Buy Ben & Jerry's and feel like an activist
1284 sats \ 17 comments \ @SilkyNinja 8 Jun culture
Last night a commercial for Ben & Jerry's played on Youtube - I wish I could find it. I think it was three to five scenes to associate Ben & Jerry's to various forms of popular activism - from social justice to climate change. If you support our company, you support real change to make the world a better place.
Greenwashing is not a new phenomena and it actually inspires icky memories of politicians and cults - so why do we let "wholesome" consumer corporations get away with it? They are arguably the most cultish of the companies.
People get up in arms about movements to revolutionize corporations to be more globally responsible - but what about change for the protection of the individual consumer? Ben & Jerry's is junk food. There's a version of the world where companies that sell consumer food that is "unhealthy" (damaging) are taxed for putting consumer safety at risk. Not even a consumer tax - a corporate tax. Maybe that's a socialist's pipe dream.
I wonder if we could at least make it illegal to imply in an advertisement that buying junk food ("cigarettes") will make you a more responsible member of society! There's likely a real psychological comparison of advertising between cigarettes = cool, rugged, tough and greenwashed comfort/"health" food = responsible, compassionate, wholesome.123
Maybe we wouldn't live in a world where you could pretend to be a social-political-environmental activist by eating Ben & Jerry's - but you would have enough money in your wallet and 'clean energy' of your own to actually do something.
If corporations are people, why do we allow them to persuade us to believe that if we supported them financially, our lives would be fundamentally changed in a way to imply we have achieved a spiritual-social purpose? It sounds like current advertising laws enable corporations to behave like cult leaders.

Footnotes

  1. Another of my recent "socialist pipe/fever dreams" is to make illegal the term "health food" - shouldn't all food be health food? And if it's not, isn't it just...candy, junk, or comfort food? ↩
  2. Might even be why so many people have begun to default morally-socially "eat vegan"... ↩
  3. How socially damaging is it to allow people to convince themselves that they are morally righteous through their consumer choices?...feels as if I hit a "gold nugget" of my nonfiction writing interests with that one. ↩
write
preview
related posts
62 sats \ 4 replies \ @Coinsreporter 8 Jun
If corporations are people, why do we allow them to persuade us to believe that if we supported them financially, our lives would be fundamentally changed in a way to imply we have achieved a spiritual-social purpose?
These type of advertising is totally banned in India. There's a heavy tax on companies for their social responsibility but it can't be advertised. All companies are required to do environmental and social work through a sister company or a charity trust.
reply
11 sats \ 1 reply \ @Signal312 8 Jun
What is your opinion of the environmental/social work that these companies do?
My expectation is that it's all about matching whatever numbers are required, and nothing useful.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 8 Jun
It's defined Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) which broadly refers to the work and activities undertaken by corporates towards issues related to social causes and development, environment, disaster relief and community support. The Corporate Social Responsibility was made mandatory for companies in India by an Act in the year 2013.
However it's true that most companies only match numbers and do nothing useful.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SilkyNinja OP 8 Jun
These type of advertising is totally banned in India.
That's pretty cool. Are there any articles or readings you'd recommend to learn about this?
reply
111 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 8 Jun
This is in Hindi and English both. The rules here does not necessarily talk about banning green washing but they also don't allow such advertisements on account of they serving as bait for consumers
https://consumeraffairs.nic.in/sites/default/files/file-uploads/misleading-advertisement
reply
11 sats \ 2 replies \ @SimpleStacker 8 Jun
I don't know if making things illegal is the right solution. That just puts more power into the hands of the government which will just further politicize business and increase corruption.
The right thing to do is to teach your children to be careful, independent thinkers who can see through the lies and illusions.
Now, what happens when most of the parents and teachers aren't critical thinkers and thus can't teach their children to be? I feel like that's the rock and the hard place that our society is caught between
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SilkyNinja OP 8 Jun
“On Liberty” by John Stuart Mill recently got on my radar via the following elevator pitch:
Mill believed that the most important thing in society was the liberty of the individual. He said that the only justification for law was to prevent harm to others.
From this I got the idea of "What if the only laws which existed existed to prevent harm to the individual?" on my mind. While the profession of lawyering may elicit an equivalent reaction of "corruption" as anyone else, I at times retain a romance for the justice system.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SilkyNinja OP 8 Jun
Another thought on my mind from this is lawyers =/= government. Law school is just so obscenely expensive that the idea of actually changing the system with a J.D. probably rarely comes on radar for law students.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatsMate 8 Jun
What I don't like about corporations nowadays is how spineless they are. They don't truly stand for anything, other than making money at the expense of virtue signaling.
As I currently work in a big corporation, it all comes down to what will please investors - do that at the expense of awarding business to a transgender business owner over a white male - even if quality and service are depleted. You see higher-cost suppliers that have diversity & inclusion accolades win business. It is horrible to see.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @BitcoinIsTheFuture 8 Jun
Corporations exist to make a profit full stop!
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @jgbtc 8 Jun
Corporations seem more interested in pleasing government than consumers. What's that called again?
reply
3 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 8 Jun
Regulatory capture
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SilkyNinja OP 8 Jun
Would it then make sense to make corporate behavior which puts consumer health at risk illegal or heavily regulated?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Signal312 8 Jun
fascism
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @jakoyoh629 8 Jun
Corporations are not people, they are the boogeyman. They eat everything, and laws won't change that. It's a mindset shift that's needed. You're right.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zuspotirko 8 Jun
Corporations are not people
For those who remember this one from 2012 lmfao:
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SilkyNinja OP 8 Jun freebie
As far as I can remember, Ben & Jerry's did not include the fat acceptance movement. Why?
An initial thought is that they are already customers, or otherwise not in their targeted market. Cartman, with his Oppenheimer cereal bombs, is not high-class enough to have wholesome-ingredient luxury ice cream appeal to his consumer habits.
Are metropolitan middle class white liberals and otherwise people who want to give the image that they care for the welfare of others - just better and more obedient consumers - especially when the product is wrapped up in a “feel good” wholesome or socially responsible package? Is this a perpetual sort of trend in advertising and retail/corporate response for demand - “Buy this, feel better about yourself - You have more money and want to feel [even] better about yourself, buy this and feel better.”
Do people not care because why not just exploit people with a disposable income?