Corrupt Mainstream Media Versus Industry

[dennislmay]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/13/bpi-sues-abc-news-for-pink-slime-defamation/?test=latestnews

"The Dakota Dunes, S.D.-based meat processor is seeking $1.2 billion in damages for roughly 200 "false and misleading and defamatory" statements about the product officially known as lean, finely textured beef, said Dan Webb, BPI's Chicago-based attorney."

"...a practice that has been used for decades and meets federal food safety standards."

" Although several news organizations used the term "pink slime," Webb said ABC was being sued for attacking the company "night after night." The "defendants engaged in a monthlong vicious, concerted disinformation campaign against BPI," the lawsuit claims, citing 11 TV 14 online reports from March 7 to April 3."

The real shame is that ABC will most likely be able to hide behind the 1st amendment during discovery. It is unlikely BPI will be able to access the paperwork, phone, and e-mail trail proving the motivations and goals of this "protected" player [ABC] in the marketplace.

It isn't the first time this game has been played and not the first time the beef industry in South Dakota has taken a huge hit using the same tactics. Remember there are always competitors and/or investors who come out ahead when a corporation takes such a hit. Follow the trail where it leads.

Dennis

[syrakusos]

Huffington Post (of course).

Pink Slime Maker Sues ABC News For $1.2 Billion: Lawsuit Accuses Network Of Defamation

Since their inception, BPI has been recognized as a meat industry leader for food safety innovations and their commitment to making the highest-quality lean beef. The International Association for Food Protection honored BPI with its most prestigious award, the Black Pearl Award, for BPI’s efforts in advancing food safety and quality through consumer programs, employee relations, educational activities and adherence to standards. BPI was also recognized with the National Cattlemen’s Foundation’s Beef Industry Vision Award, the National Meat Association’s E. Floyd Forbes Award and the Food Quality Award.

BPI Company website here.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I have to disagree on this one.

Here's what I posted to an article on The Blaze:

I can’t speak for others, but I do know my problem with pink slime. It has nothing to do with nutritional value. I have no problem eating it when I need to cut expenses. But I want to choose what I put in my body and when.

Beef Products Inc. had convinced everyone, from fast food companies to supermarkets, to put pink slime in normal ground beef without telling the consumer. They just let people think they were getting normal cuts of beef ground up while sneaking this stuff in.

It ticks me off when they do that. I think it ticked off a lot of other people, too.

Beef Products Inc. learned a hard lesson about what happens when you deceive customers and get found out.

Now it’s crying to the courts.

Boo hoo.

I can think of a gazillion ways this stuff could have been marketed and sold other than pulling one over on customers. And that includes neutralizing the term "pink slime" easily.

Hell, has anyone gone south over hot dogs? Imagine what that's got in it. Yet it's a booming business.

Now anyone producing this mystery meat is going to have to try to do that with a hugely tarnished image and a horrible nickname for the product.

What the hell were these guys thinking?

I'm sorry.

This was just plain old garden-variety greed making the business owners check their brains at the door when they went to work.

Michael

[dennislmay]

I have to disagree on this one.

Here's what I posted to an article on The Blaze:

I can’t speak for others, but I do know my problem with pink slime. It has nothing to do with nutritional value. I have no problem eating it when I need to cut expenses. But I want to choose what I put in my body and when.

Beef Products Inc. had convinced everyone, from fast food companies to supermarkets, to put pink slime in normal ground beef without telling the consumer. They just let people think they were getting normal cuts of beef ground up while sneaking this stuff in.

It ticks me off when they do that. I think it ticked off a lot of other people, too.

Beef Products Inc. learned a hard lesson about what happens when you deceive customers and get found out.

Now it’s crying to the courts.

Boo hoo.

I can think of a gazillion ways this stuff could have been marketed and sold other than pulling one over on customers. And that includes neutralizing the term "pink slime" easily.

Hell, has anyone gone south over hot dogs? Imagine what that's got in it. Yet it's a booming business.

Now anyone producing this mystery meat is going to have to try to do that with a hugely tarnished image and a horrible nickname for the product.

What the hell were these guys thinking?

I'm sorry.

This was just plain old garden-variety greed making the business owners check their brains at the door when they went to work.

Michael

Do you have an example of where deceptive labeling or advertising was used to sell the product? I have not heard that was ever the issue.

The issue was ABC News acting like something new had occurred [not true] and there was something bad about it [also not true]. The

government controls the food labeling, food safety, and advertising language that can be used to sell the product. ABC is an actor in the

market but will hide behind the 1st amendment to gather advantages other actors do not enjoy - affecting at least $1.2 billion in the market

to someones disadvantage - and advantage to others. In the past this gimmick has been used for insiders to gain financial advantage -

I personally know this to be a fact from workplace contacts. The question is do the benefactors of the ABC hit job get away with it like usual?

Does ABC get a way with it? Everyone got away with the last time S.D. beef took such a hit so expect more of the same I guess.

Dennis

[jts]

I have to disagree on this one.

Here's what I posted to an article on The Blaze:

I can’t speak for others, but I do know my problem with pink slime. It has nothing to do with nutritional value. I have no problem eating it when I need to cut expenses. But I want to choose what I put in my body and when.

Beef Products Inc. had convinced everyone, from fast food companies to supermarkets, to put pink slime in normal ground beef without telling the consumer. They just let people think they were getting normal cuts of beef ground up while sneaking this stuff in.

It ticks me off when they do that. I think it ticked off a lot of other people, too.

Beef Products Inc. learned a hard lesson about what happens when you deceive customers and get found out.

Now it’s crying to the courts.

Boo hoo.

Michael

You have no right to know what is in the food you eat if it implies an obligation on someone to tell you. Such an obligation would be a violation of their freedom. Any law that requires a list of ingredients is a bad law.

[dennislmay]

I have to disagree on this one.

Here's what I posted to an article on The Blaze:

I can’t speak for others, but I do know my problem with pink slime. It has nothing to do with nutritional value. I have no problem eating it when I need to cut expenses. But I want to choose what I put in my body and when.

Beef Products Inc. had convinced everyone, from fast food companies to supermarkets, to put pink slime in normal ground beef without telling the consumer. They just let people think they were getting normal cuts of beef ground up while sneaking this stuff in.

It ticks me off when they do that. I think it ticked off a lot of other people, too.

Beef Products Inc. learned a hard lesson about what happens when you deceive customers and get found out.

Now it’s crying to the courts.

Boo hoo.

Michael

You have no right to know what is in the food you eat if it implies an obligation on someone to tell you. Such an obligation would be a violation of their freedom. Any law that requires a list of ingredients is a bad law.

I'm sure the ingredient labels told exactly what was in the product. Sensationalism occured because someone was driving it from behind the scenes for their own purposes.

Dennis

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Do you have an example of where deceptive labeling or advertising was used to sell the product? I have not heard that was ever the issue.

Dennis,

When a supermarket puts out ground beef and has a grinder in the back and says we grind our own beef, but puts in super-processed stuff in the mix without telling anyone, that is not what I would call an exemplary performance of honesty.

That happened all the time. You need an example? Really?

Anyway, we are not discussing rights or limitations. We are discussing piss-poor marketing practices and freedom of the press. (And, no, I don't think ABC is a good organization with pure motives.)

Once again, notice that the press cannot do with hot dogs what it did with pink slime.

Why?

Because everyone knows they are crap. They just taste great and everyone's fine with that. No one is putting hot dog meat out and calling it something else.

Respect for customers is still a value to me and a strong market is still a hammer that comes down hard on violators when they get a little too cute--as this case proves.

Michael

[dennislmay]

Do you have an example of where deceptive labeling or advertising was used to sell the product? I have not heard that was ever the issue.

Dennis,

When a supermarket puts out ground beef and has a grinder in the back and says we grind our own beef, but puts in super-processed stuff in the mix without telling anyone, that is not what I would call an exemplary performance of honesty.

That happened all the time. You need an example? Really?

Anyway, we are not discussing rights or limitations. We are discussing piss-poor marketing practices and freedom of the press. (And, no, I don't think ABC is a good organization with pure motives.)

Once again, notice that the press cannot do with hot dogs what it did with pink slime.

Why?

Because everyone knows they are crap. They just taste great and everyone's fine with that. No one is putting hot dog meat out and calling it something else.

Respect for customers is still a value to me and a strong market is still a hammer that comes down hard on violators when they get a little too cute--as this case proves.

Michael

Yes I need an example from a factory label - really. If some local store relabeled something for something it was not that is local fraud - unrelated to the company which sold a product

to them with a label. Could just as easily been any meat or non-meat product added to their ground beef if the labeling is not accurate - it is not accurate.

I want to see where the factory committed a labeling fraud - if not the story is just another in an endless series of the immune media being used for simple financial/stock fraud.

Dennis

[dennislmay]

Do you have an example of where deceptive labeling or advertising was used to sell the product? I have not heard that was ever the issue.

Dennis,

When a supermarket puts out ground beef and has a grinder in the back and says we grind our own beef, but puts in super-processed stuff in the mix without telling anyone, that is not what I would call an exemplary performance of honesty.

That happened all the time. You need an example? Really?

Anyway, we are not discussing rights or limitations. We are discussing piss-poor marketing practices and freedom of the press. (And, no, I don't think ABC is a good organization with pure motives.)

Once again, notice that the press cannot do with hot dogs what it did with pink slime.

Why?

Because everyone knows they are crap. They just taste great and everyone's fine with that. No one is putting hot dog meat out and calling it something else.

Respect for customers is still a value to me and a strong market is still a hammer that comes down hard on violators when they get a little too cute--as this case proves.

Michael

Yes I need an example from a factory label - really. If some local store relabeled something for something it was not that is local fraud - unrelated to the company which sold a product

to them with a label. Could just as easily been any meat or non-meat product added to their ground beef if the labeling is not accurate - it is not accurate.

I want to see where the factory committed a labeling fraud - if not the story is just another in an endless series of the immune media being used for simple financial/stock fraud.

Dennis

Two minutes on Google and the official USDA view is that adding lean, finely textured beef to ground beef is still ground beef so not only is there no health issue there is no

labeling issue on factory or retail ends. The ABC News piece is a hit piece - find the motive behind the hit piece if you want news. Either a PC Police food Nazi editor or stock fraud.

If you don't want ground beef don't buy ground beef. Locally [very rural] I can find at least a dozen varieties and types of ground beef or ground chuck in addition to other kinds

ground meat.

Dennis

[dennislmay]

I heard that lean, finely textured beef is processed with Rearden Metal

blades and you know what they say about Rearden Metal.

Dennis

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Dennis,

I'm not going to argue for good market practices if you think the public doesn't respond to poor ones.

The company needed to tell the public what is was doing to avoid a kaboom. You seem to think the market should have rewarded the company for not telling. Well things don't work that way with free markets.

You want a real victim? I've got one for you. I'm making it up, but I can easily imagine the following scenario (from seeing this stuff on the inside in other industries).

A new employee in quality control has been working diligently to make sure the products are up to snuff. One day he goes to the supermarket and detects he bought the company's processed meat mixed in with meat displayed like it had just been ground.

He goes back to his supervisor.

Employee: Sir, I believe we have a problem.

(He explains what he saw.)

Supervisor: Listen, your job is quality control, not sales and marketing. I suggest you stick to your area.

Employee: Yes, but sir, this thing has the potential to blow up and become a nightmare for our company.

Supervisor: Why? Because you say so? Hell, you're in quality control. Don't you know that our processed beef is just as (yada yada yada)? And don't you know that the government says we can mix it in?

Employee: Yes, but the problem is that the public thinks it is getting something else.

Supervisor: Well, what the public doesn't know won't hurt 'em. They won't care. Get back to work.

At the next employee review meeting, Employee was terminated because he was not a team player and was saying bad things about the company.

I feel for this kind of person. And I know he exists because I have known several in real life.

Now, about the agenda of ABC. In this case, I don't think an anti-business agenda was their prime motive. I think it was just plain old journalism cashing in on a gross-out-factor godsend.

Here's how it works. You find a person (or company) with its pants down and it has a major gross-out-factor that affects the majority of the public. You hammer it to death because people tune in.

End of journalism class.

In this case, the sellers were sneaking in their mixtures and selling the stuff as pure ground beef. You can argue all you want about technicalities, but when the average shopper goes to buy pure ground beef, he is thinking about cuts of beef that are ground up and that's all. He is not thinking about getting amonia-cured leftovers that were previously inedible.

If you sell him something different like that--something that has a gross-out-factor--and he finds out, he will get really, really pissed off. Which is what happened.

But he will tune in to whoever is talking about it. And ABC likes audience.

On our side, Rush Limbaugh used this journalism technique not too long ago. Sandra Fluke did that crazy stunt in front of Congress and Rush went in for the kill on the gross-out-factor. You--the taxpayer--are paying so an overgrown spoiled brat can get enough sex. The country went ewwwww. And he pounded the story for several days.

I believe there are some bad guys on the ABC side with the pink slime story, but I believe they caught a ride on this one. I don't think they were driving.

But what the hell. Spin it as makes you happy. They sure do.

I'm just not on board with your conclusions.

Michael

[dennislmay]

Dennis,

I'm not going to argue for good market practices if you think the public doesn't respond to poor ones.

The company needed to tell the public what is was doing to avoid a kaboom. You seem to think the market should have rewarded the company for not telling. Well things don't work that way with free markets.

You want a real victim? I've got one for you. I'm making it up, but I can easily imagine the following scenario (from seeing this stuff on the inside in other industries).

A new employee in quality control has been working diligently to make sure the products are up to snuff. One day he goes to the supermarket and detects he bought the company's processed meat mixed in with meat displayed like it had just been ground.

He goes back to his supervisor.

Employee: Sir, I believe we have a problem.

(He explains what he saw.)

Supervisor: Listen, your job is quality control, not sales and marketing. I suggest you stick to your area.

Employee: Yes, but sir, this thing has the potential to blow up and become a nightmare for our company.

Supervisor: Why? Because you say so? Hell, you're in quality control. Don't you know that our processed beef is just as (yada yada yada)? And don't you know that the government says we can mix it in?

Employee: Yes, but the problem is that the public thinks it is getting something else.

Supervisor: Well, what the public doesn't know won't hurt 'em. They won't care. Get back to work.

At the next employee review meeting, Employee was terminated because he was not a team player and was saying bad things about the company.

I feel for this kind of person. And I know he exists because I have known several in real life.

Now, about the agenda of ABC. In this case, I don't think an anti-business agenda was their prime motive. I think it was just plain old journalism cashing in on a gross-out-factor godsend.

Here's how it works. You find a person (or company) with its pants down and it has a major gross-out-factor that affects the majority of the public. You hammer it to death because people tune in.

End of journalism class.

In this case, the sellers were sneaking in their mixtures and selling the stuff as pure ground beef. You can argue all you want about technicalities, but when the average shopper goes to buy pure ground beef, he is thinking about cuts of beef that are ground up and that's all. He is not thinking about getting amonia-cured leftovers that were previously inedible.

If you sell him something different like that--something that has a gross-out-factor--and he finds out, he will get really, really pissed off. Which is what happened.

But he will tune in to whoever is talking about it. And ABC likes audience.

On our side, Rush Limbaugh used this journalism technique not too long ago. Sandra Fluke did that crazy stunt in front of Congress and Rush went in for the kill on the gross-out-factor. You--the taxpayer--are paying so an overgrown spoiled brat can get enough sex. The country went ewwwww. And he pounded the story for several days.

I believe there are some bad guys on the ABC side with the pink slime story, but I believe they caught a ride on this one. I don't think they were driving.

But what the hell. Spin it as makes you happy. They sure do.

I'm just not on board with your conclusions.

Michael

[dennislmay]

Dennis,

I'm not going to argue for good market practices if you think the public doesn't respond to poor ones.

The company needed to tell the public what is was doing to avoid a kaboom. You seem to think the market should have rewarded the company for not telling. Well things don't work that way with free markets.

You want a real victim? I've got one for you. I'm making it up, but I can easily imagine the following scenario (from seeing this stuff on the inside in other industries).

A new employee in quality control has been working diligently to make sure the products are up to snuff. One day he goes to the supermarket and detects he bought the company's processed meat mixed in with meat displayed like it had just been ground.

He goes back to his supervisor.

Employee: Sir, I believe we have a problem.

(He explains what he saw.)

Supervisor: Listen, your job is quality control, not sales and marketing. I suggest you stick to your area.

Employee: Yes, but sir, this thing has the potential to blow up and become a nightmare for our company.

Supervisor: Why? Because you say so? Hell, you're in quality control. Don't you know that our processed beef is just as (yada yada yada)? And don't you know that the government says we can mix it in?

Employee: Yes, but the problem is that the public thinks it is getting something else.

Supervisor: Well, what the public doesn't know won't hurt 'em. They won't care. Get back to work.

At the next employee review meeting, Employee was terminated because he was not a team player and was saying bad things about the company.

I feel for this kind of person. And I know he exists because I have known several in real life.

Now, about the agenda of ABC. In this case, I don't think an anti-business agenda was their prime motive. I think it was just plain old journalism cashing in on a gross-out-factor godsend.

Here's how it works. You find a person (or company) with its pants down and it has a major gross-out-factor that affects the majority of the public. You hammer it to death because people tune in.

End of journalism class.

In this case, the sellers were sneaking in their mixtures and selling the stuff as pure ground beef. You can argue all you want about technicalities, but when the average shopper goes to buy pure ground beef, he is thinking about cuts of beef that are ground up and that's all. He is not thinking about getting amonia-cured leftovers that were previously inedible.

If you sell him something different like that--something that has a gross-out-factor--and he finds out, he will get really, really pissed off. Which is what happened.

But he will tune in to whoever is talking about it. And ABC likes audience.

On our side, Rush Limbaugh used this journalism technique not too long ago. Sandra Fluke did that crazy stunt in front of Congress and Rush went in for the kill on the gross-out-factor. You--the taxpayer--are paying so an overgrown spoiled brat can get enough sex. The country went ewwwww. And he pounded the story for several days.

I believe there are some bad guys on the ABC side with the pink slime story, but I believe they caught a ride on this one. I don't think they were driving.

But what the hell. Spin it as makes you happy. They sure do.

I'm just not on board with your conclusions.

Michael

There is and has been a pattern of news media involved stock fraud against the food industry and particularly the beef industry. The frauds have been documented and many agricultural states have enacted laws to fight the fraud. The fraudulent investors/environmentalist fascist news reporters work in concert to destroy the beef industry and enrich insiders who know when the media event is coming.

As an example [since you're not buying Rand's lesson from Rearden Metal] - pick an industry and I will create an analogous smear designed to enrich activists using media created stock fraud.

Dennis

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

... since you're not buying Rand's lesson from Rearden Metal...

Dennis,

Why should I buy your analogy when you totally ignored my question about hot dogs?

Twice.

Anyway, there is a surface similarity to the Readen Metal story, but there are some fundamental differences--ones which I believe you are ignoring.

Let's just state one. Rearden did not try to hide his metal from the public (or sneak it into things like gold items--with special government permission at that).

He touted it.

The pink slime folks were perfectly fine with hiding behind the government's skirt to hide what they were doing from the public. Except it didn't work. CYA doesn't work when you gross out your customers. And they paid a harsh price.

Frankly, I believe the pink slime people are merely losing a market they did not earn correctly and they left on the table the markets they could have had.

Once again--look at the hot dog people. I know the hot dog folks are inconvenient to this discussion because they don't fit your narrative, but they exist. (Or cheese food product. Or any number of processed foods.)

Look at the similarities.

1. Hot dogs are probably far worse for your health than anything in the finished pink slime product.

2. Hot dogs have been mercilessly targeted by smears from the press ever since the beginning of last century.

3. Hot dogs are big business--big honking successful business--and they ain't going anywhere.

Now why do you think the pink slime thing turned out differently? Because it fits a narrative about a world where things like hot dogs are not considered? Different press agents, maybe? Because hot dogs are hot dogs and pink slime is pink slime?

Or how about the management screwed up big time by ignoring its customers to the point of trying to fool them? How about that? Nah. That couldn't be it.

You want to expose news media spin against the food industry? I'm all for it.

But here is a marketing and public relations truth. Make of it what you will. I don't care.

When you try to expose spin with even more spin, you discredit your cause. You have to fight spin with correct facts in full context (and tell a good entertaining story about it at that). Then you expose the spin and undo it. Otherwise you become what you are fighting--and you convince no one.

But you can spin to your choir. That tends to work.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Do you have an example of where deceptive labeling or advertising was used to sell the product? I have not heard that was ever the issue.

Dennis,

When a supermarket puts out ground beef and has a grinder in the back and says we grind our own beef, but puts in super-processed stuff in the mix without telling anyone, that is not what I would call an exemplary performance of honesty.

That happened all the time. You need an example? Really?

Anyway, we are not discussing rights or limitations. We are discussing piss-poor marketing practices and freedom of the press. (And, no, I don't think ABC is a good organization with pure motives.)

Once again, notice that the press cannot do with hot dogs what it did with pink slime.

Why?

Because everyone knows they are crap. They just taste great and everyone's fine with that. No one is putting hot dog meat out and calling it something else.

Respect for customers is still a value to me and a strong market is still a hammer that comes down hard on violators when they get a little too cute--as this case proves.

Michael

Yes I need an example from a factory label - really. If some local store relabeled something for something it was not that is local fraud - unrelated to the company which sold a product

to them with a label. Could just as easily been any meat or non-meat product added to their ground beef if the labeling is not accurate - it is not accurate.

I want to see where the factory committed a labeling fraud - if not the story is just another in an endless series of the immune media being used for simple financial/stock fraud.

Dennis

Two minutes on Google and the official USDA view is that adding lean, finely textured beef to ground beef is still ground beef so not only is there no health issue there is no

labeling issue on factory or retail ends. The ABC News piece is a hit piece - find the motive behind the hit piece if you want news. Either a PC Police food Nazi editor or stock fraud.

If you don't want ground beef don't buy ground beef. Locally [very rural] I can find at least a dozen varieties and types of ground beef or ground chuck in addition to other kinds

ground meat.

Dennis

WTF? Why is the USDA involved?

--Brant

[dennislmay]

When a corporation is attacked using smear tactics and emotional argumentation

while ignoring questions of science and law you have Readen Metal all over again.

A beef company located in an ethnicly white, solidly Republican, right to work state

with a large Militiary economy was targeted by a media arm of the Democratic party

known to get their marching orders from extreme leftist organizers - cooridinating

with the White House and their interests.

There is no food product which cannot be smeared in a similar manner - and many

foods have been smeared which is why state laws have recognized and attempted to

curtail this method of 1st amentment protected form of fraud - always perpetrated

by the socialists and their media henchmen.

The goals are some behinds the scenes cashing in stock fraud, damage the beef

industry in relation to vegan and global warming Marxist interests, and economicly

harm a state which is not in the Democratic camp.

If all it takes to run Fascism all over the economy is a packaged emotional plea which

shouldn't work on anyone - but 4 year olds who won't eat the broccoli - then we are

doomed.

I guess that is what happens when you separate the populace from the farm and

from factories and bunch them all up in cities disconnected from reality.

Dennis

[BaalChatzaf]

When a corporation is attacked using smear tactics and emotional argumentation

while ignoring questions of science and law you have Readen Metal all over again.

A beef company located in an ethnicly white, solidly Republican, right to work state

with a large Militiary economy was targeted by a media arm of the Democratic party

known to get their marching orders from extreme leftist organizers - cooridinating

with the White House and their interests.

There is no food product which cannot be smeared in a similar manner - and many

foods have been smeared which is why state laws have recognized and attempted to

curtail this method of 1st amentment protected form of fraud - always perpetrated

by the socialists and their media henchmen.

The goals are some behinds the scenes cashing in stock fraud, damage the beef

industry in relation to vegan and global warming Marxist interests, and economicly

harm a state which is not in the Democratic camp.

If all it takes to run Fascism all over the economy is a packaged emotional plea which

shouldn't work on anyone - but 4 year olds who won't eat the broccoli - then we are

doomed.

I guess that is what happens when you separate the populace from the farm and

from factories and bunch them all up in cities disconnected from reality.

Dennis

There are two things no decent person should have to see: Laws being made and sausages being made.

I assume this is related to "pink slime" or as some call it Soylent Pink.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[dennislmay]

Food aversions are an easy emotional target when pulling a media led fraud campaign.

Like fear of heights, snakes, or spiders there is a genetic basis for some food aversions -

others are purely cultural.

Some genetic groups and their cultures have entirely different relationships to food and

what is healthy or not healthy and what they can tolerate.

Several years ago I had access to a couple industrial freezers which would have been

able to store enough hard frozen lean, finely textured beef to keep me in meat the rest of my

life - available at bargain prices no doubt. I do not have such freezers available now - a shame.

Dennis

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

There is no food product which cannot be smeared in a similar manner...

Hot dogs can't.

And God knows the bad guys have tried for about a century now.

This is the fourth time I'm mentioning it. And it will probably be the fourth time it gets ignored.

Regardless. I hold the above quote is an assumption that is not backed by evidence, starting with my hot dog evidence. I agree that many food products can be damaged by a smear campaign instigated by a single news organization, but not all food products.

As to Dennis's narrative--I agree it exists. There are collectivist bad guys trying to take over the country and they often target the food industry. But I have an addition and it is very similar to what Rand did.

Some food business owners like to get in bed with the government--say, like the sugar industry--so they can inject a processed form of their products into all kinds of places where they normally would not be welcome and hide this information from the public with special exemptions on food labeling laws (which should not exist in the first place).

And these food business owners work it, work it, work it, so they can get some fat government contracts and subsidies. For one good example, look at Beef Products, Inc. supplying the government-funded School Lunch Program. (You won't find that part in Dennis's narrative.)

In other words, there is a huge difference between pure capitalism and crony-capitalism.

Big-business Republicans intensely dislike Rand for the way she handled this. They constantly try to use her words to justify their involvement in the free market, but they also try like the dickens to cover-up their own shenanigans with the government. And in the end, they get pissed because she called them the worst of the lot. She said they should not have been in bed with the government in the first place. And she said they actively seek out government influence--not to get the government off their backs (as they should), but to limit the activities of their competitors and get special money favors (which they do).

From what I have seen so far, the pink slime issue is a classic case of crony-capitalism of the Republican flavor. All the major industry and political players are in place.

The only problem is that it blew up in their face because they became so arrogant in their insider power games, they thought the customer was not important enough to consider. And they got caught by a news organization that was hungry for audience and doesn't like big business anyway.

I haven't looked it up in detail, but Beef Products, Inc. is still keeping its government contracts, only now school districts can choose whether to include the ammonia-treated processed meat (at least, according to here). There are laws for that. It only lost its free market contracts. There are no laws forcing people who are ticked by being misled to buy it's products.

And look how it handled the PR campaign when the whole thing blew up in March. Did it get pop celebrities on board? Did it come up with new products and set up a major marketing campaign? Did it make a figure like the Ronald McDonald clown to help sell it to kids? Did it come up with appealing metaphors and creative packaging? Did it redirect the pink slime metaphor with humor campaign? Did it do anything the food industry normally does to sell? I could go on and on with these things. They are all around us. But did Beef Products, Inc. do any of that? Hell no, it didn't.

That's pure capitalism. That's the way it's supposed to work.

Beef Products, Inc. took three governors (Rick Perry from Texas, Terry Branstad from Iowa, and Sam Brownback from Kansas--all big-business crony-capitalism Republicans) on a well-publicized tour of its plants--with ABC News at that (see here for the report).

It appealed to the government and to politicians. Why? Because that's what it does. That's the way it runs its business. By stealth and political favor. It has no idea of how to handle the public. Rather that say to the public, "Look here what our products can do for you, what benefits they can bring to you, and how much fun they are," it said, "Look here at the famous politicians we have in our pocket who say we are not doing anything wrong."

And the public didn't buy it.

I wonder why.

I do not include the big-business Republican version of crony capitalism in my own view of victimhood. Like Rand, I believe crony capitalism is just as much a part of the problem as what the progressives do.

Michael

[william.scherk]

Here is Fox News affliate in New York City, featuring Ernie Anastos and Dari Alexander. The story starts with crude alarmism and ends in murk. Do their names appear on the lawsuit? Are they part of the same insane leftist conspiracy to redirect profits from Advanced Meat Recovery systems?

I otherwise agree with Dennis on shoddy, ignorant reportage (as a solely leftist infection, perhaps not).

In the sense of public perception, pathological food fears, the yuck factor, the story has legs, but by now it has been thrashed out. The USDA says Hey! We test this shit for safety. Lighten up! It is beef, you idiots. Gristle, dessicated cellular debris, defatted tendons, head and cheek meat, vascular and connective tissue, processed down to a lovely standardized foam.

Just like Farmer Jenson got every last bit of the cow into his bratwurst, Americans scrape the goodness from every last bone and scrap. It's called industry, you numbskulls. If it is cheap, it is cheap because good old American know-how allowed us to fetch every last bit of value from the hundred and fifty million dead cattle and bison we process each year.

The things that stand out for me are the amazing technological advances that led to the bounty on our shelves. Mechanically-deboned chicken and or pork and or beef and or mutton, formed meat chunks, 'lean finely textured beef' ... and on and on. Labels are fascinating things. If it is beef and you grind it, to me it is ground beef.

Speaking of vegans, I did an awful thing at tree-planting camp back in the day. Supplier could not deliver me a forty-pound box of 100% vegetable shortening for cakes, cookies, pastries, etcetera. They delivered me forty pounds of 100% beef leaf lard, however. Being hundreds of miles and a week away from a new delivery, what was I to do? Num num num. Have another slice of cake, vegan swine, he muttered to himself.

Please ignore the extended commercial for Shake-ology powdered muck mix that follows the breathless Fox report ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=solsInnu9_o

Edited September 15, 2012 by william.scherk

[dennislmay]

There is no food product which cannot be smeared in a similar manner...

Hot dogs can't.

Sure they can - every generation gets further and further from understanding where there

food comes from.

Even in the last 10 years several "ick" factor meat products which were avaiable at meat

counters in the local area have disappeared or become rare and expensive. They disappeared

from larger retailers even earlier.

...look at Beef Products, Inc. supplying the government-funded School Lunch Program. (You won't find that part in Dennis's narrative.)

Every food company I've ever dealt with or worked for provides product to government [except local micro-processors].

Government does the inspection - government is the largest single customer out there. No part of the US food industry

exists as pure capitalism outside of you eating from your own garden and even then zoning doesn't allow that everywhere.

she [Rand] said they actively seek out government influence--not to get the government off their backs (as they should),

but to limit the activities of their competitors and get special money favors (which they do).

Nearly all large publicly traded companies are guilty of that. If you don't play the government attacks directly

or through their media cronies or in some cases race-baiters or union thugs.

Beef Products, Inc. took three governors (Rick Perry from Texas, Terry Branstad from Iowa, and Sam B

rownback from Kansas--all big-business crony-capitalism Republicans) on a well-publicized tour of its plants--

with ABC News at that.

When the poliitical left attacks - along with their media stooges - business turns to those who have supported

laws to protect them from socialist fraud. The other option is to move your business overseas which is what

many meat processors contemplate every day - Mexico for hog operations, Argentina for Beef, Asia

and Chili for seafood. Our largest local employer as been on the edge of moving to Texas or Mexico for

years because of state level attacks on industry. One more problem and they are gone for good and

all of North Missouri will be a ghost town. Why would they stay?

[dennislmay]

Here is Fox News affliate in New York City, featuring Ernie Anastos and Dari Alexander. The story starts with crude alarmism and ends in murk. Do their names appear on the lawsuit? Are they part of the same insane leftist conspiracy to redirect profits from Advanced Meat Recovery systems?

I otherwise agree with Dennis on shoddy, ignorant reportage (as a solely leftist infection, perhaps not).

In the sense of public perception, pathological food fears, the yuck factor, the story has legs, but by now it has been thrashed out. The USDA says Hey! We test this shit for safety. Lighten up! It is beef, you idiots. Gristle, dessicated cellular debris, defatted tendons, head and cheek meat, vascular and connective tissue, processed down to a lovely standardized foam.

Just like Farmer Jenson got every last bit of the cow into his bratwurst, Americans scrape the goodness from every last bone and scrap. It's called industry, you numbskulls. If it is cheap, it is cheap because good old American know-how allowed us to fetch every last bit of value from the hundred and fifty million dead cattle and bison we process each year.

The things that stand out for me are the amazing technological advances that led to the bounty on our shelves. Mechanically-deboned chicken and or pork and or beef and or mutton, formed meat chunks, 'lean finely textured beef' ... and on and on. Labels are fascinating things. If it is beef and you grind it, to me it is ground beef.

Speaking of vegans, I did an awful thing at tree-planting camp back in the day. Supplier could not deliver me a forty-pound box of 100% vegetable shortening for cakes, cookies, pastries, etcetera. They delivered me forty pounds of 100% beef leaf lard, however. Being hundreds of miles and a week away from a new delivery, what was I to do? Num num num. Have another slice of cake, vegan swine, he muttered to himself.

Please ignore the extended commercial for Shake-ology powdered muck mix that follows the breathless Fox report ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=solsInnu9_o

FOX News as a great many leftist among its ranks - I would put it at 45%-50% overall - with over 50% during non-prime time, less than 50% during prime time.

Dennis

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Dennis,

In other words, you think the food industry is mainly funded by tax dollars? And since there's nothing people can do about it, they might as well play along to get along?

Everywhere I see that, I see corruption, wasted crops, weird practices and so on. Take a look at what's happening with the entire corn industry in the USA.

So how do you fix it where it exists?

Hey. Here's an idea.

Let's dress products up to look like something else and fool customers into buying them.

That's your solution?

Sorry. I have another one.

How about placing some of the responsibility on the businessmen--like Eldon Roth--who go running to Washington to get advantages at each drop of the hat?

To use Rand's analogies, I think it boils down to this.

When you see Eldon Roth, you see Hank Rearden.

I see Robert Stadler.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

There is no food product which cannot be smeared in a similar manner...

Hot dogs can't.

Sure they can...

Dennis,

Well let's put it this way.

After withstanding about a 100 years or so of vicious attacks (starting with Upton Sinclair in The Jungle), I wonder how you would pull it off.

I haven't seen the press have the smear-power to take out hot dogs up to now.

Michael

[dennislmay]

There is no food product which cannot be smeared in a similar manner...

Hot dogs can't.

Sure they can...

Dennis,

Well let's put it this way.

After withstanding about a 100 years or so of vicious attacks (starting with Upton Sinclair in The Jungle), I wonder how you would pull it off.

I haven't seen the press have the smear-power to take out hot dogs up to now.

Michael

Every half a generation later you have young people more removed from the farm and factories - saturated with PC at school

and the media. Hot dogs will survive - just not affordable hotdogs if the food police have their way. You already have many

premium choices which cost more per pound than sliced roast beef or cheaper cuts of steak. In the other food chain - pet

foods - you have premium brands with whole muscle meat that cost more per pound than many human foods.

This whole discussion is 1 part in thousands of what is going on in the food industry. Picking out 1 part in thousands and

pushing it day after day after day is done with motive - as it has been done many times in the past.

Dennis