The Accidental Hedonist's Guide to:







My Book





99 Drams of Whiskey:The Accidental Hedonist's Quest for the Perfect Shot and the History of the Drink




Communication


Mass-Produced Organic - Questions of Faith

08/11/06, by Kate Hopkins Email 1563 views • Categories: Organics

Jack sent me a link about the following product releases: Kelloggs and Keebler (Kelloggs owns Keebler, for those of you who need a scorecard to follow along) recently released a new line of organic products for some of their better selling wares.

And thus, here is the picture that illustrates the thousand words of contradictions that must be going on in the minds of organic advocates everywhere.

There are some out there who will question the motivations of the Kelloggs company. Here are several products, some of which are deeply ensconced in pop culture, who are now entering the realm of organics - a food production philosophy which, until recently, has been strictly a counter-culture approach.

This is the same reason why Wal-Marts organic announcement raised so many eyebrows. Can an institution effectively implement processes and philosphies that were initially designed to combat these institutions? Can they implement them without compromising and/or altering the initial ideals that the organic movement was founded?

If, in looking at the box of Organic Rice Krispies, your mind said something along the lines of "Oh sweet Jesus, this looks ridiculous' or 'Muh- WHA? Kelloggs Organics?', then it's likely that there's an initial and cynical doubt in both the practices and motivations of the Kelloggs and Wal-Marts of the world.

But my question is this - If the organic standards are not diluted, should the motivations of any of the institutions using the "organic" label be questioned? If McDonalds started selling "Organic Big Macs', should we roll our eyes at McDonalds for missing the point or welcome them for being responsible capitalists?

Personally, I'm a littled jaded at these larger companies to trust them completely. The bottom line for most of them is increasing their stock price- period. If producing organic doesn't add to their profit line, then I believe it's unlikely that these products will stick around.

However, until it's determined whether or not these products are viable to these corporate institutions, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm interested in seeing the consumer response to these products, and what lengths these corporations will go to produce them.

Conversely, I'm also interested in seeing how much influence these companies exert on the USDA to change the organic standards. Because it is in that influence that we'll see the corporations true colors.

Technorati Tags: , ,


Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Jack [Member] Email · http://www.ForkandBottle.com
"Personally, I'm a littled jaded at these larger companies to trust them completely." I don't think you can trust them at all. They only do what's best for their corporation's interests, which is almost never what's best for the consumer.

What I do like is how BIG the Organic is on three of those boxes. It shouts Organic. It might record a subliminal message in some consumers brains - that hey, even Kellogg's is telling us Organic is Important.
PermalinkPermalink 08/11/06 @ 08:04
Comment from: Mithrandir [Visitor] · http://www.soundandfury.info/
"Organic" is the new "natural". My girlfriend works for a company that mass-produces packaged food, often under contract from retailers, for their in-store brands. For the last year, "Organic" has been a big thing. Their customers want to put it on their labels - not for altruistic reasons, but because it sells well and the margins are good.

You can bet that they will stick to the letter of the regulations, but go no further. It is, after all, the duty of a publicly held corporation to make money. It is illegal for altruistic concerns to override profit (see Dodge vs Ford Motor Company).
PermalinkPermalink 08/11/06 @ 10:01
Comment from: Barbara Fisher [Visitor] · http://www.tigersandstrawberries.com/
The Walmartization and corporatization of organic has both positive and negative results.

One good thing is that more land will be tilled under organic methods. It will be mechanized organic methods, but it will involve less toxic pesticide and fertilizer use both in the US and around the world. (Remember, there are farmers all over the world who supply Walmart with their food--so, if Chinese farmers can go organic and sell cheaper organic food to Walmart than US farmers, Walmart will buy it.)

That is undeniably good for the environment and for human beings, because that means less toxic pesticide residue in the earth, the air, the water and our bodies.

The issue of weakening organic standars is a possible negative. While I have written in defense of the "synthetic food additives allowed by the National Organics Standards Board" in the past, and I still agree with my findings and essays on that issue--it should surprise no one that larger organic producers -are- working to weaken the meaning of the word, "organic."

That can be a problem, but it is also a problem that can be circumvented by strong consumer vigilance and pressure.

Remember--just because a product exists does not mean that we consumers -must- buy it. If we don't agree with a company's policies or practices, we can boycott that company and urge other consumers to do the same thing.

Another negative is that while the corporatization of organic food can be seen as "good for the farmers," it is really only good for the handful of huge corporate megafarms in the US who supply the majority of the organic produce to big retailers like Walmart. It is actually not helpful at all to smaller farmers whose products are arguably even better in flavor, freshness and quality than the large producers.

So, in cases when it comes to produce that I can buy locally grown and organic--I prefer it that way. The food has been in transit less time and thus has more nutritive value by the time it comes to me than the "fresh" produce trucked in from California or shipped in from China or South America.

One needs to remember that this is not a simple, black and white issue. There are not purely "good guys" and purely "bad guys" when it comes to organics.
PermalinkPermalink 08/11/06 @ 10:15
Comment from: Michael [Visitor] · http://thedarkerside.to/rants/
The problem with Organic is that most people don't know what it means.

I bet, if you ask 100 random people on the street what "Organic" means the answer you'll get is that it is "better for you" and "more expensive".

That is what it boils down to for most people and the end result of this is that those who can afford it buy organic, the rest just says: "Well I wish".

So seeing companies like Kelloggs add to this new food market isn't surprising. They can get more money and a higher profit. The question is if Organic mass production is actually sustainable, and I would say no.

(I honestly do believe that there is a certain fallacy in Organics, as most of the time it is not taken into account where the food is grown and how it is transported, so any environmental gain that may have been achieved during growing is most like blasted out the exhaust of an airplane or truck).
PermalinkPermalink 08/11/06 @ 10:47
Comment from: Karen Coates [Visitor] · http://ramblingspoon.com
Plenty of farmers here in Asia are ready, willing and able to capitalize on the growing "organic" trend overseas (and if they're not able, plenty of NGOs are willing to help them). Many have farmed organically for generations; others are perfectly happy to adopt new practices if they see a market in the US or Europe.

When a company such as Wal-Mart goes organic, it gives hope to thousands of struggling farmers in countries such as Cambodia.
PermalinkPermalink 08/11/06 @ 20:25
Comment from: william Papke [Visitor]
Have you looked at the quality of the organic produce at Wal-Mart or any of the traditional chains? Less than desirable, wilted lettuce, barely edible grapes etc. Earthbound seems to have the lock on organic produce, especially greens and celery and it is often old and limp. I have no idea if Earthbound ships poor quality produce or if my local grocers, including Whole Foods simply don't watch their stock. Either way, factory farming misses the whole point. However, without factory farming it would be difficult to buy organic in Decemeber in New York.
PermalinkPermalink 08/13/06 @ 07:16
Comment from: Michael [Visitor] · http://thedarkerside.to/rants/
Papke,

part of the idea of Organic is to eat "in season", and that in a way also means preserving when the fruits are ripe (canning etc.).
PermalinkPermalink 08/14/06 @ 10:57
Comment from: Laura M [Visitor]
When it comes to cereals and other processed foods, I'm not sure there really are many "little natural foods companies". Most of them are subsidiaries of the big guys already. For a listing of who owns who you can look here: http://www.endgame.org/organics.html

I agree - the original concept was to eat within the season, and preserve for later.
PermalinkPermalink 08/14/06 @ 12:38

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.

Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email and url)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will NOT be displayed.))
What color is a red balloon?