, everyone is happy. 


But could this be even something bigger?  I think so. 


If HR1599 does not pass (and I don't care either way, it is lots of -negatives if it does) the Senate, then we'll be back to state-by-state labeling initiatives. 


But if products are voluntarily labeled, then why do we need state laws? 


It forces the hand of the activists.  Once companies are providing that information voluntarily, the consumer has the "right to know" they claim is at the heart of the issue, so there's no need for new regulations!


So then the fight for labels is over.  Solved. 


Or is it? 


Not!


This rather clever move will unveil the true motivations. Activists will continue to call for labels using state ballot initiatives. It will show, clearly, that this is not about a choice, but it is about banning a technology by causing hardship to producers, and driving them to source non-GE ingredients. 


Will we see a call for avoiding Campbell's products?  By labeling their products they painted activists into the corner.  They can't complain about GE ingredients in Campbell's products, but at the same time are against them! 


It is a curious problem.  How do you get people to boycott something that has been fully compliant in your demands? 


We will be watching this situation closely. 

Popular posts from this blog

Scientific American Destroys Public Trust in Science

This is a sad epitaph, parting words to an old friend that is now gone, leaving in a puff of bitter betrayal. 
When I was a kid it was common for my mom to buy me a magazine if I was sick and home from school.  I didn't want MAD Magazine or comic books.  I preferred Scientific American
The once stalwart publication held a unique spot at the science-public interface, bringing us interesting and diverse stories of scientific interest, long before the internet made such content instantly accessible.  It was our trusted pipeline to the new edges of scientific discovery, from the mantle of the earth to the reaches of space, and every critter in between.
But like so much of our trusted traditional science media, Scientific American has traded its credibility for the glitz of post-truth non-scientific beliefs and the profits of clickbait.The problem is that when a trusted source publishes false information (or worse, when it hijacked by activists) it destroys trust in science, trust in s…

Chipotle's Ag-vertising to Fix their Anti-Ag Image

After years of anti-farmer rhetoric, disgusting anti-agriculture videos, and trashing farmer seed choice, Chipotle now seems to have found a love for the American farmer that is as warm and inviting as the gooey core of a steak burrito.  Their new "Cultivate the Future of Farming" campaign raises awareness of the hardship being experienced in agriculture, and then offers their thoughts and some seed grants in order to reverse it. 

But are they solving a problem that they were instrumental in creating? 

The crisis in agriculture is real, with farmers suffering from low prices, astronomical costs, and strangling regulation.  Farmer suicides are a barometer of the crisis.  Farms, from commodity crops to dairies, are going out of business daily. It is good to see a company raising awareness. 


From Chipotle's website- The "challenge is real" and "It's a hard living"-- and companies like Chipotle were central in creating those problems. 

However, Chipotle&#…

Mangling Reality and Targeting Scientists

Welcome to 2019, and one thing that remains constant is that scientists engaging the public will continue to be targeted for harassment and attempted reputation harm.  

The good news is that it is not working as well as it used to.  People are disgusted by their tactics, and only a handful of true-believers acknowledge their sites as credible. 

But for those on the fence I thought it might be nice to post how a website like SourceWatch uses a Wikipedia-mimic interface to spread false and/or misleading information about public scientists. 

Don't get me wrong, this is not crying victim.  I'm actually is screaming empowerment.  I spent the time to correct the record, something anyone can check.  Please look into their allegations and mine, and see who has it right. 

This is published by the Center for Media and Democracy.  Sadly, such pages actually threaten democracy by providing a forum for false information that makes evidence-based decisions in policy issues more challenging.  It…